Hacker News Books

- Sapiens

- The Lord of the Rings

- Siddhartha

- Chaos: Making a New Science

- The Death Gate cycle books

- Neuromancer

- Head First Design Patterns

- Valis

- Dune

- The name of the rose

I'm sure there are more, but these are the ones off the top of my head.

Personally, I just can't "handle" when the narrator does voices for characters. Overly-developed fremdschämen on my part, I guess. The only fiction audiobook I've listened to all the way through is The Lord of the Rings read by Rob Inglis, and even there I had to skip forward when he started singing.

I stumbled across Pushkin's works because of my high school curriculum and I must say it was one of the most enjoyable pieces of literature I've read next to The Lord Of The Rings and The Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy, which needless to say were not part of my high school curriculum.

"The Lord of The Rings" is the most incredible book and the most well done I ever read.

I read it recently, I knew it first time because the movie. I read it in English, and it improved my language skills a lot (even the listening, to my surprise).

I read ‘The Lord of the Rings’ for the first time this year. Highly recommend.

The Lord of the Rings is the book that turned me into an avid reader when I was 13 or so. I remember sitting in the school library studying the maps and translating the runes with a reference book I found. I was so excited when I discovered that the runes on the maps in the Hobbit turned out to be the riddle for opening the way to the lonely mountain. I still read it every few years, and was just listening to the audiobook while browsing HN and saw this article! I do get tired of all the singing though. :)

It may also be possible that the future will hold us responsible for something that we are very proud of today. I recently re-read "The Lord of the Rings" and was surprised at the racist / eugenic undertones, which unfortunately date the book to some degree. One person's chief virtue is that he's of unadulterated blood, some nation is declining because of mixing of the races etc. Unbelievable as it may seem today, people once held racism and segregation as noble ideals. What will our time be known as - the age of political correctness, maybe?

The Dispossessed by Ursula K. Le Guin

Narcissus and Goldmund by Hermann Hesse

The Lord of The Rings by J.R.R. Tolkien

"The Count of Monte Cristo" "The Man of Bronze"

What's interesting -- to me, anyway -- are the responses that are (a) books you might not be able to pay me to read or (b) books I enjoyed, but have never considered rereading.

I made it a couple of chapters into "The Lord of the Rings," tossed the book across the room, where it fell down behind some furniture and sat for years. I have never thought about reading it again.

I might need to go back and read both "Dune" and the Amber series. I enjoyed them; but, I've never thought about rereading them at all.

The 'readers' list of novels is a big a crock of shit as the non-fiction. I might be a little pessimistic, but of the top ten:

4. THE LORD OF THE RINGS by J.R.R. Tolkien
5. TO KILL A MOCKINGBIRD by Harper Lee
6. 1984 by George Orwell

Are the only credible novels there. I'm sorry Ayn Rand and L. Ron Hubbard are not and never have been popular enough amongst the populace to hit 7 out of 10 of the top 10 spots.

Radcliffe's Rival 100 Best Novels List (http://www.randomhouse.com/modernlibrary/100rivallist.html) doesn't have Hubbard anywhere and has Rand's two most read and best respected novels. I'm a wide reader and I can say every novel on this list has been recommended to me by someone or has gotten itself known to me by its own merits. No one has ever recommended me Hubbard, save for once at a garage sale when someone tried to sell me a dozen of his books for a quarter; I opted to pay $10 picking up the Red/Blue/Green Mars series, some Heinlein, Asimov and Clark. The woman joked that she doubts the bookstore will take them; incidentally I've got friends who've worked at Savers/Value Village and they can't shift the books and don't accept them.

This list is somewhat dated. After looking through the editor's top 100, many of these are indeed very good. However, a cursory glance through the 'Readers' list reveals some strange/unexpected list members, that might suggest strange/skewed sample population.

Things that immediately stood out as different:

- 3 Rand books in the top 6? Really?

- 2 Scientology / Anti Psychology books near the top (#2, #11)

A look at the fiction list reveals the same bias:

Top 10 from the 'Novels List'

  ATLAS SHRUGGED by Ayn Rand
  THE FOUNTAINHEAD by Ayn Rand
  BATTLEFIELD EARTH by L. Ron Hubbard
  THE LORD OF THE RINGS by J.R.R. Tolkien
  TO KILL A MOCKINGBIRD by Harper Lee
  1984 by George Orwell
  ANTHEM by Ayn Rand
  WE THE LIVING by Ayn Rand
  MISSION EARTH by L. Ron Hubbard
  FEAR by L. Ron Hubbard

There are still gems in these lists, I'm just surprised that many of these made the list, especially some of the high ranking ones. Something seems off.

I'd agree ebooks are lame. They're great for easy transport, and quite useful for college, but a lot of the fun of owning a book is lost.

I can't have a signed copy of my favorite book with an ebook. When I have a party or gathering at home people browse my shelves and spark conversation about certain books they've read, or thumb through others they haven't, this doesn't happen with my kindle sitting on my desk in the office. Buying a book and caring for it can mean you'll have it a lifetime, I don't know that this is the case with ebooks yet. They still feel like rentals. I have a few old books handed down from my parents, they have a charm and character all their own, something lost with ebooks. Some books I own are sentimental, my first copies of The Lord of the Rings, and a Wizard of Earthsea, I've had since I was very young. I can touch and smell and experience those books today.

Now, many teens might not care about the above, but the coolness factor may be tied to similar thought. For instance the vanity of walking around with the hottest teen novel or having it in your bedroom at home. Or, I remember in high school kids carrying copies of Fight Club and Clockwork Orange not just because they were reading them but also as part of whatever counter culture image they were going for. The author sort of touches on this, "But does size really matter that much? My copy of The Perks Of Being A Wallflower was so small I could fit it in my second-hand jacket when I was an angsty high schooler." For teens what they're passionate about and what they're into is part of their identity and trying to set themselves apart, and they like to show it off. Just look at the kids doodling their favorite band names on a binder, or listing every book, TV show, and movie they like on Facebook.

When I worked at Barnes & Noble a lot of teens enjoyed hardcovers that had some sort of unique flair. Embossing, elaborate art, books that opened in non-traditional ways. There's something to be said for the tangible aspects of the book. Appreciating its make.

• “On Liberty” (John Stuart Mill) for political enlightenment and an impeccable defence of [classical!] liberalism. It's packed with simple but enormously powerful ideas that are also timeless, thus applicable today and to so many aspects of life.

• “Don Quixote” (Cervantes): unanimously considered the best work of fiction in the Spanish-speaking world… and on many lists, even #1 of world literature, ever (!). Often overlooked (at least in Spain) by young folks as it is long, the language is archaic, and its themes appear quaint and silly today at first sight. But there's a reason it has been praised for centuries. It's funny and tender. Themes are also modern, and Cervantes' style is playful and innovative, making use of devices such as meta-references, alternative pasts, removal of the fourth wall, etc. I'm not sure how much non-native audiences can enjoy translations, though.

• “The Lord of the Rings” (Tolkien) for the original epic and touching fantasy. (I know many people devour it in their teens, or in their early youth… But I read it as an adult; quite late. Mainly because it seemed to be the only “difficult” book that many of my friends bothered to read, and that predisposed me negatively towards it. Also, my family hadn't read it, and there was no copy of it in our house.)

• “Brief History of Time” (Stephen Hawking): mind-boggling introduction to (astro-)physics, modern cosmogony, etc.

Last year, I finished reading The Lord of the Rings to my girls. Before that I read them The Hobbit. It took about three years to finish it all, but it was a great for them as an opportunity to learn about a variety of topics (language arts in general primarily, but especially vocabulary). The experience was also good to me because, while I'm typically prone to skim through less interesting passages, it forced me to read every word.

I adopted voices for the different characters to keep them interested, and to give them something to look forward to, I would not let them watch the movies until we finished reading the corresponding volume of the series. We had so much fun with this!

I'm extremely thankful for Christopher's work because the movies (which were released when I was a teenager) were my first introduction to his father's work.

I've read "the lord of the rings" when I was 12, over the course of 3 days. Eat, sleep, go to bathroom, and read.

Probably the biggest impact a book ever had on me.

I was a huge fan of LotR as a kid. Then I started to notice Tolkien's attitudes about race, class, and sex seeping into it, and it lost a lot of its appeal. If Thiel's into it, that's the final nail in the coffin. This quote from John Rogers seems apropos.

“There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old’s life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs."

If you have access to a good library, it's a good place to try various types of books to see what you like. Ultimately, what you will be reading a few years later is hard to predict from what you start reading now. However, in the beginning, finding something that "hooks" you is the best bet because it gives you the experience of being absorbed in a book. These are the books with which I have introduced some people to the world of books:

- The Lord of The Rings

- The Hobbit

- Dracula

- The Little Prince

- Animal Farm

- Asterix and Obelix comicbooks

- Siddhartha

For the next time, I'm going to try "Necronmicon" (H. P. Lovecraft!)

(EDIT: Formatting and added "Siddhartha")

I will not try to convince you otherwise then. It may however interest you that Tolkien himself said "'The Lord of the Rings' is of course a fundamentally religious and Catholic work; unconsciously so at first, but consciously in the revision." (https://archive.nytimes.com/www.nytimes.com/books/01/02/11/s...) - but the statements of an author about their own work should of course not always be taken at face values.

I was rereading The Lord of the Rings a while back and one of the things that struck me was how seriously the characters take the giving of advice. In retrospect I think this is one of the biggest blind spots of American culture in general. We act like advice is cheap or even free, both in the giving and in receiving. It's not. Even when solicited. I think we'd all be healthier if we were slower to give advice, even outside of such extreme circumstances.

"I was referring to morals in context of the written universe, not in ours. JY characters regularly confront situations where they are forced to question their own personal code.

...
...
...

JY does not offer a moral lesson here, he simply explores characters in morally complex situations."

Tolkien doesn't do that at all: the depth of his characters is never expounded upon, their decisions and choices flow from their roles (for example Elrond as the healer, or Aragon as the king of men, or Gandalf with the mission to stop Sauron). His characters are aware of the consequences and the effect the Ring will have: not even for Boromir is that a dilemma. That's why my position is that the comparison doesn't even apply because Tolkien's characters don't undergo those dilemmas. For example, the biggest dilemma is Frodo's fear of whether and how he'll be able to complete his task, not whether he should complete it. That is light years removed from character complexity and moral choices. These two authors wrote about completely different things: there isn't any overlap to compare on.

As for the rudeness: if based on your comments I think that you should re-read the Silmarillion and The Lord of the Rings much more critically because they reduce both works to satisfaction with the story and good being triumphant, and was subtly trying to suggest that, is that rude?

> I had to google what victuals meant.

You haven't read "The Lord of The Rings"?!

Distributing "The Lord of the Rings by George RR Martin": Boatloads of cash

When I read "The Lord of the Rings" for the first time as a kid, I remember reading the part where Aragorn, Legolas and Gimli ran "for two days and nights" (or something like that) chasing after the hobbits that had been taken by the orcs.

I thought to myself, "Two days, that doesn't sound too bad. I think I could do that." It seemed reasonable at the time.

""The Lord of the Rings is of course a fundamentally religious and Catholic work," he wrote, "unconsciously so at first, but consciously in the revision. That is why I have not put in, or have cut out, practically all references to anything like "religion", to cults or practices, in the Imaginary world. For the religious element is absorbed into the story and the symbolism" - JRR Tolkien

Oh I read it. And it made a lot of sense, when I was 15.

"There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old’s life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs."

~John Rogers

I can't choose one, but I'd cite:

* Jonathan Haidt's The Righteous Mind, for explaining so much personally and culturally so concisely.

* Everything on this list: http://jakeseliger.com/2010/03/22/influential-books-on-me-th....

* The Lord of the Rings, for its combination of story, interior drama, and (underrated) political economy.

* Blindsight by Peter Watts.

* Heart of Darkness by Conrad, who seems more prophetic all the time.

2. The Lord of the Rings – JRR Tolkien

Maybe try reading some travel/adventure related fiction. I am currently reading "The Lord of the Rings", and while it doesn't satisfy the wanderlust 100%, it definitely helps.

I also tried researching some more books that are travel related that I am planning to read next:

* Rita Golden Gelman - Tales of a Female Nomad: Living at Large in the World

* Douglas Adams - Last Chance to See

* Italo Calvion - Invisible Cities

* Rolf Potts - Vagabonding

You're not missing anything. There's a reason John Rogers wrote “There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old’s life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs."

It's essentially the equivalent of quoting Karl Marx. They are both so blinded by adherence to a since-discredited world view that their positions are laughable at best and at worse provide excuses for destructive behavior. Those who quote either typically haven't bothered to branch out beyond a simplistic, falsifiable perspective. Such an approach supports the smug self-satisfaction of dogmatic certainty over actually being correct.

Or, more succinctly, "There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs." - John Rogers

found this quote in the german wikipedia:

“There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old’s life: 'The Lord of the Rings' and 'Atlas Shrugged'. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.” – John Rogers

I am very interested in the maps-based story, because I have a similar pet project on my TODO list: the idea is to put Darwin's "Voyage of the Beagle" on Google maps or Google Earth, to get a better feel of the voyage. A friend of mine used to read "The Lord Of The Rings" with the "Middle Earth Atlas" on hand, in the right chronological order (read only the parts of the story that happen on a particular way). (Edit, just found this site with at least some map annotations to voyage of the beagle: http://www.aboutdarwin.com/voyage/voyage01.html)

Sidenote:
Recently somebody posted a comment on news.YC about starting a blog with 4 authors, one of them gets exchanged every week by public vote. Can't find it anymore - does anybody know the URL?

Yep. The way I used to explain it to my students was this:

Distributing "Romeo and Juliet by William Shakespeare": not plagiarism or copyright violation.

Distributing "Romeo and Juliet by Turing Machine": plagiarism, but not copyright violation.

Distributing "The Lord of the Rings by J.R.R. Tolkien": Copyright violation, but not plagiarism.

Distributing "The Lord of the Rings by Turing Machine": both plagiarism and copyright violation.