The 100 Most Influential Books in Literature

The 100 Most Influential Books in Literature-Martin Seymour-Smith

How I found this book: I was bored at Patric’s house and stole it from his shelves! Well, actually he just gave it to me.

Setting: None, as it is non-fiction, but I could say it takes place in the imaginary land of people who give a rat’s ass about this author’s opinions.

Main Characters: None, as it chronicles the author’s opinions on what he thinks is the 100 most influential writers in history and why.


Plot: Seymour-Smith chronicles from ancient to modern times what he feels are the most influential writings in literature, from the Bible to Mao Tze-Tung.

Themes:

What makes a book influential: Seymour-Smith doesn’t really have a hard and fast rule on why a book is particularly ‘influential’. Sometimes it’s only because it is the first book to start a particular style of writing or a particular thread of thought in writing, as happens with a lot of philosophical work. Sometimes it is because of the impact the book has had on history, suck as the Bible or The Communist Manifesto. Sometimes it’s just because of the enduring quality of the story, and what it had to say about the human condition. He seems to have no big rules, and most of it is very objective, (though you’ll hear few complaints out of me about WHAT he chose.)

God, do Christians suck or what: Seymour-Smith makes no bones about the fact he hates Christians. Well, really, he thinks Christ was OK, and he was really big into the Gnostics, and he doesn’t have a problem with John Bunyan, but bring up the organized Church, Puritans, or anyone else, he thinks it’s next to Satan in terms of how it’s f-ed up the world. Not saying he doesn’t have a point, but…gees, a bit harsh!

Literature for the egg heads: While I’m not arguing that his choices are the most influential works in the world, and had a wide ranging influence on all our lives, a lot of these influential works are not the things that you and I learned in literature class. Perhaps that speaks to the American educational system…or perhaps it speaks to the fact that the 100 most influential books might be influential, but it doesn’t mean they are for everyone. Does that mean that influence doesn’t necessarily equate to ‘popularity’ or ‘accessibility’? It’s an interesting question, one I’d have fun debating in a lit class.

Every book sucks somewhere: No offense to Mr. Seymour-Smith, and perhaps the historian in me and not the lit critic, but why in the world do I care about your opinion. Honestly, I write a blog about my book opinions and throw it out there for free, because if people care, they will read it, if they don’t they won’t, but I don’t expect them to pay good money for it, and then drivel on endlessly. And I lucked out in that I didn’t pay for this book, but I nearly told my friend he should demand his money back from Barnes and Noble for it!

My complaints are many, the first being that many of the essays don’t really get to the heart of WHY the book is influential, (some do, most don’t), but rather why Seymour-Smith thinks they are good or they are horrible drivel. Much of the essay is spent wandering around discussing other thoughts and ideas rather than those of the work in question, (somewhat acceptable if you are discussing the works influence, I suppose, but at least put it in context.) And Seymour-Smith has at best a tenuous grasp on history at times or the historical times the various authors lived in, (should I bring up now my shock in surprise that Hadrian was a pedophile, when as far as I knew he was a Roman emperor who was into a lot of things Greek, including teenaged boys, hardly considered pedophilic in the days of ye’ old emperor Hadrian.) Much of the essays seem to be more exercises in Seymour-Smith listening to himself talk than real, honest academic or scholarly efforts in explaining WHY these are influential pieces of literature.

What’s more, and again this perhaps has to do with the history background I have, but I had it beaten into me that the only opinion that you should be expressing in an essay or paper is the one on which your paper is written…the thesis in other words. Starting to throw out personal opinions on the bowel movements of Luther randomly in an essay on Copernicus seemed a bit confusing and at worst trite to me. While you may or may not have a beef with Martin Luther, (and I’m not saying you don’t have a right to), calling him a crank in an essay about someone else’s work doesn’t lend much credence to your scholarly opinion.

Also, what’s the beef with the church? Yeah, I know they’ve done some messed up stuff, but really, why does it have to come up every other page?

What did I like: I liked the vast encompassment of what Seymour-Smith brought in terms of influences, from religious, to philosophical, to just sheer entertainment. Many of the books he brought up I agree with on a historical level as being very important, and some of them I will add to my ever growing list of ‘things to read’, if I haven’t already, (sadly, I hit up the Bible, Homer, Thucydides, Herodotus, Don Quixote, Shakespeare, and Pilgrim’s Progress already.)

How would I rate this wormy book: I would rate this as a LITTLE WORM. If you want a list of some really influential books, it’s great, and I do recommend reading those books he chooses. But if you are looking for real academic insight onto what and why these books were influential…don’t bother; find seriously scholarly opinions on them elsewhere.