# Book that everyone knows, but most people have not read.



## Grehoy (May 30, 2014)

daleks_exterminate said:


> I'm not sure I can pinpoint a specific thing, but it never captures my interest. I can't easily force myself to do things I find boring.
> 
> It's just mildly amusing because apparently a lot of people have that with the Silmarillion, a book that I couldn't stop reading and found incredibly engaging. I understand that though, because The Hobbit, a children's book, is my Everest.
> 
> Everyone has different tastes. I don't really think not reading something that doesn't grab your attention is a bad thing. Many kids are discouraged from reading by being pushed into reading shit they don't find interesting.


I agree, choices should not be forced on people. Education system should be tailored towards individuals to accentuate their natural skills, such as educating people based on their MBTI type, with specific curriculum and options for each type.

I haven't read any of those books but maybe the Hobbit did not contain much chronological information about the history of the realm and that what you found lacking.

I started reading Umberto Eco's the Name of the Rose but it felt like a history book and I immediately dropped it after 10 pages.


----------



## daleks_exterminate (Jul 22, 2013)

Grehoy said:


> I agree, choices should not be forced on people. Education system should be tailored towards individuals to accentuate their natural skills, such as educating people based on their MBTI type, with specific curriculum and options for each type.
> 
> I haven't read any of those books but maybe the Hobbit did not contain much chronological information about the history of the realm and that what you found lacking.
> 
> I started reading Umberto Eco's the Name of the Rose but it felt like a history book and I immediately dropped it after 10 pages.



I'm not sure how much mbti has to do with personal tastes though. I'm an entp and prefer fantasy and scyfi. I know a lot of infps who really enjoy that, and some istps and such. I know entps and intps that like it and some that think it's boring.


----------



## Electra (Oct 24, 2014)

Grehoy said:


> I agree, choices should not be forced on people. Education system should be tailored towards individuals to accentuate their natural skills, such as educating people based on their MBTI type, with specific curriculum and options for each type.
> 
> I haven't read any of those books but maybe the Hobbit did not contain much chronological information about the history of the realm and that what you found lacking.
> 
> I started reading Umberto Eco's the Name of the Rose but it felt like a history book and I immediately dropped it after 10 pages.


I've read that one. I think you made the right choise. The only thing that I remember I liked about it was that it suggested people used humor back in the old days too when writing books.


----------



## attic (May 20, 2012)

I loved The little price, I wonder if with many books like that it depends a bit on when it enters one's life? I read it when I was 16 or 17, around the same time I read 1984, and Wuthering heights(a little later I think, 17-18), it was years when I was learning lots and seeing new perspectives on life, society, existence, so these books gave me lots, both in giving new thoughts and perspectives, and portraying known things in new images. Perhaps if reading something too early one won't be able to appreciate it fully, and too late, the thoughts won't perhaps be so new to you and so it isn't as interesting. The little prince seems like one could appreciate both as a child and when a little older though I guess, seeing different things in it.

I think Wuthering heights is way better than Jane Eyre, a matter of taste of course, but really, I think she was the genius of the sisters. The story is that Charlotte found Emily's poems and was so taken with them she thought they had to be published and convinced Emily, and while they did that, they added some of Charlotte's and Anne's too (I didn't like Anne's books, boring, but perhaps it was good reads for other nannies in the 1800s, but didn't give me much to read). Wuthering Heights is complex, the narrator is unreliable, and it is told like the whispering game almost, someone tells someone who tells the narrator who tells us, at times. So while reading one can see several possible stories behind the one told. It is in part about ethics, but for the time I think likely unusually grayscale-y. It is about nature and nurture, about how things live through generations, about domestic violence, when someone feels they have no loyalties left, class, women feeling they have no other options in life than to marry... and of course nature, and love. For some reasons all the film adaptations I have seen only tells the story of the first half of the book, which misses so much of the point of the book I think.

The alchemist I think I'll have to reread... I remember being captivated by it when I read it, but I really can't remember what it was about, which is so strange, I think it started in andalusia and then there was a lot of desert... then blank, haha. Sometimes I think my mind confuses stories for dream-memories, and tidy it up, delete, delete, delete...


Not mentioned... Perhaps fairly tales, like the Grimm stories, and HC Andersen. Many have read later adaptations instead, (and the one's that are folklore are adapted in the Grimm and Andersen versions to I am sure, stories evolve, so all fine). I have not read all, but some of them. I had a period when I read lots and lots of folktales, looked for patterns etc.
It was then too I read most/half? of the Poetic edda, which might not be something everyone knows of, but around here probably, and people recognise the asa-gods like Tor and Freja, and some the prophesy about Ragnarök (world ends). The biggest difference to adaptations I guess is the violence, and how it is not told like it is bad, when the mean sisters get their eyes picked out and when Tor smashes in the head of granny giant etc. My grandfather got us a audiotape with a HC Andersen story when I was very little, it was about Big Klas and little Klas, and how the latter had some luck and the first wanted money and was happy to stike his mother dead with an ax and try to sell her on the market, and how he tried to kill little Klas, but ended up dead himself. It was awfully violent, but I didn't think so much of it then really.

What else... think probably lots of things by people often mentioned only by surname, like Kafka, Camus, Dostojevskij, Tolstoj, Tjeckov, Bukowski... I have not read most of that, some short stories by Tjeckov, which were good, and the idiot, crime and punishment, Notes from underground, and half The castle by Frank Kafka, it was interesting, but boring too, haha, guess that is the point, the slow repetitiveness, so after half the book I felt that, ok, got the point I think, enough.


----------



## Grehoy (May 30, 2014)

attic said:


> I loved The little price, I wonder if with many books like that it depends a bit on when it enters one's life? I read it when I was 16 or 17, around the same time I read 1984, and Wuthering heights(a little later I think, 17-18), it was years when I was learning lots and seeing new perspectives on life, society, existence, so these books gave me lots, both in giving new thoughts and perspectives, and portraying known things in new images. Perhaps if reading something too early one won't be able to appreciate it fully, and too late, the thoughts won't perhaps be so new to you and so it isn't as interesting. The little prince seems like one could appreciate both as a child and when a little older though I guess, seeing different things in it.
> 
> I think Wuthering heights is way better than Jane Eyre, a matter of taste of course, but really, I think she was the genius of the sisters. The story is that Charlotte found Emily's poems and was so taken with them she thought they had to be published and convinced Emily, and while they did that, they added some of Charlotte's and Anne's too (I didn't like Anne's books, boring, but perhaps it was good reads for other nannies in the 1800s, but didn't give me much to read). Wuthering Heights is complex, the narrator is unreliable, and it is told like the whispering game almost, someone tells someone who tells the narrator who tells us, at times. So while reading one can see several possible stories behind the one told. It is in part about ethics, but for the time I think likely unusually grayscale-y. It is about nature and nurture, about how things live through generations, about domestic violence, when someone feels they have no loyalties left, class, women feeling they have no other options in life than to marry... and of course nature, and love. For some reasons all the film adaptations I have seen only tells the story of the first half of the book, which misses so much of the point of the book I think.
> 
> ...


I always get confused when reading Russian novels cause they keep using three names for each people, one formal name, asecond casual name and a third nickname inside the family. After some point I forget who is who. They should keep a reference table for names somewhere in the book.

Bukowski is an enjoyable casual read too .


----------



## lecomte (May 20, 2014)

The Stranger from Camus (as a french i m obligated)
and The Metamorphosis from Kafka were pretty cool!

But my favorite book is Frankenstein

About boredom, how do you choose your books?


----------



## Grehoy (May 30, 2014)

lecomte said:


> The Stranger from Camus (as a french i m obligated)
> and The Metamorphosis from Kafka were pretty cool!
> 
> But my favorite book is Frankenstein
> ...


I haven't been reading that much in the last couple of years.

Nowadays, whenever I look for information on topics I am interested in, sometimes I stubmle upon a book recommendation in the article that pique my interest, then I try to find the audiobook version on youtube or similar.

I can then listen to it while working out. I am not actively on the look out for books to read.


----------



## daleks_exterminate (Jul 22, 2013)

attic said:


> I loved The little price, I wonder if with many books like that it depends a bit on when it enters one's life? I read it when I was 16 or 17, around the same time I read 1984, and Wuthering heights(a little later I think, 17-18), it was years when I was learning lots and seeing new perspectives on life, society, existence, so these books gave me lots, both in giving new thoughts and perspectives, and portraying known things in new images. Perhaps if reading something too early one won't be able to appreciate it fully, and too late, the thoughts won't perhaps be so new to you and so it isn't as interesting. The little prince seems like one could appreciate both as a child and when a little older though I guess, seeing different things in it.
> 
> I think Wuthering heights is way better than Jane Eyre, a matter of taste of course, but really, I think she was the genius of the sisters. The story is that Charlotte found Emily's poems and was so taken with them she thought they had to be published and convinced Emily, and while they did that, they added some of Charlotte's and Anne's too (I didn't like Anne's books, boring, but perhaps it was good reads for other nannies in the 1800s, but didn't give me much to read). Wuthering Heights is complex, the narrator is unreliable, and it is told like the whispering game almost, someone tells someone who tells the narrator who tells us, at times. So while reading one can see several possible stories behind the one told. It is in part about ethics, but for the time I think likely unusually grayscale-y. It is about nature and nurture, about how things live through generations, about domestic violence, when someone feels they have no loyalties left, class, women feeling they have no other options in life than to marry... and of course nature, and love. For some reasons all the film adaptations I have seen only tells the story of the first half of the book, which misses so much of the point of the book I think.
> 
> ...


I really like Dostojevskji. I found the Brothers Karamazov to be absolutely hilarious while still being a serious novel. I genuinely didn't expect to find it so funny, and have recommended it to others because of that. It's possible that I have a weird sense of humour (i do), but Dostojevskji has made me cackle out loud while reading. I think Fryodar is one of the funniest characters ever written. Would recommend.


----------



## daleks_exterminate (Jul 22, 2013)

Grehoy said:


> I haven't been reading that much in the last couple of years.
> 
> Nowadays, whenever I look for information on topics I am interested in, sometimes I stubmle upon a book recommendation in the article that pique my interest, then I try to find the audiobook version on youtube or similar.
> 
> I can then listen to it while working out. I am not actively on the look out for books to read.


Audiobooks are a game changer. I used to read constantly, then realized I hadn't in a long time. I don't have a ton of free time, but listen to books while doing other things and it's really enjoyable!


----------



## attic (May 20, 2012)

daleks_exterminate said:


> I really like Dostojevskji. I found the Brothers Karamazov to be absolutely hilarious while still being a serious novel. I genuinely didn't expect to find it so funny, and have recommended it to others because of that. It's possible that I have a weird sense of humour (i do), but Dostojevskji has made me cackle out loud while reading. I think Fryodar is one of the funniest characters ever written. Would recommend.


That one I have not read, but it is waiting in the shelf, so perhaps it will be next after I have finished the pile of books I have begun... I thought the Idiot was a bit heavy (and all the confusing names, haha) but also funny, notes from underground too ... but I don't think Crime and punishment as much if I remember correctly, it was easiest though, suspenseful, a page turner.

------------------------------------------



lecomte said:


> how do you choose your books?


I pretty often get books that more or less fall in my lap(they were super cheap, they were giveaways on some giveaway shelf, gifts, most of them my spouse had when we moved in together, inherited books(among them for example the three musketiers, in german... in the old kinds of letters... and my german is almost noneistent, but one day, I guess)), but some I have bought, then I choose from the books we have mostly by what I am in the mood for, but try to mix some, a classic, a newer lighter read, a newer not so light read, some fairytale, once in a while something not fiction. But I tend to like some imaginative aspects, quirks, characters I can become fond of that feel real, learning about times and places I am not familiar with. I also enjoy books from other times of cultures where a lot of what I take from them is the perspective on the events.


----------



## Squirt (Jun 2, 2017)

"Everything is Illuminated" was a trip. The movie only contained about 1/3 of the book, because it would be nearly impossible to portray the rest of it on-screen.


----------



## 8080 (Oct 6, 2020)

“*Two volumes in one* / Unabridged edition”. Note the typeface, it is no longer blackletter but antiqua. [From 1941] "Up until 1943, although most copies were in Roman typefaces, there were still editions of _Mein Kampf _printed in Gothic type. That is perhaps why Gothic type remains so strongly associated with Nazi-era Germany to this day.” Source Here is a blackletter edition for comparison: Source 

“In July 1925 the *first volume* with 423 pages appeared, in December 1926 the *second* with 354 pages. *Until 1930*, the publishing house distributed _Mein Kampf_ in two large-format volumes at a price of 12 Reichsmarks each at first, and 14 Reichsmarks from 1928. Then the two volumes in 18.9 × 12 centimetre format were combined into a *single-volume* "Volksausgabe". Source


*Trevor* wrote: “While I was teaching on my placement at the start of the year my supervising teacher had an incentive program going on with some of the students in the VCE history class we were taking. He told them *he would pay $50 to any student who finished reading *_*Mein Kampf*_* by the end of the year*. He told me he had made this offer every year and had never been required to pay up. He believed this was because the book was so poorly written and so turgid that even the most money hungry 16 year old would figure there were easier ways to make some cash.” Source


The most boring book I have ever read, and that is saying something, because I find flight and train timetables highly entertaining. A life story full of untruths, mixed with much else, the endless rant of an introverted intuitive feeler. You do not have to read the book, but you should definitely know the difference between the ‘*s**econd v**olume*’ of _Mein Kampf_, that is, the second part of the book, and Hitler's ‘*S**econd B**ook’* = '*Zweites Buch'*, which was not published in his lifetime.

Anyone interested in Hitler should read his _*Second Book*_ from 1928, which can easily be found on the internet, followed by _*Hitler's Table Talk*_. The chapter headings below are intended to give an overview of the texts, which should also help those who are only interested in a specific topic.

Anyone who wants to look more closely at _Hitlerism_, which seems to me the best name for the phenomenon, analogous to _Stalinism_, cannot avoid looking at the history of the institutions of the state and the party and the essential people. Everything intended for the public was always of secondary importance.

The most important thing to know about Hitler and ‘National Socialism’ is _Generalplan Ost_:


*Wikipedia:* The _*Generalplan Ost*_ (German pronunciation: [ɡenəˈʁaːlˌplaːn ˈɔst]; English: Master Plan for the East), abbreviated *GPO*, was the Nazi German government's plan for the genocide and ethnic cleansing on a vast scale, and colonization of Central and Eastern Europe by Germans. It was to be undertaken in territories occupied by Germany during World War II. The plan was attempted during the war, resulting indirectly and directly in the deaths of millions by shootings, starvation, disease, extermination through labor, and genocide. But its full implementation was not considered practicable during the major military operations, and was prevented by Germany's defeat.

The program operational guidelines were based on the policy of _Lebensraum_ designed by Adolf Hitler and the Nazi Party in fulfilment of the _Drang nach Osten_ (drive to the East) ideology of German expansionism. As such, it was intended to be a part of the New Order in Europe.

The plan was a work in progress.

Generalplan Ost - Wikipedia


*Wikipedia, Mein Kampf*: The arrangement of chapters is as follows:

*Volume One: A Reckoning* [1925]

Chapter 1: In the House of My Parents
Chapter 2: Years of Study and Suffering in Vienna
Chapter 3: General Political Considerations Based on My Vienna Period
Chapter 4: Munich
Chapter 5: The World War
Chapter 6: War Propaganda
Chapter 7: The Revolution
Chapter 8: The Beginning of My Political Activity
Chapter 9: The "German Workers' Party"
Chapter 10: Causes of the Collapse
Chapter 11: Nation and Race
Chapter 12: The First Period of Development of the National Socialist German Workers' Party
*Volume Two: The National Socialist Movement* [1926]

Chapter 1: Philosophy and Party
Chapter 2: The State
Chapter 3: Subjects and Citizens
Chapter 4: Personality and the Conception of the Völkisch State
Chapter 5: Philosophy and Organization
Chapter 6: The Struggle of the Early Period – the Significance of the Spoken Word
Chapter 7: The Struggle with the Red Front
Chapter 8: The Strong Man Is Mightiest Alone
Chapter 9: Basic Ideas Regarding the Meaning and Organization of the Sturmabteilung
Chapter 10: Federalism as a Mask
Chapter 11: Propaganda and Organization
Chapter 12: The Trade-Union Question
Chapter 13: German Alliance Policy After the War
Chapter 14: Eastern Orientation or Eastern Policy
Chapter 15: The Right of Emergency Defense
Conclusion 
Index
After the party's poor showing in the 1928 elections, Hitler believed that the reason for his loss was the public's misunderstanding of his ideas. He then retired to Munich to dictate a sequel to _Mein Kampf_ to expand on its ideas, with more focus on foreign policy.

Only two copies of the 200-page manuscript were originally made, and only one of these was ever made public. The document was neither edited nor published during the Nazi era and remains known as _Zweites Buch_, or "Second Book". To keep the document strictly secret, in 1935 Hitler ordered that it be placed in a safe in an air raid shelter. It remained there until being discovered by an American officer in 1945.

The authenticity of the document found in 1945 has been verified by Josef Berg, a former employee of the Nazi publishing house Eher Verlag, and Telford Taylor, a former brigadier general of the United States Army Reserve and Chief Counsel at the Nuremberg war-crimes trials.

In 1958, the _Zweites Buch_ was found in the archives of the United States by American historian Gerhard Weinberg. Unable to find an American publisher, Weinberg turned to his mentor – Hans Rothfels at the Institute of Contemporary History in Munich, and his associate Martin Broszat – who published _Zweites Buch_ in 1961. A pirated edition was published in English in New York in 1962. The first authoritative English edition was not published until 2003 (_Hitler's Second Book: The Unpublished Sequel to Mein Kampf,_ ISBN 1-929631-16-2).

Mein Kampf - Wikipedia









Why Did Hitler Write 'Mein Kampf'?


In 1925, Adolf Hitler published the first volume of a semi-autobiographical book that laid out his racist policies. It is still in print today. But should anyone read it? And what would they find inside?




history.howstuffworks.com





*Wikipedia:* The _*Zweites Buch*_ (German: [ˈtsvaɪ̯təs buːχ], "Second Book"), published in English as _*Hitler's Secret Book*_ and later as _*Hitler's Second Book*_, is an unedited transcript of Adolf Hitler's thoughts on foreign policy *written in 1928*; it was written after _Mein Kampf_ and was not published in his lifetime.

Gerhard Weinberg speculates that the _Zweites Buch_ was not published in 1928 because _Mein Kampf_ did not sell well at that time and Hitler's publisher, Franz-Eher-Verlag, would have told Hitler that a second book would hinder sales even more. 

War and Peace 
The Necessity of Strife 
Race and Will in the Struggle for Power 
Elements of Foreign Policy 
National Socialist Foreign Policy 
German Needs and Aims 
Policies of the Second Reich 
Military Power and Fallacy of Border Restoration as Goal 
Hopelessness of an Economic Situation 
On Necessity for an Active Foreign Policy 
Germany and Russia 
German Foreign Policy 
German Goals 
England as an Ally 
Italy as an Ally 
Summary
*Zweites Buch and Mein Kampf*

There are a number of similarities and differences between _Zweites Buch_ and _Mein Kampf_. As in _Mein Kampf_, Hitler declared that the Jews were his eternal and most dangerous opponents. As in _Mein Kampf_, Hitler outlined what the German historian Andreas Hillgruber has called his _Stufenplan_ ("stage-by-stage plan"). Hitler himself never used the term _Stufenplan_, which was coined by Hillgruber in his 1965 book _Hitlers Strategie_. Briefly, the _Stufenplan_ called for three stages. In the first stage, there would be a massive military build-up, the overthrow of the shackles of the Treaty of Versailles, and the forming of alliances with Fascist Italy and the British Empire. The second stage would be a series of fast, "lightning wars" in conjunction with Italy and the United Kingdom against France and whichever of her allies in Eastern Europe—such as Czechoslovakia, Poland, Romania and Yugoslavia—chose to stand by her. The third stage would be a war to obliterate what Hitler considered to be the "Judeo-Bolshevik" regime in the Soviet Union.

* The "fourth stage"*

In contrast to _Mein Kampf_, in _Zweites Buch_ Hitler added a fourth stage to the _Stufenplan_. He insinuated that in the far future a struggle for world domination might take place between the United States and a European alliance comprising a new association of nations, consisting of individual states with high national value. _Zweites Buch_ also offers a different perspective on the U.S. than that outlined in _Mein Kampf_. In the latter, Hitler declared that Germany's most dangerous opponent on the international scene was the Soviet Union; in _Zweites Buch_, Hitler declared that for immediate purposes, the Soviet Union was still the most dangerous opponent, but that in the long-term, the most dangerous potential opponent was the United States. […]

*Ideas on international relations*

Of all of Germany's potential enemies comprising the eventual Allies of World War II, Hitler ranked the U.S. as the most dangerous. By contrast, Hitler saw the United Kingdom as a fellow "Aryan" power that in exchange for Germany's renunciation of naval and colonial ambitions would ally itself with Germany. France, in Hitler's opinion, was rapidly "Negroizing" itself. In regard to the Soviet Union, Hitler dismissed the Russian people as being Slavic _Untermenschen_ ("sub-humans") incapable of intelligent thought. Hitler consequently believed that the Russian people were ruled by what he regarded as a gang of bloodthirsty but inept Jewish revolutionaries.

*United Kingdom*

In _Zweites Buch_, Hitler called for an Anglo-German alliance based on political expediency as well as the notion that the two Germanic powers were natural allies. Hitler argued that the alleged British striving for a balance of power leading to an Anglo-German alliance would not conflict with his goal of Germany being the dominant continental power because it was wrong to believe that "England fought every hegemonic power immediately", but rather was prepared to accept dominant states whose aims were "obviously and purely continental in nature". Hitler went on to write that "Of course no one in Britain will conclude an alliance for the good of Germany, but only in the furtherance of British interests." Nonetheless, because Hitler believed that there was an ongoing struggle between the "Jewish invasion" and the "old British tradition" for the control of the United Kingdom, Hitler believed the chances for Anglo-German alliance to be good provided the "Jewish invasion" was resisted successfully. Hitler hedged somewhat, however, by claiming that


> The instincts of Anglo-Saxondom are still so sharp and alive that one cannot speak of a complete victory of Jewry, but rather, in part the latter is still forced to adjust its interests to those of the English. If the Jew were to triumph in England, English interests would recede into the background.... [But] if the Briton triumphs then a shift of England's attitude vis-à-vis Germany can still take place."


Zweites Buch - Wikipedia


Wikipedia: "*Hitler's Table Talk*" (German: _Tischgespräche im Führerhauptquartier_) is the title given to a series of World War II monologues delivered by Adolf Hitler, which were transcribed from 1941 to 1944. Hitler's remarks were recorded by Heinrich Heim, Henry Picker and Martin Bormann and later published by different editors under different titles in four languages.

Martin Bormann, who was serving as Hitler's private secretary, persuaded Hitler to allow a team of specially picked officers to record in shorthand his private conversations for posterity. The first notes were taken by the lawyer Heinrich Heim, starting from 5 July 1941 to mid-March 1942. Taking his place, Henry Picker took notes from 21 March 1942 until 2 August 1942, after which Heinrich Heim and Martin Bormann continued appending material off and on until 1944.

The talks were recorded at the Führer Headquarters in the company of Hitler's inner circle. The talks dwell on war and foreign affairs but also Hitler's attitudes on religion, culture, philosophy, his personal aspirations and feelings towards his enemies and friends. […]

Albert Speer, who was the Minister of Armaments for Germany, confirmed the authenticity of Picker's German edition in his _Spandau diaries_. Speer stated that Hitler often spoke at length about his favorite subjects while dinner guests were reduced to silent listeners. In the presence of his "superiors by birth and education" Hitler made a sincere effort to "present his thoughts in as impressive manner as possible". Speer noted that "we must remember that this collection includes only those passages in Hitler's monologues—they took up one to two hours every day—which struck Picker as significant. Complete transcripts would reinforce the sense of stifling boredom".

According to historian Max Domarus, Hitler insisted on absolute silence when he delivered his monologues. No one was allowed to interrupt or contradict him. Magda Goebbels reported to Galeazzo Ciano: "It is always Hitler who talks! He can be Führer as much as he likes, but he always repeats himself and bores his guests". Ian Kershaw reports:


> Some of the guests—among them Goebbels, Göring, and Speer—were regulars. Others were newcomers or were seldom invited. The talk was often of world affairs. But Hitler would tailor the discussion to those present. He was careful in what he said. He consciously set out to impress his opinion on his guests, perhaps at times to gauge their reaction. Sometimes he dominated the 'conversation' with a monologue. At other times, he was content to listen while Goebbels sparred with another guest, or a more general discussion unfolded. Sometimes the table talk was interesting. New guests could find the occasion exciting and Hitler's comments a 'revelation'. Frau Below, the wife of the new Luftwaffe-Adjutant, found the atmosphere, and Hitler's company, at first exhilarating and was greatly impressed by his knowledge of history and art. But for the household staff who had heard it all many times, the midday meal was often a tedious affair.


After the war, Albert Speer referred to the table talks as "rambling nonsense", adding:


> [Hitler] was that classic German type known as _Besserwisser_, the know-it-all. His mind was cluttered with minor information and misinformation, about everything. I believe that one of the reasons he gathered so many flunkies around him was that his instinct told him that first-rate people couldn't possibly stomach the outpourings.


Hitler's Table Talk - Wikipedia


*Mein Kampf after World War II*

Following Nazi Germany's defeat in May 1945, the Allies began to systematically remove Nazi propaganda (including books, maps, films, statues, flags, and symbols) from libraries, universities, stores, buildings, and city streets. According to the directives laid out at the Yalta and Potsdam conferences of Allied leaders, Germany was to be purged of militarism and Nazism so that it could be transformed into a democratic society that would never threaten world peace. […]

In keeping with these policies, Allied occupation officials removed _Mein Kampf_ and other Nazi texts from circulation and prohibited their re-publication. American authorities subsequently transferred the copyright to the Bavarian government, which used its legal power to prevent the re-issuing of Hitler's book in Germany and elsewhere, with the exception of the English-language versions. In spite of its efforts, the Bavarian government was never able to fully stop the reprinting of _Mein Kampf_. It has been published in a variety of languages in hard copy and in electronic form on the Internet.

On midnight of December 31, 2015, the copyright for _Mein Kampf _expired, ending the Bavarian government's official control over the book. In preparation for this deadline, Germany's respected Institute for Contemporary History in Munich has published a critical edition of the work, which contextualizes Hitler's ideas and details the tragic role Nazi racial ideology played in the Holocaust.

Mein Kampf: Hitler's Manifesto


In case anyone is insatiable: “_Hitler’s ‘Speeches, Writings, Directives’, February 1925 to January 1933, were published by the Institute for Contemporary History in Munich between 1992 and 2003 in 13 volumes of more than 5400 pages_.”


----------



## Grehoy (May 30, 2014)

8080 said:


> Possibility of Neo Nazi provocation or ENTP trolling.


I read it by the way to understand where he was coming from.

But why did you paste all that wall of text?


----------



## mia-me (Feb 5, 2021)

daleks_exterminate said:


> Yet........I cannot make myself finish The Hobbit. I've tried multiple times. I find it extremely boring.


That's because It's light entertainment for children. I enjoyed it as a child but only read it once since there wasn't much to absorb.


----------



## BenevolentBitterBleeding (Mar 16, 2015)

Front to back? The Bible.


----------



## gyozar (Apr 21, 2021)

mia-me said:


> Never understood the appeal of The Little Prince. It was read and promptly forgotten.


same I've read it both english and my first language but cant remember shit abt it


----------



## gyozar (Apr 21, 2021)

I'm gonna say pride and prejudice


----------



## Perlanthesis (Oct 30, 2020)

Mostly famous school literature


----------



## lilysocks (Nov 7, 2012)

daleks_exterminate said:


> Audiobooks are a game changer. I used to read constantly, then realized I hadn't in a long time. I don't have a ton of free time, but listen to books while doing other things and it's really enjoyable!


interesting ... i loathe the audio format for books. it really bothers me to have someone else's voice interfere with whatever i use when i read to myself. 

i think you might like titus groan. just a guess. it's kind of . . . idk, dickens meets narnia meets the original gothic type thing? you're pretty fearless and you have a voracious mind, so it might appeal to you. it is WEIRD. i had a high fever when i read it myself, mind you.

i always seem to be reading or watching odd stuff when i have a fever. one time i recall being so sick i read flaubert's parrot with a completely straight face. at some point afterwards i re-took my temperature and it was heading for 105, which probably explains quite a bit.


----------



## Squirt (Jun 2, 2017)

lilysocks said:


> interesting ... i loathe the audio format for books. it really bothers me to have someone else's voice interfere with whatever i use when i read to myself.
> 
> i think you might like titus groan. just a guess. it's kind of . . . idk, dickens meets narnia meets the original gothic type thing? you're pretty fearless and you have a voracious mind, so it might appeal to you. it is WEIRD. i had a high fever when i read it myself, mind you.
> 
> i always seem to be reading or watching odd stuff when i have a fever. one time i recall being so sick i read flaubert's parrot with a completely straight face. at some point afterwards i re-took my temperature and it was heading for 105, which probably explains quite a bit.


fevers are great time to indulge the surreal, lol


----------

