When I read Garry Wills’ critical review of All Things Shining: Reading the Western Classics to Find Meaning in a Secular Age where Wills dismisses the book as “shallow and inept” I knew I had to read it. Wills is partly right. All Things Shining is not a deep book. It cites familiar texts (The Odyssey, Moby Dick, The Inferno, etc.) and doesn’t add much new. However, if you’re a person who wants a guide to these classic works, All Things Shining will fit the bill. The only goofy part of the book is the authors’ assertion that David Foster Wallace is the “best mind of his generation” (actually A.O. Scott of the NY TIMES said it first). Infinite Jest weighs in at over a 1000 pages and, trust me, it was a grind to finish reading it. That caveat aside, All Things Shining competently explores these works in an unexciting fashion. GRADE: B-
Unexciting just about says it, doesn’t it, George? I’d rather spend time in the shade with a pulp novel or collections of short stories by Graham Greene or Arthur C. Clark.
Exactly, Rick. Books like ALL THINGS SHINING break no new ground. Rehashing the classics needs to be a bit more creative to attract readers.
Dreyfus’s attempt to resurrect the polytheism (since Christianity has, in his view, pretty much run its course) of Homer in the twenty-first century is interesting but ultimately very shallow. If you want to read some serious philosophical examinations of the Christian tradition and the contemporary world you might want to consult scholars like Paul Ricoeur, Hans Kuhn, Jacques Ellul, or Rene Girard. They are a lot more exciting than Dreyfus (or Sean Kelly) and have something important to say. Dreyfus and Kelly offer nothing mroe than a sophomoric Cliff’s note version of the classics they discuss.
Interesting analysis, Richard! I’ve read some Jacques Ellul, but not the others you list. I’ll have to get busy and track down their books!