Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

great books

Expand Messages
  • mike white
    often i speak to those who are busy, and have little time to read, by sharing my impressions and musings on various topics. i like to bring books that i
    Message 1 of 3 , Apr 23, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
       
         often i speak to those who are busy, and have little time to read, by sharing my impressions and musings on various topics.  i like to bring books that i profit from to your attention. 
         im happy to say that i finally was able to acquire a complete 1st edition of the harvard classics, and the great books of the western world, and a newer world book enclopedia. 
         the harvard classics began in 1909, so they are often in poor condition.  they are smaller, and less durable, than the great books.  the hc has 51 volumes, including the lectures.  from natural inclination, i am more familiar with the texts in the hc.  there are several duplicates, since each collection tried to cover the most important books.  i think hc was correct to include sacred writings.  both have homer, with gb having both books.  its often called 'the 5 ft shelf of books', but it takes 8ft of shelves for the hc.  that may need changed to 5 cubits of books. 
       
       
         the great books are a beautiful set, so well-made that the 1952 set i have, is still like new.  an asset for any family, and should be passed along as an heirloom.  it has 54 volumes, and takes about 6ft of shelf.  its an investment for your children, and theirs. 
       
       
         these links are useful, for they name each selection included by each collection.  its interesting to see what these learned men thought was the most important works, for educated people to be familiar with. 
       
         each of us have our own taste, and some of these writers may bore you, but with respect for these editors, it moves one to look again.  i got more from darwin on geology, than his work on evolution. 
       
         we are due for another collection, since over 60 years have passed since the time of hutchins' gb's.  it would be quite a task to limit the important works to 52 volumes.  much of the value of such collections, rests upon the respect and trust we have of the judgment of the compiler.  more regard would be given to a newton or humboldt, than to an unknown. 
         i would have to walk slowly thru my library, and make a list, to decide which 52 books were the most important to me.  likely, half would not be found in the other collections.  i would include key readings from edgar cayce, the works of john keely, and blavatsky, and velikovski.  few would care for my opinion, as to a collection.  it would be more acceptable if i could put together a book, and cite the other authors with key fragments.  we all try to see the big picture, of the universe, and of the history of man, and note the important stuff.  this should be the guiding thought of the editor and compiler.  works that merely offered clever dinner talk, would not make the cut.  odd that neither set included humboldt.  later editions of gb had 60 volumes.  some of the works included were fun reads, like twain, but gave little help on comprehending the big picture.  more shakespeare was included than necessary. 
         i think all of the given works could be read, and one would still have little idea of the true history of man, and our destiny, and the meaning of our existence.  so the editors have failed in that respect.  this comes from being too confined, to the established facts, many of which are wrong.  blavatsky may have come closest to disclosing the big picture, but she was combative, and liked to shock the reader.  her works were heavy with revelations, causing slow going, to absorb the implications. 
         was it wise to exclude the works of john stephens?  the finds of schlieman, and the ica stones?  the oera de linda book? 
         modern scholars tend to be expert in one field, with a narrow focus.  more can be learned from a naturalist, astute in many fields.  even they, often concentrated upon that in front of their eyes, instead of pondering the unknown, where we must look.  we must arrive at the higher questions, before we can ponder the deep but important things. 
       
      mike
       
       
    • dcampbell75479
      Hi, Mike, Though I seldom have time to read the books you reference, your diligent search for old and rare books is a valuable service to us all. I want to
      Message 2 of 3 , Apr 23, 2013
      • 0 Attachment
        Hi, Mike,
        Though I seldom have time to read the books you reference, your diligent search for old and rare books is a valuable service to us all. I want to personally thank you for your continued efforts. One of my most valued books is the signed copy of Prorok's "Digging Up Lost African Gods" which you alerted me to. Keep up the good work!

        BTW have you seen Steve Greer's Sirius which features a strange little mummy from the Atacama desert found in 2003. Stanford University Research did a complete analysis of it which Greer has made available online. I couldn't download it but I'm having my son look into making a copy. http://siriusdisclos...AL-COMPLETE.pdf

        How difficult is it to get into the Atacama these days? My sister and I had been contemplating a trip there but as I recall it's been a really dangerous zone even since Gene Savoy went there. Full of cattle rustlers, revolutionaries and other unsavory types. Did you go there on your last trip down south?

        Yours truly,
        David Campbell

        --- In Precolumbian_Inscriptions@yahoogroups.com, "mike white" <michael.white511@...> wrote:
        >
        >
        > often i speak to those who are busy, and have little time to read, by sharing my impressions and musings on various topics. i like to bring books that i profit from to your attention.
        > im happy to say that i finally was able to acquire a complete 1st edition of the harvard classics, and the great books of the western world, and a newer world book enclopedia.
        > the harvard classics began in 1909, so they are often in poor condition. they are smaller, and less durable, than the great books. the hc has 51 volumes, including the lectures. from natural inclination, i am more familiar with the texts in the hc. there are several duplicates, since each collection tried to cover the most important books. i think hc was correct to include sacred writings. both have homer, with gb having both books. its often called 'the 5 ft shelf of books', but it takes 8ft of shelves for the hc. that may need changed to 5 cubits of books.
        >
        > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harvard_Classics
        >
        > the great books are a beautiful set, so well-made that the 1952 set i have, is still like new. an asset for any family, and should be passed along as an heirloom. it has 54 volumes, and takes about 6ft of shelf. its an investment for your children, and theirs.
        >
        > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Books_of_the_Western_World
        >
        > these links are useful, for they name each selection included by each collection. its interesting to see what these learned men thought was the most important works, for educated people to be familiar with.
        >
        > each of us have our own taste, and some of these writers may bore you, but with respect for these editors, it moves one to look again. i got more from darwin on geology, than his work on evolution.
        >
        > we are due for another collection, since over 60 years have passed since the time of hutchins' gb's. it would be quite a task to limit the important works to 52 volumes. much of the value of such collections, rests upon the respect and trust we have of the judgment of the compiler. more regard would be given to a newton or humboldt, than to an unknown.
        > i would have to walk slowly thru my library, and make a list, to decide which 52 books were the most important to me. likely, half would not be found in the other collections. i would include key readings from edgar cayce, the works of john keely, and blavatsky, and velikovski. few would care for my opinion, as to a collection. it would be more acceptable if i could put together a book, and cite the other authors with key fragments. we all try to see the big picture, of the universe, and of the history of man, and note the important stuff. this should be the guiding thought of the editor and compiler. works that merely offered clever dinner talk, would not make the cut. odd that neither set included humboldt. later editions of gb had 60 volumes. some of the works included were fun reads, like twain, but gave little help on comprehending the big picture. more shakespeare was included than necessary.
        > i think all of the given works could be read, and one would still have little idea of the true history of man, and our destiny, and the meaning of our existence. so the editors have failed in that respect. this comes from being too confined, to the established facts, many of which are wrong. blavatsky may have come closest to disclosing the big picture, but she was combative, and liked to shock the reader. her works were heavy with revelations, causing slow going, to absorb the implications.
        > was it wise to exclude the works of john stephens? the finds of schlieman, and the ica stones? the oera de linda book?
        > modern scholars tend to be expert in one field, with a narrow focus. more can be learned from a naturalist, astute in many fields. even they, often concentrated upon that in front of their eyes, instead of pondering the unknown, where we must look. we must arrive at the higher questions, before we can ponder the deep but important things.
        >
        > mike
        >
      • mike white
        hi david, all thanks for the kind words. in october, the furthest south along the coast that i got was ica and huacachina peru. i was limited by my inability
        Message 3 of 3 , Apr 23, 2013
        • 0 Attachment
           
          hi david, all
           
             thanks for the kind words. 
             in october, the furthest south along the coast that i got was ica and huacachina peru.  i was limited by my inability to walk very far, and my few words of spanish. 
             most of the atacama is in chile now.  they exploit its mineral wealth.  for centuries that coast has been known to be infested with robbers, but i had no problem with crime.  at the bus station in puno peru near titicaca, a guy pretending to be helpful, tried to get me to leave my bag unattended.  i saw thru the ploy, just in time. 
             to explore the atacama safely, and it can be done, would require a bilingual and armed driver, with an air-conditioned 4w drive.  the bus i got south from lima was comfortable.  chile has a train from arica south along the coast, i believe.  it would be most helpful to have a local make the arrangements for you. 
             that region could have ruins from the oldest cultured man, on the earth.  what exactly do you want to see?  then we can determine if the hub to start from is in peru or chile.  friction remains between these countries over the atacama. 
           
          mike
           
           
          ----- Original Message -----
          Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2013 11:46 AM
          Subject: [Precolumbian_Inscriptions] Re: great books

           

          Hi, Mike,
          Though I seldom have time to read the books you reference, your diligent search for old and rare books is a valuable service to us all. I want to personally thank you for your continued efforts. One of my most valued books is the signed copy of Prorok's "Digging Up Lost African Gods" which you alerted me to. Keep up the good work!

          BTW have you seen Steve Greer's Sirius which features a strange little mummy from the Atacama desert found in 2003. Stanford University Research did a complete analysis of it which Greer has made available online. I couldn't download it but I'm having my son look into making a copy. http://siriusdisclos...AL-COMPLETE.pdf

          How difficult is it to get into the Atacama these days? My sister and I had been contemplating a trip there but as I recall it's been a really dangerous zone even since Gene Savoy went there. Full of cattle rustlers, revolutionaries and other unsavory types. Did you go there on your last trip down south?

          Yours truly,
          David Campbell

          --- In Precolumbian_Inscriptions@yahoogroups.com, "mike white" <michael.white511@...> wrote:
          >
          >
          > often i speak to those who are busy, and have little time to read, by sharing my impressions and musings on various topics. i like to bring books that i profit from to your attention.
          > im happy to say that i finally was able to acquire a complete 1st edition of the harvard classics, and the great books of the western world, and a newer world book enclopedia.
          > the harvard classics began in 1909, so they are often in poor condition. they are smaller, and less durable, than the great books. the hc has 51 volumes, including the lectures. from natural inclination, i am more familiar with the texts in the hc. there are several duplicates, since each collection tried to cover the most important books. i think hc was correct to include sacred writings. both have homer, with gb having both books. its often called 'the 5 ft shelf of books', but it takes 8ft of shelves for the hc. that may need changed to 5 cubits of books.
          >
          > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harvard_Classics
          >
          > the great books are a beautiful set, so well-made that the 1952 set i have, is still like new. an asset for any family, and should be passed along as an heirloom. it has 54 volumes, and takes about 6ft of shelf. its an investment for your children, and theirs.
          >
          > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Books_of_the_Western_World
          >
          > these links are useful, for they name each selection included by each collection. its interesting to see what these learned men thought was the most important works, for educated people to be familiar with.
          >
          > each of us have our own taste, and some of these writers may bore you, but with respect for these editors, it moves one to look again. i got more from darwin on geology, than his work on evolution.
          >
          > we are due for another collection, since over 60 years have passed since the time of hutchins' gb's. it would be quite a task to limit the important works to 52 volumes. much of the value of such collections, rests upon the respect and trust we have of the judgment of the compiler. more regard would be given to a newton or humboldt, than to an unknown.
          > i would have to walk slowly thru my library, and make a list, to decide which 52 books were the most important to me. likely, half would not be found in the other collections. i would include key readings from edgar cayce, the works of john keely, and blavatsky, and velikovski. few would care for my opinion, as to a collection. it would be more acceptable if i could put together a book, and cite the other authors with key fragments. we all try to see the big picture, of the universe, and of the history of man, and note the important stuff. this should be the guiding thought of the editor and compiler. works that merely offered clever dinner talk, would not make the cut. odd that neither set included humboldt. later editions of gb had 60 volumes. some of the works included were fun reads, like twain, but gave little help on comprehending the big picture. more shakespeare was included than necessary.
          > i think all of the given works could be read, and one would still have little idea of the true history of man, and our destiny, and the meaning of our existence. so the editors have failed in that respect. this comes from being too confined, to the established facts, many of which are wrong. blavatsky may have come closest to disclosing the big picture, but she was combative, and liked to shock the reader. her works were heavy with revelations, causing slow going, to absorb the implications.
          > was it wise to exclude the works of john stephens? the finds of schlieman, and the ica stones? the oera de linda book?
          > modern scholars tend to be expert in one field, with a narrow focus. more can be learned from a naturalist, astute in many fields. even they, often concentrated upon that in front of their eyes, instead of pondering the unknown, where we must look. we must arrive at the higher questions, before we can ponder the deep but important things.
          >
          > mike
          >

        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.