Comments on: What I’m Reading

By: George

George — Sat, 06 Dec 2008 08:30:01 +0000

On a less serious note: save your money when it comes to Chinese Democracy. That album is fucking terrible. I’m genuinely astonished at some of the reviews it’s been getting.

By: Daniel O'Brien

Daniel O'Brien — Fri, 28 Nov 2008 11:06:24 +0000

“Almost no reason”? I’ll have you know that I’m within walking distance of six different laundromats and liquor stores. Does Hollywood have that?

I think not.

By: Ryan Holiday

Ryan Holiday — Thu, 27 Nov 2008 20:28:44 +0000

Fortunately, that’s a false conflict.

1) Robert doesn’t espouse anything. He writes history books. Many of the Laws contradict each other because they’re not so much advice as they are collections of congruent strategies that you can take or leave.

2) Marcus Aurelius, if anything, had a very negative view of humanity. His point, similar to Robert’s, is that regardless of what you think or do, people are going to act a certain way, a way that tends to be conniving, evil, ignorant, petty, pathetic, emotional and manipulative. Marcus’s book was a collection of maxims to protect himself and remain in control. I also happen to know that Robert is using some Aurelius in his next book.

Robert’s philosophy is basically: whether you play the game or not, you should know how to. Marcus says, if you’re self-disciplined enough, you can keep yourself above the fray. So there is really not a contradiction.

Make sense?

By: Sam

Sam — Thu, 27 Nov 2008 20:04:06 +0000

Ryan, how did you go about reconciling the teachings of Aurelius in ‘Meditations’ (who appears to espouse a positive view of humanity) with the teachings of say Greene in ’48 Laws of Powers’ who proposes that one use every possible tactic to deceive mankind.

By: Pizzamancer

Pizzamancer — Wed, 26 Nov 2008 15:59:45 +0000

Interesting book list. Mine is about the same length, with a stack that just arrived from Amazon just sitting there waiting to be prioritized.

One stack I look at every morning is about 5 books high and focuses on economics. The first book in that pile I read was the “Undercover Economist”, and if you haven’t read it, don’t bother. Total garbage.

By: Ryan Holiday

Ryan Holiday — Wed, 26 Nov 2008 15:03:20 +0000

“The rich were dull and they drank too much or they played too much backgammon. They were dull and they were repetitious. He remembered poor Scott Fitzgerald and his romantic awe of them and how he had started a story once that began, ‘The rich are different from you and me.’ And how someone had said to Scott, Yes, they have more money. But that was not humorous to Scott. He thought they were a special glamorous race and when he found they weren’t it wrecked him just as much as any other thing that wrecked him.”

That’s still the dominant image we have of Fitzgerald. The irony though is that the exchange actually happened to Hemingway. If you look at Fitzgerald’s life, although he clearly had a drinking problem and was a bit of a fading star, that was sort of the last nail in the coffin.

By: John

John — Wed, 26 Nov 2008 14:18:46 +0000

Hi Ryan,

I read your blog and respect your opinion.

I was wondering what your thoughts are on truth.

I think truth resides in objectivity and absolutes.

Perception is what people do to objectivity and absolutes.

Dialogue is the result.

Thanks,

John

By: Alex

Alex — Wed, 26 Nov 2008 14:05:50 +0000

How did Hemingway destroy Fitzgerald in one move? I read Donaldson’s book and Fitzgerald’s downfall seemed like the result of a personality dependent on alcohol and the attention of others.