For most of my life, I had generally avoided novels written before I was born. They were stodgy. The language was outdated. They were boring. Even if they were significant in the historical sense, I saw them as the literary equivalent of reading the King James Version of the Bible.
I was wrong, of course, but I didn’t realize that until the last decade or so. I first started reading English translations of some Russian classics. I came to love Leo Tolstoy’s “Anna Karenina” and Fyodor Dostoevsky’s “The Brothers Karamazov,” among others.
Then a friend introduced me to German novelist Hermann Hesse. To one extent or another, I found that I loved “Steppenwolf,” “Siddhartha,” “Narcissus and Goldmund” and “The Glass Bead Game.” I’ve read “Narcissus and Goldmund” four times so far — and I keep finding new things to appreciate about it.
But I was slow to appreciate the English writer Charles Dickens — and I’ve come to understand that this has meant depriving myself of a kind of literary joy that I haven’t experienced for a long time. I just finished the Dickens novel, “David Copperfield,” a few hours ago — and I’d like to suggest that this book is better than almost any fiction that’s been written since I was born.
I’m left feeling serious regret that I’ve had such a huge hole in my education about literature and human existence.

THE McELROY ZOO: Meet Henry, the tiny kitten who was dumped with a broken leg and a big heart
Inner alarm is louder every day; big changes must come to my life
UPDATE: Judge drops charges against Diane Tran; $100,000 raised
Spoiled brat sues White Castle because he can’t fit into a booth
What do you really want in life? Believe actions, not empty goals
When did someone decide we have the legal right not to be offended?
Let others be wrong if they want; it’s not your job to fix their errors
How would we see the gang war in Texas if the faces had been black?