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 The language was outdated.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.

Do you believe you’re free? Slavery by any other name is still slavery
Is Ed Schultz insane or just an idiot? It’s really hard to be sure anymore
What if most money spent for university degrees is useless?
How one woman’s grand gesture for love turned into a nightmare
When love finally dies, it’s like a fever breaks and the pain is gone
Barbarians with evil ideas taking our entire culture off deadly cliff
EU Nanny State bans young kids from evil balloons and whistles
I’d like to help change the world, but politics is no longer my hobby
Worshiping the ‘lesser evil’ will always allow evil to rule over you