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 The language was outdated.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.

Trivial distractions keep us from focusing on love and connection
Nightmarish dreams mean dead can continue to play mind games
Do we really need so much ‘stuff’? Do we own it? Or does it own us?
Only through death of empires can something new take their places
Turkey pardon? How about pardons for jailed innocent people instead?
As a reformer, I’ve been at my best when allowed to fix what’s broken
I don’t know how to be popular, and that hurts in a social world
Reaction to Googler’s memo says, ‘Diversity is good if you conform’
Taking risks, working for big goals can create success, joy, exhilaration