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 The language was outdated.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.

Little girl helped me figure out why I’m not attracted to her mom
Anonymous attacker hit me hard, but I can’t let coward change me
Today’s group hatred says world hasn’t learned Auschwitz lessons
Hidden chains need to be broken, so I’ve become a reluctant rebel
Tough problem: What does a free society do about unfit parents?
There are more of us than ever, so why do many of us feel so alone?
Why am I shocked that a friend’s happy news makes me feel envy?
Does mainstream schooling model bring out the worst in teen-agers?
What kind of hypocrite gives advice but won’t practice what he preaches?