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 The language was outdated.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.

For rest of my life, I’ll constantly re-interpret mother I didn’t know
Loving a depressed person means holding tightly on trips through hell
There’s hatred, evil and injustice, but this is the ‘real’ America, too
I’m paralyzed by fear my choices won’t match needs of future wife
If you allow anything to be priority over love and beauty, you’re a fool
It’s a very old cliche, but it’s true: Denial isn’t just a river in Egypt
If there’s something you must do, income and vocation might clash
Tools don’t make you great artist, but tools can change how you feel
Creating new enemies: Latest crisis points to need to end Afghan war