I finally got around to picking up the abridged version of DotW recently. It is the H Stuart Hughes version, not sure if that's the one you meant? It's only early days but I'm enjoying it already. Like you said, I'm not understanding all of it but think I'm getting the main themes anyway. Thanks again for the abridged recommendation
I finally got around to picking up the abridged version of DotW recently. It is the H Stuart Hughes version, not sure if that's the one you meant? It's only early days but I'm enjoying it already. Like you said, I'm not understanding all of it but think I'm getting the main themes anyway. Thanks again for the abridged recommendation
That's the one I have. But I'm not anything like a Spengler afficionado so far be it for me to say which translation is better. I'm glad to hear it! I can't guarantee it'll change your life, or in which direction, but I think it's a necessary perspective to which we would otherwise not be exposed in the normal course of things.
Yeah again I don't know enough to say if one translation is better for readability or even more faithful to the original German, but we have to start somewhere.
I know Darryl mentioned that he compiled a list of notes on all of the references so that he could understand the specifics of the topics/artists/leaders/etc. mentioned. For me, reading it was more about exposing myself to an entirely new sensibility, a way of looking at the development of human consciousness that is different from the Hegelian/Marxist dialectical understanding or the Whig progressive view of history. I think Spengler's cyclical theories have much more in common with the ancients (e.g. the Greeks and Indians) and he himself is much more appreciative of them than almost any modern historian (he wants to understand them as they understood themselves, a lofty goal which he probably does not meet - Leo Strauss, for example, criticized him because he imputed to other cultures/peoples a self-understanding and definition which they themselves would not have recognized). This is important to me because a deeper understanding of the ancients is necessary if we are to emerge from the current and future crises of modernity with our humanity intact.
As for how long it took me to read it, I was pretty lackadaisical about it. I read it on and off over about 1.5 years, but it could be read in a few months in a deliberate and thoughtful manner. I took notes and wrote some comments along the way, but I think that if you immerse yourself in the book for at least a few months, you'll give yourself the chance to have it shape a new perspective which you can then use to view other texts, not to mention historical events and current developments.
Thanks brother, appreciate the insight. If you want another take on the view of history as a progressive path I highly recommend James C Scott's 'Against the Grain'. It is about the development of the first human states in Mesopotamia. Scott makes a convincing argument that this wasn't actually progress, or that it was inevitable at all and that there are alternatives to our current scaled up version of human societies, and that the state lead to the deprivation of the human. It's one of those books that completely changed my worldview.
Can definitely recommend Against the Grain, Dangerous History turned me on to that one. And the podcast we don't mention once mentioned that at least the Romans, if not all ancient societies, may have existed in a constant state of what we would call PTSD. Interesting idea, but just going by ratio it would seem to me that we are the aberrant mindset, not them.
I finally got around to picking up the abridged version of DotW recently. It is the H Stuart Hughes version, not sure if that's the one you meant? It's only early days but I'm enjoying it already. Like you said, I'm not understanding all of it but think I'm getting the main themes anyway. Thanks again for the abridged recommendation
https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Decline_of_the_West/cwRwDwAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=0
That's the one I have. But I'm not anything like a Spengler afficionado so far be it for me to say which translation is better. I'm glad to hear it! I can't guarantee it'll change your life, or in which direction, but I think it's a necessary perspective to which we would otherwise not be exposed in the normal course of things.
Thanks mate. Slightly different version to the one I have:
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Decline-Oxford-Paperbacks-Spengler-abridged/dp/B00DO8MNHI/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=spengler+decline+of+the+west+abridged&qid=1675934471&sprefix=decline+of+the+west+ab%2Caps%2C96&sr=8-1
But I'm sure it's all the same really. Did you take a while to read it? Stopping and looking up references he makes that you didn't know?
Yeah again I don't know enough to say if one translation is better for readability or even more faithful to the original German, but we have to start somewhere.
I know Darryl mentioned that he compiled a list of notes on all of the references so that he could understand the specifics of the topics/artists/leaders/etc. mentioned. For me, reading it was more about exposing myself to an entirely new sensibility, a way of looking at the development of human consciousness that is different from the Hegelian/Marxist dialectical understanding or the Whig progressive view of history. I think Spengler's cyclical theories have much more in common with the ancients (e.g. the Greeks and Indians) and he himself is much more appreciative of them than almost any modern historian (he wants to understand them as they understood themselves, a lofty goal which he probably does not meet - Leo Strauss, for example, criticized him because he imputed to other cultures/peoples a self-understanding and definition which they themselves would not have recognized). This is important to me because a deeper understanding of the ancients is necessary if we are to emerge from the current and future crises of modernity with our humanity intact.
As for how long it took me to read it, I was pretty lackadaisical about it. I read it on and off over about 1.5 years, but it could be read in a few months in a deliberate and thoughtful manner. I took notes and wrote some comments along the way, but I think that if you immerse yourself in the book for at least a few months, you'll give yourself the chance to have it shape a new perspective which you can then use to view other texts, not to mention historical events and current developments.
Thanks brother, appreciate the insight. If you want another take on the view of history as a progressive path I highly recommend James C Scott's 'Against the Grain'. It is about the development of the first human states in Mesopotamia. Scott makes a convincing argument that this wasn't actually progress, or that it was inevitable at all and that there are alternatives to our current scaled up version of human societies, and that the state lead to the deprivation of the human. It's one of those books that completely changed my worldview.
Can definitely recommend Against the Grain, Dangerous History turned me on to that one. And the podcast we don't mention once mentioned that at least the Romans, if not all ancient societies, may have existed in a constant state of what we would call PTSD. Interesting idea, but just going by ratio it would seem to me that we are the aberrant mindset, not them.
What is the podcast we don't mention? DOTW?
I thought it was bad form to mention HH around here, but I believe you're correct.
The name sounds vaguely familiar - I'll check it out. Thanks!