Seven books I keep close because I love them
141 points by surprisetalk 3 hours ago | 49 comments

cvoss 54 minutes ago
> knowing full well that [Delilah] will betray [Samson]

It is not clear from the text that Samson is aware of the presence of Philistines the first three times. We are told they are lying in ambush in an inner chamber. We are not told that they make themselves known, attempt to subdue Samson, or interact with him in any way. Instead, we are told that Delilah announces their imminent presence, with no follow-through. (And why, after all, would they dare come in until Delilah has established that he is weak and harmless, given his reputation for strength and bloodthirst?)

I don't believe Samson understands Delilah is betraying him. Not until the end when he's told her the real secret. Until that point, he may only receive her behavior as, at worst, a taunt and, at best, an attempt to pursue a kind of relational intimacy in which he makes himself vulnerable to her. And indeed, that's exactly where the story goes. He eventually makes himself vulnerable to her, both emotionally and physically.

A shallow reading that concludes the characters must be dumb and naive to explain the ridiculousness of the plot is rarely the most appropriate reading. Frequently, the characters and nuances run much deeper, and a more careful and thoughtful reading is required. Ancient literature is stylistically terse compared to modern literature. Space on the manuscript is precious and not given over to things that the reader is meant to infer by reflection. And whenever a phrase or pattern is repeated, that means it is very, very significant. In this case, Samson's interaction with Delilah is not a one-off inexplicable behavior. It is one episode in a series of episodes, both preceding and following, where consistent patterns of behavior develop and escalate (e.g., his vengefulness, his vulnerability to women).

reply
judah 10 minutes ago
Having just finished the book of Judges last week, this is fresh on my mind. Finishing the story of Samson, my first reaction, like the author of the post, is that Samson is just stupid. Delilah is likely a Philistine, the nemesis of Samson and the Israelites. Her intention to betray and destroy Samson is hardly hidden in her questioning him. How can Samson be so dumb?

But I thought about it deeper and how some men can be blinded by sex. In my own life, I've seen men stay with the wrong woman, tolerating all kinds of toxicity from their partner, even with all their friends telling them it's the wrong woman for him.

Samson is blinded by sex. He's recorded multiple times going outside of his community, even to enemy territory, to seek out attractive women and prostitutes. Even though Delilah is seemingly open about her intentions to destroy him, he's blinded by sex.

In that light, Samson isn't so dumb; he's just human.

reply
Joker_vD 5 minutes ago
> Samson is blinded by sex. He's recorded multiple times seeking going outside of his community to find women and prostitutes. Even though Delilah is seemingly open about her intentions to destroy him, he's blinded by sex.

Which, as I understand, is pretty much the lesson that most of theologists derive form the story of Samson: don't let your lust blind you and make you stray from your duties to the God.

reply
bdr 57 minutes ago
Speaking of “witty, and learned, and wise, and humane”, this post is all of the above. The kind of writing that, before you’re even done reading, makes you eager to look up everything else the author has written.
reply
sherburt3 10 minutes ago
His book Higher-Order Perl was really good and introduced me to some interesting programming concepts, but it also helped me realize why no one uses Perl anymore
reply
Joker_vD 2 hours ago
> After several repetitions of this, Samson decides that being shaved, blinded and crushed will be less exasperating than listening to any more of Delilah's nagging.

A very off-tangent note, but I recently learned that Samson's last words, "ἀποθανέτω ἡ ψυχή μου μετὰ τῶν ἀλλοφύλων"/"moriatur anima mea cum Philisthiim", pretty much have never been translated into English literally; it's always "Let me die with the Philistines" for some reason.

reply
ivrit-tirvi 2 hours ago
I always look it up in the original Hebrew if I really want to understand, and the difference is sometimes really HUGE (or simply wrong in modern translations).

It's also worth noting that some books of the Hebrew Bible are poetry (Psalms, Job, Proverbs, Song of Songs), which doesn't show at all after translation. Hebrew poetry is unique!

As they say, reading the Bible in translation is like "kissing your spouse through a veil".

reply
1123581321 32 minutes ago
Through a glass darkly, if you will. :)
reply
SegfaultSeagull 9 minutes ago
The Hebrew is תָּמ֣וֹת נַפְשִׁי֮ עִם־פְּלִשְׁתִּים֒, which literally translates to "You shall die, my soul, with the Philistines."
reply
blharr 52 minutes ago
"Let my soul die with the Philistines" being the literal translation?
reply
wofo 2 hours ago
I'm curious, what would you be your translation?
reply
Joker_vD 3 minutes ago
Something like "let my life perish with the Philistines". As the sibling comment notices, the original Hebrew word doesn't really mean "spirit" in the "immortal soul" meaning.
reply
andrewdea 58 minutes ago
"let my soul die with the Philistines" is the literal translation of the Latin. I'm not an expert on Greek but I'd translate that as "let my soul die with the foreigners." ἀλλοφύλων more literally means something like "different people / people belonging to another group"
reply
Mtinie 42 minutes ago
I can't speak for the OP, but in my research, the translation works out to be:

"Let me die with the foreigners"

I usually see "foreigners" replaced with "Philistines" (as noted above). It's Samson's line just before he braces against the pillars and brings the building down on himself and the thousands of Philistines inside, so I understand why it is usually translated that way.

Also, ψυχή here renders Hebrew nephesh, which is closer to "life" or "self", but when I think about the attributed statement it just reads better with the personal attachment (vs. "Let my self|life|soul die with..."). Which is the fun of translation, as each translator seeks to reveal a meaningful rendition which will resonate with their audience.

reply
jeffbee 2 hours ago
Yeah the comment is a bit of a cliffhanger. Wish they had given us their preferred translation.
reply
schoen 9 minutes ago
That's funny, I (not the poster) didn't stop to think that other readers might not understand the Latin and Greek here!

Both of those forms are third-person and say "may my soul" ( ψυχή/anima) "die with the Philistines".

The original Hebrew has

תָּמוֹת נַפְשִׁי עִם-פְּלִשְׁתִּים

which is also third person "may my soul" (נַפְשִׁי) "die with (the) Philistines".

reply
euthymiclabs 3 hours ago
Pleased to see Roget's thesaurus here. It's a fantastic resource without a great digital equivalent. I've found LLMs helpful in a pinch (and it's certainly better than a standard thesaurus), but Roget's is still the book I turn to for tricky word-picking problems.
reply
babo 2 minutes ago
Roget's Thesaurus is part of Project Gutenberg: https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/22
reply
cryzinger 59 minutes ago
I've never owned a copy of Roget's, and now I'm curious/tempted to get one, but my go-to digital word picking assistant has always been OneLook Thesaurus: https://www.onelook.com/thesaurus/
reply
leobg 2 hours ago
I was looking for it after reading the post, but there seem to be so many different versions and edtions. Harper, Penguin. College. The New. The Concise. The International. Some say they’re organized alphabetically. How do I know which one is the kind that the article talks about, if I buy used online and cant look into it?
reply
darreninthenet 2 hours ago
Are you in the USA? It's because Roget as a title isn't trademarked there so it's accepted as a name for any thesaurus.

If you want the latest edition of the "real" Roget's, it's the one published by Longman.

reply
mjd 2 hours ago
The one in TFA is Harper and Row, and the later 8th Edition, published by Harper Collins, is also organized the correct way. I think you'll be safe if you can get a Harper version.
reply
euthymiclabs 2 hours ago
That's the one I have. I've had an older version in the past but misplaced it years ago. This one does the trick, but like the article author says: it is a weighty book. (I like that.)
reply
criddell 2 hours ago
I never knew Roget's was organized like that and I have had several different editions over the years. I'm one of those people who always used it as a compendium of synonyms.
reply
PeterStuer 2 hours ago
Slightly off topic: The title hits home. When I was young, books were a luxury item. Less rich people just used the library. But the library had a strict 7 books rental policy. Not enough for the avid reader that also needed a small programming reference library. So I had 3 steady, occasionally 4th, library card pool from family members to keep my bookshelf operational.
reply
eliben 2 hours ago
I also remember libraries having a very small limit back in the day, so I was surprised to find out that in the Bay Area libraries typically allow up to 100 books per card!
reply
PeterStuer 41 minutes ago
Mind blown. How can that work? I assume book rentals follow the usual Poisson distribution?
reply
whitten 3 hours ago
I’ve been told the Legacy Standard Bible is one where the translators tried to not use the same English word when the original Greek or Hebrew words are different.

FYI: https://m.youtube.com/c/legacystandardbible

reply
reedf1 3 hours ago
was expecting umberto eco after the first few - I'm sure you've either read him or desperately should!
reply
throw7 2 hours ago
NIV is what I grew up with and I kind of tired of it because of that... I have a soft spot for the KJV/NKJV.
reply
i_am_a_peasant 2 hours ago
Same, not a believer, I appreciate KJV for its artistic value and it being referenced in so much literature and cinema.
reply
bananamogul 50 minutes ago
Am a believer, and appreciate the KJV for its language. However, it can be tricky, because words change over 400 years. So while there are many wonderfully translated passages that use very expressive language, you also have passages that are full of words that seem similar but actually are easy to confuse.

For example:

- "Prevent" in 1611 meant "go before, precede". Now it means "stop from happening". - "Suffer" in 1611 meant "allow to happen". Now it means "experience pain". - "Quick" in 1611 could mean "alive" (hence "the quick and the dead"). Now it exclusively means "fast".

And there are words that are completely archaic now - "anon", "bissam", etc. Or words that are just very rare - e.g., peradventure.

It's a wonderful read in many places if you want to revel in language, but modern translations are often better for understanding meaning. Not because they're "dumbed down" (as some claim) but rather because they reflect modern meanings and usage.

reply
i_am_a_peasant 25 minutes ago
I respect your beliefs.

I once tried to stick to Green’s Literal Translation but it got dry fast. I actually enjoyed reading the preface and made me appreciate the work Jay Green Sr put in.

reply
jabl 2 hours ago
We read some passages from Decameron back in high school. Lovely book really, I should take the time to really read it cover to cover.
reply
pavel_lishin 2 hours ago
There's apparently a pretty amusing adaptation on Netflix as well.
reply
swagmoose 49 minutes ago
I loved the Netflix adaptation. I ignorantly missed the part about it being a book and am so excited to dive into it.
reply
alabhyajindal 36 minutes ago
and the seven books I keep close: diary of a wimpy kid 1-7
reply
burnto 43 minutes ago
What an inspiring post! So much surprise and depth in each selection.
reply
Razengan 3 hours ago
I just need The Wind in the Willows :)
reply
stiiv 2 hours ago
When is the best time of year to read it?
reply
Razengan 2 hours ago
When you're trying to fall asleep but there is too much noise in your head, I suppose :)

Actually, Redwall and other slightly-mature anthropomorphic stories are also surprisingly good for that.

But if I had to pick a time of year, then I'd say winter, under the blankets or by a fire.

reply
bbkane 2 hours ago
> For example, Moses is easy to recognize at lower right, because of the glowing horns

I'm sorry, what? Why is Moses depicted with glowing horns?

reply
pavel_lishin 2 hours ago
Yeah, I thought he was easily recognizable because he's holding stone tablets.

But apparently it is a thing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horns_of_Moses

> The Horns of Moses are an iconographic convention common in Latin Christianity whereby Moses was presented as having two horns on his head, later replaced by rays of light.[1] The idea comes from a translation, or mistranslation, of a Hebrew term in Jerome's Latin Vulgate Bible, and many later vernacular translations dependent on that. Moses is said to be "horned", or radiant, or glorified, after he sees God who presents him with the tablets of the law in the Book of Exodus.

reply
waffletower 2 hours ago
A sequel that diverges from and dwarfs its predecessor -- Deleuze & Guattari's A Thousand Plateaus (translated into English) https://www.upress.umn.edu/9780816614028/a-thousand-plateaus...
reply
mjd 3 hours ago
And I bet you won't guess what any of them are.
reply
rzzzt 3 hours ago
Number #8 will surprise you!

I keep a computer graphics book that I'm reading over and over again, just one chapter that is concerned with physically-based rendering. By now the theory is getting so ingrained I could write a path tracer in my sleep! But then again, I don't want to.

reply
mjd 2 hours ago
The current front-runner is “The Crazy Ape” by Albert Szent-Györgyi, who won the Nobel Prize for discovering ascorbic acid.

It's about how war is perpetrated by the old against the young. I've carried it next to my heart since I was fourteen.

Also, it's quite short and will definitely fit in the space.

A bit more about it: https://mathstodon.xyz/@mjd/116411220100252049

reply
hnfvovpje4 2 hours ago
Ah the classic
reply
hnnbxu2nwi 2 hours ago
[dead]
reply
xerox13ster 2 hours ago
Get the data off those drives now, rather than later. The longer you hope to get the data, the more hopeless it will be.
reply