Classics and the Western Canon discussion
General
>
Planning for June 2011 read
I agree that the autobiography of Ben Franklin is an unusual choice, and is not a book I would normally pull off the shelf for my pleasure, but one thing really intrigues me. Charles Eliot chose it for the first volume in his "Five Foot Shelf of Books." I'm sort of intrigued to know why he found it so central to the adult education his series was aimed at. And I do read various bits of praise for it here and there as I wander through various volumes of criticism. But it wouldn't make me despair if it weren't selected.
I don't want to prejudice the vote for Gibbon by suggesting that it would not be a good choice, since I think it would, but there is a possible option if it doesn't get the winning vote. That is to read it as a very, very leisurely side read. I've generally avoided side reads here because in other groups they've tended to dilute the focus on the main read, but it's a book I've long wanted to read, and if the group didn't want to take that much time out of our primary reading schedule, it's one I would consider for a slow side read; that way if there were parts that didn't deserve much discussion nobody would feel compelled to say something, but when good parts came along there would be a place to discuss them.Reading about 30 minutes a week, on average, it would probably take a year plus to finish it (I realize that a considerable portion of the volumes in the Great Books series is footnotes, which appear also in the original, so it isn't as long as it at first seemed, unless one reads the footnotes also.)Again, I don't want to prejudice people against voting for Gibbon, but without setting a precedent for side reads, which in general I don't want to do, this might be an attractive option for those who want to read it but not exclusively for several months.
There are free Kindle editions around, but be careful of the ones offered by Amazon -- they are apparently not good editions or are edited from a theological perspective. Better, I think, would be the ones from Gutenberg or ManyBooks.
Would you consider breaking up the Gibbon into the three sections it was originally published in and mix it up with other readings in between, Everyman?
Everyman wrote: "I don't want to prejudice the vote for Gibbon by suggesting that it would not be a good choice, since I think it would, but there is a possible option if it doesn't get the winning vote. That is t..."I like the idea of a side read, Everyman.
On the other hand, how can one resist wrriting like this:In the second century of the Christian era, the empire of Rome comprehended the fairest part of the earth, and the most civilized portion of mankind. The frontiers of that extensive monarchy were guarded by ancient renown and disciplined valor. The gentle but powerful influence of laws and manners had gradually cemented the union of the provinces. Their peaceful inhabitants enjoyed and abused the advantages of wealth and luxury. The image of a free constitution was preserved with decent reverence: the Roman senate appeared to possess the sovereign authority, and devolved on the emperors all the executive powers of government.
Don't you love that "abused and enjoyed"?
Or, later: he northern countries of Europe scarcely deserved the expense and labor of conquest. The forests and morasses of Germany were filled with a hardy race of barbarians, who despised life when it was separated from freedom; and though, on the first attack, they seemed to yield to the weight of the Roman power, they soon, by a signal act of despair, regained their independence, and reminded Augustus of the vicissitude of fortune.
Does this guy have a sense of humor, or what?
Everyman wrote: "On the other hand, how can one resist wrriting like this:In the second century of the Christian era, the empire of Rome comprehended the fairest part of the earth, and the most civilized portion ..."
That is some really good stuff, Everyman. I think TDaFotRE has been on my TBR list as long as I was aware of its existence. I still love anything, and everything, to do with the Romans and their Empire.
Do the two 1,000+ page Penguin Classics editions actually include Gibbon's entire work? I am assuming that they do, as I saw no reference to abridgment. I think I need to order both volumes. Looks like a great summer read, interspersed with other books.
Christopher wrote: "Do the two 1,000+ page Penguin Classics editions actually include Gibbon's entire work? I am assuming that they do, as I saw no reference to abridgment. I think I need to order both volumes. Loo..."I found three Penguins comprising all six volumes of Gibbon. They were edited by David P. Womersley, and I really like the fact that the footnotes were on the page where they appear and not, as in the Great Books volumes, at the end where you have to keep turning to and fro.
Also, give this Gutenberg edition a look:
http://www.gutenberg.org/files/25717/...
Has the maps, footnotes on the page, etc. And the new Kindles, I think, read HTML texts!
I'd second Ibis 3 as well, but if Eman doesn't fall for for that - I would vote for his side read idea. -as long as the sideread doesn't result in the group not doing any other non-fiction titles. :P
It was at Rome, on the fifteenth of October, 1764, as I sat musing amidst the ruins of the Capitol, while the barefoot friars were singing vespers in the Temple of Jupiter, that the idea of writing the decline and fall of the city first started to my mind.
Gibbon, Memoirs of My Life (1796)
Another damned, thick, square book! Always scribble, scribble, scribble! Eh! Mr Gibbon?
Attributed variously to William Henry, 1st Duke of Gloucester, the Duke of Cumberland or King George III.
Speaking of Edward Gibbon, some of you might find this interesting--I sure did. This is from Steve King's literary blog--"Looking backwards from fame, Edward Gibbon dated the idea for his masterwork, The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, to a specific moment:Pretty cool, huh? I remember reading about Hardy's visit to the hotel garden in either Tomalin's or Millgate's Hardy biographies. Cheers!"It was at Rome, on the 15th of October 1764, as I sat musing amid the ruins of the capitol, while the bare-footed friars were singing vespers in the temple of Jupiter [now the Church of Santa Maria in Aracoeli], that the idea of writing the decline and fall of the city first started to my mind."Despite Gibbon's impeccable reputation for research, some biographers are skeptical of this personal note, reluctantly charging Gibbon with a rare weakness for hyperbole, or myth-making.
There is no dispute over the date of the book's completion, however, the hour described in detail in Gibbon's memoirs, the place given the status of a shrine by generations of readers: June 27, 1787, in the small summer-house in his garden in Lausanne, Switzerland, just before midnight. The book had been almost 15 years in the making -- 6 volumes, 1.5 million words, 8,000 footnotes, 1,300 years and 3 continents covered -- and Gibbon, understandably, did not want to let "the hour of my final deliverance" go unmarked, or go too quickly:After laying down my pen I took several turns in a berceau, or covered walk of acacias, which commands a prospect of the country, the lake, and the mountains. The air was temperate, the sky was serene, the silver orb of the moon was reflected from the waters, and all nature was silent. I will not dissemble the first emotions of joy on recovery of my freedom, and, perhaps, the establishment of my fame. But my pride was soon humbled, and a sober melancholy was spread over my mind, by the idea that I had taken an everlasting leave of an old and agreeable companion..."The first volumes of Decline and Fall had already been published, and as Gibbon knew, not only fame but controversy and outrage had already arrived. Gibbon's thesis was that the intellectual rigor of the Roman Empire declined into "barbarism and religion." Christian historians and readers did not like the idea that Christianity was a step backward, and some attacked Gibbon for his scholarship and his disbelief, with little impact on either.
But the controversy must have given Thomas Hardy added motivation to sit up in Gibbon's garden until midnight on this day in 1897, the 110th anniversary of the penning of those last Decline and Fall lines. Gibbon's house was Hotel Gibbon by this point, and a spot visited by many literary travelers, but Hardy had just published Jude the Obscure, and was himself vilified by press and public for irreligion and immorality. In his commemorative poem, Lausanne: In Gibbon's Old Garden, Hardy joins league not only with Gibbon but Milton, as three who have known what it is to suffer at the hands of narrow belief:"A spirit seems to pass,Hardy's last two lines were his brief paraphrase of a passage in Milton's The Doctrine and Discipline of Divorce. This was an argument for church reform, so that divorce might be granted on the grounds of incompatibility; it was also the appeal of a 33-year-old newlywed who had discovered that his 17-year-old wife seemed to prefer her parents to him. Faced with the strains of his own marriage, and with his wife's own scoffs at Jude and "Jude-ites," Hardy thought that Milton, like Gibbon, made a lot of sense about religion.
Formal in pose, but grave and grand withal:
He contemplates a volume stout and tall,
And far lamps fleck him through the thin acacias.
Anon the book is closed,
With "It is finished!" And at the alley's end
He turns, and soon on me his glances bend;
And, as from earth, comes speech--small, muted, yet composed.
"How fares the Truth now?--Ill?
--Do pens but slily further her advance?
May one not speed her but in phrase askance?
Do scribes aver the Comic to be Reverend still?
"Still rule those minds on earth
At whom sage Milton's wormwood words were hurled:
'Truth like a bastard comes into the world
Never without ill-fame to him who gives her birth'?"
Byron was another such pilgrim, visiting the Gibbon garden on the 1816 anniversary of the completion of the Decline and Fall. This was 8 weeks after his permanent exit from England, and 8 years before his death in Greece -- in service, he thought, to the rebirth of that ideal empire. He arrived carrying his own persecution baggage -- separation from his new wife and child, amid gossip of his "League of Incest" behavior-- and left with a leaf from one of Gibbon's acacia trees, to the Villa Diodati in Geneva. This was Byron's summer rental, and soon to be made famous as the site of the Frankenstein evening, but it was a house originally owned by friends of Milton, and visited by him in 1638, just 5 years before he wrote his pamphlet on divorce.
— SK"
How amazingly timely, Christopher! I wonder if the Hotel is still there?
Christopher wrote: "Pretty cool, huh?"Way cool!
Well, don't you other good people think it is becoming rather obvious that we would have a lot to say about and would enjoy chatting over Decline and Fall? So why don't you do like you suggested and take it out of the list to make it a side read, Eman? ..and then we still vote on what is left on the list. :P I know, I know - I'm greedy, but don't we all love books and reading?
Just asking..
Traveller wrote: "Well, don't you other good people think it is becoming rather obvious that we would have a lot to say about and would enjoy chatting over Decline and Fall? So why don't you do like you suggested a..."That's a useful suggestion, but I'm not going to be autocratic about it (there's enough already that I'm autocratic about). So let's vote on whether we want to leave Decline and Fall in as an option for the next major read, or remove it with the option of scheduling it as a side read.
That poll will be up in a few minute.
Everyman wrote: "Traveller wrote: "Well, don't you other good people think it is becoming rather obvious that we would have a lot to say about and would enjoy chatting over Decline and Fall? So why don't you do li..."Could you please include my suggestion (see #37 & #61) in your poll? A couple of people have expressed support.
Ibis3 wrote: "Could you please include my suggestion in your poll? A couple of people have expressed support. "I think you deserve a full answer to that question.
I know it was published in sections, but I'm sorry if it seems a bit autocratic, but I don't think it fits with what I see as the character of the group to intersperse it with other reads. It was intended as a unified work, and I think it fits better with the concept of the Canon to read it that way, just as we don't (at least officially, individuals of course can do as they like) read abridged versions of works. We didn't settle, for example, for reading only Part I of Don Quixote, we didn't settle for reading only a selection of the Canterbury Tales, and it just doesn't feel right to me to break up the D&F that way. And I recognize that most Victorian novels were published in parts over long periods of time, and I'm sure the original readers were reading other things between getting the monthly installments of, for example, Middlemarch, but now that we have these works complete we read them that way.
(There are some works which I think it's reasonable to read in parts because they seem to have been intended that way. Plutarch's lives, for example, were not as I understand it collected into a single volume until after his death, so it makes sense to read them in parallel units as he intended them. Montaigne's essays were written as individual essays and I think can fairly be browsed in rather than read straight through. But in general, where it was an author's intent that a work be considered in toto, I like to respect that intention.)
I appreciate your making the suggestion, and it's certainly not an unreasonable approach, but I just don't feel it fits with my concept of reading the works of the Western Canon.
Everyman wrote: "Ibis3 wrote: "Could you please include my suggestion in your poll? A couple of people have expressed support. "I think you deserve a full answer to that question.
I know it was published in sect..."
It's your group, so you can be as autocratic as you wish, but just to clarify my position:
1. I wouldn't support reading an abridged work, and I feel that you've made an unfair comparison.
2. Isn't having it as a side read "interspersing it with other reads", only on a smaller scale (i.e. one reads the 30 min segment for the week and then the longer segment of some other work)? I would imagine keeping a group of readers interested over time would be easier if the chunks were larger.
3. I didn't mean to imply that the group would read *only* section one (which is what it sounds like you thought I meant in your second paragraph). My idea was that, if TD&F was selected by the group, since it is so long it might make sense to take a couple of breaks during the time it is read by the group in toto. The original breaks during publication seemed a logical place for the group to take a breather/catch up if falling behind.
I feel the need to clarify, the reason for my suggesting that we read sections of Gibbon's book stems from the fact that I can't look at it as a fictional, or even a philosophical work. It's a history book so I go to it expecting first and foremost historical truth. I've heard many people say that Gibbon is quite biased in his outlook on history and at times very inaccurate so although I would be willing to give him a chance, I couldn't commit myself to the whole book because I know I would give it up after the first volume if I found it historically inaccurate.
Andreea wrote: "I feel the need to clarify, the reason for my suggesting that we read sections of Gibbon's book stems from the fact that I can't look at it as a fictional, or even a philosophical work. It's a historical truth. I've heard many people say that Gibbon is quite biased in his outlook on history and at times very inaccurate.."I agree that there is almost certainly inaccurate history in it. Our knowledge of history has changed a lot since 1770. Was he inaccurate based on the state of knowledge at the time? I don't know. That's an interesting question to raise. But I read Herodotus, Caesar, Thucydides, Plutarch, Livy, and many older historians (not to mention the history book of the Bible) knowing that there will be inaccuracies in them,but still thinking they're worth reading for what history looked like when they wrote.
But also, the approach to history in his day was, I think, different from what it is today. His work, the bits I've read of it, are indeed written from a point of view and aren't a bare recitation of pure fact.
But all this we can get into if we decide to read it, whether as a major read or as a side read.
Ibis3 wrote: "I wouldn't support reading an abridged work, and I feel that you've made an unfair comparison."
I'm sorry. That wasn't my intention, I was taking off from your post to make a broader point, but I can see that it was unfair, and I'm sorry.
As to your point about reading it in toto, just with breaks, I guess it wasn't you but others who suggested that just committing to Book 1 initially would give a chance to decide later whether to read the rest of it or not. Since you had said that others supported you idea, I guess I was looking also at what those others had added onto your original suggestion.
I do see a difference between reading it in sections as a major read interspersed with other major reads, and reading it slowly in parallel with the sequence of major reads, whatever they may wind up being. But we can differ on this if we want to.
Whichever way we decided to read it, if we do, I hope to see you in the discussion since your participation and thoughts will definitely be interesting and beneficial.
Sorry if this is off-topic, but I'm not sure where to post the question: When will there be a reading schedule for Moby Dick?
I find it easier to avoid spoilers (and the admonitions that follow) if I limit my reading to what is scheduled for the week.
Thomas wrote: "Sorry if this is off-topic, but I'm not sure where to post the question: When will there be a reading schedule for Moby Dick?
I find it easier to avoid spoilers (and the admonitions that fo..."
Sorry, I'm a few days late putting it up -- tax season, you know.
I'll set it up officially in its own folder soon, but meanwhile, here's the schedule as Laurel, the moderator for this group, has set it out. Week 1 officially begins on March 23, but I usually set up the discussion folders the evening before so that East Coast folks don't have to wait in the morning. People are free to start posting in the discussion folder as soon as I post it.
Schedule:
wk 1, 3/23 through ch 20
wk 2, 3/30 through ch 40
wk 3, 4/6 through ch 66
wk 4, 4/13 through ch 86
wk 5, 4/20 through ch 108
wk 6, 4/27 through ch 128
wk 7-8 5/4 entire book
Everyman wrote: "Andreea wrote: "I feel the need to clarify, the reason for my suggesting that we read sections of Gibbon's book stems from the fact that I can't look at it as a fictional, or even a philosophical w..."Oh, you see, I have little interest in Gibbon as a person and even less in the state of English historiography in the 18th century. I can understand why people would want to find out more about it, but my main motivation for reading the book was to refresh my knowledge of ancient and medieval European history.
Andreea wrote: "my main motivation for reading the book was to refresh my knowledge of ancient and medieval European history"I wouldn't dismiss it out of hand for that purpose. There is a lot of detail in it.
You might want to go here
http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/25717
and download it in the HTML version, which is quite nicely formatted. Give it a try and see what you think. The language all by itself is worth experiencing!
The poll on what to do with Gibbon's Decline and Fall was close, but the final decision was to take it out of the voting and schedule it as a side read. I'm going to wait a bit before scheduling it so that people have time to get the book if they don't have it, then we can schedule a nice leisurely reading/discussion of it.Meantime, we have six works to vote among for our next major regular read, including several ancient works for those who have been asking for ancient works.
The poll will be up shortly, and I'll leave it up for a week to give all our regular posters time to vote on it.
Good luck, and may the best book win!
Just a suggestion (and I'm not committing to reading anything here) you could do a combination main read/ side read, by allocating one month to Decline and Fall as the main read, then continuing with it as a side read thereafter. This would give people the chance to concentrate their efforts in the first month, but still give the option for change if they did not wish to continue.
I haven't forgotten about Decline and Fall, but my eyes have been getting progressively worse over the past several months to the point that it's quite a challenge for me now to read an actual book, especially one with smaller print, without a magnifying glass. I got the three volume Penguin edition of D&F, but there's no way I can read it at present. I go in to see the specialist in April, and will see what they can do for me. I hope to get back into good reading form before summer, but I plan to wait on D&F until I have a better idea what my situation will be.
Reading MD on the Kindle (and listening to it on tape) I can easily keep up with the reading and discussion here, but I'm not sure I want to commit to Kindling the entire D&F, not to mention that it doesn't have the maps, notes, etc. that the Penguin edition does, and I'm not sure I'm ready to listen to 120 hours of it as an audiobook, though now that I think about it, if we stretch it out long enough that would probably not be all that impossible.
But unless people are really eager to start D&F sooner than this summer, I plan to wait a bit on that side read.
Thanks. I'm hoping, and expecting, that modern medicine will come through for me!
All the best with your eyes, Eman. I recently received some damage to my eyes after an accident, so I know the terrible frustration that a deterioration in eyesight can bring.
I was wondering if the poll for the June read is up yet. I can't seem to find it?
Everyman, you know we'll all be rooting very hard for good news for you at your upcoming doctor appointment.
Traveller, the poll is up. Go to the home page for the
Classics and the Western Canon group. In the upper right hand corner you will see a list of links:
group home
bookshelf
discussions
events
photos
invite people
members
polls
Traveller, the poll is up. Go to the home page for the
Classics and the Western Canon group. In the upper right hand corner you will see a list of links:
group home
bookshelf
discussions
events
photos
invite people
members
polls
Thank you M! I'm still a klutz when it comes to some of the ins and out of GR groups. *blush* Don't know how I missed that..
Everyman, I'm sorry to hear about your eyes. I've been there; a cornea transplant bailed me out. I hope you find a way too. In the meantime, that adjustable font on the Kindle is pretty handy huh?I've been wanting to read Boethius for ages.
Traveller wrote: "I was wondering if the poll for the June read is up yet. I can't seem to find it? ."Yes, it's up. On the menu on the upper right of the home page click on Polls. It's right there!
Everyman wrote: "Thanks. I'm hoping, and expecting, that modern medicine will come through for me!"sending you my very best hopes for recovery
Everyman wrote: "I haven't forgotten about Decline and Fall, but my eyes have been getting progressively worse over the past several months to the point that it's quite a challenge for me now to read an actual book..."I hope that your specialist gives you good news Everyman.
Since Boethius is fairly short (120 pages in my edition) and since the Republic came in a close second, (two votes back, but if I had voted I would have voted for it, so really only one vote back) I'm tempted to go ahead and schedule the Republic for the next read after Boethius. Call it our philosophy summer.
:( See you guys in the fall, maybe... I've had really bad luck since joining the group. Every time the vote ends up for books I've already read. Both Consolation and Republic now join Moby Dick, Canterbury Tales, Huckleberry Finn, Oresteia, and Paradise Lost.
Well, if the side read of Decline and Fall happens in the summer, I might join in that one (depending on the length of the weekly reading etc.).
ETA: I guess this means my summer will be open for me to finally read Metaphysics, right?
Ibis3 wrote: "I've had really bad luck since joining the group. Every time the vote ends up for books I've already read. Both Consolation and Republic..."May I suggest that this is actually good luck? These books are great in part because they are very much worth reading multiple times. I, and I know I am far from alone in this, find that each reading is a richer experience, revealing truths that I had overlooked in previous readings.
A long-time tutor at St. John's College who was asked how many times he had read the Republic, replied "always, always one time too few." He had probably read it at least a dozen times, perhaps many more than that in his preparation for the Freshman seminar each time he taught that (tutors at St. John's teach all the levels of the seminar and almost everything else in the program too), but every time he read it, he found more wisdom that he had not seen before.
Another comment I have heard is "you can't read the Republic for the first time." Meaning, that the first time you aren't really reading the Republic; that doesn't come until you second, third or more reading.
So I hope you will reconsider and think of reading these books with us to see whether it isn't true that re-reading, particularly with a group committed to understanding and discussing, is more powerful than reading? And in addition, with your experience with it, you can be even more of an asset to the discussion.
But a P.S.: If you do decide to skip these readings, better not read the Metaphysics this summer, or if we choose that here in future you'll be in the same box!
I would like to join in on all of the above readings, esp. Boethius, Consolation of Philosophy. (cited repeatedly in one of my favorite novels -by John Kennedy Toole!) Would like to know what this man was about, exactly!
Christina wrote: "I would like to join in on all of the above readings, esp. Boethius, Consolation of Philosophy. (cited repeatedly in one of my favorite novels -by John Kennedy Toole!) Would like to know what thi..."We'll be delighted to have you with us!
I don't know Toole. What's the novel you're referring to?
Bill wrote: "Everyman wrote: "I'm tempted to go ahead and schedule the Republic for the next read after Boethius. Call it our philosophy summer. ..."Sounds good to me!"
ditto
CK wrote: "Bill wrote: "Everyman wrote: "I'm tempted to go ahead and schedule the Republic for the next read after Boethius. Call it our philosophy summer. ..."Sounds good to me!"
ditto"
And me
and me
Referring to A Confederacy of Dunces. It's hilarious, but the main character is a bit of an overeducated "oaf" - a medieval, if you will. And he is constantly quoting Boethius! And crying out to Fortuna...haha.
Vikz wrote: "CK wrote: "Bill wrote: "Everyman wrote: "I'm tempted to go ahead and schedule the Republic for the next read after Boethius. Call it our philosophy summer. ..."Sounds good to me!"
ditto"
And me..."
Trav claps hands. Me too!
Everyman wrote: ".Another comment I have heard is "you can't read the Republic for the first time." .."
I had read a comment much along the same lines regarding Joseph Conrad's Nostromo: you can't read Nostromo unless you've read it before. And it was TRUE.
I had read a comment much along the same lines regarding Joseph Conrad's Nostromo: you can't read Nostromo unless you've read it before. And it was TRUE.
I'm about to buy my copy of the Boethius. Can anyone recommend a translation? (I don't think I've asked this yet for the Boethius . . . )
S. Rosemary wrote: "I'm about to buy my copy of the Boethius. Can anyone recommend a translation? (I don't think I've asked this yet for the Boethius . . . )"I can't recommend any because I haven't read any. But I can tell you that I looked for translations, and settled initially on the Richard Green based on reviews I had looked at. But I haven't started it yet, so that's not my recommendation, just my decision based on my own research. There are lots of translations; the challenge is that the Consolation is written partly in poetry and partly in prose. Translating poetry is always a challenge, and perhaps even more when it is poetry with a philosophical underpinning.
While we're on translations, for the Republic, Jowett or Shoprey were for many years the gold standards, and most of us at St. John's read one of those two. However, Allan Bloom came out with a translation in 1968 (yes, I was through college by then) which has been praised by many, though not all, Platonists (which is nothing new, getting Platonists to agree on anything is never going to happen). When Joe Sachs came out with a new translation in 2007 I was eager to read it, because Sachs was a well respected St. John's tutor, but while it got good reviews, I didn't find it as smooth as Bloom, though it may be more accurate -- Sachs is more of a Platonist, while Bloom is a wider ranging thinker. And there are certainly others out there that I'm not familiar with.
I think any of those four translations would be fine. We probably will be focusing more on the overall ideas of the dialogue than on the minutia. Jowett is widely available on the Internet, so for those who want to read it online, that would be a fine choice.
One nice thing is that all translations use a standardized page numbering for Plato, so no matter which translation people are using, we can easily refer to passages using that page numbering and anybody can find the references easily.
Thomas I'm sure can also chime in here with his thoughts on translations.
Classics and the Western Canon
Books mentioned in this topic
The Republic of Plato (other topics)Republic (other topics)
The Consolation of Philosophy (other topics)
The Nature of the Gods (other topics)
The Consolation of Philosophy (other topics)
More...
Authors mentioned in this topic
Michel de Montaigne (other topics)Michel de Montaigne (other topics)
Benjamin Franklin (other topics)
I'm torn among Plato's Republic, Aristotle's Nichomachean Ethics, and Boethius's Consolation. I'd be happiest with one of those three.
Gibbon's Decline and Fall is tempting, but I don't think we as a group- or I individually- could sustain a good conversation for so long on one work. We do often peter out towards the end of long works, and Gibbon is longer than anything we have thus far attempted. I don't like the idea of reading one volume of it, because they really are a set as far as I understand.
I think I'm going to listen to the lobbyists and see how the voting goes . . . I'd be happy with almost anything but Franklin (sorry, Ben).