
Here are the thrills, grandeur, and unabashed fun of the Greek myths, stylishly retold by Stephen Fry. The legendary writer, actor, and comedian breathes life into ancient tales, from Pandora's box to Prometheus's fire, and transforms the adventures of Zeus and the Olympians into emotionally resonant and deeply funny stories, without losing any of their original wonder. Classical artwork inspired by the myths and learned notes from the author offer rich cultural context.
I just finished the Odyssey, a required book in high school, after I previously finished the Iliad, which wasn't required in high school. Reading those two together after reading Stephen Fry's Mythos and Heroes books was a wonderful experience that I felt could have been replicated in high school rather than the whirlwind of bouncing around to unrelated books like the Catcher in the Rye.
Technical writing is a skill you can learn. If you have somebody pointing out what you are doing wrong structurally, you can learn to do it right every time. I had a Ph. D. supervisor who taught me that little life hack thirty years ago. I was a bit depressed with my lack of progress when he pointed out just four or five things that I was doing wrong a lot. So, I fixed those things and it got better and developed the skill of spotting my own mistakes.
The whole process took something like six months or so to get to acceptable levels (by review committees for conferences and workshops). Learning to communicate is a big part of the process of getting a Ph. D. A master degree won't quite get you there (depending on the field). Especially computer scientists seem to have a few blind spots for this. Anyway, if you can't talk about your findings in a coherent way, nobody is going to bother listening to you.
Literary writing is more free form. Technical writing skills are merely the starting point for that. But it's like any art form where somebody that has mastered rules and skills start bending the rules in intentional ways; or even change them. Some authors I like make that look easy to the point where I wonder whether I could do that. But doing that well is not easy.
And there's also the notion that it's not just about the style and form but about the content. After a life of ignorance about Greek mythology, I read Stephen Fry's Mythos over the summer. His writing is wonderful. But it also drove home the point of how ignorant I was of Greek myths influencing basically every popular movie or book I've ever liked. I like the Matrix, for example. There's a reason Morpheus is called Morpheus (Greek god of dreams) and that whole business with the blue and red pills relates to that. That whole movie is dripping with Greek mythology references and it's not like they were subtle about it. I kind of knew of course.
Movies and books don't just come out of nowhere. They are variations of stories that have been told and retold over and over again by countless people for thousands of years. And the better authors tend to know their mythology, philosophy, work by their modern peers, etc. Learning to write involves a lot of reading so you can refer to that and be original and intentional.
Sure, but it's reasonable to want to try, especially for a novel considered by some to be "the greatest work of literature ever written". That seems worthy of investigation at least. Giving up when things get tough is a pretty problematic approach if you want to grow. Whether my objection matters admittedly depends on whether the goal is to learn/grow, but I think there's a good case to be made that it is.
> My point being that the original comment sounded more like wishing to check a box of having read a classic book rather than wanting to approach the book for what was in it and growing from the experience
But the point of being well-read isn't just to complete a checklist. I think you are reading very deeply into something and drawing a potentially unwarranted conclusion.
Everyone I know who reads avidly, and who many would consider well-read, who are even aware of the existence of Anna Karenina read not for the sake of it, but to improve themselves, their knowledge and understanding of the world around them, etc.
I think that's where our differences in this thread are coming from. I'm assuming the whole point is the acquisition of knowledge/understanding, and you seem to be assuming a different motivation, although I'm not entirely sure what that motivation is (I don't think "checking a box just for the sake of it" is a warranted conclusion in context, and "checking a box" is just a rhetorical device to help us understand that this person has a gap in their reading that they haven't succeeded in filling yet). Perhaps they primarily value good literature, in which case having a list makes quite a lot of sense.
If someone expressed the same frustration about the Greek myths, a potentially more productive response would be to point someone to Stephen Fry's Mythos, Heroes and Troy, which he wrote exactly for the reason that this comment thread exists: some people find the original material difficult to get through, but the underlying message was important enough to re-tell.
In the case of Anna Karenina, perhaps exploring the various translations that exist and choosing one vs. the other would be the ideal next step.
Stephen Fry re-tells the ancient greek myths in his own style, adding personal commentary along the way. Recommended.
Mythos by Stephen Fry - an irreverent take on Greek mythology which is fun and entertaining.