Who decides what is required? That doesn’t make any sense. You can recommend awesome books to your friends (have you read Meditations by Marcus Aurelius?) but they are not compelled to do so.
If I see books on your recommended list that I either liked or hated I may be more or less inclined to read your recommendations, but calling a book a “must read” is egotistical.
I think when people consider something required, they either mean they wish it taught in school or have a belief that it is profound enough to recommend to everyone. Like, I have a Marxist-Leninist reading list that I made and linked in my profile, and would love for more people to read it (or, more specifically, the works on it) but I can’t beam it into people’s heads nor force them to engage with it. I can only recommend it for those who actually want an ML reading list.
I agree with the post, mostly. I don’t think anyone should read things they dislike, but I also think there are books that are required reading.
Reading a good summary or review may be enough, but not knowing who Romeo and Juliet are could be a problem even if not reading the book isn’t.
Who decides what is required? That doesn’t make any sense. You can recommend awesome books to your friends (have you read Meditations by Marcus Aurelius?) but they are not compelled to do so.
If I see books on your recommended list that I either liked or hated I may be more or less inclined to read your recommendations, but calling a book a “must read” is egotistical.
I think when people consider something required, they either mean they wish it taught in school or have a belief that it is profound enough to recommend to everyone. Like, I have a Marxist-Leninist reading list that I made and linked in my profile, and would love for more people to read it (or, more specifically, the works on it) but I can’t beam it into people’s heads nor force them to engage with it. I can only recommend it for those who actually want an ML reading list.