The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1909-06-21

a religious work. The list is absolutely
incomplete and inadequate without
those three"
BENJAMIN IDE WHEELER
should think the bible was pretty near
the groundwork Of learning. but. per
haps. in making out the list on which.
I am sure. DR.. Eliot spent much time.
he may have aimed not at the great
books, but at those containing some
thing of precision. in knowledge.
would be slow 10 criticise him, and
even then would say what I though
good. not bad. The omission Of
Shakespeare was also noticeable. bur
not so important as the bible.
JUDGE RALPH c. HARRIsON-The
books on the list are not Of universal
appeal The bible. Shakespeare and
Homer are so universal that it would be
presumed that the public would already
be familiar with them; and it would
be presumptuous to include them IS
Harvard classics If any one reads
and studies the books on this list he
would get a good knowledge OF Htera-
ture.
REV. WILLIAM RAIDER am sur
prised that DR.. Eliot has omitted the
great orations and has given our Amer
lean writer's scant notice. The bible
should have been included. quite apart
from it's religious value. It is strange
that Hamlet is not there. nor Uncle
Toms Cabin" and BosweIrs Johnson.
WILLIAM RICHARD wATsON-Au
the books on the list are for students.
None are popular in the library
sense. save Emerson's essays don't
think the bible could be omitted from
any liberal education. Few people
would get much out OF these books un-
less they had had the advantage OF an
education am surprised that there
is little on sociology.
PRESIDENT SASHA. :. 1.-The class
teal writer's OF Greece and Rome. as well
as modern writer's should have been
included in the list. I can not sub
scribe to Darwin. as his theories are
not supported by reason or by fact.
I would exclude Shelly completely. as
he scarcely deserves a place among
honorable writer's. I would have Wash
ington Irving on the list and Daniel
Webster.
JOSEPH ID. REDDING-No man could
read these books with great advantage
unless he was familiar with the best
literature II I were allowed only
few books I would select Shakespeare.
49, LsLf. r,s,-+,-ors- rt1-.- - T,---,-3-,--
works.
REV. CHARLES r. BROWN would
suggest that both the bible and Shakes
peare be substituted for some OF the
books named. The Pilgrims Prog
ress~ and the Maids Tragedy might
be omitted. It seems to me that a
novel like Thackeray's Henry Es-
mond' should be included. However. I
do not want to place myself in a posi-
tion of eriticising DIT. Eliot 1 am glad
that The Cali is asking opinions on
that subject. II viii direct public at
tentfon to literature.
JUSTICE HENRY A. MELVIN con
slider it absurd TO try 10 prescribe a
course of reading as a substitute for a
college education. A college education
is entirely too variable a quantity TO
be measured by books OF essays Diff
ferent people go to college for diner
ent purposes and with different ends
in view. and it would be impossible TO
compile any limited library which
would fulfill the wants of all.
PROF. EDWARD BULL CLAPP-The
bible. Shakespeare and Homer should
not have been omitted. They should
have appeared IN that order. heading
the list.
DIR. j. X. 8IeLEAN-No bookshelf 5oo
feet Ions could afford to omit the bibls
or Shakespeare. Those works are the
center Of gravitation. for ali learning
centers about ther4