Gurdjieff's books?

[SovereignDove]

Thanks for pointing me here!

:D

 

[RflctnOfU]

Re: Question on a Recommended Order of Reading Gurdjieff's Books

I am eager to begin reading Gurdjieff's books to begin to understand and approach the Work, and am wondering if there is a recommended order in which to read his writings?

I have the following books on Kindle to choose from right now (but if another title would be more appropriate to begin reading I could look for it also):

Meetings With Remarkable Men
Beelzebub's Tales To His Grandson
In Search Of The Miraculous (Ouspensky)
Life Is Real Then, Only When "I Am"
The Fourth Way

Any help or suggestions would be much appreciated! (I tried searching for a list on the forum threads but didn't find one, although maybe I overlooked something)

:D

An important point to mention is that you have the UNrevised edition of Beelzebub's Tales. It is published by Penguin Compass. Also, it really is important to follow G's indications not to read other than the indicated order, as well as in the indicated way (BT's, then Meetings, then Life is Real). There is a reason for this, which has to do with 'associations'.

ISOTM is a good introductory book on the theoretical side of G's teaching, and would probably aid your understanding of the 'meat' contained in G's books.

Three years ago, when there had simultaneously arisen three very serious facts hindering my work and insuperable by usual means, I then, among other measures unusual in the life of people, for the purpose of conquering these "uninvited guests," also wrote one small booklet under the title of The Herald of Coming Good.

If you as yet have not read this book entitled The Herald of Coming Good, then thank the circumstance and do not read it.

Noted. Thanks T.C. I've got it now, so I'll read it bearing this in mind. Never tell a child not to open the fridge...

Keep in mind that G admonished his students to NEVER believe what he said. I think it is fair to say the same in regards to his written expositions as well. He 'talks' about the asian psyche being highly dual and the tendency to use misdirection...with them you must come to the point as if 'by the way' - Meetings, p.218

It is my opinion that ALL of G's writings, along with what fragments he gave to his pupils, constitute a labyrinth like puzzle. Ultimately, to grok what G taught through his written works, you have to be VERY familiar with ALL of it. None can really be taken in isolation. All of the 'keys' are in All and Everything. But these 'keys' are nowhere near the 'doors'.

Best of luck with your searching!

Kris

 

[SovereignDove]

[quote author=RflctnOfU]
An important point to mention is that you have the UNrevised edition of Beelzebub's Tales. It is published by Penguin Compass. Also, it really is important to follow G's indications not to read other than the indicated order, as well as in the indicated way (BT's, then Meetings, then Life is Real). There is a reason for this, which has to do with 'associations'.

ISOTM is a good introductory book on the theoretical side of G's teaching, and would probably aid your understanding of the 'meat' contained in G's books.

[/quote]

Thank you for the direction, I will read them in that order then, and pay careful attention, with I'm sure several re-readings! I like a good puzzle, should get my thinking going.

I have the kindle version of Beelzebub's Tales from Amazon, so I'm not sure if it's the unrevised version or not-it's not published by Penguin Compass, so I may need to search for the unrevised edition.

Mod edit: quotes

 

[RflctnOfU]

[quote author=RflctnOfU]
An important point to mention is that you have the UNrevised edition of Beelzebub's Tales. It is published by Penguin Compass. Also, it really is important to follow G's indications not to read other than the indicated order, as well as in the indicated way (BT's, then Meetings, then Life is Real). There is a reason for this, which has to do with 'associations'.

ISOTM is a good introductory book on the theoretical side of G's teaching, and would probably aid your understanding of the 'meat' contained in G's books.

Thank you for the direction, I will read them in that order then, and pay careful attention, with I'm sure several re-readings! I like a good puzzle, should get my thinking going.

I have the kindle version of Beelzebub's Tales from Amazon, so I'm not sure if it's the unrevised version or not-it's not published by Penguin Compass, so I may need to search for the unrevised edition.

Mod edit: quotes
[/quote]

The unrevised edition is 1238 pages in length.

Kris

 

[SovereignDove]

[quote author=RflctnOfU]
An important point to mention is that you have the UNrevised edition of Beelzebub's Tales. It is published by Penguin Compass. Also, it really is important to follow G's indications not to read other than the indicated order, as well as in the indicated way (BT's, then Meetings, then Life is Real). There is a reason for this, which has to do with 'associations'.

ISOTM is a good introductory book on the theoretical side of G's teaching, and would probably aid your understanding of the 'meat' contained in G's books.

Thank you for the direction, I will read them in that order then, and pay careful attention, with I'm sure several re-readings! I like a good puzzle, should get my thinking going.

I have the kindle version of Beelzebub's Tales from Amazon, so I'm not sure if it's the unrevised version or not-it's not published by Penguin Compass, so I may need to search for the unrevised edition.

Mod edit: quotes

The unrevised edition is 1238 pages in length.

Kris
[/quote]






Thanks...yes it is revised version.

 

[Mal7]

I read the second edition of the revised translation. The copy I had was published New York: Jeremy P. Tarcher / Penguin, 2006. It is 1135 pages long (although this doesn't in itself make it a shorter edition, it might have had smaller type, with more words per page.)

There is a 3 page Editor's Note (no name given for the editor) at the beginning of the book:

"The revised English translation was published in 1992, two years after Mme de Salzmann's death. Many readers welcomed the new edition. Others had a strong preference for the original book [Orage's English translation] and objected to allowing it to go out of print.

[. . .]

Responding to this demand, Triangle Editions, Inc., which holds the copyright, took the unusual step of republishing the original trnaslation in 1999 so that both versions would be available. Triangle also published the original Russian text in 2001. Welcomed by Russian readers, who confirmed the readability of the original text, the Russian edition provides an authentic reference for measuring the quality of the English translations.

This second edition of the revised translation contains further revisions that were discovered in work on the Russian book, particularly corrections in Gurdjieff's neologisms, called the 'special words.' Readers wishing to pursue further study of these translations should refer to the Guide and Index to Beelzebub's Tales (Traditional Studies Press, 2nd ed., 2003), which has page references and comparative detail for both the original and revised translations [. . .]"

What are the reasons for considering Orage's English translation from 1950 better than the translation made be Mme de Salzmann and others, published in 1992 (and revised again in the Tarcher / Penguin 2006 edition)?

I am interested in the actual text of the two different English translations, not subsidiary (but possibly not irrelevant) concerns about such matters as whether Orage understood the teachings or the original Russian text better than de Salzmann.

For example, can someone point to some parallel passages from the two translations, and show how one is to be preferred to the other?

I do understand that later or more recent translations are not necessarily better than earlier ones.

Montaigne's Essays for example, are possibly more interesting to read in English in one or other of the two earliest English translations made by John Florio (1553-1625) or Charles Cotton (1630-1687), than in some more recent 20th century translations, notwithstanding that some scholarly corrections might have been made by the 20th century translators.

 

[Approaching Infinity]

What are the reasons for considering Orage's English translation from 1950 better than the translation made be Mme de Salzmann and others, published in 1992 (and revised again in the Tarcher / Penguin 2006 edition)?

Gurdjieff worked with Orage (and others) directly on the English version. It was also the version he used all throughout his teaching of English and American students, where chapters would be read out loud, and G would observe their reactions to what he wrote. He continually refined it until based on these readings until it was finally published. He also approved the final proofs. So, it can be said to be the only "G approved" English version.

For example, can someone point to some parallel passages from the two translations, and show how one is to be preferred to the other?

Wiki has some examples: _http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beelzebub%27s_Tales_to_His_Grandson

 

[RflctnOfU]

What are the reasons for considering Orage's English translation from 1950 better than the translation made be Mme de Salzmann and others, published in 1992 (and revised again in the Tarcher / Penguin 2006 edition)?

Gurdjieff worked with Orage (and others) directly on the English version. It was also the version he used all throughout his teaching of English and American students, where chapters would be read out loud, and G would observe their reactions to what he wrote. He continually refined it until based on these readings until it was finally published. He also approved the final proofs. So, it can be said to be the only "G approved" English version.

For example, can someone point to some parallel passages from the two translations, and show how one is to be preferred to the other?

Wiki has some examples: _http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beelzebub%27s_Tales_to_His_Grandson

Mal7 - Also, the following link is the first three chapters of a book that, in my opinion, misses the mark about half the time, but these first chapters are spot on. It speaks directly to the issues with the revised edition.

_http://www.gurdjieffsburieddog.com/uploads/1ST_3__shortened_PDF.pdf

Kris

 

[Mal7]

Thank you Approaching Infinity and Kris. Those replies and links were helpful.

I have now bought the 1250-page Kindle version on Amazon, which is Orage's 1950 translation. (Although the "Editor's Note" shown on the US Amazon's sites "Editorial Reviews - From the Publisher" section would lead one to think they were offering de Hartmann's revised translation, but it is not).

 

[Mal7]

Oops I meant to say "de Salzmann" not "de Hartmann" in my previous post. 25 more posts and I will be able to edit my own messages.
I will probably tack down a physical copy too. With such a large book, I don't think Kindle is the ideal format. I think the physicality of reading a paper book gives me more of a sense of how far through the book I am at any point, as compared with the little marker on the Kindle screen saying I am e.g. 35% through. I think Beelzebub's Tales for Kindle might be a little like The Complete Works of Shakespeare for Kindle, which people can download for free and think "Wow I have all of Shakespeare on my Kindle" but then how much of Shakespeare on their Kindle would they actually read? (Speaking for myself anyhow, the Complete Works of Shakespeare was one of the first Kindle titles I downloaded. I haven't more than a few pages or lines of Shakespeare on my Kindle, but have read several Shakespeare plays in paper book form since then.)