Customer Reviews

The Art of Living: The Classic Manual on Virtue, Happiness, and Effectiveness

5 star:		(40)
4 star:		(10)
3 star:		(7)
2 star:		(3)
1 star:		(11)

 

 

Epictetus desperately needs a modern, contemporary translation. As far as I know, all of the available translations in print are either terribly academic or use Victorian language. This is NOT a translation but a very free, very loose paraphrase and condensation. I knew I was in trouble when I read the introduction. The author slams Western philosophy for being too cerebral and for not dealing sufficiently with the irrational aspects of life. She obviously does not like the use of reason to deal with day to day life. Then why, I might ask, is she paraphrasing a philosopher who is one of the presursors to modern rational psychotherapy? Like many Westerners who dabble in Eastern philosophy and only know it superficially, she assumes that it speaks more directly to the needs of people than Western philosophy. This despite the fact that Plato, Aristotle, Epicurus, Epictetus, etc. were immensely popular with the general population of ancient times. So much so, in fact, that common citizens wore rings and bought mirrors with sayings of Epicurus on them and Socrates could be lampooned in a popular comedy. Stoicism was the unoffical religion of the roman army-not an elitist, irrelevant teaching. And Epicureanism had widespread allegiance and was able to fill huge communities all throughout the ancient world. The most popular devotional books of the 17th and 18th century were all basically rewrites of the ancient Greeks. By the time the introduction was finished, I knew that I was in for a very trendy, inaccurate rendering of Epictetus. The worst chapter has to be the one called "Avoid casual sex". Being familiar with Epictetus, I would love to know where the author found anything in his works which would justify her stating that an active sex life is okay "within a framework of personal commitment". Epictetus believed that men and women should perform their moral duty no matter how difficult. That meant sex only within marriage-not some absurd arrangement that is, as the author says, "within a framework of personal commitment" which could mean anything-and usually does. Epictetus felt that men and women had a duty to something greater than their own personal ideas of what they thought that their duties and commitments might be at any particular moment. Individuals are citizens of a wider community and what they do should lend harmony to the larger community. Their behavior is not determined by trends but by the highest standards. Moderns may not like that. It goes against their grain. Fine, but don't distort Epictetus just to make people feel good. Epictetus, who never minced words, would never flatter his audience or offer a salve to their conscience. I think that Epictetus, the moral rigorist, would have been appalled. His teachings are very stern and difficult. That's why stoicism is both greatly admired and, also, widely rejected. It is a philosophy of moral battle and psychological toughness in a world where, as Tom Wolfe says in "A Man in Full" "principles are dead". When individuals feel they are surrounded by nothing but corruption, injustice, and irresponsibility and feel that they are victims of the same and can do little about any of it, Stoicism shows a way to salvation, a way to preserve your integrity and peace of mind even when you are working for a corporation run by modern day Nero's (are there any other kind?), or suffering physically and mentally from the stress of modern life and its overwhelming evils. Stocisim urges us all to be good men and women even-especially-when it is tough to do so. Epictetus teaches that the happy life is the virtuous one. Watering down his message is doing a disservice to him. Rather than claiming that this is Epictetus speaking, the author should have simply mentioned that it was inspired by some Stoic ideas. That is all it truly is.

Epictetus is one of the real "greats" in the history of philosophy. From the very bottom of the Roman social ladder, he taught and practiced a philosophy (originally due to Zeno) that came to be called "Stoicism" and influenced Roman society all the way to the very top: Roman soldiers used to carry copies of the _Enchiridion_ into battle, and the emperor Marcus Aurelius's famous "Meditations" consist mostly of his urging himself, apparently with limited success, to come closer to the Stoic ideal.

The people who characterize Sharon Lebell's interpretive rendering as a "self-help" book have at least half a point; the written records of Epictetus's teachings (Epictetus didn't write them down himself) were self-help books in the first place.

And fine ones they were. Oh, there are a few points at which Epictetus counsels heights of detachment suitable only for inhuman monsters, as when he suggests that we remember our wives and children are mortal so that we won't grieve when they die. But on the whole his teachings are firmly founded on the view that absolutely everything occurs by Providence, we are all of us children of God and citizens of the world with natural fellowship with one another, and we should assume responsibility for precisely those things which we can control -- namely, ourselves.

This view, or something very close to it, has grounded religious and philosophical programs from the Torah to Alcoholics Anonymous, from Spinoza to the Musar movement, from antiquity to the very latest modernity (e.g., Mark Rosen's excellent _Thank You for Being Such a Pain_): when you face a challenge, use it to improve yourself; that's what it's for.

And Epictetus's teachings were not assembled into books in order to provide academic employment for classical scholars. They were recorded because Epictetus himself wasn't going to be around to teach forever and it was believed to be important that his influence outlive him. His philosophy, after all, was supposed to be both practical and practiced.

What Sharon Lebell has done in this excellent little volume is skim the very cream of Epictetus's philosophy and make it accessible to the modern reader. And it is worth remembering that Epictetus himself did not teach in writing but spoke directly to his listeners; his students would not have sat in the library poring over long crabbed volumes but sat in the open air listening to popularly accessible discourses.

Lebell does interpret and modify, and she doesn't always say so. For example, she has Epictetus say at one point, "Rationality isn't everything." This is by way of making the entirely unexceptionable point that there are things we're just not going to understand. But there is a good case to be made that, for Epictetus, rationality -- i.e., conformity to "nature" under the governance of reason -- was indeed "everything," not merely a means to an end, as Lebell's rendering suggests, but both means _and_ end.

But this is a piddling objection; Lebell's interpretations stay pretty close to the original, as any reader can verify by actually checking her text against a good translation of the sources. (I like the _Everyman_ edition, but I think it's out of print.)

And before dismissing Lebell's interpretation as just another self-help book, we should ask ourselves how many _other_ "self-help books" include the advice, "Let your reason be supreme" [p. 62].

This book is inspiring, but perhaps confusing from a historical standpoint, given that Lebell doesn't tell us when she's embellishing on the original. Some reviewers have been speculating on what Epictetus did and did not write about. Example: some have complained that he couldn't possibly have addressed "casual sex". A reviewer named "Strict Evaluation" poo-poos Lebell's use of Epictetus's name and skeptically asks "what's the Greek for 'casual sex'?" -- implying that Lebell's book has little relation to Epictetus. I can assure you that that reviewer is uninformed and overdramatic. Case in point:

Lebell writes:

"Abstain from casual sex and particularly avoid sexual intercourse before you get married." ... "If, however, you know someone who has had casual sex, don't self-righteously try to win them over to your own views."

Arrian (Epictetus's sole recorder) writes in the Enchiridion:

"As to pleasure with women, abstain as far as you can before marriage: but if you do indulge in it, do it in the way which is conformable to custom. Do not, however be disagreeable to those who indulge in these pleasures, or reprove them; and do not often boast that you do not indulge in them yourself."

I'd say that Lebell has done a good job of capturing the spirit of what Arrian reported of Epictetus teachings (in this case). She often adds her own extrapolations and interpretations based on (1) her own understanding of the philosophy, and (2) a desire to make the reading more accessible and compelling to her audience. I agree that it would be awfully nice to have references to the original texts for comparison -- or perhaps an original+commentary format -- but before you indict her for complete fabrication, please, at least take a look at the original!

I basically agree with the review below which was critical of this work as watered down epictetus. I still believe however that this work provides an excellent introduction to the ideas of epictetus in particular and stoicism in general. If this is your only exposure to stoicism, I would worry that you might conclude that this is a warm and fuzzy, feel-good philosophy rather than an extremely tough form of mental discipline where if successful you can expect to live out your life free from suffering and maybe more importantly free from the fear of suffering. Epictetus was not a new age guru but a slave of the roman empire who ended up being the teacher of that other great stoic, the emperor Marcus Aurelius ( see Gladiator movie). The fact that the slave and the emperor both choose to live their lives by the tenants of this philosophy is a more powerful recommendation than anything I could add. I was already familiar with the "Discourses of Epictetus" so I was not really bothered by the shortcomings of "the art of Living" and I have to admit that reading the discourses is quite a slog (it is basically the lecture notes of one of his students). I have given copies of the "discourses" to friends and they went unread while over the last year I have given 10 copies of "The art of living" to friends in distress and they were all read. If you find this philosophy intriguing after this introduction you can move on to the Discourses ( I'd recommend the Long translation - best of a bad lot ) and then the "Confessions of Marcus Aurelius" and "the moral essays of Seneca". "Virtue is necessary and sufficent for a good life" - a radical idea to live by in this cesspool of self-indugence that passes for the good life in 21th century America.

Epictetus, in the stoic tradition, faces life in such an open-hearted way, that by the first pages we are already totally shocked.

Those short sentences and simple thoughts pack such "weight" and truth in them, that in a matter of minutes you are already questioning all the important decisions you took in the past and start to ask yourself where the heck you thought you were heading... :-)

The worst thing: Even if you don't like what he writes, it totally makes sense and you can feel it inside you... It's terrifying! :-)

As it was supposed to be, this short book is an invaluable manual for good living and peace of mind. It makes all those important "truths" you were taught for years and years, suddenly seem so small, that the phrase "rethink your life" had to be associated to this book.

By teaching us to face life in a different way, this book simply makes us better human beings. The so-called big problems suddenly become small and the otherwise "small things" are turned into a font of happiness.

And the best of all, this book is so cheap and thin, that is hard to find an excuse not to read it! I am sure we all can take at least something of great value to our lives by reading this book.

It is amazing that after thousands of years, nobody can know, explain and understand human nature so well as those ancient Greeks(or Greecians, as some might say...).

Also, if you like this book, check the works of Seneca because they are very, very interesting too!

we don't have a lot of books from Epictetus and in fact this one is the only one. Pascal thought that only two authors were worth reading ,Epictetus and Montaigne. he was right.if you do not want to waste your life ,if you want to be happier in your life and if you are sometimes depressive ,you must read that book.This book changed my life and i'm sure it will change your whole existence.

"First, say to yourself what you would be; then do what you have to do."

The Art of Living is a neat little book reinterpreted (paraphrased - not translated) by Sharon Lebell, from the Enchiridion (Handbook) of Epictetus (pronounced Epic-TEE-tus). Epictetus (c.55 - c.135 C.E.), was an exponent of Stoicism who flourished in the early second century C.E. His Handbook concentrates almost exclusively on ethics and how to live a fulfilling life that culminates in happiness. This fulfillment is, according to Epictetus, based on accepting the events of life that come our way and then moving beyond them. "Don't demand or expect that events happen as you would wish them to. Accept events as they actually happen. That way peace is possible." Focusing on, and using, what life has dealt you is very important in Epictetus' thinking. As is living simply while pursuing virtuous activities. Epictetus admonishes us to "walk it, don't just talk it." He says, "Show your character and commitment...through your actions...Pursue the good ardently. But if your efforts fall short, accept the result and move on."

Although similar to Balthasar Gracian's Art of Worldly Wisdom, it is not as detailed or precise. This paraphrase of Epictetus will remind many of Lao Tzu's Tao Te Ching or of Buddhism's Dhammapada. For Christians, the similarity will be closest to the Book of Proverbs (or also The Wisdom of Solomon, Sirach, and even The Sermon on the Mount). Those of us who cherish the wisdom traditions of the world will welcome this little book as an additional part of our collection. However, if you are looking for a critical edition, this book won't fulfill your needs. It is definitely designed to be read for pleasure and to compliment other books or studies within the genre.

"Goodness exists independently of our conception of it. The good is out there and it always has been out there, even before we began to exist."

Lebell's interpretation of the important messages from Epictetus for today's ordinary readers apparently fails to meet the standards of many reviewers. I happen to like it as an introduction to the basic concepts. We gave a copy to our teenager years ago, and I believe that some of it may have seeped into his set of values.

Unless the harsh reviewers provide us with citations to excellent, accurate, complete translations, then their comments are insufficient to guide those of us who want to learn more about ancient Stoicism. They simply fail to help anyone. Isn't that the point of publishing reader reviews?

Please, give us citations to the best translations, and the best works to consult, whether those of Epictetus, Marcus Aurelius, Cicero, Seneca or others.

Thank you in advance.

I suppose if you're a Latin scholar, you might take exception to this interpretation, but keep in mind that it is an "interpretation," not a translation. If you would like a good introduction to the Stoic philosophy that led to The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius, this book is a great place to start. If you are looking for straightforward advice on living in modern society (although the basis of this book is over 1900 years old) you will not be disappointed. This is a book that can be read straight through, or savored line by line. Each time I pick it up, I find new insights and nuances that I'd never noticed before. It's funny how closely the concerns of philosophers in Rome mirror our own so closely.

Sharon Lebell's "translation" (or should I say more accurately, "rewriting") is worth reading. The advice still makes sense, even though you are reading a greatly DILUTED, MISTRANSLATED, CREATIVELY EDITED, AND WHOLLY "NON-CLASSICAL" alleged translation. A hint that something's amiss is the juxtaposition of Sharon Lebell's name next to Epictetus's. Since when does a translator of a classical author place her name so prominently next to the real author? Answer. When the translations are so different from the original that the juxtaposition of names "Epictetus, Sharon Lebell" accurately portrays the authorship of THIS pseudo-translation of a great classic text. Per the advice of a few previous reviewers, I DID DO SOMETHING SOME PEOPLE MAY CHOOSE TO BYPASS: I consulted a hardcover edition of Epictetus's DISCOURSES and ENCHIRIDION based on the translation of Thomas Wentworth Higginson. It was a worthwhile experience of textual comparison. Take Chapter Thirteen of Epictetus's Discourses: "To Those Who Talk Too Much About Their Own Affairs." Higginson's translation, though somewhat stilted, presents three full pages (328-330) of advice on avoiding gossip, both as a speaker and listener. Lebell's "translation" pares down three dense pages of tiny single space writing into less than one full page of alleged translation. What authority has granted Lebell permission to chop out three-fourths of what Epictetus says on the topic, and so loosely translate whatever remains? Since when is such a divorce from a responsible rendering a "translation?" And can someone clarify this question? Did Epictetus ever write such a puny text called "The Art of Living"? The aforementioned passage contained in Higginson's translation is contained in the Discourses (I saw no mention of "The Art of Living" anywhere. Was that perhaps in a Dalai Lama book? Did the author creatively merge Tibetan Buddhism with Stoic philosophy? That would explain how Lebell could have taken the 330 densely compacted pages of the Discourses, and turned them into a couple of dozen big-lettered paragraphs, most of them failing to amount to a quarter of a page.). No, Lebell's "The Art of Living" is not a translation of Epictetus. But is it useful? Yes. Is it worth reading? Yes, especially if a genuine translation is NOT available. And that's the problem. Few legitimate translations are available. But they are available. This points to another misrepresentation by Lebell and/or her publishers/editors. By calling excerpts from Epictetus "Discourses" (and possible Enchiridion) "The Art of Living" Lebell makes a reader feel that she is providing the reader with a hitherfore untranslated work. Well, gottcha! No such untranslated work. The readers is reading a few creatively translated (mistranslated) snippets from a much larger body of work. So, I can't dare to call Lebell's highly abridged and creatively edition "a translation." It's not. What can I compare it to? Well, there's a wonderful little book called "I Ching Wisdom" written by Wu Wei. It's great. It's worth reading. But when you actually read the new definitive Alfred Huang translation of the I-Ching, you know you are reading a useful, yet greatly altered "Cliff Notes/Fortune Cookie" version of the original. Does this disparage Lebell's contribution? Well, no. Read on their own merits -- not as a translation of Epictetus, but solely as Lebell's "brainstorming" after reading a few of Epictetus's Discourses, etc. -- the book is very good. But the real great tragedy and endictment here points to the irresponsible publishers/editors who saw fit to allow Lebell to abridge and mistranslate excerpts from Epictetus's works, and then try to pass it on to unsuspecting readers as: "The Classical Manual on Virtue, Happiness, and Effectivenss." If the source of Lebell's pseudo-translation is Epictetus, then where is her original source? And why didn't the irresponsible publishers/editors ensure that Lebell provided readers with an accurate and complete translation of the Discourses and Enchiridion? As a piece of scholarship, Lebell's pseudo-translation is inexusably irresponsible and shallow. As a valuable contribution to "self help" literature, it's a good quick read for even a 45-minute commuter flight. You can probably read and reread the book in that time. Why even buy it? You can read it while standing at the airport magazine store in less time than it takes to get through airport security. So...if you're interested in Epictetus, go elsewhere. If you want an overpriced misrepresentation of Epictetus with a nice hardcover, then you'll get exactly just that. I only wish Lebell had been ethical enough as an author to have excised Epictetus's name out of the book, in addition to the other 300 or so pages she left out and/or changed beyond recognition. What's the sense of starting to translate a work when you can't get through one-thirtieth of the work? "Buyer Beware!"