February 2025 List of the Month: Books That Changed Our Perspective

Some books are so thought-provoking that they can change the reader's mind about something, altering their perception of an issue, an experience, maybe even life itself. Our List of the Month for February 2025 is dedicated to the Books That Changed Our Perspective!

Each participant may vote on ten titles (and add other, non-weighted titles). Titles can be either fiction or non-fiction. Selections can relate to changes in philosophical perspective, one's perception of specific non-fiction topics, and more.

Please add a note indicating how the books you've added changed your perspective.

For a complete list of topics covered so far in our project, please see the new section for Lists of the Month on the Zeitgeist page

We would welcome suggestions for future lists. Please add them here, and we will keep them in mind, going forward.

This is a nice topic, one that will require some thought.

An idea I had was Fiction from your hometown, city, state, or region where you live.

A challenging list this month!

The staff additions need Explanations (-:

our personal perspectives? Or society's as a whole? Or both? Just wondering how other people view this list.

Man, I want to add a note to one that other people are putting there: "Made me realize the author was a complete idiot."

>4 al.vick:

I took it as meaning my own perspective ("add a note describing how your perspective changed"). To presume to judge the changing of society's perspective seems a bit presumptuous, although there are a few books there--notably The Jungle--where a case could easily be made.

>5 timspalding: Hahaha. I had some similar reactions

I took it as my personal perspective as well.

I mean that Upton Sinclair guy. Eat your sausage, people!

I notice that even if you hit the show more text, explanations are restricted to one line and are still incomplete.

>10 Bookmarque:

They aren't behaving that way for me.

But at full window-width on my desktop, the complete "show more text" version does a strange column break that is ugly and not intuitive.

>9 timspalding: I don't know the book or the author at all, but now I'm very curious why you think so. 😄

>9 timspalding:

Naw, I'm joking. It was not Sinclair. Is was the author who rhymes with Vuval Yarari. :)

>2 sturlington: I like that idea! Everyone could add their books, and specify the state/province/region in the explanation field. Stay tuned...

>4 al.vick: Our personal perspectives was what I was going for, but people (as always) have latittude. If they feel a book truly changed society's perspective, they should mention that in the notes.

>13 timspalding: I really liked, let's call it Vapiens, but haven't been tempted to read his later books.

>16 anglemark:

:)

Funny, this was a topic we’ve just been discussing in my Civic Engagement class. So I’ve trawled up my own list this past week.

>9 timspalding: Eat your sausage, people!

I think that's been mis-punctuated. I'd argue it should be rendered (sic)
Eat, you're sausage, people!
or
Eat your sausage-people!

What's for dinner, Mom?

>19 elenchus: As a Hannibal fan, my mind goes weird places when I see "sausage" and "people" in the same sentence.

>20 timspalding:

To Serve Man

>1 AbigailAdams26: I had a thought for another potential list: books you'd love to see made into film/TV/screen adaptations.

Also, it's going to be interesting trying to state succinctly how some of the books on my list changed my perspective. I keep hearing Inigo Montoya in my head, saying, "No, there is too much. Let me sum up." :D

>24 slimikin: That's an excellent list suggestion!

>24 slimikin: Related to your idea: books you live in fear of seeing adapted because you know they're going to screw it up.

>26 amanda4242: They're the same list.

I can't make up my mind on how to interpret "change" here. It could be "change" as in "180 degree shift" in opinion or it could be "change" as in "modify". Or, in the loosest application of "change", it could simply mean learning--not so much a change of perspective as a gaining of one.

I can't think of any book that affected me in the first sense, going from one position to its very opposite. (And frankly am rather surprised that this could be the case for anyone--but maybe I'm imagining views of greater importance being at stake than is the case in such instances.)

On the contrary, there are many examples of the second type, refining, clarifying, expanding etc. on a basic scheme.

And of course the third would dominate, as long as one remained teachable.

>28 LolaWalser:
I was able to come up with nine titles, using the basic gloss of "books I found especially revelatory."

>26 amanda4242:

God, that's a great, sad thing.

>24 slimikin: Another great list idea!

>27 Aquila: There's a fair bit of overlap, but my list of books I'd love to see adapted also includes some mediocre works with decent stories that I think could be improved by any halfway competent filmmaker.

>32 amanda4242:

In other words, books they can't mess up much. :-p

So we can still say good books you'd love to see made into film/TV/screen adaptations and books you live in fear of seeing adapted because you know they're going to screw it up are the same list. :-)

Certainly I can't point to a counter-example, although I can point to cases of better and worse disasters in "adapting for the screen." There was a play version of Dickens's Great Expectations that I actually thought pretty good, though of course it wasn't the basis for any movie versions. :-)

I was gratified by the cinematic interpretation of Inherent Vice, and it made me wonder what other Pynchon (if any) might be grounds for a movie.

>34 paradoxosalpha: That was Paul Thomas Anderson, not a mere mortal doing the adaptation ;)

>27 Aquila: Bwahahaha, they kinda are. I actually thought some folks' list might include books that have unsatisfactory adaptations already and that they just, please, ONCE, would like to see done well.

>36 slimikin: Bwahahaha, they kinda are. I actually thought some folks' list might include books that have unsatisfactory adaptations already and that they just, please, ONCE, would like to see done well.

Yes, but given the odds of such a thing happening are approximately .0001 per attempt, none of us will live long enough to see it happen. :-p

>32 amanda4242: That's a really good point. My brother really enjoyed The Expanse series, but he loved the TV show because, as he put it, all the excess of the books was flensed away, baring the heart of the story to shine. I can definitely think of some series and books I've read where either more or less detail would be an improvement in an adaptation.

>37 waltzmn: True. Especially if we consult others' opinions instead of just our own: what someone else might feel to be a perfect adaptation may fall short for us. ...And then there are the "terrible" adaptations that I kinda love. Unashamedly. (But also quietly. :D)

This is a great topic, especially now.

How are the rankings determined? Is it just a combination between the number of votes the book gets for this list and the book's LT rating?

>41 R3dH00d: How are the rankings determined?

I think the votes are modified by the rank in the individuals' lists, and "LT rating" doesn't enter into it.

>34 paradoxosalpha: I'm holding out hope for a Mason Dixon movie. I need to see the talking dog and the mechanical duck.

>42 paradoxosalpha: Yes, points are determined by the rank on the individual members list. Within ties, books are ordered most popular (on LT) first.

>41 R3dH00d: >42 paradoxosalpha:

Yes. It's the number of entries, but also their rank. Ratings don't figure into it.