The Reader’s Encyclopedia

The author writes in the preface that he has endeavored to edit this reader’s encyclopedia in such a way as to enlarge upon original entries from the past with modern treatment; to feature both obscure works and those better known; and to offer brief explanations of significant figures, movements, and terms from aesthetics, science, philosophy, economics, and politics that may be relevant for readers.

Indeed, at first glance, this volume seems quite comprehensive. Yet, enigmatically, some of the most obvious and needed entries are nowhere to be found. For example, suppose you wanted to discover in which book you could find “Pip” ( the protagonist and narrator in Charles Dickens’s novel “Great Expectations”). Pip is not there, show more nor is his actual given name in the story, Philip Pirrip. Only if you know to look up “Great Expectations” will you find reference to him or to Miss Havisham, although Miss Lonelyhearts, from Nathanael West’s novel, makes the cut.

Similarly strangely omitted, you will find an entry for Georgette Heyer, but none for Regency Romances, or even the Regency Period generally.

“Cat” is an entry, but “Cat in the Hat” is not, although Dr. Seuss is. Nor is “Madeline,” the famous character in books for children by Ludwig Bemelmans, who does appear as an entry. Neither Margaret Wise Brown nor her iconic book, “Goodnight Moon” are included. In general, children’s literature is a much neglected category in this book.

Generally, however, the range of entries is excellent and often surprising, and extends beyond the West, always a sadly anomalous plus.

It’s fun just to page through the book, in which you will find all kinds of tidbits of information, from background on Octavio Paz to Greenwich Village to the French Cordeliers to the significance of the number nine.

I use this book as a coffee table book to stimulate conversation. show less

With the advent of excellent online research tools like Wikipedia.org, one might be tempted to believe a book like Benet's "Reader's Encylopedia" is obsolete. Au contraire, mon frere.

The advantages of using Wikipedia to gather information about a particular work or author: it's comprehensive, entries easily link to further information, and it's fast. The disadvantages: it's not always focused on the literary importance of every cultural reference, and it's generally more information to wade through than you really need for casual reading.

Using online reference sources is like consulting a reference librarian; cracking open the "Reader's Encyclopedia" is like having a highly literate friend hanging around in your den--you can ask him show more for a quick fact, and depending on your mood you'll get your answer and go back to your book, or you'll wander off on a tangent and chat for hours about related topics.

There are certainly those who disagree with me and feel a focused subject encyclopedia like this is outdated--and I'm probably an old fart for thinking this way--but if books are your friends you won't regret having a copy of Benet. show less

-pre-googling, it helped me with more crosswords than any other book
-an addictive book, every entry pulls me into others
-later editions are better for women and world lit

This would be my desert island book, I can spend hours lost in it, and I don't believe I could ever read all the entries. Everyone should own a copy, for a literature buff it's invaluable, and for someone with less knowledge (like me) it offers good introductions to writers, playrights, texts, artists, cultural movements, historical and mythological figures, literary themes, and so on, and so on....

Incredibly handy reference work, containing biographical information for major writers, definitions of literary terms, entries for characters, literary movements and genres, historical figures who are featured in major works of literature, mythology, and more. Every edition contains slightly different information, as new writers and styles are added and older, now unfashionable ones are dropped, so it's optimal to get a copy of each. I only have the third edition now, after downsizing my library. I have found it incredibly useful over the years.

I like to flip through this book in order to remind myself how much more I have to learn. It's a collection of short pieces on, well, on things I already ought to know, a la the Encyclopedia Britannica used to be.

Invaluable reference tome for Literature over many centuries: Even more of a 'must have' now google-wikipedia-yahoo, & the dreadful blanket ignorance of 'Social Media' that offers so many varieties of alleged factual knowledge and provenance.