A book that changed you

I saw this post somewhere else and thought it might be happy here in this group.

Have you read a book that changed you or the way you look at things?

Recently I read Ishmael by Daniel Quinn (hmmm, touchtones don't like Mr. Quinn) and it changed my world view. I started looking at overpopulation and other flaws in our society in a different light.

The Grapes of Wrath helped me to unserstand the Great Depression when I was in high school. Not only that, but history in general... I started to see history through the eyes of the perople who had to live it.

Systems of survival: a dialogue on the moral foundations of commerce and politics by Jane Jacobs was one of those moments for me. I read this my senior year of college on a couch that I had received in trade for an agreed amount of manual labor (read: family).

Jacobs pointed out to me that there are basically only two ways of getting what you need or want in life: to trade for them or to take them. Ultimately, these lead in to commerce and politics, which provide norms and rules for these activities. The moment of thinking came when I challenged myself (and failed) to think of another way to provide myself with things that I needed.

I never had a clearly articulated or well thought out philosophy on the subject (and still don't) but until reading that book I had some vague notion of antipathy (in a sort of teenage angsty way) towards the application of economics and politics, thinking that there must be, somewhere, something immoral about both. After reading the book, I realized that economic and politics are ubiquitous tools not only used by specialized professionals. Further, since they are merely tools, any immorality surrounding them lies, in root, with the manner and application of the tool, rather than being something inherent to itself.

So basically, this book helped me figure out that money, by itself is not an evil thing, but rather a tool that can be used for either good or evil. I have since bought a new couch. I can only hope that is not evil.

My life has been changed several times by several books. I just finished reading The Rape of Innocence: Taking Captivity Captive by Lacresha Hayes. My mouth is still wide open. It would be a pity if she doesn't make it to the bestsellers list. That woman went through literal hell and came back.

As a man, it made me more aware of my wife's feelings. My wife was sexually abused too. So, I have a new respect for her when she says no or that she doesn't feel like it. Also, as a Christian, the book made me ashamed of all those who carry the title but do NOT live it. She was raped by a minister after years of sexual abuse as a child. Hypocrisy is a big theme in this book. I was fighting mad for over half the book and joyful for the rest. I'll never see women the same, and that's a good thing for me.

Getting things done changed my way of keeping and organising things. I don't really organise things previously because the mental effort to keep track is too great and i'm too lazy. Now i just create a system which makes organising effortless. Still working on it though, but it changed plenty of me.

The Mahabharata. There was something hilarious and profound and -wink wink- familiar about (the warrior god) Arjuna getting onto the battlefield and having what amounts to a thirty-volume nervous breakdown: "What's all this for???" (Wouldn't you be intrigued by a god with doubts?)

A Fine Balance by Rohinton Mistry had a huge impact on the way I view life. Mistry's characters come to life in all of their glory, anguish and deprivation, but, most uncommonly, by their joyfulness found in the midst of suffering. The author teaches us how to find that fine balance between joy, which is not dependant upon external circumstances, and despair. Those characters who faced the worst obstacles overcame them with resilience and adaptation to whatever the present brought them without laying waste to their immediate enjoyment of life, a fine balance that every human being needs in order to survive the trials and torments of being mortal humans. Maneck's suicide symbolizes, not weakness, but an inability to find this fine balance so essential to a life well lived.

Message 6: ThePoet
I agree, that books really changed the way I look at people.

Thank you for recommending this book. I just looked at it on amazon.com and put it on my wish list (to buy soon).

P.S. I am new at this. I meant to say thank you for recommending the book Getting Things Done.

Thanks, gang, I've added a couple of these to my list. I think the book that changed my way of looking at things the most was Brian Swimme's The Universe is a Green Dragon. It emphasizes the positive wonder of the world and was a great antidote to the emphasis on original sin in my Catholic upbringing.

A couple of books that changed the way I see myself & the world around me -

A Woman's Worth, by Marianne Williamson. I read this when I was in my early twenties & it changed me forever. Up until that point I felt like my feminine traits were a weakness. After the book I not only felt good about being a woman but felt LUCKY to be one. Truly an empowering book for women of all ages but especially those coming-of-age.

Many Lives, Many Masters, by Brian Weiss. This opened my mind to the possibilities of reincarnation & the possibilities outside of my own personal belief system. After reading this book, I realized that I do believe in reincarnation - despite my belief in Christianity.

Embraced by the Light, Betty Eadie. This I have to add because although I don't really believe in everything she said, I did feel that there were some truths included. Such as the concepts of one God, that we're all defining differently based solely on our level of current development. And finally, that we choose the circumstances of our lives - good & bad - and that there is purpose it it all - good & bad.

Vladimir Nabokov led me to a new standard for truly evocative prose. I like this thread.....I need more time to consider which other books to add.

Cheating a bit- I'll go with authors: Nabokov, as hemlokgang mentioned above, William Burroughs and Samuel Beckett. Nabokov for exactly the reason hemlokgang mentions, Burroughs for the sheer bizarre imagination that went into his prose, Beckett for reimagining "drama" as a space that would accomodate something seemingly antithetical to theater, but now would be hard to imagine not part of the "grammar" of theater. In each case it felt like my mind's landscape had enlarged, opening up territory that was always there but i never new existed.

I first read fiction by Jean-Paul Sartre and Albert Camus when in college in the late '70s, L'Etranger , La Nausee , and No Exit introduced me to the existential school of philosophy. I have not since strayed from my allegiance to existentialism. It has been a "touchstone" in my life.

I never saw myself the same after I read She Drove Without Stopping by Jaimy Gordon during college. My life was further impacted by meeting the author (a professor at my school). The book was a part of an awakening I experienced in my early adulthood - an awakening that involved anger over my true status as a woman in our world.

Honestly, it was Motherless Daughters by Hope Edelman that changed me. Taught me a LOT about myself...having grown up with a sick, and often unavailable, mother..actually I read it before she died nearly 2 years ago. Soon, I'll read it again and discover yet more about myself I suspect.

Hi Severn

That book changed my life too. I read it about 20 years after my mother died and I couldn't believe how well it described me. Did some therapy after that and made some changes.

It's hard to narrow it down to just one, but here are a few that have really impacted on me:

Everywoman by Derek Llewellyn-Jones

This was one of the first adult non-fiction books I think I read! In secret of course! ;-P This was definitely an educative experience, and as a girl a total eye-opener. I learned a huge amount from this book, much of which has stuck with me up to now.

Life Is So Good - George Dawson

I think this was the first time I was really introduced to the realities of racism and social hierarchy. I read it when I was about 14 and it made a huge imprint on who I am. I remember I cried a lot while reading it, completely distraught that such pain was inflicted / existed in the world, and yet amazed every time by how positive this man remained in spite of everything. It's a true testament to the 'there's always someone worse off than yourself' idea.

Sold - Zana Muhsen

This book was quite horrific, with graphic descriptions of female circumcision and the like. I had never heard of anything like it, and it was the first time I knew how badly women are treated. I read it when I was 14 and probably too young - I felt like I lost a fair bit of innocence from this book. I thought of myself, my gender, my sexuality; everything, completely differently. It made me feel lucky for what I have, but also scared by the hurt that I too could potentially face in my life on the basis of my gender. Scary stuff.

Tomorrow, When the War Began - John Marsden

A fantastic teen novel on a subject I hadn't thought about before. I always considered Australia as so safe and cut off from everything else. As a teenager, it introduced me to the idea of invasion, and how we would/could react. It also made me think of how teenagers would cope in a world free of adults. It had danger, sex, survival, death; a huge explosion of action and emotion. It was gripping. I still feel excited simply thinking about this book.

The Manifesto of the Communist Party - Karl Marx

I read this book and felt excited, amazed; a huge connection with what was said. It's a remarkable book that completely changed the way I think about the world, it's history, and my place in amongst it. Even if its end goal is never realised, it does a brilliant job of teaching you that to fully know something, you need to learn its opposite. And also that what we see today isn't how it's always been: It's a completely human creation that can be changed in just the same way as it came to be.

2001: A Space Odyssey - Arthur C. Clarke

The film and the book - both remarkable and unforgettable.

Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? - Philip K. Dick

The film is good; the book is brilliant. This changed the way I think about the future, where we might be heading. It's still so relevant.

Careless - Deborah Robertson

I recently read this and found it a huge inspiration. It has motivated me to read more local fiction, and aim to write something myself one day. A brilliant book!

The Communist Manifesto is a great book and would have had much more impact, I think, had he been talking about automatons instead of human beings. Don't let the idea that you can mold people into something they are not be a foundation of your social views. Ask Lenin, he'll tell you, so will Stalin. Stalin realized that people were not balls of clay ready to be molded, so his answer to the problem was to kill 20,000,000 of them, mostly through slave labor and outright genocide.

Thanks for your opinion, geneg. I'm not quite sure why you have suggested that from what I've said I must adhere to an idea that "you can mold people into something they are not". That is not what I think and wasn't what I was trying to get across at all.

When you read the Communist Manifesto, it's really important that you read it in it's own right. When Marx wrote this book, Lenin and Stalin bore no relation to him. What they did in the name of his book was not his fault.

As with any book, there are a multiplicity of interpretations one can make from what is written. A great example would be the Bible. People have in different places and at different times thought very different things about what the Bible says and instructs. Many, many horrible things have been done in the name of the Bible, despite a great many other readers believing that in no section does it instruct that such acts are permissable. It's all relative.

This reality applies to any other book, including the Communist Manifesto. In no place does Marx write that Communist societies should become cruel dictatorships. Stalin & Co merely used the appeal of Marxism for their own crooked ends; they completely exploited the popularity of the book to lure people in to a system that bore little relation to what Marx was talking about.

But as I said, my own opinion is that whether a true Marxist society were ever to materialise or not, the book's importance nevertheless lies in what it teaches you about human societies, history, and knowledge, more generally. It forces you to examine your own way of life much more closely than you did before. It identifies capitalism as something that is not naturally occurring, but something that has come about over time; a completely human creation that has the potential to be changed or replaced in just the same way as it came to be.

This level of self-reflection is something I didn't comprehend before reading this book, so on that basis I think it is an important inclusion in my 'Books that made me think' list.

What led to my comment was the last half of your last sentence regarding The Manifest of the Communist Party here:

"The Manifesto of the Communist Party - Karl Marx. . .

And also that what we see today isn't how it's always been: It's a completely human creation that can be changed in just the same way as it came to be."

I agree whole-heartedly with this statement, but I don't think we agree on exactly what "changed in just the same way as it came to be" means.

Capitalism came about as an organic solution to the problems associated with the creation of the Industrial Revolution. (By organic I mean a solution that emerged from the conditions present at the time (think Zeitgeist) No one sat down and "invented" the system, even if it does from time to time give that appearance. Several, beginning with Adam Smith described capitalism as it was developing, but did not invent it as an intellectual exercise. Marxism is a wholly human intellectual exercise, not one that has risen from the great interplay of human life. People (Marx, Engels, Lenin, etc.) sat down, thought it through, and said this is the new system. Well, it didn't take long to discover that 1) there is no such thing as a coherent and easily directed "Proletariat", a necessary component of Marxism and 2) people will not willingly be shoved into the labelled boxes, another necessary component of Marxism. The failure of Marxism as a social system is driven by the failure to recognize these two things. Evolution is just that: organic change brought about by changes in the environment, those who adapt survive, those who don't die out. When was the last time you saw a livery stable? Running against it's tide will yield many years of necessarily bloody chaos. Marxism is an intellectual exercise that requires force to maintain. It is, for many people, a kind of open prison. They are not allowed to be who they can be, they are forced to be something they aren't.

Now that you have thought through how sensible Marxism may be, do you feel competent to share this news with the world, by force if you must?

Communism may be an ideal form of governance at some time in the future when humankind is ready to express it as an organic solution to problems, but until then you cannot telescope one's vision of the future into the present with any success. Wait for it. If it is useful at some point it will emerge, otherwise attempting to force it will not work.

The Book Thief really made me think. Not only was it a well written enthralling story, it was very, I don't know, human. It was so simple, yet very complicated all at the same time, with very real characters who I could relate to. I don't know; it just....changed me in a way. The other book would be Let's Get Lost which seems really stupid, but I have had experiences like some of the ones in the book. It even made me cry, which is hard to do. The characters got some interesting points across the line and were very real.
I don't know
I sound stupid now, but these books really affected me...

Re: #21

That opinion is fine, you're completely entitled to it.

But regardless of our differing perceptions on how capitalism may have come about, and the feasibility of Marxism, it's all kind of irrelevant here.

The point of this thread is to contribute by saying what books made us think. Through writing my post I wasn't attempting to voice an opinion on the pros and cons of capitalism or Marxism/communism, I was merely saying that the book made me think. Never at any point did I express that the system should be enforced. I never even said that I didn't like capitalism. I was simply trying to express that this book made me think of capitalism more critically/analytically, and in turn helped me to understand it/the world more fully.

As you have made a few points in your post that I find a little provoking, however, I feel I should respond.

I have to say I do not agree with what you have said about Marxism being a purely intellectual exercise. The ideas were not simply constructed in some kind of historical vacuum; Marx and Engels were both witnesses of the 19th Century Industrial Revolution. They didn't just construct some oppressed class for their own ends; they saw it first hand. Maybe something worth looking into is Engel's "The Conditions of the Working Class in England in 1844", in which he writes accounts of the types of living & working conditions he witnesses in Manchester. The relation between this type of account and the political system devised by he and Marx thereafter, appears to me to be directly related. In this way, I cannot accept what you've said about Marxism being something not related to any context, and as such something that is not natural for humans to uphold or potentially live by.

Marx did not call for anything to be introduced by force; that was an addition made my Lenin years after. All Marx was really saying, was "What would capitalism look like if it was left completely unchecked?" and he concluded that there would be such a large group of oppressed people that a revolution would occur. I can't recall in any of his writings that I've read where he's said a communist system should be enforced. These are additional ideas added later by other people. He was more just making a prediction of what would happen. Figures like Lenin and Stalin have more to do with Fascism than Marxism, and as such I don't think it's fair to assume that Facism and totalitarianism are inherent features of a socialist order. Fascism also took root in bourgeois countries like Germany and Italy. The business classes were very big supporters of Mussolini and Hitler - at least up to a point. So to consider Communism as inevitably forceful and resulting in totalitarianism/dictatorship may have some historical precedent, but this result was not one intended by Marx, nor the natural end result from his writings. To insinuate that Marx is responsible for Stalin's 20,000,000 deaths is obscene - it's similar to blaming Wagner and Nietzsche for the Holocaust!

I find the idea that Capitalism is a purely organic entity to be a little far-fetched and self-serving for those who are overly satisfied with their own economic context. All systems do have some organic root, but at some point some person starts to draw those boundaries up on paper, and then they become rules and regulations that govern a system; they become codified and in many ways dogmatic.

I always think it is important to keep in mind who it is that has written the history books, the laws; who has had access to the highest levels of education and as such the benefits/power of literacy? The poor historically have not, and as such I don't think it's accurate to say that the world has simply 'evolved' naturally to be this way; under capitalism. People make the world as it is, and it's a fact that some have more sway over how it turns out than others.

Ideas also go in and out of fashion. Certainly in the 1950s-60s, heavy-handed government intervention in the economy was seen to be a very positive thing, based on the way countries like the U.K, the U.S. and Australia handled their economies during the wartime. The neoclassical economic revolution, which we are still largely living through, really only came into vogue in the 1970s, after a number of countries went into recession - largely because of an oil crisis. Living within this context it can indeed come to appear as though the current economic ideological milieu is the 'natural' way, simply because nobody remembers anything different. And it's always easier to defend what is, rather than what could be.

But all this aside, my own interest in Marx is more rooted in philosophy, not politics or economics. If anything, I feel Marx's best revelation was that humans tend to construct systems and then they let those systems control them; they become slaves to their own creations. This was Marx's development on Feuerbach's idea that humans had created God, and then they put God into such a place that it dominated them. Marx transferred this idea into his 19th Century context, attempting to make sense of how something like the Industrial Revolution and its systems of exchange could have come about.

There's no reason to think I'd want to force this book on anyone, nor the message, but for me the book definitely made me think, and as such I maintain that it's one that changed me, and one that I recommend.

I understand what you are saying and where you are coming from. Keep in mind, all complex dynamic (chaotic) systems (in this case Capitalism) begin with their ends built-in. As the system grinds away, doing what it does, solving the problems cranked into it and changing it's own recurring initial conditions over time, it no longer serves the purposes for which it emerged.

Capitalism is in just such a place today. The problem of making capital available for use by the widest numbers of people has been solved. The greatest social discovery of capitalism is that there is not enough value to trade for everything that arises. Thus, the credit crunch, a problem that capitalism can only address through a form of retrenchment in areas no longer accessible without possible destruction of the entire structure. Ultimately, capitalism will be awash in debt and collapse of its own accord, being an economic system that has been patched and tinkered with in misguided attempts to make the system continue to run smoothly when it has already dealt with the basic problem. Most of these changes have been with the eye toward increasing capital rather than managing it efficiently. At some point capitalism will fall and when it does something else will emerge to take its place. I'm just saying you can't force the "next" economic system to bloom according to a preconceived plan without immediately starting the system off all wrong, without understanding the nature of the beast, a shape-shifting beast at that that changes from a good thing to a bad thing over time the system will be a square hole and the solution will be a round peg.

Communism under Lenin et al was forced on people because, at that time, left to its own devices it would have been and indeed was rejected by the majority of the people it was designed to help. As I said, few of the proles understand (this makes it elitist, only the anointed understand) what is "good" for them and refuse to go along. Nearly none of the bourgeoisie will willingly give up what they have for some undefined "greater good" and the result is revolution and violence. These are things Marx et al had no way of knowing when they were dreaming. No, I am convinced their motives were pure (well, maybe not Stalin, but by then it was too late anyway) but there was little support from below and thus it had to be imposed from above. No one plans violence, but when one plans violence ensues.

As I touched on before Capitalism has outlived its usefulness. It has solved the problem it arose to defeat and is busy creating the next set of problems to be solved. Is some form of socialism next? Possibly. Communism, probably not. Something entirely unknown at this time, probably. Once Capitalism crashes (30 - 100 years by my estimate, the end of cheap oil and the doubling of the earth's population) something will arise from the ashes. We could find ourselves in a new Dark Age, a pre-mercantile economy, or a new system may emerge that addresses world population growth, energy, and credit efficiently and effectively that none of us recognize now.

When I read The Communist Manifest I did not read it from the perspective of the 1840's, I read with today's history and understanding, in today's context, if you will. I am able to view it from a perspective none of its creators had: as a failure everywhere it has been introduced.

One thing we must all keep in mind, always, especially today when we in the US celebrate our freedom from tyranny is that man craves power, not justice. Our freedom was an organic outgrowth of the conditions, not something someone sat down and designed. Our form of governance of course was designed as an intellectual exercise, but one carefully crafted to make a lot of people "feel" powerful, but in reality only allowed for the most basic forms of governance, most of which already existed. It was Capitalism that inspired our new government and it will be Capitalism that requires us to change it. But change won't come until it is necessary for survival. Jefferson saw the end of Capitalism in his arguments with Hamilton over the monetary mechanisms that would be pursued and came to a totally different conclusion than Marx. Of course his solution of generational revolution was no more successful than Communism, but he saw the accumulation of wealth as dangerous to liberty, and sure enough it is.

I'm sure the eyes are beginning to, if they have not already, glazed over. If you have interest in continuing this, set up a thread in the Marxist/Socialist group and I'll follow you there, and if this is a topic you wish to continue to discuss you will find more folks willing to engage, maybe.

Anyway, you are right, this is a group about books that made you think, not a discussion on the books themselves. I should change my screen name to OTgeneg.

I didn't know that there was a Marxist/Socialist group, thanks for letting me know.

Thanks too for the interesting conversation. Differing opinions aside, it's much more stimulating than what I do to earn a living from day to day, so I appreciate the time taken in writing your responses.

Cheers :-)

Getting things done. Busy life made simple, or rather, practice doing brain dump on a notebook, and you'll be happier. :)

Not changed me, but changed my life. Maybe to a small and coincidental extent, but maybe not.

This would be too bizarre to admit to anyone but fellow book junkies, but: I fell in love with a character in Twelve by Nick McDonnell. Literally! I even figured out the author was lying, and Mike actually had BROWN hair, not blonde. Uh-huh.

Unfortunately, imaginary Mike lived in New York, while tangible me was an ocean away. After re-reading the book for about 5-6 times I promised myself that, were I ever to meet someone as fascinating as this character, I'd obviously have to look outside of my own continent.

And I did. I moved to the US. Chance would have it, I got into a super-duper-fancy school after the stint at community college that made the move possible, legally.

If it hadn't been for Twelve, who knows, I might still be slowly rotting away in a cold and awfully Swedish small-town universe.

Jack Kerouac's On the Road. Read it when I was in college and proceeded to hitchhike for tens of thousands of miles, largely back and forth between Moorhead MN and Minneapolis, MN, but also Montana and all over France and Israel and one spectacular trip with my friend Pascal--Moorhead-Vancouver-BC, down through Oregon, back to Quebec City, up to Gaspe Peninsula, down to DC, back to Moorhead. For 3 years (the DC-Moorhead trip made me quit all THOUGHTS of hitching--rotten things happened, ut nothing that broke me), I had so much fun and saw so much! It was great while it lasted, fabulous kindness from all kinds. One of my favorite things about that was that truckers gave me rides all the times and almost everyone said some version of "Girl, get yourself some land." That was such a big wish from them to me. Really nice memories.

Oh goodness. Any of Robert McCloskey's books when I read them to young people. Barbara Cooney's Miss Rumphius. TH White's Sword in the Stone. Brown's Goodnight Moon and Runaway Bunny. Guess How Much I Love You (sorry, don't know how to make the titles into blue links or whatever). Little Women, and Black Beauty and Lad a Dog from my own youth. The Narnia series.

Also: To Kill a Mockingbird, still. Yes, Grapes of Wrath and also Of Mice and Men. 1984 and Fahrenheit 541. Twain's War Prayer. Thich Nhat Hanh and Thomas Merton and William Sloane Coffin. Woolf's A Room of One's Own (I read it every ten years or so). MLK Jr.'s writings. About a kazillion poets. Colman McCarthy's writings about teaching peace to young folks. That old book by Edwards on being a YA librarian, called The Fair Garden and the Swarm of Beasts. Strunk and White's Elements of Style.

Our unabridged 1939 Webster's dictionary, which is simply called The Big Book and sits on the shelf next to our dining room table. I have studied homeopathy for years, and the materia medica is beautiful and perceptive and I never get tired of it.
The Man Who Planted Trees.
FWL's The Language of Flowers. E.B. and Katherine White's stuff.
And none of that even begins to address current titles which I find beautiful or funny or thought-provoking. Sigh.

The Art of Looking Sideways. My first glimpse of it was when I was 11 and immediately I knew this was going to be a keeper.

When I saw this group, I immediately thought of Ishmael and saw that it is listed in the first post! It has a beautiful Taoist flavor, touches on early story telling (hinting at the Old Testament) and has an overall feeling of Gaia. Another, more recent read that has been transformitive in my views is Quantum Theology. This one reflects the beauty and intracacy of all life and is convincing in the idea of intentionality and purpose. Just a few of the references are to Mandelbrots' fractals, string theory, and the structure and freedom of music all stemming from Light. Very cool!

I know that the book that changed me was No Logo by Naomi Klein. When I read that book I was in my early 20's it made me feel like I had been a fool up to that point in the un-thinking way I lived. (I have since forgiven myself as have realised that most western people live their whole lives not really noticing what impact their lifestyle has, or what effect marketing/advertising/business models/economics has on their living.)

I also read A brief History of Time about this time and that gave me another perspective on life- and put me in my place a bit.

Books that changed people are good recommendations I reckon- if it moved someone that much I bet there's something in it for me.

@Ireadthereforeiam: Unfortunately, books that changed people's lives can be extremely personal and subjective. I know people who say, for example, Life of Pi has changed their life. I rushed out to read the book and it bored me to death.

>33 corneggs:, yep, that's for sure.

Maybe I meant: "If it moved someone (that I know and respect the views of) that much I bet there's something in it for me"!

Ok, not to go all 'Oprah' on everyone, but two books I can honestly say moved me (also, I reread them every few years) are The Color Purple and The Poisonwood Bible. Both trashed my life completely. The characters sucked me in, and I could hardly believe they were fiction. How could something so tragically beautiful be made up? The utter wreckage of a human being and the small promise of hope... Seems all too real.

Both are outside of my preferred reading which is total out-there fiction, fantasy, mysteries, even (please don't groan) romance. I read to escape anything remotely real and most probably these books are the reason why - I believe WAY too much in fiction.

The Owl Killers in a very round about way really affected me. It introduced me to a perspective on religion/Christianity that I knew was in me but I couldn't quite figure out by myself. It basically showed me characters who were saying that you can have faith and beliefs but belonging to a set religion isn't what is important. Just be you. So simple and obvious but I only got to grips with that at 22.

There are many more like that but it is now nearly 1am. Going to think on it though.

I wouldn't exactly say that The Poisonwood Bible changed my life but it was a remarkable book in several respects: the narrative technique, the impact of her African experiences even on a ditzy Valley Girl type, and more than anything else, the matter-of-fact go about life with no excuses portrayal of the crippled woman. That reminded me of the peasant women with bound feet in China even into the 20th century....

I seldom read fiction, but the book thief sounds interesting enough. I'll give it a try. Thanks peace4me.

The first two books that were non-genre that I read out of high school truly turned me into lifelong readers. Prior to this, the reading I did was primarily horror.

The first was Bonfire of the Vanities by Tom Wolfe. It opened my young eyes to the complex and sometimes hilarious world.

Even moreso, however, was A Prayer for Owen Meany by John Irving, which I still count as probably my favorite book of all time.

I remember carrying each of these books around with me and reading passges from them to friends and family. I wanted everyone I knew to read these two books for different reasons.

I am a person who's life has been changed more often by books than by actual real people. But in terms of paradigm-shifting, the world is no longer the same as it was moments, there are a couple of books that stand out, both read when I was very young--ten or eleven:

The Alexandrian Quartet, which was a revelation to me in how to tell a story, and memorable for being the first time I ever read a book and thought, "I want to be a writer."

Pilgrim at Tinker Creek, which taught me more than anything else how to look, and how to see.

I think the age of 10-12 is when I turned from being a young reader, who just read for the story, to an "adult" reader, who read for content, message and meaning. Those two books were pivotal. I'm sure the transition wasn't as smooth as it seems to me now, and I'm sure I was still too young at the time to really "get" either book, but that period remains in my mind as a kind of fault line, when reading changed from something simply pleasurable to something necessary.

The Moral Animal by Robert Wright. This book showed me that it is possible for us humans to actually understand our motivations and predict our behavior. If we can understand it, can we modify it? Still pondering that one, but since reading that book I feel i can gauge others' intents and likely future actions SO much better.

When I was in college i read Atlas Shrugged and that was a breath of fresh air. It offered a counterpoint to all the rhetoric I was inundated with in class. It was also long enough to last me a while, like an ideological life preserver. It provided me with a point of reference. Up until reading this my junior year (of my own volition--it wasn't assigned) I was starting to get vertigo.

I just finished reading meditations of Marcus Aurelius and, with all it's fragmentary problems, seemed like a good counterpoint to Ayn Rand's egoism (although it was cynical in the purist sense).

I just finished reading Looking for Alaska by John Green a few hours ago and I must say that ever since I got past the first quarter of the book I have been overwhelmed, perhaps obsessed, with the idea of people. People take so much for granted in their daily lives and don't even realise it. We never seem to consider our blessings every day or ponder the fact that at any moment, in any way, we might suddenly die. This book was extremely inspirational to me and I hope it is to you as well.

Love Without End was a big one. I had a passionate dislike for Christianity as a teen, and Green offered a counter vision that feels to me infinitely more authentic to the gospels than modern Christianity. Though it is extremely mystical and any traditionalist who hears about it seems to consider it satan inspired heresy propagated by a false teacher. Of course these are the same guys that ignore the golden rule and everything Christ directly says in the gospels is important.

Power of Now/a New Earth: Read both before Oprah-fication. Blew my mind. Tolle is talking about something more complex than simply living in the moment and ignoring all else. I've been struggling to put his ideas into practice since I read the books in my early teens.

The Shack (does not deserve touchstones) changed me from someone who would read absolutely anything in print to someone who knows life is too short. If it sounds like drivel, feels like drivel, looks like drivel etc. . . you will never get those hours back.

I've heard the Shack is rather drivel-ish, and that it has some rather disturbing moral implications. One less book to read. Not that I was considering it to begin with.

One book that will definitely change you - in a positive way - is The Jetstream of Success. It shares the life strategies of a leading vc and as someone who is always looking for ways to better myself I found it very informative and very useful.

#46 Sadly, I read it before hearing anything about it.

#43....I could not agree more. In fact all of John Green's books which I have read (Looking for Alaska,Paper Towns, andThe Fault in Our Stars) have dramatically changed my life.

Looking for Alaska really taught me the value of person. And that people are not okay and we are all crazy and maybe you should pay more attention to what people say. I mean gosh Miles, when she said "Y'all smoke to enjoy it. I smoke to die" could you have at least taken a hint? Maybe? And I know you were all drunk but really you should have stopped her.

Paper Towns also said so many things about a broken person. Margo is so cool and chill but inside she just wants to run away and start over. Beautiful book and beautiful writing.

The Fault in Our Stars just talked about life. In the real way. No romanticizing. It was a sad sort of beautiful. It was raw and it was real.

After all of these books I am not only a Nerdfighter (DFTBA) and have joined all of these fandoms (or maybe it is just all the same fandom...not totally sure) but I see the world differently. Thanks, John.

I realize each of us are unique in what interests us let alone what changes us...but for me it was Snow Leopard by Peter Matthiessen. This was in large part due to where I was (ending a 10 year marriage) but it also served as a great introduction to Zen Buddhism while captivating me on the natural scope of the Himalayas and the search for snow leopards - though for me that aspect was primarily the mechanism by which Matthiessen shared his personal story of the death of his wife and their philosophical approach to life.
But with his passing last month I must honor him and one of the great books, for me, of the century.

By nature I love searching out books that make me think and can recommend The Alchemist by Paulo Coelho as a good book about the idea of destiny, The Jetstream of Success by Julian Pencilliah as a good book if you're looking to find away at commingle more successful (it focuses on identifying and making the most of opportunities) but the ultimate has to be Small Gods by Terry Pratchett. Its a stand alone book in the best selling Discworld series and says a lot about organized religion and state control. A real classic

In Crime and Punishment, Rodion Romanovich Raskolnikov, an impoverished former student living in 19th century St. Petersburg decides to murder a pawnbroker who has swindled many people for her own gain, and who in theory, would benefit the world by dying. With this action, Dostoevsky posed an ethical dilemma of "Is it ever justified to take a life" that's still talked about to this day. This book is a real classic that everyone needs to read at least once.

Like probably everyone else here, I've read lots of books that 'made me think' but the ones that had the greatest impression on me were the ones I read as a teenager (more than fifty years ago).

The one I remember most was Leo Huberman's Man's Worldly Goods, which I read when I was about 16 or 17, growing up in the 1950s in Texas. I was already a socialist of sorts, but this book made me a Marxist, because it was a clear exposition of the ideas of Marxism ... for the first time, I saw that the prospect of socialism was not just some sort of ethical ideal, but was soundly based in an account of human social evolution. You COULD get from 'ought' to 'is'. Or so it appeared to me at the time. (Advice to youngsters: don't settle into any political ideology, assuming you must do that, until you're over 30. You just don't know enough about the world yet.)

I've changed my views radically since then, but I still recall the impression it made on me, that "Ah, now it's all becoming clear" feeling. A very powerful and welcome feeling for a teenager.