One of my pet peeves re: articles like this one is that the pictures of the subject's library will generally show a wall of books, but seldom are the pictures focused enough to let you see what's actually on the shelves. Nice to be able to see a number of the titles (which have reminded me of other things I've meant to read... more expense...).
My pleasure. Yes, I was very pleased to be able to include the pictures. It helps explain what’s happening. Hard to understand how a library comes together without a sense of the individual books.
Good discussion. These kinds of exchanges always make me think of memento mori realities. I am 66 and tending to do more rereading of favorites and/or classic like Thucydides which I have not read.
This has not kept me from buying more books, but I only purchased two so far during the first five days in England. A little less than two weeks to go. I wonder how my restraint will be in Cambridge and Oxford. :)
I'm working on creating my own library and I'm quickly reaching the point where I don't have enough space. But I'm gonna keep going because books bring me joy. Most of the books I buy I acquire from library book sales and that's saved me lots of money.
That sounds like an excellent plan! It’s always fun to see what happens when you run out of space. A great chance to cull and curate—or squirrel more books away in unexpected places. Both are fun.
Unpacking the library offers a real intimate glimpse into the life of a working writer surrounded by the tools of his trade. Unboxing books evokes nostalgia and discovery as old favourites resurface and new possibilities emerge. Hayward’s eclectic organisation reflects his varied interests, from European history to political science, creating a living, evolving resource. This tactile connection to his collection not only aids his professional work but also enriches his journey, highlighting the serendipitous insights that digital resources often miss. Thank you so much for sharing this.
So interesting. It made me think about my own book collection and how I would answer those questions. Also, that house! Those books! That shelving! A book ladder!!!
Thanks again, Joel. I always like seeing someone's home library when they care enough (and can afford) to take it seriously (meaning: to display them in cool cases and include the ladder). I care about my library, but I'm still waiting to prove it.
“I find the majority of biographies, while usually informative and good reading, to be superficial, or to substitute the author's bias or contemporary ideology instead of understanding the subject on his or her own terms. And they often don't get the context right, or very fully.
“Example: I think the very best biography of Lincoln is still Lord Charnwood's 1916 effort. Lincoln often disappears for many pages while Charnwood explains the context, which is necessary for Charnwood's careful understanding of Lincoln's political strategy. By contrast, David Herbert Donald's heralded 1997 Lincoln biography says he intends to interpret Lincoln ‘through a Rawlsian lens.’ And it shows: Donald skips over important details, and interprets Lincoln completely wrong in places. Utterly infuriating. John Burt's masterful ‘Lincoln's Tragic Pragmatism’—not quite a biography, but a very worthy book—nonetheless interprets Lincoln through a Kantian lens, which is also dubious. How about interpreting Lincoln through Lincoln's own eyes (or maybe Jefferson or Locke or Burke or Shakespeare?) instead of substituting a contemporary and therefore parochial framework? (Runner up for good Lincoln bio is anything by Guelzo.)
“There are many good Churchill biographies, including Andrew Roberts, Gilbert's one-volume, Geoffrey Best, Roy Jenkins to some extent, but for general readers I usually recommend Manchester's three volumes ‘The Last Lion’), even though it contains many factual errors, some contestable judgments, and Manchester's odd idiosyncracies that show up in all his books. But he has a keen eye for the larger context in the Churchill bio, and a strong narrative style.
“Caro's massive LBJ project is an amazing achievement with much insight (I hope he can finish the last volume!). FDR is very tricky. Conrad Black's bio is quite good (though I think—and have told him directly!—that he is too sympathetic to the New Deal). I'm still partial to James MacGregor Burns's multi-volume treatment; not a fan of Jean Edward Smith's FDR bio, and got to tell him why once. (His John Marshall bio is better.)”
Hayward and I have a lot in common when it comes to building a working library. I particularly liked his comment on where to put Orwell. Literature? Essay? Politics?
Everyone’s got their take on the world. I find it’s best to be curious of how others see it rather than assume they see it wrongly. Even those with whom we disagree can bring valuable insights to us. And sometimes it’s the collective product of all varying points of view that produce the most workable outcomes.
There worlds where "greatness" means "I agree with the endpoint that they wanted." Thus there are Stalin worshippers, Mao devotees etc. One can see what they want and even understand their basis while still saying they have learned nothing about what "greatness" is. Greatness is not condemning enemies of the State to death.
If they are ordinary people this maybe excusable but as an intellectual force far less so. There are movements in history which sounded majestic in their time but when looked at through the lens of the past are dimminshed by their reach for the confusion of agreement for greatness. Schönberg comes instantly to mind. A fine composer but not the savior of music that he claimed.
The Neo-conservative movement is another because the wish to destroy certain aspects of biological diversity in human existence. Homosexuality was one - both in the intellect of Leo Strauss ( https://www.salon.com/2015/01/20/conservative_heros_dark_side_how_an_intellectual_icons_legacy_got_sanitized/ is a good summary though the depth of it goes much, much deeper) and the policy of Ronald Reagan (e.g. the AIDS epidemic that the executive branch of Reagan ignored, at the very least).
I know there are many people who worship the Neo- age: Neo-conservative, neo-liberal, and neo-classical age at once, because the can ignore the costs of doing so and celebrate the victories. But this is merely that they have not died off yet. They don't have a gravestone which stares back at them. But many of us do.
The future is about "what have you done for me lately?" And brings up the flaws: homosexuality, climate change, and abortion among them, as proof that in reality, the movement was composed of ordinary people making vast mistakes: racism, classism, imperialism that they thought were acceptable under the logic of their time.
This is often the case: the foibles that bring down great movements are know afterwards in a retrospect. The The Civil War, Great Depression, and The Vietnam War, were the tearing apart of the substratum of logical thinking that had been practiced beyond practicality. One can often place the moment when this happened when the logical system shattered - Dred Scott, The Great Crash, The Tet Offensive - these moments are a wall with a "the end" on it. Of course, one can look backwards to see it was coming but the ordinary people needed to live it in "real time" to understand why.
This is "real time" for the Neo-age: it is holding one to power with Trump and Biden (and Putin and Xi) each one stemming the tide of the future which comes with every CO2 molecule release into the air. This is why we must look at history in mathematical terms and see why the logic rises, peaks, and slides into ruin and leaves behind consequences that are predictable. There is a pattern which the math can teach us if we listen with new ears.
Thanks for this one, and particularly the photos.
One of my pet peeves re: articles like this one is that the pictures of the subject's library will generally show a wall of books, but seldom are the pictures focused enough to let you see what's actually on the shelves. Nice to be able to see a number of the titles (which have reminded me of other things I've meant to read... more expense...).
Thanks again.
My thoughts exactly. I really appreciated the close-ups of the shelves.
My pleasure. Yes, I was very pleased to be able to include the pictures. It helps explain what’s happening. Hard to understand how a library comes together without a sense of the individual books.
That house is so lovely for a reader. I am glad he let you show the photos.
Yes, me too. Seeing it all makes the piece come together.
Hi Joel,
Greetings from London!
Good discussion. These kinds of exchanges always make me think of memento mori realities. I am 66 and tending to do more rereading of favorites and/or classic like Thucydides which I have not read.
This has not kept me from buying more books, but I only purchased two so far during the first five days in England. A little less than two weeks to go. I wonder how my restraint will be in Cambridge and Oxford. :)
You’ll come back with an extra carryon! I hope you’re enjoying the trip!
As a three whiskey happy hour fan (his podcast), I really enjoyed this.
Excellent!
I'm working on creating my own library and I'm quickly reaching the point where I don't have enough space. But I'm gonna keep going because books bring me joy. Most of the books I buy I acquire from library book sales and that's saved me lots of money.
That sounds like an excellent plan! It’s always fun to see what happens when you run out of space. A great chance to cull and curate—or squirrel more books away in unexpected places. Both are fun.
Unpacking the library offers a real intimate glimpse into the life of a working writer surrounded by the tools of his trade. Unboxing books evokes nostalgia and discovery as old favourites resurface and new possibilities emerge. Hayward’s eclectic organisation reflects his varied interests, from European history to political science, creating a living, evolving resource. This tactile connection to his collection not only aids his professional work but also enriches his journey, highlighting the serendipitous insights that digital resources often miss. Thank you so much for sharing this.
My pleasure! Your response is exactly what I was hoping for with this. Don’t we all want to know how writers are using their libraries?
So interesting. It made me think about my own book collection and how I would answer those questions. Also, that house! Those books! That shelving! A book ladder!!!
Beautiful, no?
Indeed.
Thanks again, Joel. I always like seeing someone's home library when they care enough (and can afford) to take it seriously (meaning: to display them in cool cases and include the ladder). I care about my library, but I'm still waiting to prove it.
Just take this as inspiration and your own delay as preparation. It’ll come together, and when it does …
What a good interview. I've enjoyed listening to Steven Hayward on the 3 Whiskey Happy Hour podcast, and it is nice to see another side of him.
Thanks, Thaddeus!
A truly wonderful q&a session here, Joel! Really enjoyed it!
Glad you enjoyed it. Me, too!
What biography does he admire?
Henry, here’s what Hayward said:
“I find the majority of biographies, while usually informative and good reading, to be superficial, or to substitute the author's bias or contemporary ideology instead of understanding the subject on his or her own terms. And they often don't get the context right, or very fully.
“Example: I think the very best biography of Lincoln is still Lord Charnwood's 1916 effort. Lincoln often disappears for many pages while Charnwood explains the context, which is necessary for Charnwood's careful understanding of Lincoln's political strategy. By contrast, David Herbert Donald's heralded 1997 Lincoln biography says he intends to interpret Lincoln ‘through a Rawlsian lens.’ And it shows: Donald skips over important details, and interprets Lincoln completely wrong in places. Utterly infuriating. John Burt's masterful ‘Lincoln's Tragic Pragmatism’—not quite a biography, but a very worthy book—nonetheless interprets Lincoln through a Kantian lens, which is also dubious. How about interpreting Lincoln through Lincoln's own eyes (or maybe Jefferson or Locke or Burke or Shakespeare?) instead of substituting a contemporary and therefore parochial framework? (Runner up for good Lincoln bio is anything by Guelzo.)
“There are many good Churchill biographies, including Andrew Roberts, Gilbert's one-volume, Geoffrey Best, Roy Jenkins to some extent, but for general readers I usually recommend Manchester's three volumes ‘The Last Lion’), even though it contains many factual errors, some contestable judgments, and Manchester's odd idiosyncracies that show up in all his books. But he has a keen eye for the larger context in the Churchill bio, and a strong narrative style.
“Caro's massive LBJ project is an amazing achievement with much insight (I hope he can finish the last volume!). FDR is very tricky. Conrad Black's bio is quite good (though I think—and have told him directly!—that he is too sympathetic to the New Deal). I'm still partial to James MacGregor Burns's multi-volume treatment; not a fan of Jean Edward Smith's FDR bio, and got to tell him why once. (His John Marshall bio is better.)”
This is cool! Thanks!
I need to ask him! I should have asked him!
Yes yes email him!
Done. See his answer above.
Hayward and I have a lot in common when it comes to building a working library. I particularly liked his comment on where to put Orwell. Literature? Essay? Politics?
It’s tricky. Some authors just stand on their own for the breadth of their work.
If Leo Strauss and Reagan are greatness, he has learned nothing.
Everyone’s got their take on the world. I find it’s best to be curious of how others see it rather than assume they see it wrongly. Even those with whom we disagree can bring valuable insights to us. And sometimes it’s the collective product of all varying points of view that produce the most workable outcomes.
There worlds where "greatness" means "I agree with the endpoint that they wanted." Thus there are Stalin worshippers, Mao devotees etc. One can see what they want and even understand their basis while still saying they have learned nothing about what "greatness" is. Greatness is not condemning enemies of the State to death.
If they are ordinary people this maybe excusable but as an intellectual force far less so. There are movements in history which sounded majestic in their time but when looked at through the lens of the past are dimminshed by their reach for the confusion of agreement for greatness. Schönberg comes instantly to mind. A fine composer but not the savior of music that he claimed.
The Neo-conservative movement is another because the wish to destroy certain aspects of biological diversity in human existence. Homosexuality was one - both in the intellect of Leo Strauss ( https://www.salon.com/2015/01/20/conservative_heros_dark_side_how_an_intellectual_icons_legacy_got_sanitized/ is a good summary though the depth of it goes much, much deeper) and the policy of Ronald Reagan (e.g. the AIDS epidemic that the executive branch of Reagan ignored, at the very least).
I know there are many people who worship the Neo- age: Neo-conservative, neo-liberal, and neo-classical age at once, because the can ignore the costs of doing so and celebrate the victories. But this is merely that they have not died off yet. They don't have a gravestone which stares back at them. But many of us do.
The future is about "what have you done for me lately?" And brings up the flaws: homosexuality, climate change, and abortion among them, as proof that in reality, the movement was composed of ordinary people making vast mistakes: racism, classism, imperialism that they thought were acceptable under the logic of their time.
This is often the case: the foibles that bring down great movements are know afterwards in a retrospect. The The Civil War, Great Depression, and The Vietnam War, were the tearing apart of the substratum of logical thinking that had been practiced beyond practicality. One can often place the moment when this happened when the logical system shattered - Dred Scott, The Great Crash, The Tet Offensive - these moments are a wall with a "the end" on it. Of course, one can look backwards to see it was coming but the ordinary people needed to live it in "real time" to understand why.
This is "real time" for the Neo-age: it is holding one to power with Trump and Biden (and Putin and Xi) each one stemming the tide of the future which comes with every CO2 molecule release into the air. This is why we must look at history in mathematical terms and see why the logic rises, peaks, and slides into ruin and leaves behind consequences that are predictable. There is a pattern which the math can teach us if we listen with new ears.
This was delightful, both text and photographs. Thanks!
The shelving! Loved that part, and also how self-deprecating and funny Hayward is. Very much enjoyed this.