Esoteric book lists: genuine culture or literary showing off?
A list of esoteric authors sparks a debate about literary showing off: how many people have actually read the books they share?
English · Original discussion in Spanish · Published
The curious case of esoteric reading lists: how do you tell a real reader from a name-dropper?
Lists of forbidden, occultist or dense literature circulating online are nothing new. What is surprising is the insistence on sharing them as if they were a trophy. A recent exchange shines a spotlight on one particular selection: from Rabelais and Cervantes to Lovecraft and Danielewski, taking in the classics of theosophy along the way. All of it garnished with repeated links and authors who appear several times over.
The criticism was not long in coming: the list looked like it had been lifted straight from the catalogue of a second-hand bookshop specialising in 1960s occultism and science fiction. People pointed out that 80% of the names were the usual suspects —Blavatsky, Crowley, Guénon, Evola— and that the authors were repeated ad nauseam. But the most striking thing was the suspicion that whoever shared the list had not read even half of it: when asked about Vollmann, he admitted to having abandoned it halfway through. And when Danielewski, the creator of 'House of Leaves', came up, he was warned he would end up explaining to the in-laws why some pages have upside-down type.
The test that separates readers from posers
When in doubt, a little quiz was proposed to check whether anything had actually been read. The questions ranged from the basic —which book triggers the plot of 'The Name of the Rose'?— to the deeply obscure: a character's shadow in Bolaño's 'The Savage Detectives'. The challenge hangs in the air, unanswered in the exchange. Something that recalls the old maxim: anyone who brags about reading Vollmann is lying or has far too much free time.
Underneath it all lies a tension between two worlds: that of the title collector, who mistakes accumulating names for knowledge, and that of the real reader, who would rather spend their time reading than decorating bookshelves. The question that remains is whether these lists serve any purpose beyond feeding the digital ego.
Lists of forbidden, occultist or dense literature circulating online are nothing new. What is surprising is the insistence on sharing them as if they were a trophy. A recent exchange shines a spotlight on one particular selection: from Rabelais and Cervantes to Lovecraft and Danielewski, taking in the classics of theosophy along the way. All of it garnished with repeated links and authors who appear several times over.
The criticism was not long in coming: the list looked like it had been lifted straight from the catalogue of a second-hand bookshop specialising in 1960s occultism and science fiction. People pointed out that 80% of the names were the usual suspects —Blavatsky, Crowley, Guénon, Evola— and that the authors were repeated ad nauseam. But the most striking thing was the suspicion that whoever shared the list had not read even half of it: when asked about Vollmann, he admitted to having abandoned it halfway through. And when Danielewski, the creator of 'House of Leaves', came up, he was warned he would end up explaining to the in-laws why some pages have upside-down type.
The test that separates readers from posers
When in doubt, a little quiz was proposed to check whether anything had actually been read. The questions ranged from the basic —which book triggers the plot of 'The Name of the Rose'?— to the deeply obscure: a character's shadow in Bolaño's 'The Savage Detectives'. The challenge hangs in the air, unanswered in the exchange. Something that recalls the old maxim: anyone who brags about reading Vollmann is lying or has far too much free time.
Underneath it all lies a tension between two worlds: that of the title collector, who mistakes accumulating names for knowledge, and that of the real reader, who would rather spend their time reading than decorating bookshelves. The question that remains is whether these lists serve any purpose beyond feeding the digital ego.
Also available in: Deutsch
Summary of a discussion on Burbuja.info - Foro de economía, actualidad y política., translated from Spanish and reviewed before publication. Read the full discussion (27 replies).
More summaries
-
Hayden Panettiere: The Lovecraft Name Conspiracy Debunked
The theory linking Hayden Panettiere's name to H.P. Lovecraft clashes with etymology, as Panettiere simply means baker.
-
The Pulp Canon That Existed Before Lovecraft
Cosmic horror and pulp fantasy: Machen, Chambers, Haggard, Burroughs, Vance, and Aickman—and why algorithmic maps fail to recommend them.
-
Organic Portals: The Theory That Says 80% Have No Soul
Between 50% and 85% of the population are soulless 'organic portals'. The theory, its esoteric sources, and why it fascinates in the digital age.
-
Solar eclipse reignites the clash between faith and physics
Three minutes of darkness were enough for the eclipse to be read as a message from God, a sign from the elites, or simple celestial mechanics.
-
Nuclear prophecy about New York brings doomsday cinema back to life
The death of a Heroes actress and the date 16-8-2026 read as 888 have revived the theory that cinema foretold the destruction of New York. An analysis of the…
-
A 90º azimuth links three Sant Martí hermitages in Catalonia, Spain
Three Sant Martí churches in Catalonia, Spain, trace an exact 90º azimuth. The measurement, verifiable in detail, reopens the debate on medieval sacred geometry.