Scan barcode
readingliz's review against another edition
informative
inspiring
lighthearted
reflective
medium-paced
3.5
musicdeepdive's review against another edition
5.0
Perhaps an obvious statement, but: this is read best in chunks rather than as a whole (and this is true of much Eastern philosophy, it seems). When you pick up the book, sit with a piece of it each night for a few weeks. What might seem benign in a full read-through becomes refreshing when allowed to simmer for some time.
rumbledethumps's review
4.0
Good, modern translation. Dispenses with much of the mystical, incomprehensible phrasing of older translations and makes it relatively easy to start on the path to understanding this centuries-old text.
rick2's review
5.0
I mean. How would one hope to rate something like this?
All I can say for sure is that I’ve read bits and pieces as the mood strikes and it has given me comfort and strength in difficult times. What more can one ask of ancient wisdom?
All I can say for sure is that I’ve read bits and pieces as the mood strikes and it has given me comfort and strength in difficult times. What more can one ask of ancient wisdom?
spacestationtrustfund's review against another edition
1.0
This is just the James Legge translation, but edited by Raymond van Over. It's not the worst version I've encountered, but Legge's version is absolutely awful. Van Over even acknowledges this in the introduction when he mentions editing the romanisation system "from the difficult Legge system into the more readable Wade-Giles," possibly the only time someone has ever called Wade-Giles "readable." The only reason I have this edition is because the cover is awesome. It looks like a retro video game. I love it.
spacestationtrustfund's review against another edition
3.0
This review is of the translation by John Blofeld.
Blofeld's dislike for Baynes is hilarious... ly relatable. This is a pretty solid translation, even from an academic perspective, albeit dated (1963).
Blofeld's dislike for Baynes is hilarious... ly relatable. This is a pretty solid translation, even from an academic perspective, albeit dated (1963).
goomz's review against another edition
5.0
I find it strange when people quote this book. I've seen multiple philosophers, writers, History Channel documentaries, heck, even Sean Connery in Zardoz quote the I Ching. Don't they realize that the I Ching's advice is directed towards the specific hexagram casted in response to a specific question? Its advice is catered to those who ask it– its words cannot be pulled out of context and applied to any life situation willy-nilly! The results could be disastrous! Take these two quotes, as an example:
"It is worthwhile to cross great rivers."
"It is not worthwhile to cross great rivers."
So is it worthwhile to cross great rivers or not? Without casting, who would know! You could choose the former, and cross that great river, and all get dysentery and get swept away! "Most likely" safe to cross, huh. Shoulda flipped some coins first, yeah, good ol' Chingy would've told you to take the toll road around it, that way you could've made it to Oregon with some surviving family members.
"It is worthwhile to cross great rivers."
"It is not worthwhile to cross great rivers."
So is it worthwhile to cross great rivers or not? Without casting, who would know! You could choose the former, and cross that great river, and all get dysentery and get swept away! "Most likely" safe to cross, huh. Shoulda flipped some coins first, yeah, good ol' Chingy would've told you to take the toll road around it, that way you could've made it to Oregon with some surviving family members.
karatedrummer's review against another edition
5.0
Perhaps an obvious statement, but: this is read best in chunks rather than as a whole (and this is true of much Eastern philosophy, it seems). When you pick up the book, sit with a piece of it each night for a few weeks. What might seem benign in a full read-through becomes refreshing when allowed to simmer for some time.
More...