In the end, On the Shortness of Life is more a book that I am glad to have read but did not particularly enjoy reading. For anyone interested, give the first essay a read, skip the other two.
On the Shortness of
Life is an essay collection by Lucius Annaeus Seneca, a Roman philosopher
most well-known for his writings on stoicism. This collection in particular
contains an essay ‘On the Shortness of Life’, a letter written to comfort his
mother after his exile and a letter to his friend Serenus who requested his
wisdom and advice. Together the three come to just over a 100 pages.
From what I understand, stoicism is a way of life that aims
to be immune to misfortune. Like Taoism, it appears to be a philosophy of
inaction rather action. Seneca frequently points to the futility of so
many activities (and with good reason) and advocates that it’s better to live a
life of leisure instead of toil (which I don’t agree with).
As for being immune to misfortune, Seneca remarks that misfortune happens to anyone and everyone at without warning; he himself suffered many such as the death of his son and his exile. How Seneca deals with this is to accept misfortune without sorrow and hold possession over nothing. For instance, he notes that it’s more painful to receive wealth and then lose it than it is to have never had wealth to begin with; Seneca himself was quite wealthy but 'remedied' this by living frugally so that if he ever lost his wealth he would be unaffected. In fact, when he was exiled and lost all his wealth, he told his mother that poverty wasn’t much of a bother to him since he only needed to eat small quantities to survive. It almost seems as though he did not approve of the enjoyment of good fortune since this exposes one to the risk of suffering by misfortune.
As for being immune to misfortune, Seneca remarks that misfortune happens to anyone and everyone at without warning; he himself suffered many such as the death of his son and his exile. How Seneca deals with this is to accept misfortune without sorrow and hold possession over nothing. For instance, he notes that it’s more painful to receive wealth and then lose it than it is to have never had wealth to begin with; Seneca himself was quite wealthy but 'remedied' this by living frugally so that if he ever lost his wealth he would be unaffected. In fact, when he was exiled and lost all his wealth, he told his mother that poverty wasn’t much of a bother to him since he only needed to eat small quantities to survive. It almost seems as though he did not approve of the enjoyment of good fortune since this exposes one to the risk of suffering by misfortune.
As for the writings themselves, the essays do contain
several powerful quotes and much food for thought but I couldn’t help but feel
that they dragged on at times. Perhaps the first essay I found quite striking but the
other two just didn’t hit the same notes for me. On the whole
In closing, it was nice to have some exposure to Seneca and
get an idea for what he’s about, but I can’t see myself gravitating towards his
writings again in a hurry.
In the end, On the Shortness of Life is more a book that I am glad to have read but did not particularly enjoy reading. For anyone interested, give the first essay a read, skip the other two.
In the end, On the Shortness of Life is more a book that I am glad to have read but did not particularly enjoy reading. For anyone interested, give the first essay a read, skip the other two.
See you next week
No comments:
Post a Comment