 |
Today I stumbled across the Guardian article, “Influence of classic literature on writers declining.” I understand what the author is saying. When I was in high school and college I learned all sorts of classical literature which I am eternally grateful for. However, now that I’m older and less patient, I am more happy with reading YA and contemporary literature.
I still need to write my book reviews for the last two books I read during my classic literature run. I haven’t done one of them because I just want to say, “this wasn’t my thing” even though everyone and their grandmother seems to love it. The word Steve used was “accessible.” With authors like Austen, the language gets in the way of the story for me. I enjoy it but it takes more work. Still, I am 100% behind reading the classics. Without knowing Shakespeare, for example, you can’t know how literature has evolved into what it is today.
Still, the ease of contemporary fiction is good for influence’s sake, as the article suggests. While not all of it is good or anything that I’d be interested in personally, the same has gone for classic books of the day when the sensationalist novels were full of drivel. It’s just a fact of literary heritage that best sellers are not always going to be quality books. That doesn’t mean we can’t read them for entertainment. I still like to watch reality shows from time to time even though I know they’re full of pretentious crap. But I digress.
Personally, I want a balance of classic to contemporary but lately my preference has been leaning more into the modern fiction (and the books that were popular when I was a kid, as you can see in my photo.)
Technorati Tags: reading,books,news,writing,English,Contemporary,bookshelf,Guardian,article,Influence,literature,author,college,Austen,language,Shakespeare,example,fiction,drivel,fact,heritage,entertainment,preference,photo,authors,sellers
Classics must be read.Period. I see a lot of children who do not know where an idea in a book has come from and when I explain they are like 'WHAT?' They need to be able to make links to other stories and compare otherwise reading is just a one-dimensional activity.
ReplyDeleteI totally agree. I even welcome versions of classics that are curtailed for remedial readers. It opens up a whole new world for students.
DeleteThere are two kinds of readers: those who read for pleasure and those who read for engagement. Those out for pleasure can and should stick to what entertains them. Those searching for engagement should find books that challenge them (hopefully, they find this entertaining).
DeleteStudents should have to read a breadth of work, but once they're out of the classroom, who cares so long as they're reading?
I agree with you. Remedial readers have such a hard time getting engaged in the process that anything they find interesting is a God-send. However, even if they find an easy version of a classic book, I think the impact of classic literature is something they should still investigate after school. Otherwise, they may be limiting themselves to what's popular, not what's quality.
DeleteInteresting that you mention Austen - I find her much more readable than Dickens, say. The Victorians were just too verbose for me, especially when writing in installments!
ReplyDeleteThat's true. I've not tried Dickens since middle school but I have some of his books that I planned on looking into. If it's more dense than Austen, I'll have to grab an audiobook to help me along, maybe. Thanks!
Delete