But they're so loonnggg and they're so hhhaarrdd (that's DEFINITELY what she said) and bleh I don't wanna read classics!
Uh-huh. Would you like some cheese with that stupid? (That's wrong, isn't it..)
Anywoot, that's the response I most often get when people discover I blog about/constantly read the classics: they're too hard. To that, I have to wonder- when did hard become synonymous with bad? Are we that intellectually lazy that we won't even embark on a literary journey because we've heard that it might take some effort? When did we lose sight of that fact that anything worthwhile requires a little bit of work? EEK SHE SAID WORK this is just supposed to be fun RUN AWAY.
Take a chill pill. Let's recall: work is not a synonym for epic, heinous torture. Some work can be fun- the work that you enjoy. Most of us have jobs we don't enjoy, that don't line up with our views of what life should be, so we automatically equate the word “work” with mundane, disappointing, and not enjoyable. I'm here to BEAT THAT FALLACY out of your head. BEAT, BEAT. There. Is it gone? Are you ready to read something hard and love it? Because I'm going to be doing a series of posts over the next...lifetime..about how to get the most out of the classics without wanting to shove something sharp into your eye.
Reading a classic isn't the same as reading an urban fiction/paranormal romance/whatever- you can't turn off your brain. If you expect to get the same Soma experience (Brave New World reference, anyone? Bueller?) from reading a classic as you do from reading Dan Brown, you'll just end up frustrated. If you don't engage the book, the literary devices, stylistic experiments, social commentary, and vocabulary will fly right over your head. You'll miss out on the author's point, and you'll be bored out of your head piece.
So, Step One: be the author's bestest friend, like, ever! Or don't- most of them are dead, and that's just creepy. What I ACTUALLY mean is do a little Google dance and find out what you can about the author before you read the book. Keep it simple- read the Wikipedia article if you can't find anything more reputable. Knowing the barest bones about a writer's social situation, family and marital history, type of alcoholism (come one, most of them had that) and historical context will shed big-tons of light on the book s/he has written.
Examples? Don't mind if I do! Knowing that Salinger studied Eastern religion in college will help elucidate Franny and Zooey. Reading a bit about the childhood of Charles Dickens- that included poverty and debt prison for his family- makes you realize how personal Oliver Twist is to his heart, and makes the book more human. Finding out that Dostoevsky spent time in prison for his political beliefs, and about his struggles with his religious beliefs, can make Crime and Punishment understandable, palatable, and easier to deconstruct. The fact that Edith Wharton's family of origin is the subject of the term “keeping up with the Joneses” makes her sardonic analysis of upper class New York that much more funny.
So! That's my first bit of advice about reading the classics. Let your fingers do the talking..to the interwebs..and dig up the backstory of the author. And when your brain protests because that involves thinnkkkiinnnggg and wwwoorrrkkiinngg, tell it to shut up- it's fun, and it's worth it. But don't tell it to shut up out loud. Then people just think you're nuts.
Thoughts? Do you think this is a worthless exercise? Then you're WRONG! J/k. Not really. Sort of. But really- tell me what you think.
Thoughts? Do you think this is a worthless exercise? Then you're WRONG! J/k. Not really. Sort of. But really- tell me what you think.
FINALLY. I am so glad that someone out there has made the point that putting a little effort into reading is NOT a bad thing.
ReplyDeleteThis is going to turn into a side-thought ramble, but it sort of applies, so hear me out. I read Shakespeare for the first time in school in the eighth grade. I remember being rather nervous because everyone talks about how HARD it is to understand what he says. Now, I may have just been pretentious for a 14-yr-old, but I decided then and there that I was going to walk into that classroom and understand Shakespeare if it was the last thing I did.
And I did. I was so surprised at how NON-difficult he is to read. That was it for me; I've been reading classics ever since. Sure, some just haven't done it for me. I HATED Lord of the Flies, and it took me three reads to realize the genius behind The Great Gatsby. But you are so right: the effort makes it that much more worthwhile in the end.
Phew. I need an oxygen machine now.
Agreed! I've always found the context of the author's life and the time period in which they wrote a book to help me to understand some aspects of it better! I'm excited to read more of these posts!
ReplyDeleteI definitely agree with your google suggestin. I always get a backstory on author or the book when I embark on a classic. Especially since I no longer have a college prof to guide a discussion, I must do alll the work myself.
ReplyDeleteAfter struggling through the first half of Ulysses I finally had the thought of learning a bit about James Joyce. I totally see your point on this, and when I next take up a new classic I am going to read about the author first.
ReplyDeleteThank you for posting.
I don't usually have a problem with Classics. They often have a plot! Post modern on the other hand..
ReplyDeleteI'll admit to checking out the authors backstory if any particular book resonates.
This is not a requirement for me though - we don't know very much about Shakespeare for example.
And what about the authors with less than stellar lives/viewpoints? Do we ignore their work? Didn't we talk about this a few days ago???
Here's an example:
Hunger - Knut Hansun.
Supposed to be a top book - but the author was a Nazi sympathizer. I'll probably read it anyway.
Godwin's law - thread now ended! Sorry.
I find it strangely comforting to know that Dostoyevsky had terrible gambling debts & had to flee Russia to escape his creditors. If a genius like Fyodor couldn't stay solvent, being broke doesn't seem so ignoble!
ReplyDeleteI always do my "investigating" midway or at the end of the book. It depends how much said novel sparked my interest. I loved this post, looking forward to reading more.
ReplyDeleteI always look up stuff about the author like Whitney I normally do this halfway through a book. If Im really having trouble then I look up the sparknotes but this is quite rare and the last person I did this with was Henry James.
ReplyDeleteGreat post Jane ... but I'll take you task on one thing. Wikipedia is pretty reputable these days and it usually has links to other sites so you can double check what it says. Of course there are errors at times but it can often work as the first stop.
ReplyDeleteJessiKay-That's interesting, I sort of did the same thing with Shakespeare but my method was to SEE the plays instead of READ them. Seeing them live makes them totally understandable, in my opinion.
ReplyDeleteJamie- That's cause you're a genius.
Pinkflipflops- Yes! I think a lot of people don't put the work in because they don't have a professor to guide them, forgetting that they know how to do it themselves because they learned HOW in college.
Suzanne- Hah, I dunno that anyone can help you through that book... ;)
Jeremy- I did do a post/rant a few days ago about the morality of an author, and whether you should let that keep you from reading them. Personally, I would have an issue with reading anything from a Nazi sympathizer. Post modern works are difficult, and their author's life story doesn't usually make them any better, I've found.
Bibliophiliac- For reals. If that super genius can't...
Whitney- There's something to be said for waiting- you can avoid potential spoilers!
Jessica- I sparknoted Henry James, too! The Turn of the Screw- oh, man. I thought I had totally missed the ending. I was glad to find out it's that way on purpose.
Whisperinggums- You think so? I do tend to just scroll down to the external links and click out of Wikipedia to the original sources. My college professors wouldn't accept it, so I just have this bleh feeling about it. Of course, most biographical info about the classic authors should be in your book's introduction..
I love this post - it's true that people don't realize that putting some extra effort into reading a book makes it that much more rewarding. And I agree with you about Shakespeare; I love reading his plays, but if I can see one performed and THEN read it, it's infinitely easier to understand.
ReplyDeletePS- I love your Brave New World reference. :)
ReplyDeleteYou are so right on. I've had some real "a-HA, so THAT's why he/she wrote about that" moments when I read about the authors.
ReplyDeleteAnd you are also right on about the classics. Just because classic books generally aren't about shopaholics, vampires or bounty hunting doesn't mean they aren't cool. :)
I think it's important also to mention that no-one writes a book so it will become a "classic". Once you get that into your head, reading the classics becomes easier and less stressful. Shakespeare was writing crow-pleasers for goodness sakes - when I talk to people I always compare him to James Cameron. Dumas wrote serials for newspapers (which collected together are "classics") and Twain and Cervantes wrote comedies which are funny to this day.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.ManOfLaBook.com
Terrific post. I agree that researching the author can add a lot to the book you're reading. Case in point (for me anyhow) was when I recently read Bonjour Tristesse and feel in love with it even more after I learned about Sagan herself.
ReplyDeleteLooking forward to your "Part 2". :)
Ooh, this'll be a good series. I'm tired of people refusing the classics just "cuz." They're classics for a reason! The more I read (and I've barely scratched the surface), I realize that they do interesting stories better than most of today's authors. Bonus: it builds your vocabulary!
ReplyDeleteI mostly agree with you: the only problem is when people become over obsessed with the biography rather than the work - like Sylvia Plath or Ted Hughes, and the author's life becomes almost a substitute for the art, or the prism through which everything is viewed and interpreted. Looking forward to this series of posts!
ReplyDeleteI read about the author/context after I've finished a book, because I like to interpret the text as a stand-alone. I may get a second meaning or more understanding after I perform a little Google-fu, but I can also consider my original interpretation.
ReplyDeleteLooking forward to more in this series!
I agree - classics are great because you have to think, because it involves some effort. You can't have a truly great reading experience unless you put effort in as well!
ReplyDeleteMay I say, I like the cut of your Jib. For reading Dickens/Austen/Bronte may I suggest What Jane Austen Ate and Charles Dickens Knew: From Fox Hunting to Whist-The Facts of Daily Life in Nineteenth-Century England an excellent companion that only deepens ones appreciation of the works.
ReplyDeleteA little work (gasp) with our reading is not a bad thing!
ReplyDeleteI linked this as part of my Friday Five over at Kate's Library.
Great post! I read this last week and it reminded me to go look up George Eliot as I'm reading Middlemarch -- she had a fascinating life and it's really added a lot to how I'm reading it. I'm still missing a lot, I'm sure. I know I'm not getting all the religion and politics of her time -- makes me wish I was studying this for a class. I do miss my lit major days...
ReplyDeleteGreat post. I definitely enjoy finding out something about the author and/or the inspiration/setting that may have influenced the book.
ReplyDeleteIn reading the classics, I generally try to find a copy that has an editor's note or introduction and read that first to get the 'cliff's notes' version of a biography and minor theme summary. If I'm really excited about a book or an author, I'll do a little extra homework either before, during, or after reading. It makes the experience so much more fulfilling.
Hi, I just discovered your blog a couple days ago, and wanted to say I'm really enjoying it. I was an English major in college and read a lot of classics prior to that as well, but have fallen out of touch with those types of works in recent years. While I'm glad I've broadened my horizons to things like nonfiction and contemporary literature, I've been trying to get back into the classics. I'm reading Far from the Madding Crowd by Hardy right now, and hope to read Woolf's A Room of One's Own up next.
ReplyDeleteThanks for the reminder about classics being worthwhile intellectual "work". I've found Hardy's book requires more concentration than the other stuff I've been reading, but the reward of putting more effort into it is far greater. I love that. Some people do Sudoku puzzles, some of us read. (I do both - great exercise for the brain!)