My boyfriend and I had an intense discussion on "the classics".
I'm currently archiving books and my focus is on anything made now, first, then working my way back. Especially since most people I know who are into this sort of thing absolutely have the classics covered. My partner decided to ask me why I'm not focusing on "the classics" and that if he were in charge of the system, he'd be focusing on "the classics".
I disagreed. Historical importance aside, to me, a book is a book. Many hold a great deal of wonderful stories and messages, but some happened to be made at an earlier time. Many of them made by white, middle-to-upper-class white men. Not to say that their ideas were not important or their stories not good, but I do not base my love for reading around them or my love for books.
Am I crazy for thinking that "the classics" have no more literary importance than something that is as equally beautifully written as today. To me, plenty of contemporary works are future classics. Even books like "Song of Achilles", while flawed, are so culturally important to now that I've seen people mentioning that there are some classes reading it for college.
Many classics have a historical importance, yes, some are revolutionary for their time, no doubt, but many of the books themselves – contents wise – I can think of a few that just don't hold up. A long while back on here, I mentioned my reading of "Carmilla" which was a very sapphic tale and I think one of the vampire stories to come out before "Dracula" – I read it. There's a reason it's a lesser known "classic" – it felt very rushed, like it could have been edited a few times more, and lengthened in many areas. Will I try and save it to my little archive? Of course, but there are plenty of other queer, vampire romances that are being written write now, to this very day, and many of them do it just as well, if not better.
That's not to say that these things are not important, but I simply do not hold writers in higher esteem or of higher overall importance because they're "classic" authors. I dunno. It just feels a little snobby to me. However, I'm sure there are plenty of people on here who are much well-educated on the subject than I am. I'd love to hear everyone's thoughts!
by ladylibrary13
5 Comments
Are TikTok’s more important than modern literature? They have more relevance and are up to the moment. Modern literature takes months or years to write and is old an irrelevant by then.
TikTok’s are better.
People will tell you that the classics are more important, but then they will count the books they have read, as if reading the complete works of Pindar were the same thing as reading *Fifty Shades of Gray*.
I tried so many times to read “The Classics.”
Monte Crisco bored me because they were having tea every other page. Something about a letter to a sailor or something. DNF
Scarlet Letter. Some woman had sex and got pregnant. Some church men are mad about it. That is literally still going on today. DNF
Jane Eyre. Girl runs off in the dead of night to stick to morals or whatever. Religion trumps common sense/personal safety, I guess? Apparently, the cure for a spouse with dementia is locking them in the attic and age gap relationships are perfectly acceptable if you’re Jane Eyre. I finished it and hated it.
I did enjoy John Steinbeck and Jack London.
I did enjoy Frankenstein, Dracula, and Jekyll/Hyde. Those books were good. Never read Jane Austen or Lonesome Dove or Gone With the Wind or anything like that.
I’ve found much more relaxed readers and recommendations in other books subs. I lurk here a lot but post nothing because not enjoying “The Classics” is practically criminal in book world.
Unless Lord of the Rings, Chronicles of Narnia, and the Oz books count as classic literature.
Currently reading Howard Pyle’s King Arthur series.
You’re definitely right about the privileged white men thing. This argument seems to circulate every few months in bookish circles. The classics are fine but they aren’t the end all be all. I don’t think they are any wiser than contemporary works.
Is your bf a bit of a literary snob?
Classics tie you to the generation that came before us. A lot of them are not enjoyable to read and might not even hold up to modern standards of writing and morality. Nevertheless, you can have an intimate understanding about how those people view themselves and the world.
I think it comes down to what it is that you want from reading. If it’s entertainment then you can’t skip classics, that’s fine. But you can also use reading as a sort of study and intellectual challenge. Some readers would also want to become writers themselves, so they need the classics because they are the foundations of the books we have today