” If the classics are so damn good, why aren’t people lining up outside bookshops to buy them?” That’s the question Mark Bastable asks in this hilarious and insightful article at BiblioBuffet that I first discovered via Pages Turned. Go read it—now. It’s worth it. When you’re done, just click that handy back button, and you’ll find me waiting here.
…
Okay, so did you read it? Good. Wasn’t it fabulous? Bastable makes some great points about how not all classics are fun for everyone, but that classics can be fun, and that the more you read them, the more fun they become. But for many readers, the trick is getting over the intimidation or getting past the memories of being forced to read classics in school that weren’t a good fit. So, inspired by Bastable’s post, I’d like to offer some tips for readers who want to dip their toes into classic lit but don’t know where to start:
- Get recommendations from real readers you trust. Don’t rely on “great books” lists and the like. They are helpful, but they often include too many different types of books and don’t necessarily take readability into account. Jenny and I have reviewed lots of classics and so do many of the bloggers in our blogroll. (Off the top of my head, I’d suggest Rebecca Reads, A Striped Armchair, Stuck in a Book, and Savidge Reads as enthusiastic and frequent readers of accessible classic literature.) Some good classics-focused events are the Classics Challenge, in which participants read a classic of their choice; the Really Old Classics Challenge, which focuses on literature prior to 1600, and the Classics Circuit, which focuses on a specific author or type of classic each month. Check these out to get reviews from actual readers like you.
- Consider your tastes. Not every classic is for everyone. Just because a book is “great” doesn’t mean it’s a great read for you. When trying to choose a classic to read, consider whether you’d read a contemporary book with that premise. If not, an additional cultural and language barrier of 50 years or more isn’t going to help.
- Look for your favorite genre. If you love science fiction, try a classic science fiction writer, like Asimov or Wells. If you’re into mystery, try a “Golden Age” writer like Allingham, Sayers, or Tey. If romance is your thing, consider Austen or Heyer. Like comedy? You can’t do better than P.G. Wodehouse.
- Start small. Many great classic novelists also wrote short stories. Pick up a good short story anthology to get a taste of several at once. Be aware that not all authors write equally well in both forms, but a short story can help you get a better sense of an author’s voice.
- Watch the movie first. I know—sacrilege! But I do believe that good film adaptations can help if you’re having trouble understanding the language or forming a good mental picture of the setting. I don’t ever remember my mother reading classic literature when I was growing up, but she fell in love with the film versions of Pride and Prejudice and Sense and Sensibility and decided to try the books. She loved them and has gone on to read more Austen without seeing the movies first.
- Try and try again. As Bastable says, “even people who are seriously into classic literature don’t like all of it. Nobody could. You’d have to be suffering from some kind of multiple personality disorder.” There are plenty of classics I don’t like. I hated Mrs. Dalloway and The Sound and the Fury and The Red Badge of Courage. To dismiss all literature more than 50 years old because you don’t like Dickens is like dismissing all green food because you don’t like spinach. If you try a classic, and it doesn’t suit you, that’s fine. Follow these suggestions and try another. Lather, rinse, repeat.
So, dear readers, if you don’t read classics, what’s holding you back? If you do, what tips would you provide for the reluctant classics reader?
Notes from a Reading Life (October 11–23, 2009)
Books Completed
- The Victory by Cynthia Harrod-Eagles
- The House of the Spirits by Isabel Allende
- Animals Make Us Human by Temple Grandin (audio)
Currently Reading
- Armadale by Wilkie Collins
- Wuthering Heights by Emily Bronte (audio, reread)
- The Ode Less Traveled by Stephen Fry. Lessons in writing poetry. Preparing to venture into odes.
On Deck
- Invention of Everything Else by Samantha Hunt
New Acquisitions
- Nothing!
Books to Remember
- Kisses on a Postcard by Terence Frisby. A memoir about the evacuation from London in WWII recommended at Book Snob.
- Claudine in School by Collette. Collette intimidates me for some reason, but Eva’s review makes this sound like a book I’d like .
- Spell of the Tiger by Sy Montgomery. I love big cats (and little ones), and this book that Eva mentioned about man-eating tigers and the people who live near them sounds fascinating.
- Prince Rupert’s Teardrop by Lisa Glass. Kirsty’s review at Other Stories brought this book about a mentally ill woman and the disappearance of her elderly mother to my attention. Written by one of the fabulous book foxes at Vulpes Libris.
- Tree of Leaves by Mark Z. Danielewski. A co-worker told me about this novel that plays with typography and format and still manages to be seriously creepy.
- Shelf Discovery by Lizzie Skurnick. Nicole’s post at Linus’s Blanket about this book and the related challenge mentions several of my favorites from my tween and teen years. I was so excited to see those titles mentioned that I had to add the book to my list.
I read the article and loved it. I read a variety of fiction, non-fiction, plays, and bios, but more often than not when I read a classic I’m blown away by how good it is. The great ones really do stand the test of time. I’m at the time of life when I’m rereading a lot of classics I read in school and it’s been so long that it’s as if for the first time–I’m glad classics remain on school reading lists. Most of them truly are worth reading.
I loved your list–sound advice!
That article is great- mass market fiction as “cultural MSG”? I believe that’s my new favorite phrase!
My biggest weaknesses concerning classics are that I love plot and always want clarity. After I pushed through Absalom Absalom my senior year of high school, it felt like a miracle to read a book that was actually accessible! You’re very right about classics being an awfully broad term. A novel is a novel, despite its age or context- although Bastable makes a very good point about how we can’t appreciate some classics as well as the first audiences since we’ve assimilated them.
Of course, there is one classic I consider a no fail for everyone- The Count of Monte Cristo. There is everything you could possibly want in a novel crammed in there- betrayal, revenge, murder, revenge, Greek beauties, revenge, Napoleon, revenge, lesbians, revenge…
I loved that article! I am only just discovering classics, but the more I read, the more addictive they become!
I’m not sure I agree with you about watching the movie first – I do think that ruins a good book. I think watching it afterwards might help to clarify things, but I think it is important to build up your own picture of the characters in your head before seeing them on screen.
Great post though – everyone should read more classics!
That was a great article – thanks for linking to it. I do think he makes a great point by stating that the term Classics encompasses a huge variety of books, since it’s not really a genre so much as an index of a book’s age. I often find myself forgetting this, thinking that because I enjoy one Classic, I must necessarily enjoy them all, and of course this is unreasonable. We all read for different reasons, or while in different moods or stages of literary development, so not every book will work for us. Like you, I have not enjoyed my attempts with Mrs. Dalloway or The Sound & The Fury… but at least I tried them, and I think I learned something about myself as a reader. It is really illuminating to try fiction from different eras, because I think it can tell us a lot about what we value in the books we read.
As for how to get someone to try Classics when those aren’t really their thing, I think it’s key not to force the books upon them, or to make too big a deal of it. Also, sometimes the lesser known titles can be a good bridge – The Grapes of Wrath may seem too daunting to a new reader, but Of Mice and Men is probably more accessible. Same goes for things like Animal Farm in lieu of 1984. And I think that if you can start with shorter works, that might help too, because often these books are written in a different style or at such a higher caliber of writing/language that they can be challenging and demanding for the unaccustomed. I can’t imagine starting with War & Peace straight out the gate, for instance!
You offer great advice here! I’d add that often classic books aren’t difficult at all, even though they have a reputation for being difficult. I’ve heard people say so many times “I thought such and such was going to be boring and hard, but it was great!” And also that people shouldn’t get bogged down in understanding everything when they do encounter difficult books. Just keep forging on, and you will understand more and more as you go on, and you don’t have to pick up on every little thing.
Embrace surprise.”This book isn’t what I thought it was” – good.
This advice is useful for all reading, actually.
That was a great article…thanks for the link. I struggle with some of the classics (the language!), but I’m trying to get over my fear.
Loved that article. Also saw it via pages turned. My fave part was when he said we should be able to distinguish between knowing a book is good literature and liking it, that it doesn’t have to be all or nothing, each is separate. I find this so true. Usually when I rate a books off in my head, there are quite a number I give 5 stars to but do not consider them favourites, while some books I consider 3 to 4 stars I find meaningful to me.
I love classics and rarely read something I didn’t like. The Sound and the Fury is the only one I can remember not liking, but then I only read the first part. Does it get at least a little better after that? One day I might try reading it again..
I too loved the article!! Thanks for the heads up.
I too am not sure about the watching the movie first (I have a “must read it first” rule myself) — but I think you have a valid point: if it’s the language that is holding you up, learn what the plot and time period is so that you can approach it without that difficulty! I’ve seen all the Austen movies but have yet to read them all–I just know I’ll love them when I do.
Anyway, thanks so much for this post. I love it!!
I also saw that article at Pages Turned and thought it was really great. Your list is full of excellent suggestions. I might start using that “try a short story” idea with some friends of mine!
Loved this post (and the article)! And I feel so honoured to be one of the bloggers you thought of. :) And your advice is spot-on!
I hated Red Badge of Courage too, lol.
Re. what tips would you provide for the reluctant classics reader?
As you said, it depends on their taste. I’d probably advise them to avoid the denser, stranger books, the older, more plotless ones — no Gargantua and Pantegruel, no Tirant lo Blanc, no Anatomy of Melancholy — and aim, instead, for shorter, lighter, brisker books: The Princess of Cleves, Pride and Prejudice, Aubrey’s Brief Lives, with its gossipy irrelevancies, and its farts:
“This Earle of Oxford, making of his low obeisance to Queen Elizabeth, happened to lett a Fart, at which he was so abashed and ashamed that he went to Travell, 7 yeares. On his returne the Queen welcomed him home and sayd, My Lord, I had forgot the Fart.”
If they like non-fiction then perhaps Boswell’s Life of Johnson, the Essays of Francis Bacon, or some Marcus Aurelius? If they think they might like to try some poetry, then perhaps Keats, perhaps Gilgamesh, perhaps Beowulf? If they have a taste for quirk, perhaps Christopher Smart’s excerpt, My Cat Geoffrey? If they like Lord of the Rings then I’d recommend some of the Norse legends, the Edda maybe, and also Tennyson’s Idylls of the King. If they’re interested in Japan then I’d recommend Sei Shonagon before the Tale of Genji — actually, someone who likes Aubrey might like Shonagon too, and perhaps Pliny’s Natural History on top of it.
“In the Ocean of Gades, betweene Portugall and Andalusia, there is a monstrous fish to be seene like a mightie great tree, spreading abroad with so mightie armes, that in regard thereof onely, it is thought verily it never entred into the streights or narrow sea there by of Gibraltar. There shew themselves otherwhiles fishes made like two great wheeles, and therupon so they be called: framed distinctly with foure armes, representing as many spokes: and with their eies they seeme to cover close the naves from one side to the other, wherein the said spokes are fastened.”
I’d try to find them a version with the language modernised.
An interesting question. Thank you for asking it.
JaneGS: I too like to read all kinds of things, but my heart always comes back to the classics that have stood the test of time.
Literary Omnivore: Yeah, my one foray into Faulkner was frustrating because I do want my books to be comprehensible. I’m going to give him another try one of these days. I haven’t read Count of Monte Cristo, but I have a copy. I’m just waiting until I know I’ll have a huge chunk of time for it.
Jackie: I knew someone would object to that advice :-) On the few occasions I have seen the movie first (usually because the movie was highly regarded in its own right), the book wasn’t ruined for me. But I wouldn’t want people to make a habit out of seeing the movie first; I think of it mostly as a way to get over a mental block regarding an era or author.
Steph: Right, there’s no reason anyone should be expected to enjoy all the classics. Most of my favorites are classics, but there are plenty of classics I’d never read again (and plenty I don’t care to read).
Dorothy: True, there are so many classics that aren’t tough reads at all. And I loved Bastable’s point that the more of them you read, the easier they get. I’ve certainly found that to be true. I’m always surprised when people comment on the difficulty of language in Victorian lit because I’ve read so much of it for so long that I’m fluent, but that’s not true of everyone.
Amateur Reader: It is wonderful when a book is a surprise!
softdrink: I do think it’s largely a matter of finding the right fit to start and then getting into practice. Eventually the language feels normal.
claire: So true. There are lots of books that I appreciate as great works but didn’t enjoy. Since I mostly read for pleasure now, I try to find books that I both appreciate and enjoy.
Rebecca: That’s exactly what I had in mind about the movie watching! I think there are people who will respond better and understand the language more once they’ve heard it and seen it acted out. My ideal would be for folks who start with the movies to transition to reading the books first (as my mom did with Jane Austen).
Marie: If you do get your friends to try some short stories, you’ll have to report back and share how it worked!
Eva: Thanks! I like that you read such a mix. I think it helps people get over the idea that classic readers are book snobs who don’t read anything fun.
DKS: Nice suggestions. I’ve not read many of the works you mention, but some are on my list. I love the quotes–so much for stodgy, huh?
I remember teaching Romeo and Juliet many years ago and some of my students snickering at the dirty jokes, thinking that they were making fun of Shakespeare for not knowing what he was saying and their “clueless” teacher for not getting that it could be dirty. They were quite surprised when I told them, “yes, he’s saying what you think he’s saying. And, yes, it is funny.”
Re. I can’t imagine starting with War & Peace straight out the gate, for instance!
Agreed, but I think I’d make an exception if the person (this hypothetical classics aspirant) told me they liked Lord of the Rings. Tolstoy’s language is simpler than Tolkein’s (how much simpler depends on the translator of course, but he’s not a complicated man to read), the action is quick, the characters are vivid, and the outlook panoramic. “It’s like Lord of the Rings,” I’d tell this person, “with fewer hobbits and a lot more peasants.”
How about the short stories of Maupassant? If Flannery O’Connor is old enough to be regarded as a classic, then throw her in there too, and Chekov, and some short Gogol: The Overcoat, The Nose. If they like that, then point them in the direction of Kafka.
DKS: True–someone who enjoys an epic like Lord of the Rings might be more keen on a long Russian novel like War and Peace. (Fewer hobbits and more peasants, hah!) And I’d throw O’Connor on any list of short story writers.
I think Taming of the Shrew was the first Shakespeare that made me think, “Oh, hold on, this is actually a rude bit …”
“What, with my tongue in your tail? nay, come again, Good Kate; I am a gentleman.”
If I wanted to make the point that classics are not stodgy, I’d nick a bit out of Rabelais. Half a page of farting, gobbling, drunkenness, codpieces and vomiting should knock that idea straight out of the sceptic’s head.
Another suggestion? Maria Edgeworth’s Castle Rackrent. Short and very funny, as long as the reader has a grip on the language. If they enjoy that, try them on Thomas Peacock.
This is a beautiful article, and I love your comments on it. I wish everyone would read this! I mean, I sometimes (especially in the summer…) tend to be an insanely lazy reader. But there is still just so much out there that you can always find something “entertaining,” yet still substantive. Thank you for posting this.
Great advice here for reading the classics and I don’t have any more to say really that hasn’t been said already. But I would urge people to try classic literature from countries outside their own. The different perspective can be really fascinating.
Really good advice! I like “watch the movie first,” especially since that’s not something I’ve thought of. Shakespeare is the classic author that I have the hardest time with — the language and the plots and the prose are all so foreign to me. But seeing the plays performed helps a lot, as does seeing interpretations of the works in movies, etc.
Benjamin Jones: Thanks! I know the need for a lazy read now and then. Nothing wrong with that at all. I like to balance the junky stuff with the classics.
Litlove: Good suggestion! I haven’t read nearly as much international literature as I’d like. Well, I suppose UK classics are international to me, but they just feel like the roots of US classics.
Kim: Thanks! It seems to me that Shakespeare is written to be performed, and so I like seeing the plays, even the ones I haven’t read and don’t plan to read.