Eden (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
wilderthan) wrote2009-06-26 01:52 am
wilderthan) wrote2009-06-26 01:52 am
Entry tags:
Musing: books - The unassailability of classics
When I'm on goodreads, Jane Austen inevitably seems to come up. And inevitably there are people who are intense fans of her work and think that she could never have done any wrong, that her work is all completely without flaw, etc, etc. Even got someone telling me I'm pretending to be an English Lit student -- that there's no way a "real" English Literature student could possibly dislike Jane Austen in any way.
I can understand the perspective that says Jane Austen's work has to be read with a consideration of context to get the most out of it. I totally get that -- it's the same with so many classic novels: you have to understand where they came from and when, to really understand what's at work in them.
However, no matter how classic a book is, I don't see why it should magically become unassailable in its own context. I read Jane Austen knowing about the context: that doesn't mean I can't think one of her characters is boringly over-nice (Anne from Persuasion) or irritatingly irrelevant to the plot (Margaret from Sense and Sensibility), or that I can't simply not get into the book (Pride and Prejudice), or that I can't just find the plot not to my taste (Northanger Abbey), or the ending abrupt (Lady Susan). A book being old and a classic doesn't mean there can be nothing technical wrong with it, even when taken in its own context.
In my opinion, nothing should be unassailable, regardless of age.
Also, crying out "it's a classic!" is not, in fact, a magical button that, once pressed, allows one to like books one just doesn't like.
I'll sit in my corner and mutter darkly now.
I can understand the perspective that says Jane Austen's work has to be read with a consideration of context to get the most out of it. I totally get that -- it's the same with so many classic novels: you have to understand where they came from and when, to really understand what's at work in them.
However, no matter how classic a book is, I don't see why it should magically become unassailable in its own context. I read Jane Austen knowing about the context: that doesn't mean I can't think one of her characters is boringly over-nice (Anne from Persuasion) or irritatingly irrelevant to the plot (Margaret from Sense and Sensibility), or that I can't simply not get into the book (Pride and Prejudice), or that I can't just find the plot not to my taste (Northanger Abbey), or the ending abrupt (Lady Susan). A book being old and a classic doesn't mean there can be nothing technical wrong with it, even when taken in its own context.
In my opinion, nothing should be unassailable, regardless of age.
Also, crying out "it's a classic!" is not, in fact, a magical button that, once pressed, allows one to like books one just doesn't like.
I'll sit in my corner and mutter darkly now.
no subject
no subject
I had someone who was just absolutely convinced I was "missing the point" re: Austen. I'm pretty sure I got the point, it just didn't impress me that much...
no subject
I've tried to read Don Quixote several times and love the idea of the story, but can not get into it no matter how hard I try. On the other hand I really enjoyed Moby Dick even if I did have serious 12 boy giggle fest over the scene where they were squeezing out the sperm oil and calling it sperm.
no subject
*sigh*
no subject