I'm one of those people who recommends classics, but never at the expense of enjoyment. If a book starts to feel like a chore, it's time to stop reading it. Maybe it'll feel different later! But life's way, way, way too short to waste any of it on books that don't give exponentially more than they take. Which is why I find myself returning to fiction more and more often. A good storyteller endows his or her work with its own gravity -- it doesn't take much effort for a reader to tip past the event horizon and fall in.
Also, it's been my experience that classics are classics for a reason. My mom recommended Steinbeck's East of Eden to me for YEARS back when I was in college before I finally cracked it open. Once I did, I was hooked. Since then, I've read it three more times. It's my favorite book. Before that, it was David Copperfield.
I'm not suggesting that everyone will love a so-called classic work of literature, but I wouldn't read them if they didn't pull me in. And I think a lot of people end up being surprised at how exceptionally entertaining old classics are. I read Anne of Green Gables when I was 30 and laughed until I cried.
Oh this is such a good way to think about it! Right book, wrong time — I may just go back to classics or specific books that didn't work for me right now or in the past and maybe I'll find them to be my cup of tea then!
Plus, for me, some of the classics have a very westernized feel (which, as a non-westerner I'm not very into) and/or have some questionable stuff (I understand they're products of their time but so I am so I guess it makes me uncomfortable to read them). In an ideal world, people would just be chill and not push the same books on people again and again and just let them read whatever— that's the utopia I dream of, anyway.
1. There are plenty of non-western classics, about which I think I could make the same claims. (And which westerners should read!)
2. When you talk about classics being "pushed" on people, I'm assuming you're referring to what happens in school, and I couldn't agree more. Imagine pressuring a bunch of 9th graders to read The Scarlet Letter oh wait. But seriously the way kids in school (even college students) are pressured to read certain works of literature is largely responsible for why so many people hate reading. It's a colossal tragedy.
3. I think it was L.P. Hartley who first said, "The past is a foreign country; they do things differently there." Just as it's important for westerners to read non-western books, and non-westerners to read western books, it's important for everyone, I believe, to read old books. Nothing will stretch a person's capacity for empathy like finding themselves emotionally captured by a protagonist who is vastly different from them. It's extremely eye-opening to read about someone who is the same age, gender, and ethnicity as you, but who lived a hundred years ago, and realize you have way less in common with that character from the past than you do with your neighbor upstairs, who isn't the same age, gender, or ethnicity as you, but who also can't seem to stop doomscrolling TikTok late at night.
Hello, hello! This reply is more than year late, but thank you so much for reading & commenting! :)
1. You're absolutely right. I think I liked some non-Western classics better when I was studying Literature, but as I've grown older, I've not seen as many people push those onto others/claim superiority because they've read those classics (of course, there some people who feel superior if they read classics/non-fic/etc. whatever they consider elite among books).
2. Yes! I think giving students space to read whatever they like is more conducive to creating long-time or lifelong readers. Forcing them to read (what to them feels) boring or unnecessarily contemplative books can really dull the joy of reading.
3. That's actually a really good point. Literature captures a changing world and mirrors life at the time it was written (more or less) and if teachers/professors encouraged reading with the perspective you just shared — reading to see how someone similar or very different to you lived all those years ago, or what they wrote about back then, rather than saying "this is a classic because we've always said so, and you absolutely have to love it and pretend to fully understand it," I think more of us would be interested in reading books written before their time.
I'm glad you liked the issue; thanks so much for reading! I love how your newsletter explores fiction in such a fun way — I sincerely hope more folks find it so they're encouraged to pick up the cool books you read and review. :D
I'm one of those people who recommends classics, but never at the expense of enjoyment. If a book starts to feel like a chore, it's time to stop reading it. Maybe it'll feel different later! But life's way, way, way too short to waste any of it on books that don't give exponentially more than they take. Which is why I find myself returning to fiction more and more often. A good storyteller endows his or her work with its own gravity -- it doesn't take much effort for a reader to tip past the event horizon and fall in.
Also, it's been my experience that classics are classics for a reason. My mom recommended Steinbeck's East of Eden to me for YEARS back when I was in college before I finally cracked it open. Once I did, I was hooked. Since then, I've read it three more times. It's my favorite book. Before that, it was David Copperfield.
I'm not suggesting that everyone will love a so-called classic work of literature, but I wouldn't read them if they didn't pull me in. And I think a lot of people end up being surprised at how exceptionally entertaining old classics are. I read Anne of Green Gables when I was 30 and laughed until I cried.
Oh this is such a good way to think about it! Right book, wrong time — I may just go back to classics or specific books that didn't work for me right now or in the past and maybe I'll find them to be my cup of tea then!
Plus, for me, some of the classics have a very westernized feel (which, as a non-westerner I'm not very into) and/or have some questionable stuff (I understand they're products of their time but so I am so I guess it makes me uncomfortable to read them). In an ideal world, people would just be chill and not push the same books on people again and again and just let them read whatever— that's the utopia I dream of, anyway.
Thanks so much for reading, Jordan! :)
Some follow-up thoughts --
1. There are plenty of non-western classics, about which I think I could make the same claims. (And which westerners should read!)
2. When you talk about classics being "pushed" on people, I'm assuming you're referring to what happens in school, and I couldn't agree more. Imagine pressuring a bunch of 9th graders to read The Scarlet Letter oh wait. But seriously the way kids in school (even college students) are pressured to read certain works of literature is largely responsible for why so many people hate reading. It's a colossal tragedy.
3. I think it was L.P. Hartley who first said, "The past is a foreign country; they do things differently there." Just as it's important for westerners to read non-western books, and non-westerners to read western books, it's important for everyone, I believe, to read old books. Nothing will stretch a person's capacity for empathy like finding themselves emotionally captured by a protagonist who is vastly different from them. It's extremely eye-opening to read about someone who is the same age, gender, and ethnicity as you, but who lived a hundred years ago, and realize you have way less in common with that character from the past than you do with your neighbor upstairs, who isn't the same age, gender, or ethnicity as you, but who also can't seem to stop doomscrolling TikTok late at night.
Hello, hello! This reply is more than year late, but thank you so much for reading & commenting! :)
1. You're absolutely right. I think I liked some non-Western classics better when I was studying Literature, but as I've grown older, I've not seen as many people push those onto others/claim superiority because they've read those classics (of course, there some people who feel superior if they read classics/non-fic/etc. whatever they consider elite among books).
2. Yes! I think giving students space to read whatever they like is more conducive to creating long-time or lifelong readers. Forcing them to read (what to them feels) boring or unnecessarily contemplative books can really dull the joy of reading.
3. That's actually a really good point. Literature captures a changing world and mirrors life at the time it was written (more or less) and if teachers/professors encouraged reading with the perspective you just shared — reading to see how someone similar or very different to you lived all those years ago, or what they wrote about back then, rather than saying "this is a classic because we've always said so, and you absolutely have to love it and pretend to fully understand it," I think more of us would be interested in reading books written before their time.
Thanks for this. I completely agree! So much can be learned from fiction. It can enrich the soul. Also it’s fun.
I'm glad you liked the issue; thanks so much for reading! I love how your newsletter explores fiction in such a fun way — I sincerely hope more folks find it so they're encouraged to pick up the cool books you read and review. :D
Thanks! Likewise! I'm always happy to see Perceptive Madness in my inbox because I know it will be interesting and that I will learn something.
💜🌟 Thank you!