I read a lot. I like to consider myself a well-rounded reader in that I try to engage in books across all genres and all authors. As an English major in college I read everything from John Milton to Annie Proulx, and if my English degree helped me with one thing it was expanding my exposure to different types of writing, different types of authors, and forcing me to sit down and actually read books I would otherwise not afford a second glance.
In high school and in college I like many other students also had to give some attention to those books that are lumped into a very general group known as "the classics." I don't really have a firm grasp on each and every book that is purported to fall into this category, but to me, the classics are books that have survived throughout time and still have relevance to readers, and often to society, in the present day. I don't think the idea of a book becoming a classic is a bygone concept, either. Books that are written today can easily make an impact and become lasting, the question is whether future generations will continue to see them that way.
I have always had this idea in my head that to be a well-rounded reader one must indulge in the classics. If not the entire list (for which I'm not even sure a comprehensive one exists), then at least some of the highlights. I've read my fair share of the group and have a number of them sitting on my bookshelves at home that still beckon to be read. But I'm going to let you all in on a little secret.
I don't really like reading the classics.
As a hopeful writer and a very avid reader, my inclination to steer away from the classics makes me feel like something of a disappointment. Don't get me wrong, I do have some favorites among the classics, some of which I consider all-time favorite books. Trust me, that's a big statement. Books like "Wuthering Heights," "Rebecca," even "Paradise Lost" all had a huge impact on me as a reader and will forever be treasured favorites. Of course, all of these are also books I had to read as part of a class.....which again, makes me thankful I was an English major.
What is it about the classics that doesn't appeal to me? Yes, the writing styles are much different than those of today which requires more from the reader in terms of interpretation, but is that necessarily a bad thing? It's the overall story that is the real matter of importance, which means that maybe I'm just a lazy reader.
Most of the time I shy away from the classics simply because there are other books on my To-Read list that seem more exciting, or that I literally cannot wait another second to dive into. The classics to me always seem like something that can be saved for another day, when I run out of other things to read. I don't get home at night and feel a burning need to tear into "A Tale of Two Cities," although who knows, maybe I would if I actually attempted to read it.
I don't know. Does this even matter? Am I still a good reader if I neglect these works? Is it enough that I have read some of the classics and at least have a good, basic foundation? Different people will probably have different answers to these questions, so there probably isn't a right or wrong way to go. But I do want to make an effort to revisit a lot of these books I have skipped over and see for myself what all the fuss is about. Obviously it's just going to take a committed effort on my part to see each book through to the end.
Oh, the dilemmas of a serious book worm!
No comments:
Post a Comment