|
I know I am late on this but I believe the classics are important, especially when reading the "New" literature. For example, is Jhumpa Lahiri's "The Namesake" the same without reading Gogol's "Overcoat"? Is Chinua Achebe's "Things Fall Apart" as enriching if you have not pondered Yeat's "The Second Coming"? (I understand the last two are not "old" classics, but they are classics all the same) The answer for ME (important point, as this is how I view the classics) is that I read the classics to see the basis of the new works by up and coming authors. I see peculiar overlaps between stories, such as "The Kite Runner" and "The Namesake", through their similar classical themes.
I actually read in two different ways, I read pop authors, i.e. King, Brown, Grisham etc. only for instant gratification, I read them when I do not want to have to think. I read the classics, i.e. Kafka, Hemingway, Carrol, Lewis, Cervantes, etc. when I want to learn something, maybe something important about life for them, something I can take from and better myself or my surroundings.
I always believe that it is important to read things that are applicable to you, and I believe that is the basis of our tastes in stories. Do they relate to us? Can we see ourselves or our lives in the words of the author? Those are the questions that make certain authors your own personal classics. Without any impact on the reader, a work is nothing but words and paper.
|