Quote:
Originally Posted by djulian
Fair points on your whole post!
I specifically agree with your statement quoted above. There are no unassailable criteria, and my own definition "accepted by multiple generations as worthwhile" is subject to plenty of debate.
I reject the appeal to authority as a defining factor for choosing classics. I prefer to accept the appeal to the masses. I think it's appropriate here because "classics" as a category remains subject to the whims of a culture. I'm not sure that the category has any type of objective meaning apart from people--no book is simply a "classic" on its own without a group of people identifying it as such. It must be a subjective label. So, I resort to the masses because I think that they're less likely to be as myopic as the tower full of old, white men.  This may be a futile hope.
I don't know for sure, but I might still enjoy Moby Dick even if everyone said, "It's worthless." Heck, I enjoy Tom Clancy, and he's not achieved "classic" status (at least, I don't think he has.) |
Yeah, I agree that the Appeal to the Masses makes the most sense for classic determination. But once we've gotten there, we also have to admit to ourselves that just because The Masses like something doesn't mean it's automatically more valuable than something most people don't like.
And, of course, once we've accepted the criteria that "classic" just means "lots of people have liked it", then there's not a real reason to read something one DOESN'T like, unless you're just very, very interested in reading things that people you haven't met recommend.
So, in summary, the OP's strategy for reading the classics should, in my opinion, be the same "strategy" zie uses for everything else: pick up stuff you think you'll like, read 50-100 pages, put it down if you don't want to continue. Rinse, repeat.
