Quote:
Originally Posted by issybird
I took another look at the article, and I don’t think this is quite the point. In your first point, you identified the switch in tone in the Jezebel article, which I think occurs with this:
I have to say I also see a fair amount of Gatsby-bashing even here at MR, so I do think it’s a thing. The whole classics aren’t relevant, they’re hard to read, kids shouldn’t have to read them bit. Also the one where people don’t like books with unlikeable protagonists.
So I’ve got two points, and one is that it’s the internet. The irony of an article in an on-line magazine deploring what others discuss online is huge. Everyone’s got a platform, should they choose to use it. To me, the article doesn’t say that people who participate in social media don’t read classics; it’s more that those who don’t read classics participate in social media. Eh. Some do, some don’t in both camps and I’m not seeing any penetrating insight with this.
In essence I agree with her about the classics and those who don’t like them; the problem is the Book People appellation, which is where she loses the high ground. High-hatting people isn’t going to convince them to give The Scarlet Letter a try. She’d have been better off writing two articles; one about the canon and campaigns against it and a second, funny and not sneering, article about Book People, because some of what she cited could stand mockery. A hashtag #amreading? I cringed.
|
I like her point about people bashing the classics. I've grown up in an anti-elitist environment, where reading classics was frowned upon, genre literature was good, etc. I found that sort of sentiment highly detrimental and it was a breath of fresh air discovering the likes of Dostoevsky on my own.
I think it's good reading those kinds of books in school. They're supposed to make you think and confront your ideas about the world and the people who inhibit it. Then discuss those thoughts presented to you with others in class. Of course, this all falls apart if your classmates are not up for having a constructive discussion or are unprepared or the teacher doesn't know how to lead the class; but that's true for any subject. School is supposed to make you think, especially in ways that you wouldn't stumble upon on your own (otherwise what's the point?).
As for reading, I try to challenge myself. I read mostly classics or other lauded "high brow" literature. Whenever I read something like Harry Potter I tend to read them in foreign languages that I'm learning. I don't enjoy Harry Potter without the bonus of language learning thrown into the mix, but with it it's my favourite book series that I keep returning to whenever I need something cosy and familiar.
This is what works for me, and what I would recommend to people like me. What works for other people is their business, and I wouldn't want to get involved in that process.
I think reading in and of itself is much more important than what you read (for me it's a form of meditation - it relaxes me and calms my mind and increases my focus). It's just that I personally cannot sufficiently lose myself in reading unless I feel challenged by the material.
I'm also a bibliophile. I love paper books and shelves full of them. And that's about the only aspect of this social media "book people" world that I do enjoy. I'm not interested in the social stuff in a virtual environment. I love discussing books in real life, but dislike social media. I do, however, love creativity and books; so I won't complain if I happen upon beautiful images of book arrangements and/or spine poetry
