I am not sure I can coherently reply (well, you(a general reader
) are right, if you think: if you are not sure, then why do you reply? drop it). I have always had problems with essays in school
You have an interesting approach to "definition" of what "great literature" is.
I think it shows that there
at least two different groups of people who define what "great literature" is.
We look at books from completely different perspectives.
Yours is sort of professional?
Amateur is me
I don't care what influence Dicken's book had on our life as long as his books are dull, borring and not interesting - for me. If I don't enjoy reading a particular book it cannot be great literature, doesn't matter what Einstein might say about it. Dicken's could be wise man but this fact doesn't affect his books. If I don't like his books then his work is not great literature for me.
I am not sure about
Quote:
|
that most people would accept that Charles Dickens is a more "important" author than, say, H. Rider Haggard
|
For example, The Lord of the Rings is Great Literature with capital letters
(again imho) Why? Because it is a superb book/very interesting/requires real genius and extraordinary talent to create such a world and history and all the characters/races/adventures/happy and not happy endings. He is a corner stone of fantasy for me. IMHO, the book has changed fantasy world. However, it is an exception. There are other great books that didn't change anything but they still fall into great literature cathegory
such as The Great Book of Amber, The Dark Tower series, Wheel of Time, The Count of Monte Cristo, Master and Margarita.
My point is...at the end of the day, who decides what is great and what is not? There are as many opinions as people out there. Literature is not math where you have clear definition that when you add 2 to 2 the result equals 4. I think people (maybe only 10 out of 1000, I don't know) from a second group where I belong to don't accept an idea that someone else might decide for us what is great and what is not
Only books we really like are great literature for us. Until certain age I thought that I am stupid and not as smart and my father because I do not read and enjoy "serious" books but like adventure and fantasy. I don't think so anymore. That's not to say that I think I am very smart
but I don't feel uncomfortable anymore for disagreeing with an opinion such as yours and disagree with they way you label what is great literature and what literature is only interesting.
P.S. I have my own definition of what great literature is.
Usually I never re-read books. I am a slow reader and I don't have time to re-read books if I want to read all the books that are on my "wanted" list. The main reason is that when I know how how everything is going to end it is not interesting to read a whole book again, it doesn't hold any mystery for me anymore. However, sometimes I encounter a book or series of books that after I finish the book I still want to come back and re-read a whole story. to enjoy the journey, to grasp the details - details what I am coming back to enjoy - a wish to come back and re-read the book makes it a great literature for me
