Strategies for reading the classics?

[khalleron]

Originally Posted by anamardoll

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.

I believe I said that, about 50 posts ago.

[anamardoll]

Originally Posted by khalleron

I believe I said that, about 50 posts ago.

Ah, well, obviously I missed it. My apologies.

[djulian]

Originally Posted by anamardoll

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.

I can agree with all of this.

[crich70]

Classics (IMO) are books that have been enjoyed by numerous generations and haven't faded into obscurity. The approval of the masses is a given since people of authority only come to realize that book x by author y is a classic after a given amount of time (such as 100 yrs) has passed. Authority figures teach classes on Charles Dicken's works for example, but I have yet to hear of Tom Clancy's books being taught as part of a college course. They haven't been around long enough to be considered classics as yet. That said I agree that a diet of only classic books could get pretty stale after a while and mixing in some new books can't hurt. And of course not everyone is grabbed by a given classic book just as not everyone likes a given book by a contemporary author, and there is no rule that you have to finish a given book (classic or modern) if you find it isn't for you. Everyone is different in what they like or dislike. It may be that a given book is written in a style that you don't care for or that you just aren't ready for that book at the present time. What matters most whether a book is considered a classic or is a modern book is that the reader gets pleasure out of the act of reading it. That is the whole point of fiction books, classic or modern. To a lesser degree it is also a point in non-fiction books as well. A non-fiction book can be dull or an interesting read depending on many different factors just one of which is how clear the writing is. If a book (Fiction or Non-Fiction) fails to capture the reader's interest it will flop no matter what else it has going for it. One of the reasons classics become classics (IMO) is that the writing is clear and we can still empathize with the characters.

[MV64]

Originally Posted by Giggleton

I like to read books too, but I understand that everything is derivative all the way back to before the nothingness. Just knowing that the classics are there, either stored locally on my SD card or somewhere in the cloud is usually enough. The ideas presented in the classics have replicated on down to everyone, virus like, as is the word's way. We don't really have to "read" the classics to understand them.

Is there a digested version of the classics available? lol, there's probably hundreds!

Exactly.

Also, I'm not sure having a strategy is good or necessary for classics. Classics or not, these are just like any other book. Some are good, some aren't. If you're having trouble with a book and you're not enjoying it, don't bother with it.

If you're worried about not keeping up with intellectual company, just read summaries and analysis on Wikipedia or something to understand what it's about.

Personally, I enjoy the ancient history writers like Thucydides and Herodotus, but can't stand Plato. And as far as 19th century writers go, most of those classics are just trash. Approach classics like you would any other book you'd read now: Don't go for name recognition, read a summary of the book and if it's a book you would normally read if it wasn't a classic, then go for it.

[khalleron]

Originally Posted by MV64

And as far as 19th century writers go, most of those classics are just trash.

Them's fighting words!