I decided to read all those classic books I skipped when I was young. I thought I must have missed out. After reading A Tale of Two Cities, I think my time was better spent with Ian Fleming and Alastair MacLean. I tried The Way West, Don Quixote, and several others.. Sam Clemens is more my style.
Today I picked up Hugo’s Les Miserables and Dante’s Inferno. I wonder if there’s some psychological link to my picking those two.
According to the quizzes linked at right for these two books, I’m at the 3rd Level of Hell, and am one of the female characters in the Hugo story. Check them out yourself!
I recently read an on-line discussion on what makes literature “classic.” Steven den Beste also grappled with the topic. Really, a classic is simply a book which will be read for many years, not necessarily one with deep meaning. Edgar Allen Poe wrote what many consider classics, but I don’t see that any of his stories have any deep meaning except as a look into his own psyche. Mark Twain (Clemens), on the other hand, wrote some timeless satire. A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur’s Court is timeless, and speaks about many conditions that still haunt our world–war, slavery, economics (cost of living vs. wages), despotic rule, religious fanaticism, and celebrity adoration. It could be written today, if we only had an author with his combination of writing talent and understanding of human beings. Sam was the best observer of human character ever.
I enjoy Larry McMurtry’s Lonesome Dove series of books. I don’t think they’re great literature, but I think they will be viewed as classics in the future because they are good stories. I would guess that many books by current and recent authors which have sold a great variety of novels, not just a lot of a single one, will be viewed as classics. Authors like Stephen King and Tom Clancy have generated many stories which are good reading. They will continue to be read.
Poetry is a different story. I don’t think there are any good poets in the world today writing poetry. What now passes as poetry today is short prose. There is no rhyme. There is no meter. Poems today are written by people who fancy themselves as being able to see what others are too uninformed to notice–just like pop art.
But art implies emotion and seeing what isn’t there. Like Nude Descending a Staircase, it imprints in your mind a vision of something that isn’t really there. Poetry since the 1960s hasn’t done that.
Interesting how the decline of poetry begins at that particular time. There are many fantastic poets in the world. But poetry has never been fiscally beneficial. Until music fans became demanding. Any competent poet writes lyrics. That’s where the money is. Some of my favorites are Jimmy Buffett, John Denver, and Paul Simon. Each could turn a memorable phrase, or stir an emotion with a single line. There are many others, but those top my personal list. Each wrote classic literature like Carl Sandburg or Robert Frost–it just happened to have a meter which matched that of the music. And it doesn’t always rhyme…but it doesn’t need to. The vision or emotion is there.
Literature is moving to the internet, although it is far too soon to judge whether any of my favorite sites will become “classics.” I still cannot sit and read a book on the computer. I would rather have one or two sitting on my nightstand to read before falling asleep. But there is quality writing in the blogosphere and in online versions of different periodicals.
“Classic” devolves to “popular,” but not in the sense of “fad.” A classic of the future will be a book of today which is enjoyable to read, but has presence in the future either through character or situation.