A Classic Bore

 We all have those books we've been meaning to read, some of which are considered classics. As an English major, I've had to read a lot of them. Some I enjoy, like Shakespeare's plays, Charlotte Bronte's Jane Eyre, Robert Louis Stevenson's Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. 

Then, there are those that are painful to read, like anything by D.H. Lawrence, most of the works by Hemingway, and what I'm currently reading, Emma by Jane Austen. 

Honestly, I don't see the appeal of this drawn out, verbose, repetitive novel. It took a whole chapter to describe a character's 'character.' Jane, you could have done it in a paragraph. WHY is this a 'classic?' Because it was written a long time ago? Because other novels by Jane have been a success? All I know is that it's pedantic, tedious, and a real torture to read. And it's an obvious example why high school students hate reading these books. I'm in the middle of chapter 5 and the last page- 391- is looking like it's a universe away and I may never get there. Clearly it was a favorite among the British but not so much among Americans. No one I know seems to have read it. 

Will I finish it? Doubtful. But I'll keep it on my nightstand and delve into it when insomnia hits. Clearly I should be out cold after a chapter or two.

Char

Literally Speaking...

"L" is for literary.  The Nobel and Pulitzer Prizes for fiction literature always go to 'literary' books- and I hate to sound like a snob, but I can count on one hand how many I could read to the end.

I find them unappealing.


Call them classics, but some of the 'greatest literary works of our time" (according to the 'experts') I hate. Like:

Great Expectations
The Great Gatsby
Anything by D.H. Lawrence
Anything by William Faulkner
Most of the Nobel/Pulitzer winners in the last 10 years

I'm an English/journalism major, so how can this be??

Here are some classics that I love:

Anything by William Shakespeare
Anything by J.R.R. Tolkien
Jane Eyre
Tess of the D'Urbervilles
A lot by Charles Dickens

My middle grade novel, Evolution Revolution, about the intellectual dawning of a squirrel who learns to use simple machines, has been rejected more times than I'll admit, and has been labeled 'too literary' for middle graders. I don't get how editors and agents can say that when there is a lot of action, science, and adventure.

Don't let the term 'literary' scare you; it's not all angst/inner thoughts/internal drama.

It's just another label, and who listens to labels anyway?

Char

"Man Up"

"Gender driven."
"Gender specific."
"Appeals to "X" gender."

All these labels mean is that there is some kind of "Do Not Enter" for one gender. A book is written for or by, or featuring one gender in the title role. While I don't care if the main character is male or female, it seems boys have a problem identifying with the opposite gender. They will read Harry Potter, the Heroes of Olympus, Ender's Game or any thing that features another guy, but trying to get them to read Twilight or Jane Eyre or any books where females are the leading character is a battle royale. My own family, consisting of three sons and the hubs, has never read any of my books for that reason. Blonde OPS has Bec Jackson, a 16-year-old girl, but she's cool, she's a hacker. Why doesn't that interest them? And the Sirenz series has a cool bad guy in Hades, and Greek mythology, the same gods in the Percy Jackson stories.

How and why do males become so sexist in their reading while females are more open minded? Maybe if they read more books with females, we wouldn't be quite the mystery they seem to think we are. I think English classes need to balance the scales a bit more and present more books that feature girls and women in leading or at least equal roles.

And the guys should just man up and broaden their horizons--females make up half their world.

Char