KeshKesh7

Call me communist but I hate, hate, HATE classical literature.
For the most part it's bad plots, stiff dialogue, unrealistic action, and bad writing in general. Either you can't understand it or it's the most boring thing in existance.
What are some actual GOOD classics?
Maybe I should say what I've actually read:
Edgar Allen Poe (although I like his poems), Jane Austin (she'd never make it today and you know it), Charlotte Bronte, Nathanial Hawthorne, Bram Stoker...
I usually read the first page and if that don't hook me, I don't read it. My library has a classical section of paperbacks and I usually browse them, pick a couple out, then put 'em back.
On that note, what are some actually GOOD books? The only book that I liked that comes close to classical literature is 1984. Yeah.
It's actually frustrating not to have found something I like. I'm positive SOMETHING is out there. At least two. I'm not that big of a snob, haha.

__________________
An ounce of performance is worth pounds of promise.
-- Mae West
Anything worth doing is worth doing slowly.
http://therockgodsblog.blogspot.com/

For me with Squalor

Have you actually soldiered on and read through any of those books that you above dismissed after one or two pages?
(Don't even think about War and Peace) Thing is they are classics for a reason, and they are not easy to read because we don't live in the same time as the writers its something you have to get used to, its not all that difficult if you start a book with the right attitude.
Also if you can't get through Little Women and 19th century soap operas, then try some 20th century stuff, the Beat movement, Salinger, Kundera, (I like Heller but most don't) Vonnegut is a must, and Douglas Adams just for some fun. Of course Orwell and Golding and all other curriculum writers are worth reading. Just some thoughts........

__________________
Alcohol is the best deal out there!
What other product do you get 40% back from?

KeshKesh7

I read most of Dracula, got halfway through Jane Eyre, tried to finish Nathanial Hawthorne, and barely started Poe.
I love the history part of the stories -- I just can't get past the writing.

__________________
An ounce of performance is worth pounds of promise.
-- Mae West
Anything worth doing is worth doing slowly.
http://therockgodsblog.blogspot.com/

KeshKesh7

And it's not that I don't understand it -- as a Creative Writing major we've covered that hundreds of times.

__________________
An ounce of performance is worth pounds of promise.
-- Mae West
Anything worth doing is worth doing slowly.
http://therockgodsblog.blogspot.com/

NightOwl

It really depends what you define as 'classic'. If you are put off by Victorian language/style from the outset, it is unlikely that you will persevere with anything from this era for long enough to get into it. Which seems a shame because you would probably find some things you like if you gave them more of a a chance to develop. Maybe try something like 'Frankenstein'. I found that quite accessible.

Other than that, if you liked '1984', have you read 'Brave New World'? It's not that old, (1930s??) but it is a 'classic' imo. It's another spin on the dystopian future thang and a cracking read.

sekrg

I think you just need to find your niche in the classic genre. 1984 is one of the definitive novels of the 20th century but I personally like Orwell's other novels. If you like that socialist view of class ridden English life in the 30's then you may enjoy 'Keep The Aspidistra Flying' and George Orwell's other works. Aldous Huxley wrote 'A Brave New World' and writes in a similar style to Orwell. One of the greatest pieces of American literature would be John Steinbeck's 'Of Mice and Men.' Have you read Anton Chekhov? Chekhov was a Russian dramatist who paid little attention to plot and allowed the reader to interpret the characters and story. Classic is not necessarily Victorian. The definition of classic is 'belonging to the highest rank or class.' Wikipedia defines classic literature as 'literature that is considered a model of its form.' Some people believe in order for a book to be given the term 'classic' it has to be pre-1900. But many works of classic literature are from the great 20th century writers.
I agree with you about Jane Austen. To me she was the most prolific Mills and Boon writer of Georgian England.

shraga

I had a classical literature phase in high school (mainly because that was all my high school allowed me to read) I enjoyed Jane Austin despite the fact that every book of her's is a soap opera. Certain books I found that I had to push my way through and some just weren't any good.
But some were great. Treasure Island was a great book while "A seperate peace" was horrible.
Every day and age had its good nd bad writers.
Classics become classic because everyone says so not because they are good.
Try A potrait of dorian gray or crime and punishment

__________________
Shraga Y. Weissmann
Israel
Pease critique my humor for Chompers (744 words)

SevenWritez

The Sun Also Rises

Lord of the Flies

Catcher in the Rye (one of my favorite novels, but I'm a teenager so it 'speaks,' to me, I suppose)

Of Mice and Men (a bit stiff, but if you allow yourself to like the characters the ending is heartbreaking)

The Power of One


These are more contemporary classics, but they deserve their recognition none the less, and I'd recommend all of them. While I've never been able to get into the much older classics, I still respect the writers for what they accomplished. You have to remember these artists came from a different era, and the way things were seen and spoken then are much different when juxtaposed with the society of today. And while I don't claim to be a know-it-all when regarding the impacts of such literary works, most of said writers tended to have major impacts on the milieu surrounding them, if not the world entirely.

Anyways, it doesn't seem to be the writer's and their talent-related faults, but your reluctance to delve in an older style. The novels I listed above have a style much easier to shift into, and they are all great stories. Hope you enjoy them (if you haven't already read them, that is).

Fyodor

It might help if you read past the first page. When I picked up Dostoevsky's Crime and Punishment I thought the first 50 or so pages were really hard to get through. But it was a book that I really wanted to read so I pushed through and I ended up really liking the book.



I hated the Scarlet Letter. To me it was just too boring.

__________________
“Writing in English is the most ingenious torture ever devised for sins committed in previous lives. The English reading public explains the reason why.” --James Joyce


Critique me and I'll do my best to help you.

Swamp Thing

Try anything by Hemmingway, try Heart of Darkness and Lord Jim by Conrad, find some of Faulkner's short stories, Orwel, which I'm sure you've read, Moby Dick by Melville might work for you, at least glance at Voltaire's Candide, though I don't think it will work for you.

I'm trying to think of things that are a little more fast pace than Dickens.

Let us know what you discover.

__________________
To identify the elements of style, perhaps we should begin by eliminating the idea of correctness.

- Mario Vargas Llosa

Shawn

Read Lolita by Nabokov. I practically drool at his use of language. Until I read it, I didn't know what the beauty of words was.

__________________
Critique?
Applebee's
www.theoddvillepress.com

RebelGoddess

I get what you're saying about how you feel that:

I agree on the stiff dialogue, unrealistic action, and bad writing, but I think you're wrong about the bad plots.

Unfortunately, a lot of what was written back then had stiff dialogue and unrealistic action; the bad writing though, I think, stems from the general lack of education years ago. Many writers just wrote with no formal training at all. I mean, take the Brontes for example: Emily, Charlotte, and Anne were teenagers who most likely just sat around their kitchen table and wrote together.

But lack of training and sub-par prose doesn't diminish the quality of the classics in my opinion.

When I'm reading a classic for the first time I definitely have to force myself through it. It usually takes me at least 2 readings, if not more!, to really enjoy the story.

As for suggestions for you, I'm not sure what to say; I have no clue what exactly you'd like. But here are some that I love:

Fahrenheit 451 - Ray Bradbury
Adventures of Tom Sawyer/Huckleberry Finn - Mark Twain
Dracula - Bram Stoker
Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde - Robert Louis Stevenson

Another thing I can suggest is to re-read some of the classics you haven;t liked in the past; sometimes all it takes is time, a different point of view, and a second reading to enjoy it!

I hope you enjoy some of these!

Racheal

__________________
Writing is life.

Writers' block doesn't exist. It's actually called work avoidance procrastination.
-Jasper Fforde

The Backward OX

lin

Did you get the impression, before having experienced it, that you might want to have sex?

With another human?


Same deal.

__________________

The Backward OX

Who are you accusing of being human?