In one of Lauren’s classes, an online discussion board plays a large role. Students must post topics for discussion, then read and respond to what others have posted. Oh, technology! Lauren related one post to me, which stems from a frequent cry of discontent heard ’round the nation. No one reads classic literature any more! Subsequently, our entire society is on the verge of collapse (or something a little less dire).
I think this notion is completely ludicrous, and I’d like to dispel the idea from those who hold it. Contrary to popular belief, an experience (or even a statistic) that implies people aren’t reading the “classics” says nothing about the state of our society, the state of literature, or even the state of reading habits. Here’s why.
1. What is a classic anyway?
If you believe that “no one reads the classics anymore,” please provide to me a list of those books or authors you consider to be classics. No doubt, they should all be books that you yourself have read. I will go through this list and, unless you have been exceptionally thorough, will provide for you a list just as long of books missing from your list. The books that we can classify as “classic” are innumerable.
Furthermore, the distinction of classic or canonical literature is a contentious subject around literary scholars. You will surely note that the “classics” are generally old, generally long with lots of big words and complex language structure, have been lauded by critics in our current time period, and have been read by many people for long periods of time. You should also note that most “classics” are written by men, ignore minority issues of their time, and may not have been widely read at the time of their release. In other words, the content of these books is often questionable, their distinction suspect, and their status hardly universal. The classics of today may have been trash literature of 50 years ago.
2. It is important to WANT to read a book.
I agree that our society has decreed certain books to be canonical, and it is important to make sure those books are presented in education as well as available for children to read them. However, that someone has read a “classic” does not mean that book will mean anything to them. I have read “Huckleberry Finn” several times, both personally and for classes. I have heard the arguments about why it is great American literature. And I hope I never have to read it again because it never made much impression on me. You can force a child to read a book but that doesn’t mean it will mean anything to it.
If we are to expect children to read the classics of their own volition, we must first make them like to read and be good at it. If a child finds reading a bore and reads just 15 pages an hour, how do we expect it to get through even the lightest of Dickens? Forcing the child to read a book well-above its reading level is surefire disaster.
Indeed, taking arguments about the classics to their logical extreme, would it be good for schools to force children to read only the classics and ban all other books? Of course not. Free choice is vital for the enjoyment of any book.
3. Collective agreement does not equal correct judgment.
My mother absolutely loves “To Kill A Mockingbird.” She’s read it multiple times. Indeed, a lot of people love that book. I’ve read it a few times and never thought much of it. It’s a fine story and not much more. Similarly, I love reading Shakespeare. My mother loves seeing the plays live but doesn’t get much enjoyment out of reading the plays themselves. Yet in both cases, society has judged these works to be “classics.” So are we both wrong in our beliefs about various books that we dislike? Of course not!
Because of prevailing social norms, the strength of critical opinion, and general accessibility of a piece of literature, certain books retain their classic status while others fade away. Would you want your children reading Gustave Flaubert’s tales of visiting prostitutes in Turkey? What about Henry Miller’s tales of debauchery in Paris and New York? Of course not, so these books are not read in schools (generally). Believe it or not, books you consider classics may no longer provide useful pedagogical tools or relatable situations for our teachers and children. That’s why high schooler’s read A Separate Peace and not Tropic of Cancer, even though both books are considered classics.
In the end, we should be encouraging a collective narrative for our society. One way to do this is through literature. But in sticking with the “classics,” we recognize their own collective biases, wash over alternative viewpoints, and fail to encourage pleasure from reading. We should keep the classics in classrooms, but give children many options when it comes time to choose a book. There are valuable lessons to be learned in books by contemporary authors, just as there is collective history to learn from the classics. With proper choice and options, those children who may disdain the complex writing in older classics will have a real option to embrace them later in life. If we don’t offer that choice, we create a bunch of well-read adults who can’t stand literature. No one wants that.