RANDOM JOTTINGS


A blog about music, sports, theatre and rants





I was sorting out my bookshelves the other day in a vain attempt to get some more space and, while doing so, realised that well over half my collection, if not more, could be classified as 'Classics'.  Austen, Bronte, Dickens, Eliot, Wharton, Zola, Trollope et al and I started to wonder how a book is classified as such.

I regard the Anne of Green Gables books by LM Montgomery as classics, also Frances Hodgson Burnett's Secret Garden and A Little Princess.  But somehow I don't categorize Elizabeth von Arnim or EM Delafield as Classics (with the exception of Diary of a Provincial Lady).  So what does constitute a classic?  It can't just be time …. Lucky Jim by Kingsley Amis, Catcher in the Rye by Salinger, To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee are just a few examples of titles which are marketed as Modern Classics.   Perhaps in a hundred years or so when they are no longer modern they will become just Classics.  It is a question I have often pondered on and wondered if being named as a Classic can put off prospective readers?  I have been asked by colleagues and friends on different occasions what was I reading and when I produced a Bronte or an Austen, I would see a grimace and the response would be Oh, a classic how boring. 

Last year I re-read Georgette Heyer, an author consigned to the Romance section of my local library and, I daresay, in others as well.  I will go so far as to say that I think her books are Classics. Not only do they qualify under the time lapse if this is a criteria, her early ones were written in the 1920s and 1930s, but her Regency novels are simply masterpieces of a particular genre and will never be bettered.  The fact that they have never been out of print, save those she suppressed, is testament to this and yet she has always been spoken of rather slightingly.   

When I go to my book sale in November, a regular local one in aid of charity and filled with thousands of books, I go straight to the hardback table and usually manage to find some old and neglected book which nobody is interested in, one year an entire Millennium Everyman edition of 100 classics given to schools across the UK, and which had been thrown out and never read.   These superb  books were selling for 50p each, yes 50p and were being totally neglected while over on the paperback tables people were filling their bags with Grisham, Brown, Steele et al for at least three times the price. Sad.

100_2870

A few weeks ago those lovely people at Oxford University Press sent me the full 2010 catalogue of their World's Classics with a letter asking if I would like anything to review.  Well this is like letting a child loose in Toys R Us and I spent a happy hour drooling over practically everything (on line catalogues are well and good but nothing beats a paper version). The list includes British and Irish literature, the Oxford Shakespeare, American and European Literature, Eastern Literature, philosophy, Politics, History and many more.  An entire library of knowledge all ready and waiting.

In this catalogue the titles range from Seneca through to Scott Fitzgerald and OUP is publishing This side of Paradise, his first novel, for the first time alongside the Great Gatsby and The Beautiful and the Damned.  There are plenty of authors I have heard of but not read and, apart from very generously sending me a lovely parcel of books the other week at my request, another book arrived the other day, Tarr by Wyndham Lewis, about which I know nothing. Now's my chance to learn.

The entire classics series is being re-marketed and issued with new covers with complete notes on the text and a chronology of the author and loads of information to help introduce the reader to each title.  They all look gorgeous which I hope you can see from the picture and I am a lucky lady indeed to possess so many of these titles.

Please check out their World's Classics on their website and see what riches await you.

Ultimately, I suppose in order to qualify as a Classic, a book has to stand the test of time and fashion and still be interesting and readable for all ages.  I would love to know what Random readers feel on this subject and if you have any authors, neglected or unread, that you feel should be Classics.

Posted in ,

15 responses to “When does a book become a Classic?”

  1. anne Avatar
    anne

    Classics seem to be stories which stand up to time, certainly, because their message /characters/writing is timeless. Even if the setting it a “long ago” time, they speak to the reader by touching on timeless/age-old themes/situations, etc. Their writing grips and pulls you to that time/place, and you are part of it.

  2. Liz F Avatar
    Liz F

    Don’t feel qualified to comment about what makes a classic but I am definitely envious of those Oxford editions!
    Heartfelt sympathies to Bren! All you can think is that it is a fabulous experience for your daughter and then start looking for cheap flights to go and visit her!

  3. Claire (Paperback Reader) Avatar

    Elaine, as I have said on Simon’s post on same topic, I tend to define classics as something a century old or older (by this means of classification and of the joy it brings to people of disparate backgrounds and ages, the Anne books are most definitely classics) whereas Fitzgerald and Woolf are modern classics (of the modern period) and then there are contemporary (postmodern in a sense although labelling them as such adds confusion) classics that were published about thirty years or less ago (To Kill a Mockingbird is a modern classic as is One Hundred Years of Solitude but The Handmaid’s Tale and Beloved are both contemporary classics). You can tell I have given this just a little thought! Either way -classic, modern classic, contemporary classic- all are books that awe me whilst reading, that have something to teach me of life and relationships, that nurture and engage me.

  4. Desperate Reader Avatar

    Like you I love the Heyer novels, I’m not sure they’ll ever be ‘classics’ but they deserve so much more status than they get.Romance hardly does justice to the world she recreated, or to all the strong independant women she wrote.

  5. Elaine Simpson-Long Avatar

    Don’t think I can better the comment by Rachel above regarding Classics. Thank you Rachel very much for this.
    I note that Simon over on Savidge Reads has also posted on this very same topic so do nip over and have a read of his post as well.
    Simon T of Stuck in a Book also has this topic in his draft folder so we are obviously all suffering from blog serendipidy or else we have all been the reciepient of some of hte lovely new OUP classics series which has made us all hone in on this.
    I am glad to see from your comments that you think classics is a genre a little wider these days as I hope this will encourage them to be read and not avoided as dull and boring. Such a shame as readers are seriously missing out on wonderful literature

  6. Simon (Savidge Reads) Avatar

    Oooh we had blogendipity and I didnt know until I just responded to a comment left by Rachel!
    I have decided to hit some of the classics over the next few months and was asking what people thought a classic is as I am still not really sure.

  7. Kat Avatar

    I love the Oxford editions! What a beautiful set of books!
    I’m fairly liberal in my definition of classics. We all know the great giants: Stendhal, Austen, Trollope, Wharton, Chekhov, etc. The canon, I mean. Some good novels, I agree, like those by von Arnim, occupy middle ground. I love them to death, but the quality isn’t quite there. And sometimes they are very mildly dated.
    On the other hand, I feel very strongly that certain genre books are classics. Because they are kept separate from the rest of literature, they don’t get their dues. I’m very fond of science fiction/fantasy and believe strongly that Pamela Dean’s Tam Lin, Clifford Simak’s They Walked like Men, & John Wyndham’s The Day of the Triffids are classics. You know more about the mysteries than I do.
    It’s hard to argue these lists but the category of classics is looser than it used to be. So many people questioning them these days.

  8. Bren Avatar

    For me classics are books which can be read and reread. Sometimes when I read a modern book I know I will never read it again .Even if I liked it. For me classics are the likes of Elizabeth Taylor ,Willa Cather , William Maxwell as well as books by the Brontes etc. Also some modern childrens books such as Krindlekrax ,Kensukes Kingdom , War Game.I am a primary teacher and have had to reread these books many times and always enjoy them.
    Writing this with tears in my eyes.My 20 year old daughter gone to America yesterday.For a year to study.Of course a chance of a lifetime and great experience etc.But I miss her .Cant even go into her bedroom.Her pyjamas smell like her and it makes me dissolve,

  9. Susan in TX Avatar
    Susan in TX

    I don’t feel qualified to answer your question, but I think I just drooled on my computer when I saw that picture! ;) Yes, I’m kidding, but enjoy all those beautiful books!

  10. Laurel Ann Avatar

    WOW Elaine! What cash of books from OUP! I have several of their lovely new editions and agree that they are excellent with the added supplemental material. How ever will you read and review that beautiful array of books in the picture? Hmm? Dumb question really.
    I think a book becomes a classic when it is at least 30 – 50 years old and is so cherished and valued that it is placed on “must read” lists of schools and pleasure readers. Sometimes, books even become instant classics and bypass the waiting time. I am thinking of Atonement. I am sure readers will add their own favs to the modern classics list.

  11. Simon T Avatar

    How interesting – I started writing a beru similar post earlier, and it’s waiting in my draft folder!

  12. JaneGS Avatar

    in order to qualify as a Classic, a book has to stand the test of time and fashion and still be interesting and readable for all ages.
    That’s pretty much my definition, which shows the marketing hype phrase “an instant classic” as ridiculous :)
    I wonder if Gaskell’s books were considered classics a generation ago–I think not. I think she was considered a popular Victorian author, but one who feel out of favor after she died. Now, though, I do consider her books as Classics.

  13. Rachel Avatar

    Interesting question, Elaine!
    I read a lot of ‘classic’ literature and personally I find that ‘classics’ tend to be ‘classics’ because of the quality of the writing, the profundity of the story and the message it has to give, and the personableness of the characters. Plus, there is a certain indefinable ‘magic’ quality to them that makes you feel like you’re reading something important and special. If the writing is excellent, the story something that moves, inspires, encourages, captivates and educates, and the characters real, warm blooded people that come alive off the pages, then a book is a ‘classic’ to me, as that is the sort of book I’d want to read again and again and again. Outside of the accepted canon of ‘classic’ literature, I’d also say books like Margaret Atwood’s ‘The Handmaid’s Tale’, Donna Tartt’s ‘The Secret History’, E M Delafield’s ‘The Provincial Lady’, Willa Cather’s ‘Lucy Gayheart’, Elizabeth Von Arnim’s ‘The Enchanted April’ and Richard Yates’ ‘Disturbing the Peace’, just to name a few, should be classics, as they fit all of my criteria and are fantastic, awe inspiring, wonderful books.
    I do think there’s a real prejudice against labelling a book a ‘classic’ however, as people seem to instantly associate ‘classic’ with ‘long’, ‘difficult’, ‘boring’ and so on. How wrong they are! Classics are classics because they stand the test of time and speak to humanity across centuries and decades about the real issues of the human condition. It also helps that most of them make you laugh, are brilliantly well written, and have characters that stay with you forever. I think there are a lot more ‘classics’ out there than what are traditionally named classics, but then I should think everyone has their own subjective list of ‘classic’ books they think everyone should read – I know I do!

  14. Dorte H Avatar

    I think a classic teach you something about human beings and the relationship between them. Though these stories are fiction, they seem to say more about life than real life.
    As a teacher of literature, I also wish that people would buy and read more classics. On the other hand I read far more crime novels than classics, partly because there is a limit as to how many great stories I can digest in a short time span, partly because of my job. It is infinitely difficult for me to read an English work of high quality without formulating analysis questions all the time. So in order to relax, I have to read something lighter.

  15. Carolyn Avatar

    I’m not sure how books acquire the designation “classic”. Some classics I like and some I do not. Two American authors whose work deserves the designation are: Ellen Glasgow (1873-1945) who wrote mostly about her home state of Virginia; and Margaret Deland (1857-1945) who wrote a series of novels and short stories set in the fictional town of Old Chester, Pennsylvania, which are in my mind the American version of Elizabeth Gaskell’s Cranford.

Leave a Reply to Dorte HCancel reply

Discover more from RANDOM JOTTINGS

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading