I've wanted to make a real post for about about a week now, but the term is ending and everything is getting quite hectic, so a short one will have to do.
I've started my summer reading list and I've even added a "Currently Reading" tab on the side of this blog. My list is entitled "Books I Should Have Read Before Now". I guess it isn't even a real list per se because I'm only thinking about one book in advance. But it has made me question what "Books I Should Have Read Before Now" means. I get a nagging feeling every time I see these books and a sense of guilt to go along with it. That's how I know I should have read them by now, but why? Does it make me less of a human because I haven't read all of Catch 22? Does it make me less of an English teacher? Less of an English major? I don't think so, and yet the guilt persists. I'm not even sure I believe in the list that I created. People should read books that they like. There shouldn't be a sense of responsibility and duty in reading for pleasure. But here I am. Maybe that's how we know what makes up the literary canon- the feeling we get in the pit of our stomach when we see a certain book that we haven't read. "Oh, I feel like I'm going to puke every time I see Moby Dick on the shelf. I suppose I should get around to reading it." Or maybe that's just me.
I do have to say though that I have liked every book on the list that I've forced myself to read. Next up is Crime and Punishment, which David has been telling me to read for the past year because it always seems to come up in our conversations. Well, there it is. I'll be airing my dirty little secrets all summer long on the side of my blog. Are there any brave souls out there who would be willing to post a comment about a book they "should have read by now" ?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
LOL Mike just likes Crime and Punishment because it was his extemporaneous stump speech in forensics.
I did read Moby Dick. I had a kind, hard Amer. Lit. prof who gave us 3-9 pts. of extra credit for reading and submitting summaries of 3 chapters every week. It's the only way I made it through.
Books I should have read by now:
I have Josephus and Eusebius translations that I BEGGED my parents to buy for me in high school that are still uncracked on my shelf in addition to numerous theology and Hebrew books.
Lit. books I don't even bother to display for guilt.
Does the April 08 edition of InStyle magazine count?
Sorry I won't hog all the comments. But I HAVEN'T read the Count of Monte Cristo, but it brings up a funny story about my brother who despite no Eng. major roots loves to start reading the Classics. He picks up these books he thinks he'll like and enjoy being part of that cultural awareness and then sets them down after several days never to finish. Count of Monte Cristo, The Three Musketeers and Moby Dick all languish with broken spines...
I second Mike's enthusiasm. C&P is riveting. It's like an exciting detective story with great dialogue and substantive philosophical/religious ideas to keep you coming back.
I also loved Moby Dick, by the way--a high seas adventure with characters of Shakespearean proportion and a history of whaling besides to give you a break from pure fiction.
You notice I tend to think of classics not in terms of being edifying, but as potentially fun. Having fun is what's important. So there should never be guilt that you haven't read something, but remorse that you have denied yourself pleasure in order to do something that probably was much less enjoyable.
And if a classic isn't fun, then I say just drop it and read something that is--as Monica is now telling me that she wrote in her post.
Anyway, I do feel guilty when I realize all the less-fun, non-classic classical scholarship that I should be reading to make myself a better student.
But I'll never feel guilty that I haven't read David Copperfield, for example. I know enough about Dickens to know I hate him.
I sped read David Copperfield before my senior year to catch up with the AP English class I was joining. I think speed reading maybe the way to enjoy Dickens. ;-) (Though I really like talking about Dickensian twists where all the characters show up in the end and everything ends happily enough.) I did make myself read Great Expectations this fall and it was fine. Dickens is not a fav.
But I commented again to say that facebook reminded me of another book that I should have read by now: The Great Gatsby.
I went on a "great books" reading spree last fall because of Jasper Fforde's Thursday Next series. Thursday is a literary detective and can book jump into stories so there's lots of classics (English classics mostly, but the Trial gets in there too).
Anyway it's great when the reading itself is fun, but barring that I find movies and parodies good motivation. It's an easy way fake a discussion about the work lacking a lit. class or book group or blogging series. :-)
"I find movies and parodies good motivation."
YES!!! Sometimes the original must be read just so you can enjoy a good parody of it. And of course this comment strikes at that greatest of all reasons to read even the boring classics. It's worthwhile to be able to participate in the allusions, whether in conversation, other books, or wherever in the culture. And after all, if I hadn't read Dickens, I couldn't join in a conversation to say I hate him.
(Monica walked by and says to add that she also is no Dickens fans. I think there's a compulsion when one dislikes a classic to find others who feel the same way. I feel the same about movies. Man, I love it when I find someone who hates 2001, Easy Rider, or Kill Bill.)
Post a Comment