on classic and non-classic literature
I don't know if you know this, but I read a lot. I read a lot (past tense). Fantasy, young adult, classic. All kinds of literature. And I don't really see how something can be more valuable that the other.
People go around speaking of classic literature. J.D. Salinger, Charles Dickens, some other smart white dude. I know that these authors are respected and that their works are considered classics because they are good. They are well written and have gained merits over the years that allow for them to be inserted into the educations of people all around the world. If I'm reading a classic book I feel like holding it out for everyone to see. That I'm smart, educated.
Don't get me wrong, I really enjoyed 1984 by George Orwell. But I didn't have to explain myself to anyone while reading it. But when I'm reading a piece of so called "young adult literature" (mostly aimed at girls of 13-17), I feel the need to constantly explain myself. I found myself doing this the other day. I was reading "Eleanor and Park" by Rainbow Rowell (a nice book by the way, have a look if you're interested), and someone asked me what it was. I started explaining it, starting by saying it was very escapist. That it was only to free my mind and read something that didn't matter. To take a break from all the "smart" and exhausting things I'd been reading. Really I liked this book, despite its obvious romantic plot and icky lovely teenage feelings. But because I go to the IB, a "place for smart people", I didn't want to seem like the kind of person that enjoys this kind of literature. Non-serious literature. Really I care about other people's opinions a lot, which becomes clear to me in instances like this.
I have read all books written by John Green, most famous for The Fault In Our Stars, now also a successful film. I have enjoyed them, some much more than others. However, I am aware of the problems. Like in all literature, also young adult literature has its problems. People feel like male writers often portray the female love interest in their stories as overly quirky or the fantasy projection of their high school crush that they could never have. I'm sure this is the case with some. I am annoyed at the oddly named, loud mouthed, funnily dressing girls that turn out to be just like everyone else and falling in love with the main character, a "perfectly normal boy". Young adult literature is predictable, most times. It's mostly heteronormative, the usual boy meets girl story with a twist at the end to make the reader think what they read is totally different from any other book on the market. Sure, there are exceptions to every case, but most often love stories are very similar. Only the characters change, and those are what actually make the story what it is.
The reason I read young adult literature is to escape, yes. But also to let myself feel. If I give into the book, let the words take me on a journey and really invest myself in this fictional romance, I feel things. I'm angry at the bullies, I'm happy when the couple finally kisses. I'm heartbroken when there is a misunderstanding. All young adult books are different, not necessarily by plot but by way of writing. All authors have their own way, and that way can either draw you in or push you out.
I really enjoyed Perks of Being a Wallflower. It was a good book. Coming-of-age books are dear to me, as I too am young and looking to find my way. I understand that they are not literary classics, and I understand that my professors and teachers and male friends will not like most of them. But I shouldn't be ashamed of reading them. Why do I feel the need to prove myself to these people? To prove I'm smart enough to read young adult literature as "escapist", and undermine all the work that has been put into the book by simplifying it to something I can read without thinking.
I have also read 3 and a half books from the Song of Ice and Fire series by George R.R. Martin. I also enjoyed those books. Adult men read those books, my teachers know those books. I don't have to explain myself at all when I read those books. This is odd to me sometimes, how some collections of words are more valuable than others. I understand it yes, but at this basic level it does seem a bit funny right?
I encourage you to get off any high horse you might be sitting on and consider that some people like young adult literature. That does not make them stupid, or allow you to tut at them and continue reading Kafka or whatever it is that you were reading while smoking your non-pretentious cigarette. Young adult authors are authors just like Charles Dickens or George Orwell, and just because their story is selling to teenage girls does not make them any less talented. [I am aware that "classic" literature is written in a way that analysis can be done, the language is more complex and the stories are unique, that is why they are classic.] This can be argued from both sides I know, but I don't like thinking my favorite authors are less important than people who wrote books that bore me. I don't care how many millions of people have fallen in love with the story of a young orphan boy, I enjoy reading about two teenagers falling in love in Omaha a lot more. Sue me.
- Becks
People go around speaking of classic literature. J.D. Salinger, Charles Dickens, some other smart white dude. I know that these authors are respected and that their works are considered classics because they are good. They are well written and have gained merits over the years that allow for them to be inserted into the educations of people all around the world. If I'm reading a classic book I feel like holding it out for everyone to see. That I'm smart, educated.
Don't get me wrong, I really enjoyed 1984 by George Orwell. But I didn't have to explain myself to anyone while reading it. But when I'm reading a piece of so called "young adult literature" (mostly aimed at girls of 13-17), I feel the need to constantly explain myself. I found myself doing this the other day. I was reading "Eleanor and Park" by Rainbow Rowell (a nice book by the way, have a look if you're interested), and someone asked me what it was. I started explaining it, starting by saying it was very escapist. That it was only to free my mind and read something that didn't matter. To take a break from all the "smart" and exhausting things I'd been reading. Really I liked this book, despite its obvious romantic plot and icky lovely teenage feelings. But because I go to the IB, a "place for smart people", I didn't want to seem like the kind of person that enjoys this kind of literature. Non-serious literature. Really I care about other people's opinions a lot, which becomes clear to me in instances like this.
I have read all books written by John Green, most famous for The Fault In Our Stars, now also a successful film. I have enjoyed them, some much more than others. However, I am aware of the problems. Like in all literature, also young adult literature has its problems. People feel like male writers often portray the female love interest in their stories as overly quirky or the fantasy projection of their high school crush that they could never have. I'm sure this is the case with some. I am annoyed at the oddly named, loud mouthed, funnily dressing girls that turn out to be just like everyone else and falling in love with the main character, a "perfectly normal boy". Young adult literature is predictable, most times. It's mostly heteronormative, the usual boy meets girl story with a twist at the end to make the reader think what they read is totally different from any other book on the market. Sure, there are exceptions to every case, but most often love stories are very similar. Only the characters change, and those are what actually make the story what it is.
The reason I read young adult literature is to escape, yes. But also to let myself feel. If I give into the book, let the words take me on a journey and really invest myself in this fictional romance, I feel things. I'm angry at the bullies, I'm happy when the couple finally kisses. I'm heartbroken when there is a misunderstanding. All young adult books are different, not necessarily by plot but by way of writing. All authors have their own way, and that way can either draw you in or push you out.
I really enjoyed Perks of Being a Wallflower. It was a good book. Coming-of-age books are dear to me, as I too am young and looking to find my way. I understand that they are not literary classics, and I understand that my professors and teachers and male friends will not like most of them. But I shouldn't be ashamed of reading them. Why do I feel the need to prove myself to these people? To prove I'm smart enough to read young adult literature as "escapist", and undermine all the work that has been put into the book by simplifying it to something I can read without thinking.
I have also read 3 and a half books from the Song of Ice and Fire series by George R.R. Martin. I also enjoyed those books. Adult men read those books, my teachers know those books. I don't have to explain myself at all when I read those books. This is odd to me sometimes, how some collections of words are more valuable than others. I understand it yes, but at this basic level it does seem a bit funny right?
I encourage you to get off any high horse you might be sitting on and consider that some people like young adult literature. That does not make them stupid, or allow you to tut at them and continue reading Kafka or whatever it is that you were reading while smoking your non-pretentious cigarette. Young adult authors are authors just like Charles Dickens or George Orwell, and just because their story is selling to teenage girls does not make them any less talented. [I am aware that "classic" literature is written in a way that analysis can be done, the language is more complex and the stories are unique, that is why they are classic.] This can be argued from both sides I know, but I don't like thinking my favorite authors are less important than people who wrote books that bore me. I don't care how many millions of people have fallen in love with the story of a young orphan boy, I enjoy reading about two teenagers falling in love in Omaha a lot more. Sue me.
- Becks
Comments
Post a Comment