abasio Posted June 18, 2009 Share Posted June 18, 2009 I kind of like classical stuff from Shakespear to Homer and Dante but I do feel that they are often so long in the tooth and full of a lot of hot gas. There are always long passages saying very little, a character describing his or her feeling or the situation in minute detail using a hundred words where they could have use 20 with the same effect. Although I like reading ancient literature I must admit that modern literature is much better. It has better character development, knows how to entice a reader and generally just blows the oldies out of the water. No I know that at least one of you disagrees (I can actually feel the future laying into me so) give it your best shot Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yerg Posted June 18, 2009 Share Posted June 18, 2009 The last classic book i read was Leo Tolstoy's "Anna Karenina". I read it in three days - though usually i read quite slowly - but this one was so interesting and the ending "the suicide scene" was so intense and brutal - i was shocked the way Tolstoy described it - so 10/10 for this. But actually i'm more into sci-fi. Now reading Asimov's "Foundation" - liking it very much. Concerning ancient books - i spent last year reading various buddhist texts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Go-Goa Trancer Posted June 18, 2009 Share Posted June 18, 2009 I tried to read "A la recherche du temps perdu" by Marcel Proust. It was very difficult, with very long describing passages. They were well written IMO, but it takes a special state of mind to enter the book universe. I stopped after 200 pages or something. I think I'm not ready yet for big classic reads. And I never really tried very old ones... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Otto Matta Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 Don Quixote, although written over 400 years ago, reads like it was written yesterday, and is highly entertaining. Totally recommended. But yeah, stuff like Shakespeare I have a very hard time with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abasio Posted June 22, 2009 Author Share Posted June 22, 2009 I finished reading Goethe's Faust Part 1 which was a mix of very well written parts and long winded gas baggery! Some scenes were beautifully written whereas other just dragged. Oh & the ending was shite! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
murphythecat Posted July 28, 2009 Share Posted July 28, 2009 I tried to read "A la recherche du temps perdu" by Marcel Proust. It was very difficult, with very long describing passages. They were well written IMO, but it takes a special state of mind to enter the book universe. I stopped after 200 pages or something. I think I'm not ready yet for big classic reads. And I never really tried very old ones... its SOOOOO good tough, but i didnt read to whole collection lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
murphythecat Posted July 28, 2009 Share Posted July 28, 2009 really, i firmly disagree with you abasio. okay yes, classic'S are more complicated, but really, no one write nowadays like volatire, or moliere and no one makes poetry lie bodelaire i dont know, im in art and letter in school, so maybe i really like complicated stuff, but for me, only adventures story are fun, but nothing more, while classics are achievments of a life time, i dont know... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buzzman Posted July 28, 2009 Share Posted July 28, 2009 Haven't read much in my life, so not sure if I'm on the right track here But I don't understand the way they overdescripe everything in the older literature I've read... Was reading some older danish novels, where they used several PAGES to descripe the scenery, that made little or no purpose at all in contrast to the storyline.... Several pages about how the savanah looked like, they could have put it down to 20 words like abasio said. Come to think about it, the book was written before television was invented (or at least before it was owned by the majority of people) so i guess what the writer intented was, to descripe a scenery (in this case, the african savannah) as detailed as possible, so the everyday-danish person could imagine how it looked like. Caus in the 30's, no danish guy would know how it looked like, unless you had been to africa.. Today, even a 10 year old child knows what the savannah looks like, from Disney movies or Animal Planet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mephistopheles Posted July 28, 2009 Share Posted July 28, 2009 I too like to read classic authors....for example: Goethe's Faust..... Dostojewski's Brothers Karamozow..... Anais Nin, if you want to learn more about the female psychology..... Henry Miller rules! (Tropic of cancer or tropic of capricorn / Plexus-Sexus-Nexus) Baudelaire's "les fleurs du mal" are beautiful..... Marquis de Sade......if you want it a bit ......different......hehe...... Herman Hesse and if you are -like me- into history: Herodotos "Histories"!!!! Tried reading James Joyce's "Ulysses" but I gave up on that one for the moment...... Some modern classic i like to read as well: Umberto Ecco and Saramago...... All of these give you such a rewarded feeling after reading their work (often struggling with)......better than the crap they feed you in bookstores sometimes...... :-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abasio Posted July 28, 2009 Author Share Posted July 28, 2009 really, i firmly disagree with you abasio. okay yes, classic'S are more complicated, but really, no one write nowadays like volatire, or moliere and no one makes poetry lie bodelaire i dont know, im in art and letter in school, so maybe i really like complicated stuff, but for me, only adventures story are fun, but nothing more, while classics are achievments of a life time, i dont know... Classics are definitely more poetic! Classical poetry is really nice! I think my main problem with classical literature is that it is all written for the stage and in a time where people just went on and on and on and on about something without pause for breath which in this day and age just seems to be ridiculous! My favourite classics are from just over a hundred years ago rather that 100s of years ago. The writers had more of a literary audience in mind. I loved Flatland by A. Square Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest_mephistopheles_* Posted July 28, 2009 Share Posted July 28, 2009 Classics are definitely more poetic! Classical poetry is really nice! I think my main problem with classical literature is that it is all written for the stage and in a time where people just went on and on and on and on about something without pause for breath which in this day and age just seems to be ridiculous! My favourite classics are from just over a hundred years ago rather that 100s of years ago. The writers had more of a literary audience in mind. I loved Flatland by A. Square Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sneila Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 I couldn't really care less about your character development and fast moving plot, I'm not reading for cheap entertainment. I'd rather read books with artistic merit. I also prefer older books because they have more interesting things to say to me. They were written by more interesting people. Nowadays most books seem to be written by average idiots and the content reflects that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anakoluth Posted September 16, 2009 Share Posted September 16, 2009 Classics are definitely more poetic! Classical poetry is really nice! I think my main problem with classical literature is that it is all written for the stage and in a time where people just went on and on and on and on about something without pause for breath which in this day and age just seems to be ridiculous! Yes I think there is something true in your post. I guess people back then were far more sophisticated and driven by their ideas. Monumental works such as Chateubriand's "Mémoires d'outre tombe" or the already mentioned work of Proust (even though not being from the Classical era) are just impossible nowadays with us people drowning in so many things to do and time killing crap such as social networking. Me, I like lots of old French stuff, i.e. Baudelaire, Balzac, Maupassant, and some German like von Kleist and Fontane. My problem with especially German classics is that I've heard so many people talking about those authors as "everlasting authorities" that I'm totally fed up and don't even wanna dive into stuff like Goethe. Just because I don't like the feeling of being obliged to like something just because the whole world keeps raving about it. Having said that, I'm much more into modern classics, especially works of the Expressionism and Post-War eras of Germany, France and Scandinavia. It actually has been quite some time that I've read anything from after 1970. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.