Why most of the Classic books often seem boring???

[krishna_lit]

“Classic' - a book which people praise and don't read.” ― Mark Twain

This looks very right for many people. Many classics in the history are seen as boring works to read for this generation? I read on this forum that Moby Dick was a very boring book, but some days ago Google even celebrated 101th Anniversary of that book making a Google Doodle on its homepage, why would it do so if it is just a boring classic book? And like this many other books - War and Peace, Crime and Punishment and many of Charles Dickens books and many many more are marked as a tedious read. Why is that??

[Charles Darnay]

Crime and Punishment? I can understand the others on your list, but the person who thinks that Crime and Punishment is boring....well I don't know.

The reason tends to come from reputability. Taking your list as an example, we are dealing with books over 100 years old - and some people find it hard to immerse themselves in the ideologies or socio-political world that is at least somewhat foreign to them. Not to mention that our changing language - which some may praise as progress - is that of inefficiency and quick snaps: making the extreme wordiness of Charles Dickens confusing and thus boring.

Instant gratification has permeated our very selves due to the world we live in (I am speaking generally here) - and books were never intended for instant gratification.

[stlukesguild]

When a book that has attained the status of "classic"... which assumes more than a few readers have found the book important... and well written... is derided as "boring" it says more about the "critic" than it does about the book itself. As CD suggested, there are reasons that a larger contemporary audience may struggle with older works of literature: their distance from the subject matter and the thinking conveyed, the archaic nature of the vocabulary and formal structure of the language, the apparent "slowness" of reading a sprawling novel or epic in an era of instant gratification, the internet, Facebook, Twitter, etc...

My thinking is that:

1. I don't read to reinforce my own experiences, thoughts, feelings, ideas, biases, etc... Rather reading allows me to enter into the thoughts of other individuals... to engage in a dialog or intercourse with the dead/ghosts, as Kafka put it... other individual with different experiences, living in different cultures, etc...

2. The "goal" of reading isn't getting to the point or grasping the "meaning"... rather the goal of reading is to take pleasure in the experience itself. In this it is rather like life itself. I have no problem with meandering digressions and sprawling descriptions as long as they are well-written.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

Classics are boring to many partly because they weren't written for us, but an audience that had longer attention spans. People who read the "classics" weren't being bombarded by TV and music and the Internet and all the little technological toys we have now; they lived a "simpler" life, and did not grow up needing or craving constant stimulation. That's why slower paced books were the norm--why long metaphor-filled descriptions of setting and character were relished. Plus, people needed to kill time with something, so a long book with copious descriptions and diversions wasn't a bad thing.

And this is not to say that we can't enjoy these books now just as they were enjoyed then. The difference is that most of us, if we are raised in any other manner than a cloistered, secluded way, have to learn to read these books in a different mode: learn to read the and appreciate the length . . . the "boringness." It takes some practice, but when you do, you'll find the genius in all those old, stuffy books.

[Jackson Richardson]

I expect most people find "classics" boring because they had to do them at school.

[cacian]

They are boring because they were written in a different era. We have moved on and the books have not.
I have yet to read a book that transends all eras.
We think speak and read differently. Thanks to the media one can read a paper like the sun with no grammar at all and then find themselves fed classic stories. I could not make head or tail of them either mysefl. I hated university choices of literay books. I thought they were dire.
I still do.

[Paulclem]

I do not agree that classic equals boring - though I can think of classics I found boring whilst appreciating their ckassicness. It is no guarantee that an individual will like a particular book. As time moves on, so does the language and focus of the readers. Literary books have modern techniques whereby the author and reader are engaged in a collaboration of tecnique. The long descriptions are less common because of the relative informedness of the readership which the author can rely upon. They are also more au fait with modernist techniques and the various crafting skills of authors. It is also true that classics need more effort precisely because of the reasons cited abovve.

[cacian]

I do not agree that classic equals boring - though I can think of classics I found boring whilst appreciating their ckassicness. It is no guarantee that an individual will like a particular book. As time moves on, so does the language and focus of the readers. Literary books have modern techniques whereby the author and reader are engaged in a collaboration of tecnique. The long descriptions are less common because of the relative informedness of the readership which the author can rely upon. They are also more au fait with modernist techniques and the various crafting skills of authors. It is also true that classics need more effort precisely because of the reasons cited abovve.

Hi Paul how do you mean 'more au fait'?
Most classics are written in a different style of language that is not recognisable today amongst the youth especially.
I think classics will eventually die out because of the language barrier and the setting in their stories are written.
When I read a book like Jane Eyre for example I feel a total detachment from it because of the language the characters the story plot and the settings.
There is nothing there for me to identify with. The question is would the youth todaycare at all whether it is a classic or not?
By the look of it I do not think they will and I truly understand why.
The aim of a book is to make one feel part of it continously which would give one a reason to want to read it.
Classics are an identity crisis because they lack that modern touch.
Any book that does not fit in within the next 100 years will get lost in translation. That is my prediction on classics.

[krishna_lit]

Hi Paul how do you more au fait?
Most classics are written in a different style of language that is not recognisable today amongst the youth.
I think classics will eventually die out because of the language barrier and the setting in which stories are written.
When I read a book like Jane Eyre for example I feel a detachment from it because of the language the characters the story plot and the settings.
There is nothing there for me to identify with. The issue with the youth today would they care at all whether it is a classic or not?
By the look of it I do not think they will and I truly understand why.
The aim of a book is to make feel part of it continously which would give me a reason to want to read it.
Classics are an identity crisis because they lack that modern touch.
Any book that does not fit in within the next 100 years will get lost in translation. That is my prediction on classics.

Hi Cacian, You sound right... It must be difficult for the reader to identify himself with the characters in the classic books anymore and that is enough to lose the nerve of reading a book because reading something interesting is all about wanting to be a part of it and when that doesn't happen there is no point in it... We do need all new classics for this generation or for all the generations yet to come...

[Jackson Richardson]

The most boring book I've read recently was by Clive Cussler, a contemporary.

This bundling together everyone pre-contemporary as "classic" is silly, as though Homer, Dante, Jane Austen, Shakespeare, Mark Twain and James Joyce are the same sort of thing. If that's what you think, then you haven't read them with any imagination. You probably find most of life pretty boring as well if you haven't that basic level of discrimination.

[kiki1982]

I think we are confusing two things here:

There are books, as Moby Dick, which has been mentioned, containing passages that not necessarily appeal to the average reader. Hugo is one of those too. Does it mean that the whole of that novel is boring? Erm, no. It can still be a mightily good novel with a slightly superfluous bit in it. That's why it is still read. I suppose War and Peace also contains such passages.

Then there are books which do not appeal to us because we just don't like them. Stream of consciousness is such a notorious genre not liked by anyone. That's fine. It is not necessarily boring. Just say you don't like it. For me personally it depends how extreme it is. Mrs Dalloway was not really my cup of tea, although the witing itself was excellent.

I don't see why you should be able to 'indentify' with characters, settings, language, etc. A novel doesn't improve by the degree you can identify with a character. If that were the case, we would better not read anything from another culture. We couldn't identify. The key to reading something strange (be it in culture or timeframe) is largely in the human aspect of things. Shakespeare's characters 'lived' 400-500 years ago, but they are so very human. What English they speak or what houses they lived in is not really of any importance.
The Classic, in other languages which are more influenced by change than English, is still there. It's not yet on its way out because of its language alone. Maybe beecause of people's concentration spans.

[cacian]

The most boring book I've read recently was by Clive Cussler, a contemporary.

This bundling together everyone pre-contemporary as "classic" is silly, as though Homer, Dante, Jane Austen, Shakespeare, Mark Twain and James Joyce are the same sort of thing. If that's what you think, then you haven't read them with any imagination. You probably find most of life pretty boring as well if you haven't that basic level of discrimination.

True imagination is clue but one must remember we do not all read and have the same imagination.
My imagination swithes off with Dante. This is a not a voluntary choice it is how I feel it makes me.
My imagination finds other things more interesting that you would not find interesting yourself.
It is how the world works.
To stereotype readers into on type is an error and to expect a writer to execute for all is even more of an error.

[Volya]

I think it is partly due to the difference in language between now and the past (even if they are written in the same language). For example in class we had to study Jekyll and Hyde. 80% of the class didn't bother reading it because apparently it was too boring, and they claimed they 'couldn't understand' what it was about. Instead, they just read a sparknotes summary (and the fact that most of them still manage to get A's just tells you something about the education system )

[mal4mac]

“Classic' - a book which people praise and don't read.” ― Mark Twain

This looks very right for many people.

It doesn't look right to me, at least today. Who do you know who goes around praising books they don't read? It might have been true for certain parts of 19th century America, where charlatan teachers were rampant, needed the money, and got away with singing the praises of books they hadn't read so that ignorant townsfolk would hire them. That's the kind of academic cheat that Twain is probably attacking... along with any townsfolk who may try to social climb without putting in the reading hours.

Many classics in the history are seen as boring works to read for this generation? I read on this forum that Moby Dick was a very boring book, but some days ago Google even celebrated 101th Anniversary of that book making a Google Doodle on its homepage, why would it do so if it is just a boring classic book? And like this many other books - War and Peace, Crime and Punishment and many of Charles Dickens books and many many more are marked as a tedious read. Why is that??

You will find every kind of view on this forum! Personally I have read all the books you mention, including most of Charles Dickens major novels, and I found them all excellent reads, the best evening's entertainment one could ever have... apart maybe for C&P which I found very dark and very long winded... still worthwhile though...

[mal4mac]

There are books, as Moby Dick, which has been mentioned, containing passages that not necessarily appeal to the average reader.

Like what? I heard this criticism before I read the book and steeled myself for the "detailed whaling sections" and "complex Biblical allusions". But I needn't have worried. I'm an average reader, but I had no problem with the book at all! (The Wordsworth version had some good notes to get me over any slightly rough patches... but I hardly used them...)