I need help on my AP Comp Assignment

[Yuorichi]

Hello Literature Forums,

You may have read my earlier post, but I left it very vague so it was hard for anyone to give an answer. So in this post I'm going to re-clarify my question and hopefully I can get some good feedback . So In my AP Comp class we are writing a 6 page essay that covers why a contemporary american novel (A Book written by an American Author and published past the 1980's) should be considered a classic even though it hasn't stood the test of time. So to clarify, I have to write an essay about The Road by Cormac McCarthy (great book by the way) that discusses why The Road, even though it hasn't been out for long, should be deemed a classic. Now the question I have about this assignment is what points can I make to establish that this novel should be considered a classic? Keep in mind that each Body Paragraph has to be around 2 pages in length, so it needs to be a little broad so I can expand upon it. I understand that discussing it's entertainment and appraisal from critics could make one paragraph, but I'm struggling trying to think of two other reasons why it should be considered a classic, as even though it has themes prevalent in our society, the book doesn't take place in our time period and I can't claim it encompasses the themes of our era as our era hasn't ended yet.

Thanks for taking the time to read the post even if you don't give feedback! If you have any ideas then please post them and I will be checking back periodically to see what you guys can come up with.

-Yuorichi

[Calidore]

Can it be compared in any way to any older novels that are now considered classics?

[Yuorichi]

Can it be compared in any way to any older novels that are now considered classics?

Yes it can, I was thinking about using that as a reason but I couldn't figure out how to incorporate other classic novels in my reasoning. Like you could make a stretch and say that The Road is similar to The Grapes of Wrath because they both focus on a journey filled with hardship and the characters know of their fate but continue on in hope. It's also similar because you get the contrast between the Selfish and Giving between the Father and the Boy, and that can be compared to The Grapes of Wrath's class struggle between the wealthy being selfish and the Migrants being giving to other Migrants. I just don't know how to properly write about that in my essay without sounding either like I'm stretching the truth, and I don't want to come off as sounding confused in my reasoning. IE : The Road should be considered a classic because it shares themes and values of classic books such as The Grapes of Wrath. In this example, I would not only have to prove The Grapes of Wrath as being classic, but I would also have to make a logical connection to that and The Road, which ends up becoming a lot of work.

[kelby_lake]

In this example, I would not only have to prove The Grapes of Wrath as being classic, but I would also have to make a logical connection to that and The Road, which ends up becoming a lot of work.

This is true.

Personally I would talk about the ways in which you think it reflects our era and try and argue some relevance there. A lot of classics are classics because they capture the era in which they were written. You could also talk about it encompassing epic themes and how we might find it relevant in the future.

[PeterL]

The Road is not a classic, nor will it ever be one, because it is rather imitative of many other works that are similar, and there is no sign that the post-apocalyptic sub-genre will last for any significant amount of time.

[WyattGwyon]

The Road is not a classic, nor will it ever be one, because it is rather imitative of many other works that are similar, and there is no sign that the post-apocalyptic sub-genre will last for any significant amount of time.

I would agree it is less likely to be considered a classic than just about anything else McCarthy wrote—which doesn't mean one can't write a good essay arguing that it is one, it only makes the job a lot harder.

[PeterL]

I would agree it is less likely to be considered a classic than just about anything else McCarthy wrote—which doesn't mean one can't write a good essay arguing that it is one, it only makes the job a lot harder.

That is true, but that puts into the the category of punting. The OP'er should just concentrate on telling a good story.

[ennison]

I suppose that you are arguing that it will stand the test of time and become a classic. You could look at the following points: theme - it's about love so that makes it universal in the sense that the theme is never out of fashion but does it deal with it in a new or, for you, interesting way; does it have any stylistic originality that makes it stand out from the ruck; are the issues big moral issues or are they mundane; how does it fit into the body of his work; has it "entertainment" value (pretty obviously has) and how is that?. These are just a few ideas for your pot.

[qimissung]

These are Italo Calvino's 14 definitions of what makes a classic:



1. The classics are those books about which you usually hear people saying: 'I'm rereading…', never 'I'm reading….'

2. The Classics are those books which constitute a treasured experience for those who have read and loved them; but they remain just as rich an experience for those who reserve the chance to read them for when they are in the best condition to enjoy them.

3. The classics are books which exercise a particular influence, both when they imprint themselves on our imagination as unforgettable, and when they hide in the layers of memory disguised as the individual's or the collective unconscious.

4. A classic is a book which with each rereading offers as much of a sense of discovery as the first reading.

5. A classic is a book which even when we read it for the first time gives the sense of rereading something we have read before.

6. A classic is a book which has never exhausted all it has to say to its readers.

7. The classics are those books which come to us bearing the aura of previous interpretations, and trailing behind them the traces they have left in the culture or cultures (or just in the languages and customs) through which they have passed.

8. A classic is a work which constantly generates a pulviscular cloud of critical discourse around it, but which always shakes the particles off.

9. Classics are books which, the more we think we know them through hearsay, the more original, unexpected, and innovative we find them when we actually read them.

10. A classic is the term given to any book which comes to represent the whole universe, a book on a par with ancient talismans.

11. 'Your' classic is a book to which you cannot remain indifferent, and which helps you define yourself in relation or even in opposition to it.

12. A classic is a work that comes before other classics; but those who have read other classics first immediately recognize its place in the genealogy of classic works.

13. A classic is a work which relegates the noise of the present to a background hum, which at the same time the classics cannot exist without.

14. A classic is a work which persists as a background noise even when a present that is totally incompatible with it holds sway.



You might be able to make an argument for or against The Road using one or two of these.

[ennison]

"Pulviscular"! Please tell me I ain't the only dumbo who has never heard of that. It sounds like a form of thrombosis!

[chrisvia]

In a case like this, I would recommend spending some time on the emotions of fear and uncertainty, and the human will to survive (and protect our children), that are prevalent in the novel. Link these to the fact that such emotions are universal and timeless.

[cafolini]

I don't see his clues as intending to define. The insides of Cosmicomics, Palomar and Numbers in the Dark say a lot more about this.

[ennison]

In the sense that McCarthy is asking What If... then he is part of a tradition. You say it is not in our era but I would contend that the uncertain future envisaged by CM is not far away imaginatively as the threat posed by weapons of mass destruction may have receded since the height of the Cold War but still remain a background grumble. The atavistic reversion to survival mode can be seen in any number of disintegrating societies in modern times even if the apocalyptic destruction imagined by CM has not been suffered. Think of the horribly brutal civil wars of some modern African states. There have been occasions in the twentieth century when people in groups have resorted to cannibalism- at least two of the commie-created famines drove significant numbers to that. And yet in these same situations both self-sacrifice and love have also attended so the ideas of The Road are modern and are of our era. It has been truthfully said that Orwell was not referring to some putative conditions of a world four decades ahead of his time but to conditions of 1948.