0 reactions
More modern works should be considered classics right now
I've been thinking lately about how, when the term "classic literature" is used, it still seems to refer to the same texts that have been deemed classics since the latter half of the 20th century. From books like Wuthering Heights, Crime and Punishment, and Frankenstein to more comparatively modern classics like Fahrenheit 451 and Catch-22, it seems to me like the list of books considered classics has remained pretty stagnant since the turn of the century.
So my question is this: what constitutes a classic? How much time must pass after initial publication and critical reception before a book can be considered for "classic" status? Is there anything else that needs to be done to achieve that (i.e. scholarly essays written about it, multimedia adaptations of the work, etc.)?
Personally, I think that books like The Amazing Adventures of Kavalier & Klay by Michael Chabon and The Nickel Boys by Colson Whitehead should be considered classics, and both of those works were released in the 21st century.
I would compare it to movies. We can appreciate Citizen Kane as a classic for all that it did for what we now know as standars convention in movies, but that doesn't mean that modern movies can't be just as good as, if not better than Citizen Kane and can't also be discussed as classics.
I suppose my main point is that I believe there should be more willingness to usher more modern works into the pantheon of classics. I think there should be more appreciation on that level for the works that are coming out right now and some of the future legends who are actively releasing new books. I appreciate Dostoevsky, Dumas, Shelley, etc., but in my opinion, there are classics much more recent than their work that haven't yet gotten recognized as such like they deserve to.
#entertainment
source
I've been thinking lately about how, when the term "classic literature" is used, it still seems to refer to the same texts that have been deemed classics since the latter half of the 20th century. From books like Wuthering Heights, Crime and Punishment, and Frankenstein to more comparatively modern classics like Fahrenheit 451 and Catch-22, it seems to me like the list of books considered classics has remained pretty stagnant since the turn of the century.
So my question is this: what constitutes a classic? How much time must pass after initial publication and critical reception before a book can be considered for "classic" status? Is there anything else that needs to be done to achieve that (i.e. scholarly essays written about it, multimedia adaptations of the work, etc.)?
Personally, I think that books like The Amazing Adventures of Kavalier & Klay by Michael Chabon and The Nickel Boys by Colson Whitehead should be considered classics, and both of those works were released in the 21st century.
I would compare it to movies. We can appreciate Citizen Kane as a classic for all that it did for what we now know as standars convention in movies, but that doesn't mean that modern movies can't be just as good as, if not better than Citizen Kane and can't also be discussed as classics.
I suppose my main point is that I believe there should be more willingness to usher more modern works into the pantheon of classics. I think there should be more appreciation on that level for the works that are coming out right now and some of the future legends who are actively releasing new books. I appreciate Dostoevsky, Dumas, Shelley, etc., but in my opinion, there are classics much more recent than their work that haven't yet gotten recognized as such like they deserve to.
#entertainment
source
| 6,000 mlx | |
| 6 | |
| 0 |