To further clarify, what makes a particular work a "classic" isn't purely whether modern people enjoy reading it or not. In the bigger picture, that's actually one of the least criteria for determining a classic. There are far better elements of a classic than enjoyment, and that's one of the reasons why classics are required reading anyway: to teach people to appreciate what it is they're reading on different levels.
Other criteria include:
1. The "staying power" of the particular work, that is to say, how that work has remained within the cultural conscience of a society at large. Shakespeare, for example, has a great deal of staying power, largely because his works have a sort of timeless quality to them, in spite of the antiquated language in which they were written. Take Romeo and Juliette for example: how many different versions of this story have been made, and remade, and played upon, in various media, including movies, television shows, etc.? The Lord of the Rings, while a more recent work, would certainly fit this criterion very well, considering the drastic impact this work has had in influencing both culture and literature over the past 50 years or so.
2. The "cultural or social commentary" of the work. Works that are often labeled "classics" usually have a great deal to say about the place and time in which they are written. Tom Sawyer and Of Mice and Men are both excellent examples of this. Now, I'm more familiar with Huckleberry Finn, so I'll concentrate on it. The book has a great deal to say about racism, slavery, and the culture of 19th century America. For this reason, I find it shameful that some people want these classics removed from required reading lists because of racist language; such an attitude is almost counter to the reason Twain wrote it in there. And Of Mice and Men, certainly if someone wants to learn about the Great Depression, it is one of many great books that can help give a good picture of life during that era.
3. Philosophical aspects of the work. Almost any work worth reading is going to present you with some idea of the worldview of the author. In Huckleberry Finn, for example, the reader is presented with some of Clement's own theological and philosophical ideals, particularly in the discussion between Huck and his aunt about the nature of heaven. In Of Mice and Men, the reader is presented with a view of life based on the ambitions of the two main characters - namely the rabbit farm. On one level, it represents the ideal American Dream, a life dictated by the work and desires of the person, but on another level, it represents Paradise, or heaven. In either case, due to the sheer absurdity of the world itself, such happiness is never to be found by men; no matter how grand such illusions may seem to us as we dream them, reality always breaks in and destroys them. At least this was Steinbeck's worldview, and one that he communicates through his story.
But these are the main reasons these particular works are considered classics, not because some teacher somewhere decided that he liked them, and so they were to be taught rather than other works. So while reading such works, it helps to read them, not just on the level of enjoyment (or lack thereof), but on deeper levels, to try and understand the author, their society and worldview, and perhaps their message for their world, and, to some degree, to the world in which we live today.
Quote: Anyway, as far as Catholic schools go... I don't agree with it. I think if you want your children to grow up to be religious, fine with me, just keep it at home. School is a place for learning, not religion.
But, as I have already stated above, it is becoming so that learning is taking place less and less in public schools and more and more in private schools. A time will very likely come - unless something drastic occurs in our public educational systems to change it - that soon the only decent education to be had will be from religious institutions.
|
