Danielle The Book Huntress ’s Comments (group member since Jan 22, 2011)

Danielle The Book Huntress ’s comments from the Classics for Beginners group.

I really disliked Heart of Darkness. It made me feel repulsed during and after I read it. I don't think I will read any more of his books.

Sadeem, I felt that way for a while, until I discovered all the classic gems that were like books I wanted to read in my spare time.

Welcome, Erica and Sadeem.

Welcome, Kim!

Welcome, Kim. I love Jane Eyre. I haven't worked up the courage to read Wuthering Heights yet.

Welcome, Ashley.

Welcome Sabrina.

Welcome, Jhecca!

I think the key to enjoying classics is finding classic books you that you would like to read. There are so many out there. The folks on this group have varied tastes, so we can help you out in exploring this new territory.

Welcome, Elisha.

If you say that a book can only be a classic if it's fifty years old, and there are not established canonical classics written by writers of color, how do you know that's because they weren't published or because they didn't exist in the first place? How many mainstream publishers (whose works still exist and are widely read) would have accepted a work by a black author in the era of segregation in the United States? Do we know for sure it's because these writers weren't quality when we assume that their works weren't deserving of literary merit? And why should I have to wait fifty years to say that Beloved is a classic when I know it when I read it as a classic?

That's the point I am making.

As to what works for you as determining classics, it doesn't necessarily have to work for the next person, which was my point in the first place. And while it's interesting to discuss these things, at some point it becomes a circular argument that has no end in sight.

The purpose of this group is not to close the minds of members on to what makes a classic, but to open the doors to their exploration of the genre, which is why I am opposed to narrowing the viewpoints with a small list of criteria that classics have to meet.

We'll have to agree to disagree, Yasiru, which is fine with me.

If authors of color are not allowed to have their work published, how is it available to be evaluated to meet those time-tested criteria? It isn't. So that yardstick is a flawed one, in my opinion.

Heidi
The Swiss Family Robinson
The Adventures of Tom Sawyer
Everything by Beverly Cleary
A Wrinkle in Time
The Chronicles of Narnia
Chitty Chitty Bang Bang
The Gruesome Green Witch
Are You There God, It's Me Margaret
Nothings Fair in Fifth Grade

Pippi Longstocking (I haven't read the book but I loved the movie)

Welcome, Ashley. This is a great group to get your foot wet in the classics genre.

I think every person who reads a book should be able to say why they liked or didn't like it. Even if they don't take the time to write a review for it.

Even though I didn't enjoy a lot of the books I had to read in school, that was a good thing about having to read them, as I had to go to the process of analyzing that work and my reactions to it.

I don't subscribe to the test of time way of defining a classic. I think it eliminates books that have proven their classic status in other ways. I do believe that many books that were considered trash because of popular appeal back when they came out are now classics, so the tide can change on what is and isn't considered suitable to the classics canon. Plus there is a European bias that would eliminate younger works from the classic canon just because of when they were written. If you look at most of the African American literature that is considered classic, most was written after the 1950s. Hence, that is why I would consider Beloved and Song of Solomon, I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings, and The Color Purple classics.

Theresa, I would say yes. Others may say differently.

Yasiru, I am not into being sarcastic online (because all I have is my words to represent me and it's very easy to be misunderstood), so I will usually say what I mean, or make it clear that I am joking. I'm glad we're clear that I wasn't making fun of you.

Jonathan, I know what you mean. I think books are way too subjective to make blanket statements about what books suck and what books are great.

Yeah, you can tell when a writer really enjoys and puts their heart into their novel. I hate when I read a book and I feel that the writer is phoning it in.

I admit I am guilty of run on sentences and comma abuse in my writing.

Jonathan, I love reading good writing. I read for pleasure, but I definitely take more pleasure out of writers who have a gift for prose.

Yasiru wrote: "Not certain if that was sarcastic, m'Lady?

Just a random thing I'd come across the other day."

I didn't take it as sarcasm at all. I find it very germane and well phrased.

That is definitely appropriate to the conversation, Yasiru. :)

I think that the key to effective writing is to learn the rules of grammar and writing as best as possible, then you can learn how to break those rules. There is definitely room for stylistic inaccuracies in grammar, but they should be on purpose and for effect, and not because the writer doesn't know any better.

Now I will be the first to say I make mistakes all the time in grammar, but I still think it's important to know how to write good quality prose and to understand good writing mechanics, so you can be a better writer. That doesn't happen overnight.

One way to learn how to write more effectively is to read as much as you can. The thing about classic reading is that you will be exposed to archaic forms of writing, so that for a modern reader and audience, it's not as relevant. If you want to write old school, there is a place for it, but it definitely won't appeal to everyone.

Welcome to all the members.