The Classics

[Stacia (the 2010 club), groupaholic, YA-MA founder]

Because we didn't have a topic for the books that started it all.

[Gwennie]

Wow! I'm surprised we missed this one. Good catch!

[Pierre]

Stacia - Writing a Novel. How about that? You have a creative mind and I suspect you are writing. Much admiration if you are. It ain't easy.

I have just finished reading A Tree Grows in Brooklyn. Okay, it's not the classic Classic you have in mind. Betty Smith put this novel together in the 1940s as an autobiographic account of her life as a child growing up in 1900s Brooklyn.

It's hard to accept what happened to these children. So poor, such a hard existence, you'll cry. Children working long hours and being paid 75c per week.

Not easy to become involved because the story-telling is narrative oriented. I wanted to hear the characters speak and see them in action ... not be told about it.

But a heart-felt novel nevertheless. And definitely YA.

I watched some episodes of the film on Youtube, as I was told it was one of the best movies ever made. Great to read about the characters and then see them come alive on the screen.

I wrote a review and awarded Betty four stars, mainly for having the guts to put this work together.

Have fun, all.


Pierre.

[Regina]

I have had that on my list of to be read for years.

[Stacia (the 2010 club), groupaholic, YA-MA founder]

Pierre, yes I do write. I think (hope) my stories are good, but fear my editing ability is lacking.

How old does a book need to be in order to be considered a classic? Maybe I should change the title to reflect books before a certain year?

[Jen (at last!)]

I'm glad y'all put this up. I was afraid I was the only one who loved the classics. :)

Maybe I am b/c no one commented on my quotes... :/

[Jenny]

I love classics! I want to own all of those Penguin hardcover classics with the crazy designs. And the Puffin children's classics are adorable. Need them.

[Stacia (the 2010 club), groupaholic, YA-MA founder]

Jen, chances are you're more well read than I am on the classics.

Don't shoot me if I'm way off about what is or is not a classic because I'm not completely sure what defines a classic.

These are some of the ones I've read and liked. I'm sure I have more, but would need to think about it.

[Pierre]

S, Editing info. Google John Grogan, Marley and Me (something like four million copies sold). He reckons delete 20% of our words when editing. All the superfluous stuff. Leave only the words that earn their keep.

I am currently reading John Steinbeck's Journal of a Novel - The East of Eden Letters. Lots of young people and children in Steinbeck's work. He recommends not depending on adjectives or adverbs, but using the appropriate noun or verb. At edit stage, he removes most adjectives or adverbs he finds.

Anne of Green Gables above, I see. Loved it.

I'm not mad about the classics. Very much over-written and narrative oriented. Stacks of modern classics, mainly character-driven story-telling where the reader falls in love with the story.

For me, Sarah Gruen's Water For Elephants (many young people struggling in life) is one. I did fall in love with this novel and when I reached the final page, I was so entranced, I went back to page one and started again.

Likewise The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo series. Read twice. But badly overwritten. That writing needs tightening up. I reckon a 30% edit. Lovely characters.

Have just finished Betty Smith's A Tree Grows in Brooklyn which I regard as a classic. But messy plot and narrative oriented. I put the work aside many times before getting into it a third of the way through.

I read there is a La Nina effect in the Pacific, causing wet weather in Africa and elsewhere. Very wet here, just north of Singapore, in spite of the dry north east monsoon coming through.

Have fun, all.

[Jen (at last!)]

Stacia *procrastinating wrote: "Jen, chances are you're more well read than I am on the classics.

Don't shoot me if I'm way off about what is or is not a classic because I'm not completely sure what defines a classic.

These ar..."

Nah, I'm sure you're fine. I'm a big time classic literature geek is all. Lol. I adore Jane Austen and Elizabeth Gaskell if that clues you into my geekitude. ;)

Here's a brief definition for you:

A classic stands the test of time. The work is usually considered to be a representation of the period in which it was written; and the work merits lasting recognition. In other words, if the book was published in the recent past, the work is not a classic. A classic has a certain universal appeal. Great works of literature touch us to our very core beings--partly because they integrate themes that are understood by readers from a wide range of backgrounds and levels of experience. Themes of love, hate, death, life, and faith touch upon some of our most basic emotional responses.

[N.B.]

It's so hard to determine what's a classic and what isn't. I expect Harry Potter and His Dark Materials will join the ranks of the classics someday. For me though, the book that has all the hallmarks of a classic is Inkheart by Cornelia Funke. Firstly, the idea is just brilliant. A father and daughter who can maike characters leave their books simply by reading aloud. How many of us would love to have a chat with our favourite characters. Then there's the whole good fighting evil thing which never grows old. But for me, it's also the way its written. Everything: the setting, the descriptions, they just stayed with me. I've read this book more times than I can count and I hope to introduce my little niece to it someday.