Five years later, I learned that [ surprise! ] different sizes of hooks catch different sizes of fish. I had always randomly picked a hook out of the tackle box, not noticing the difference.
This is very similar to how I often dealt with literature in those days: casually, carelessly, and cursorily. I skimmed through books without paying attention to the oceans lying beneath the waves.
At some point in middle school, I began to dip my toes in the water. For the first time, I analyzed books and short stories in class; I vaguely remember being impressed by "Harrison Bergeron". Perhaps it also helped that my teacher was a huge fan of Star Wars, the Lord of the Rings, and several other franchises that I also approved of. By connecting literature basics such as the hero archetype to the familiar stories that I had grown up with, I learned to step back and take a look at what I was reading. Soon, I was seeing underlying techniques in everything-- so much, in fact, that I entered a somewhat-involuntary phase of literary snobbishness. Nobody had ever warned me about overshooting and crashing into the bottom of the ocean!
After three years of pretentiously flaunting books such as Anna Karenina and Atlas Shrugged, I had an epiphany. Not anything too literary-- but I realized that the books that I was reading, purportedly full of deep meaning, were honestly not that enjoyable. Beginning to read commercial fiction again was like surfacing after diving; turning the first page of the urban fantasy thriller that I would have shunned before was like taking the first breath of sweet, fresh air. Soon, I was able to find a healthy balance of engaging commercial fiction and more exploratory and historical literary works. Fortunately, learning to appreciate both worlds is like learning to tread water; you never quite forget, and I certainly haven't stopped enjoying the ride.
Admittedly, there are some books that I still can't seem to get into. Ulysses is one [ sorry, Mr. Mullins! ], and Gravity's Rainbow is another. I have no doubt that Finnegan's Wake is worse. Maybe I just don't have a penchant for the exploratory genre-- but Pynchon is definitely not up my alley.
But even now, I sometimes pause to wonder whether my interpretations are short-sighted. After all, sometimes what appears to be a pond is really a deep, majestic ocean.
Mayhaps I misunderstand the end of the story, but it sounds like you're saying that you found a balance between enjoyable commercial fiction and unenjoyable literary fiction. This is very wrong. In my opinion, all books you choose to read by your own free will and not imposed upon you by the government bureaucracy (school) should be enjoyable. There is not a divide in enjoyably of commercial and literary fiction. It is just that some literary authors had no clue how to write a good book and others can actually right.
ReplyDeleteTry reading something Russian if you want proof of this. Of all literary fiction I have ready (not much, admitting), the two Russian books I have read have actually been enjoyable.
Also, I have high hopes for Dickens and Hemingway and will likely read them sometime in the not too distant future.
I wouldn't say the literary fiction is unenjoyable-- but at the time, reading some of the books is something of a challenge. It pays off later, I promise! There are different ways of enjoying books, and I wouldn't presume to know right off the bat which books would be worth reading.
DeleteRussian novels are just difficult for me in lots of different ways, haha; Anna Karenina turned out to not be a terrible ordeal, but many similar novels are quite dense, if interesting in their own manner.
In general, I would say that reading commercial fiction is a little more relaxing for me, as I don't really have to apply my mind, while literary fiction often ends up being more engaging and lasting.
I enjoy your honesty in expressing the often difficult nature of real literature, although I do have some concerns about the connection you attempted to make in the post. In your defense, to call "find[ing] a balance between enjoyable commercial fiction and unenjoyable literary fiction" false or "very wrong" is awfully presumptuous and utterly rude. I would be taken aback to hear even a teacher tell me this, much less a student. In my personal opinion, literature (whatever we define it as) is variable, and inconclusively judged in regards to whether or not the work is "enjoyable." The term itself infers that its judgement to be dependent on the character of the person (in this case, the reader), and their personal preferences and tastes. A certain Russian book may be thoroughly enjoyable to one reader while another may despises the entirety of it's existence. Ernest Hemingway and Charles Dickens may have written world renowned "literature" that has been reviewed in high esteem by professional readers and critics, but the truth is that every single person in the world is likely to not feel exactly the same way; some people hate Oliver Twist and A Farewell to Arms. Everyone's taste in literature is not meant to be "cookie cutter" similar. In expressing certain works as "enjoyable" or "not enjoyable" is a personal opinion in which you were clearly free and correct to state your tastes. It is not anyone's place to decide whether or not you have "good" taste in literature, much less that you are "very wrong" in expressing your opinion. I know I personally have not been the biggest fan of some of the books we have read in class but there have been other challenging works that I have absolutely loved, including Jane Austen's novel Pride & Prejudice. As for your post, I think you may have been able to go a bit more into depth about your framing topic and the connection but you had a good start and possibly could have expanded more from there.
ReplyDeleteI didn't even really make a connection in this one haha. I guess I just stuck the xkcd in there.
DeleteI'd agree with you on those points-- there are also different flavors of enjoyable, as I've found. Reading Pride and Prejudice is quite different from reading the Lord of the Rings, but both are quite engaging in their own ways.
Hehehehe Ulysses. Sorry, I couldn't resist :P
ReplyDeleteSo do you want some level of enjoyment from "literary" works, or are you okay reading some that aren't fun at all? Did you get a sort of improved feeling after you finished, say, Gravity's Rainbow? I had basically the same experience as you in middle school, but I guess I enjoy books on some level even if they're not enjoyable. For me, it's like drinking grapefruit juice- terrible at the time and sort of painful, but you feel healthier and sort of righteous afterwards.
Literally the worst D:
DeleteI do look for some enjoyment in literary fiction; not enjoyment in the traditional sense, I suppose, but something akin to the righteous feeling of drinking grapefruit juice. For me, it's worth it if I read a book, then end up pondering it later, even if the experience itself wasn't exactly fun and engaging.
(I guess that's sort of how it was with Gravity's Rainbow? It was a terrible experience, but I sometimes find myself thinking about it and admiring Pynchon, as much as I hate to admit it.)