Sometimes I didn't even know what the fuck I thought about a book at all until I'd sat locked in the library tower with fourteen other people hashing it out over three exhausting hours. And that utterly rocked.

How interesting. I seem to be JZ.

Dear P-C's Mom,

P-C married a white Buddhist chick who makes hamburgers three times a day. He was afeared to tell you that she is having a baby and he's flunked out of school.

Merry Christmas!

Aimee

I wonder if part of the reason I get so emotional whenever this discussion comes up is I somehow managed to make it well into my late 20's before I ever realized there were people out there who dismissed whole genres and the people who read them. Since I'm only in my early 30's, I haven't quite gotten past my, "What? How can you say such a thing? And don't you dare doubt the spiciness of my brains!" reaction.

(Susan, I'm sorry I don't like Jane Austen. I tried, I really tried. Ironically, what I don't like about Jane Austen is what I don't like about Moby Dick -- the level of detail about things that weren't relevant -- in my eyes -- to moving the plot forward.)

(Don't apologize, Steph. I'm always surprised when people don't like her, but not insulted. Anyway, one of the things I've decided based on today's discussion is that one of these days I'll have to try Moby Dick, just to see which side of the loves-it hates-it fence I'll fall on.)

There is no one canon, and whatever books are considered important today should be reconsidered tomorrow.

Definitely, while at the same time considering tomorrow why they were considered important today.

I've just threadsucked and reread the discussion and - I don't know, I don't see the attitude that got under Hayden's skin.

First off, I think maybe it's important to remember that this conversation got started with an article that made a nasty gratuitous smack against the romance novel. So if there's ever going to be a little sensitivity on the issue, maybe it's now.

So really, where we started today wasn't dissing "Great Books" but venting a bit about books or genres that don't tend to get the respect.

Shakespeare came up when Aimee mentioned that she didn't like it - but mentioned it in the context of what an oddity it was. And the response was generally surprise mixed with suggestions for elements of his work she might not have encountered or different ways of looking at it.

Madame Bovary was brought up in derogatory terms. But while that one didn't really find any defenders, pretty much every book or author that came up thereafter had both detractors and defenders. Interspersed with that was some discussion of the value of capital-c Canon - and I'll note that the first (only?) mention of Austen was as an example of how understanding of broader Canon could give you a better understanding of her work. Ditto Milton and a few others. Not everything that came up was in that vein - I misremember now who was snarked at for excessively long sentences. But it wasn't the general vein of the discussion, as far as I can tell.

Deb G obviously has a distinctive take on canon and crit, etc. But it seemed to me like her comments too drew more discussion than " rah rah analysis sucks" or the like.

Moby Dick maybe wasn't getting showered with the love. But Steph's first comment (after she mentioned other Melville that she did like was: "Moby. Dick. I understand intellectually what he was doing with it, style-wise and theme-wise, but DAMN."

I won't dispute that Hayden might still be stinging from earlier conversations - like I said, I haven't been in this thread for very long having been on a self-imposed restricted thread diet for a while. But I honestly don't see it here.

If I'm misinterpreting things here, or if anyone has issue to take with any of this, please, please do, because I really want to understand where I'm missing things or why our perspectives might be so different.

Final comment: JZ is me in missing and wanting more focused discussion and analysis and whathaveyou. But for the most part, this seemed like a pretty rational discussion to me.

Madame Bovary was brought up in derogatory terms. But while that one didn't really find any defenders

Untrue! Dana liked it. I'd love to see her explain why, because I've hated it every time I've read it, and I read it a lot when doing my IB extended essay.

Though that's not why I hated it.

I've read about 4 translations of Anna K since writing the EE, after all, and Anna K figured more in the essay than Madame Bovine.

I'm also bored stiff by Jane Austen. Sorry to say. Just find her dull.

On the other hand, I still adore Hardy. I find Steinbeck to be hit or miss, and Dickens women make me cringe and throw things, though I've liked some of his paragraphs quite a bit.

As late as the mid 19th century, sailors in a port were observed staging Hamlet for their amusement. Shakespeare only left popular culture for the elite canon in the U.S. from the late 19th century forward. I dimly rember from history something about how it was the Jacksonian era the first greatly widened the gulf in the U.S. between popular and elite culture.

To be fair, the Shakespeare that was popular in the 19th century was thoroughly bowdlerized with happy endings for R&J etc.

How can JZ be so awesome? I do not understand it.

I know! It's beyond comprehension.

I've just threadsucked and reread the discussion and - I don't know, I don't see the attitude that got under Hayden's skin.

I re-read too. You know what I think it was? There was a pile-on of hating individual classics which after a while had a cumulative effect. Followed by a lot of people saying, "I'm not going to be made to feel guilty because I don't want to read your steeenkin' classics (read: Canon.)" Most folks were fairly reasonable during this stretch, however, there were a lot of individual asides which added to the whole "serious literature stinks" tone.

It was interesting to read Lilty's comments because there was nothing so radical in her statements, and she was entirely both reasonable and saying, "Hey this is my personal thang" but the effect of her personal statements coupled with high-fives of "Bovary sucks weasel ass" again had a cumulative effect.

Plus, the structure of this particular thread which - as brenda and Heather in particular have noted - and which Consuela amended (she's good at the clarification) dissuades critical discussion. It's more useful than stimulating.

Summation:

I have enjoyed this a bunch.

Plei is me

Wolfram and TB are both my internet boyfriends.