I was reading this rather intriguing article last night, prompted by a tweet from John McCullough (you could be forgiven for thinking that John's tweets are becoming the sole source for posts on here). I tend to agree with Elif Batuman says there - that the right book has to reach you at the right time. Sometimes, you'll go back to a book that had previously left you cold and wonder what on earth it was you hadn't liked about it, rather in the same way that I have no idea at all why I disliked tomatoes as a child, when these days I find it nearly impossible to get through a meal that doesn't contain them.
It's set me thinking which books I'd choose for this sort of article. I've got a couple in mind (one novel, and one poetry collection), but I want to have another look at them over the next few days and see if my opinion has changed at all since the last time I tried to read them.
In the meantime, I'd love to hear your suggestions - 'classics' or canonical books that made you wonder what all the fuss was about...
3 comments:
I can't think of a classic that left me cold offhand, but there is also the other way around: a book that does not stand up to a second reading. My example from contemporary literature: Jeffrey Eugenides's "Middlesex." A great, even fantastic read the first time, but on the second reading, the plot no longer drove it as well, and there was too much stuff that was clearly saying "interpret me."
I've not read that, Andrew, but that is an interesting counterpart to the 'overrated' classic, isn't it? I must give it a go.
I'll give it a couple more days then post my two books.
The novel that I'd have to choose, I think, is Catch 22.
I like what it's saying, I just find it hard to get to grips with how it's saying it - I've tried to read it a couple of times and have given up halfway through on both occasions, finding it monotonous and repetitive. But both occasions were at least 10 years ago, so maybe it's time for another go.
Still thinking about the poetry, though...
Post a Comment