For those who are sorely disappointed that Jane Austen's novels stop at 6, Georgette Heyer's Regency stories will happily salve the hurt. In A Convenient Marriage, Heyer takes up Austen's signature diction, tone, and characterization to spin a lively tale about unexpected outcomes; however, in this standard marriage plot, the central female, Horrie, is the rascal - not a man.
Horatia Winwood (Horrie) has good intentions when she ventures out unchaperoned and unsanctioned to approach the Earl of Rule, the wealthy gentleman who has asked for the hand of Horrie's sister, Lizzie. Horrie knows Lizzie's heart is somewhere else, so she sees no reason why she can't stand in for her sister with the Lord; after all isn't one sister as good as another? Lord Rule surprisingly agrees to marry the upstart young girl, who evolves from delightful innocent to gambler and ingenue - or at least that's what the gossips are saying about her, which makes a few of Lord Rule's enemies - and his mistress - smile like cheshire cats. If they can prove that Horrie is not worthy of Rule's association, they may succeed in accomplishing their ultimate desire: Rule's embarrassment and fall from social grace for his enemies; and his devoted attention for his mistress.
Yet, the ill-wishers neglect to take into account that Rule may have different ideas about Horrie. After much deception, a sword fight, and great suspense, what starts out as a convenient marriage turns into something entirely different at the end.
6.27.2009
6.09.2009
Unreadable Books?
An article at Paper Cuts prompted me to wonder what unreadable books are AND if certain books just shouldn't be unreadable.
For example, a few folks in the comments listed The Great Gatsby as unreadable. I've heard this a million times - particularly when I was teaching American Literature to high school students - and the closest thing I could get to an explanation of this unfathomable mystery is that folks encounter this book too early and don't understand it.
In fact, now that I mention it, I think this may be the case with most classics. Many of my students ended up liking/loving The Great Gatsby because I took the time to explain it them. Most teenagers ARE Jay Gatsby, so it's beneficial that they understand him. The students who didn't like the book didn't read it. I am constantly running into the breed of reader who hates Gatsby because they read it in high school, didn't get it, and thought it was wretched. I attribute this reaction to one or more of the following reasons: 1. They didn't read the book. 2. Their teacher didn't care to connect the book to their point in life. 3. They weren't able to connect the book to their point in life. Point 3 is forgivable. It's difficult to connect to a book that, though may be dealing with issues of your age, is not written for your age.
I don't want to in any way imply that certain books should not be read at certain levels because one never knows which books are going to inspire which kids, but I DO think these books should be considered life courses and people should return to them again and again. I return to the same old classics that I've always loved nearly every year, and I am always surprised when I find something new. Yet, this is the nature of reading great books - a point that has been made a million times but bears repeating: classics are classics because they describe humanity and humanity is fascinating to us precisely because of the fact that it never changes. However, individuals do change in their own ways, and they change as they mature. Books that may have never made sense at 16 can seem to solve the world's great mysteries at 30.
So. I ask you: Should books be considered unreadable? Isn't it possible to dismiss a novel at a certain time of life because you just don't have enough experience to "get it" but return to it later in life and find it revelatory? Or are there some books that should never be tackled at all because they are simply unreadable?
For example, a few folks in the comments listed The Great Gatsby as unreadable. I've heard this a million times - particularly when I was teaching American Literature to high school students - and the closest thing I could get to an explanation of this unfathomable mystery is that folks encounter this book too early and don't understand it.
In fact, now that I mention it, I think this may be the case with most classics. Many of my students ended up liking/loving The Great Gatsby because I took the time to explain it them. Most teenagers ARE Jay Gatsby, so it's beneficial that they understand him. The students who didn't like the book didn't read it. I am constantly running into the breed of reader who hates Gatsby because they read it in high school, didn't get it, and thought it was wretched. I attribute this reaction to one or more of the following reasons: 1. They didn't read the book. 2. Their teacher didn't care to connect the book to their point in life. 3. They weren't able to connect the book to their point in life. Point 3 is forgivable. It's difficult to connect to a book that, though may be dealing with issues of your age, is not written for your age.
I don't want to in any way imply that certain books should not be read at certain levels because one never knows which books are going to inspire which kids, but I DO think these books should be considered life courses and people should return to them again and again. I return to the same old classics that I've always loved nearly every year, and I am always surprised when I find something new. Yet, this is the nature of reading great books - a point that has been made a million times but bears repeating: classics are classics because they describe humanity and humanity is fascinating to us precisely because of the fact that it never changes. However, individuals do change in their own ways, and they change as they mature. Books that may have never made sense at 16 can seem to solve the world's great mysteries at 30.
So. I ask you: Should books be considered unreadable? Isn't it possible to dismiss a novel at a certain time of life because you just don't have enough experience to "get it" but return to it later in life and find it revelatory? Or are there some books that should never be tackled at all because they are simply unreadable?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
