• Sometimes it surprises me just how much literature has changed over the years. Just look at the books that they give us in English class. Neither Romeo nor Juliet spoke the word “like” outside of its original meaning. Brönte never actually wrote the word “god,” but rather, replaced the “o” with a hyphen. Dickens never deviated from that absolute formality of his time period’s basic style, and where Harry Potter would say “whoever doesn’t,” Merlyn might say, “He who doth not.” The basics of literature have undoubtedly evolved over time. However, the question remains, for better or worse? Truthfully, there is no real answer for this. I find myself often believing that Stephen King’s novels top Mary Shelley’s, and I am a diehard fan of the classics. And while there may be no undeniable answer to this question, there are reasons for the gray zone that many of us lie in.
    One of the factors that I find affects my personal voice of book quite often is my own mood. Generally, what we call the classics of literature are deeper, more analytical stories than the instant hits of today (i.e. Artemis Fowl, Harry Potter, and the ever infamous Twilight).Of course, this is not to say that no modern books can match the level of sophistication displayed in the classics, Stephen King’s The Green Mile outshone quite a few classics in my eyes. Still, the trend is undeniable. And sometimes this is a good thing. After all, how many times have we heard our English teachers say, “It’s such a great book because it makes you think!” However, there are times when I crave something lighter, something that won’t require me to identify every last hidden meaning and literary technique in the book. Nevertheless, attitudes change. Assuming that once you pick up a book you don’t attempt to finish it all in one day, you might suddenly want something else while you’re still reading it. If you picked up Great Expectations, you might find yourself leaving Pip halfway through his life for Edward Cullen. Likewise, you might find that those sparkle-skinned vampires bore you, and that you’re real interest is in the romance between Elizabeth and Mr. Darcy. Either leaves you with a half finished book and no desire to read on, and while one can’t afford to be too capricious in their selection, tastes do change, and the crème de la crème(1) of each genre might leave a bad taste in your mouth.
    Besides simple changes in preference, there is another dividing factor: writing style. As I’ve said before, the classics of English literature seem to follow a set of rather rigid laws, enforcing an impersonal approach to writing, not so different from that which has been used in the latter part of this sentence. Certain books invoke stereotypes in my mind through nothing more than the style they’re written in. Shakespeare’s Hamlet saw me envisioning an old, gray-bearded man sitting at a desk wearing a funny hat, writing with a quill pen by candlelight. Jane Eyre brought the image of a British-accented lady under a parasol, drinking tea and narrating her story to nobody in particular. Yet there were other books that made me see much different things. Twilight, for example invoked a vision of a teenage girl sitting at a compute and writing what some of us know as “fanfiction,(2)” while The Outsiders reminded me of a male greaser who writes a story with the intention of making himself the hero of it by creating a persona(3). (As a side note, I’m curious as to what mental images of me this article brings.) These differences might be quite a deterrent to those who are unaccustomed to such styles. I‘ve heard the classical style describes as being “dignified” and “enduring” by some, yet still “awkward” and “stupid” by others. Nonetheless, the modern style might be a similar deterrent to those of us who can’t stand to see words with less than two syllables. Through these stylistic differences, the divide between the two genres further increases.
    Still, there are many other factors that split the two categories. Besides stylistic there are noticeable differences between the subjects addressed in each genre. One of my past teachers has told me that the reason classics are classics is that there address subjects that anybody in any time period can relate to. They are “enduring.” However, while our modern novels often address the same things, they do so in a way that caters specifically to our times. They reference such things as Facebook, Coke, and iPhones, things that we can relate to as students. Most, I would think, would prefer to read about Britney and Brad than Arthur and Atlas. Besides this, classics reference things such as the East India Trading Company and “The Rime of the Ancient Mariner,” and I have a feeling that not many of us know what a Sysphean Task is off the top of our heads. Modern books also often have characters whose every problem, no matter how menial, is resolved. Both the lives and personalities of these characters are all but perfect. These figures are not-so-affectionately dubbed in modern literary slang as being “Mary-Sues,” meaning cliché, underdeveloped and/ or perfect characters (I’d like to cite one romance novel as a primary offender here, but would prefer not to invoke the wrath of its rather large fanbase)(4). Some enjoy reading about these perfect characters, living their lives vicariously through them. And as always, there are those who would prefer that tea-sipping lady’s work for its older subject. Still, there are more factors in a book’s subject. If one is to look at the “His Dark Materials” series, one would find obvious anti-church elements that would have never been allowed to be published in the older times. Modern books are stronger and much more liberal than the classics.
    Still, there is another factor in this debate that cannot be controlled by us alone. That is society. In elementary, I was bombarded with commercials for Harry Potter. It was cool to read the Hardy Boys. And thus, I became accustomed to modern style, and less open to Victorian and Shakespearian literature. Perhaps if A Tale of Two Cities was thrown at us as much as The Tale of Desperaux, we would think differently. Perhaps we would have put down our Runny Babbit’s and moved on to, well, Babbitt. Of course, thisn’t practical for the media, since the avant-garde(5) of literature isn’t writing any more. The majority of them are dead, actually. So, the media moves on to authors who still are active. Such is life, eh? Besides, as a high school student, I know that if everybody likes something, saying that you like it as well is a status booster. However, there is the other end of things, one that can be summed up in three words. Classics are classics. They are placed on the highest rung of the literary ladder. These are the stories that the stereotypical English professor will call “literature,” often times the only real literature. We then, as the readers, are expected to read these books. One person who I asked about this said that she doesn’t see why some “learned” person calling a book a classic makes it any more of a book than other ones. One of my teachers has said that since she is surrounded by classics at her job, she prefers to escape into modern books at home. And while I still do (and forever will) maintain that Stoke tops Stephanie, there are times when I agree.
    Looking back on centuries of writing from only 15 years of experience, I realize that I’ve probably only scratched the surface of this subject, if even that. Yet even if there are millions of differences, even if the thought of 400 pages of tiny print makes you puke, one irrefutable fact remains. Had Jane Austen not written at all, perhaps Maureen Johnson might not have either. Had Shakepeare’s witched not existed, perhaps Rowling would have never even thought of Harry Potter. So the next time you crave vampires, try putting down Twilight and picking up Dracula, or when you want an old, gray-bearded wizard, try passing up Merlyn and reading up on Dumbledore. Grab your handy copy of A Companion to Victorian Poetry and make a cup of tea. You’ll be surprised what you’ll find.

    ~

    1. The best of the best
    2. fan fiction- a fictional account written by a fan of a show, movie, book, or video game to explore themes and ideas that will not or cannot be explored via the originating medium.
    3. Incidentally, the author is a woman, and not a greaser at all.
    4. Twilight, for those of you who couldn’t figure it out.
    5. Vanguard