I read a book for fun last week. No, seriously, I did. This is an exciting moment! This week La Salle is on Spring break, so my class tonight is cancelled. Well, I guess it's not cancelled, but it's more non-existent, since it was never scheduled in the first place. Watching my words! Anyway, since class is cancelled (thank goodness) I decided that I could take a breather from working on my paper and spend some time reading a book I picked up on the bargain shelf at Barnes and Nobel -- Jane Slayre. Now, before you jump to conclusions, although the author is clearly using the popularity of books like Pride and Prejudice and Zombies, she's not part of those publications. I haven't read any of the Jane Austen style books (even though I love zombies) because I can't stand Jane Austen (see early posting Jane-Austen-Phobia from September of 2010 for more information). Jane Eyre, though, is one of my favorite books, so a Jane who stakes vampyres? PARTY.
Strangely enough, although I really did love the book -- if you're a Bronte fan, and enjoy a good parody, I'd suggest it-- it reminded me of the one Austen book I didn't hate. Actually, it was the only Austen book I ever finished, but really, Jane Slayre reminded me a little of Northhanger Abbey because of all the supernatural elements. Interesting! And although it was a fun, quick read (really, 2 days and I was finished. If anyone wants to borrow, let me know) I started thinking about literary merit. Grad school is warping my brain.
But really -- how much credit should I give the author? It was Charlotte Bronte's story, and some sections are essentially word-for-word. Should she even be given the title of author? The plot of the story was mostly intact, but it was lacking all of the symbolism from the original. It wasn't literature anymore, but fluff. Yes, if you really wanted to enjoy the book, reading the original was necessary, but there was nothing to analyze, nothing to discuss, no deeper meaning. It really just made me want to read Jane Eyre.
You know, with all the free time I have.
I did originally toy with a paper topic that would allow me to use Jane, but instead I'm sticking with just James Joyce, which brings me to topic two of this post. Has anyone read Tarr? In case you are wondering what Tarr is all about, here's a link to the Wikipedia paragraph about the novel. It's a modernist novel by a guy I know only through his mention in A Moveable Feast. Hemingway hated him. And since I love Hemingway, I wasn't thrilled to see Wyndham Lewis on my grad class syllabus. There is only one other novel I refused to read, but I might have to add another book to the list. I couldn't even get through two pages today without wanting to throw the book across the room. It's not that it's confusing, I just have no desire to waste my time on a book that even our professor said wouldn't make any sense.
Over it.
I enjoy challenging literature. I like to think analytically and critically about my reading. I do not like to feel patronized, or like the literature I read isn't on a level high enough. I don't enjoy pretentious literature. We had to look at an excerpt from Finnegan's Wake in class the other day. Pretentious. No one can honestly say they enjoy that.
Although, I have a blog about literature. Maybe I'm the pretentious one.
And, in case it was bothering you, the other book I refused to read was Babbitt in 10th grade Humanities. And in my defense, almost the entire class was in the library sparknote-ing the book before class for about 3 straight weeks. I don't think anyone read the book...
No comments:
Post a Comment