Monday, March 23, 2009

Brit Lit


I have always enjoyed British Literature, and have found some of my most enjoyable undergrad experiences included my Brit Lit classes. Granted, in that formal setting, we studied formal authors, some of whom I love, others I hate with a passion. Seriously, how many Norton Anthology of English Literature Volumes do you have on your shelf, and more importantly, how often do you pick them up? I admit that I probably have too many volumes, and I only refer to them once every 6 months or so, but this is not to say that British Literature has not remained a part of my everyday reading lifestyle. In fact, recently, quite the opposite is true.

This is not to imply that I have been spending my nights reading classics by Shakespeare and Dickens, but instead suggests that I have found some more modern, pop culture authors to absorb myself in. Namely, Nick Hornby.

I have always enjoyed Hornby's works, and admit that I have been guilty of enjoying the movies made from his novels as well, enough so that they rank in my top 20. ( High Fidelity) and maybe About a Boy makes it into my top 100 films, where as the book scores much higher.

Recently, I have made the goal to read ALL of Hornby's books (since reading ALL the Palaniuk works turned out so well). Therefore I have immersed myself in popular British Culture. His settings are always England, London usually, and his writing style includes typical non-American slang. I have been reading so much lately, that my emails have started including sayings like, " Brilliant!" or on a rare occasion, "Cheers", and I have caught myself saying, "Yeah, course" instead of the typical, " Of course". But these a simply part of what I enjoy about reading, escaping into a world of a novel and living it for the duration of that story.

And, the British invasion doesn't end there. After finishing, A Long Way Down, High Fidelity, About a Boy, How to be Good and beginning Fever Pitch I needed a little break. So, I took this opportunity to make good on a promise.

I had made a deal with a friend that I would read anything he suggested, and he would do the same. I have yet to give him my recommendation, but took the challenge anyway. In one afternoon I read Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone.

What you need to understand, is that my "friend" gave me this particular book due to my protests against it. I just do not understand adults reading literature designed for children, turning it into a craze and making the author one of the wealthiest women in the world. It annoys me. I find that I do not typically enjoy things quite this well liked by the majority, especially when it comes to literature. I assumed this book to be childish, and doubted that it was worth all the attention it has received.

And, I took this challenge head on, not only agreeing to read it, but actually to let go of my prior bias, to read the work as objectively as possible. Forgetting, as well as I could the movies, the candy, the money the hype and the sheer lunacy of the whole Harry Potter craze. As it turns out, I wasn't completely right in my initial feelings.. but I wasn't completely wrong either.

My observations are as follows: It is a classic Cinderella story re-developed to include a highly imaginative and detailed fantasy world of magic. Classic good vs. evil themes throughout and good character development (remember, I only read the first one!) I was impressed with Rowling's imaginative detail, especially in the part where she describes the rules and play of the fictional magical game of Quidditch. The detail of the imagery of the entire Hogwart's castle and world, down to the temperature, texture and smell of the rooms is just plain great writing. I can see why this became so popular.

However, I also noticed that as I had suspected, this is meant to be read by a different reading level than I consider most well-read adults. The vocabulary is geared towards a younger reader and the length of chapters, and overall writing style appeals to a pre-adolescent age group. I probably would have loved these books when I was 8-11. As I also suspected, while there are well developed characters and story lines, it doesn't do much for my "deeper thinking" sense. I read it quickly, and superficially, the story remained on the surface, I was not challenged by my moral code, nor was I forced to look at something differently. My world view has not been altered, nor even challenged. It was a good break from my usual reading, but it was just that, a break. I doubt I read the rest of the series anytime soon.

I finished the book with the feeling that it would be a good Chapter book story to read to young children. Interesting enough to capture their childlike imagination, short enough chapters to hold their attention and overall a fun story. I will keep it in mind for the future.

Now, I can peacefully go back to my Hornby and whatever ends up next on my never ending reading list. And, lest we forget, find something truly horrible for my friend to read... I'm open to suggestions...

8 comments:

The Critic said...

Ahh...now that you've started however, let me add that the books grow in sophistication, chapter length, etc. as the series progresses. She writes younger for the earlier books, viewing her audience as growing in age as the series progresses. Thus the last book is rather more morally complicated, ethically complex, and mature in theme and content than book one.

Granted, you'd have to take my word for it, since you've decided to give up reading something that you've described as "just plain great writing" merely because stores happen to sell Chocolate Frogs at the impulse buy counter...

(and yes, that's me doing the *bawk bawk bawk!!!* dance and flapping my arms around taunting you.)

The Critic said...

Let me further add, that it wasn't actually until book 3 that I really got hooked. Book one, I said, well that was all right. Book two, I said, these are kinda addictive all in all. Book three, I said, whoa I have to buy book four as soon as I finish this! And so it goes.

But you've been a good sport so far and now I just await your recommendation. Dare I guess it will be one of the many books I've seen you discuss before Klosterman, Hornby, Palahniuk, Burroughs? Now, keep in mind, I've read something by each of those authors, so your task is a little harder. I've not come out and disparaged anything before reading it. Hell, I even read Twilight so your job will be harder.

Andrea said...

Luckily I am not susceptible to peer pressure even with chicken dances.

However, Dave rented Twilight for tonight, so I will be subjected to even more overly popularized, ridiculousness for teenagers.

Sigh.

The Critic said...

obviously, i have to bring out bigger guns.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6UV3kRV46Zs

Dave said...

I will never read a Harry Potter book. I can stomach the movies, but reading the books would violate the principles set by real fantasy novels within the Dragonlance, Ravenloft, and Forgotten Realms series. For a novel to be considered real fantasy, it has to take place within a Dungeons and Dragons campaign, otherwise it is some sort of sci-fi gibberish. The only exception to this rule is the Lord of the Rings series, which was the grandfather idea behind D&D literature.

Anonymous said...

D- you're such a snob! in a previous life, I too was a sci-fi aficionado, but these books are highly entertaining and borrow heavily from authors like JRR Tolkien and C.S. Lewis. But, my D&D days are long behind me and my tastes have changed dramatically with age, so...I'm willing to cut you some slack.

flaky genius said...

I, too, waited to read the books until after the craze had begun. Unlike A., however, I was not exposed to movies and chocolate frogs and midnight release parties until I had read books 1-4. I think what surprised me the most about the Harry Potter books was their complexity. I'm surprised that A. noted vocabulary as being intended for children. I noticed high-level vocabulary and complex sentence structure, things, I might add, Steinbeck and Hemingway both lack. (There, I've said it, The Critic. I know you won't let that slide.) That is not to say the characters or themes are as complex as those offered up by the authors for grown-ups, okay? I don't see Harry Potter as a Cinderella story as much as I see it as an almost allegorical religious story, but then I've read the series so that may change the analogy. I admire anyone who can set aside their bias to attempt an objective examination of something, which really shows in this review by A. That's an incredible feat.

The Keirnel said...

I view Harry Potter as a "gateway drug," if you will. For me any book or series of books that can open children, AND adults alike, to the world of reading is something to be valued and held in high regard. It matters not that the books be "young adult" in nature. It is more important that the reading of such novels encourages use of the imagination, introduces people to new worlds and ideas, and invites further delving into the world of literature.

AND I agree with Flaky Genius up there, I thought the level of vocabulary was quite extensive considering the directed audience.

I greatly enjoy the series and have found great pleasure being lost in a world that is in no way seemingly related to my own.

Side Note: As D has marked "Lord of the Rings" as an exception to his D&D rule, I will note that I never saw the young lad read ANY book until reading "Lord of the Rings," and look at him now! GATEWAY DRUG, I tell ya!

Related Posts with Thumbnails