Classics Club August Meme: Question #1

This month's question for the Classics Club meme is:

What is your favorite classic? Why?

To be honest, there are several different books that come to mind when I am asked this question. Because I read so many different genres, there are many different classics that appeal to me for different reasons and in different moods. However, if I were to truly just pick one that meant the most to me the most consistently, I would have to pick the Anne of Green Gables books by L.M. Montgomery (Okay, okay, there are eight of them. But at least they all go together, right?). 

I'm not sure exactly when those books developed from just really good stories to books that were formative and meaningful to me. I read most of them in elementary school. I had a good friend that also loved the books, and we would give them to each other on birthdays, while also maintaining kind of a silly competition as to who had more of them. For over a year, whenever I would take a trip to the bookstore, an Anne of Green Gables book was what I would choose. I also remember my mom bringing home books 3-5 from a used bookstore and being absolutely thrilled. 

After reading all of the books for the first time, I went through a phase where I reread all of them every summer. They never grew old or repetitive to me -- I just felt warmer and more at home with every reading. I stopped those marathon rereads in high school, but in college I found myself reading the books that were most relevant to the phase of life I was experiencing -- I read Anne of the Island at the beginning of college, and Anne of Windy Poplars while I was serious with my husband. I suppose now I need to read Anne's House of Dreams and Anne of Ingleside now that I am expecting my first child. In every book I found lessons that were relevant to life, little gems of wisdom that helped me get through difficult experiences. In addition, I just love Anne. I love her curiosity and imagination, her fervor for life, her slow-burning but passionate love for Gilbert. I love the way having children is a priority for her, but that she still pursued her academic goals. Of all the literary "friends" I've met through books, Anne is the best, and I am so grateful that I get to go through the many phases of my life with her. 

Lessons I Learned from Anne Shirley

In continuation of the festivities of Anne of Green Gables Week at Yet Another Period Drama Blog, I thought I would write a post on lessons I've learned from the Anne books by L.M. Montgomery. These books were seriously formative throughout my life -- I remember collecting them one by one throughout elementary school (a friend and I were competing to see who got all of them first, and we always got each other one of the books for our respective birthdays), and I used to read them every summer. Since being in college and getting married, I've re-read Anne of the Island, Anne of Windy Poplars, and Anne's House of Dreams. I'm sure as the babies come along the books about Anne's children will become even more delightful to me. I learn something new from every reading, despite or maybe because of the simplicity of the books.

"Isn't it nice to think that tomorrow is a new day with no mistakes in it yet?"


There have been many awful, awful days where this has been my only comfort -- that I can start over again tomorrow with a clean slate.

If someone is a jerk to you, love them until they can't help but love you back.


In Anne of Windy Poplars, Anne has a really unpleasant coworker, Katherine Brooke, who is lonely and pessimistic and contrary. Instead of being cold and rude to her, Anne welcomes her to Green Gables and does everything she can to make this woman happy. In the end, they become close friends, and many facets of Katherine's life improve. This is possibly one of my favorite messages in all of the Anne books.

Sometimes, true love sneaks up on you and then punches you in the face (and jealousy tends to help it along).

Anne had to fall in and out of love with the seemingly perfect Royal Gardner, and she had to stomach Gilbert flirting with Christine Stewart, and Gilbert had to become deathly ill, before she realized that after all the misunderstandings, rescues, and shared endeavors, they were meant to be. Similarly, I had to date many frogs (who were not rich or wonderful like Royal Gardner, I might add), observe many female friendships, and infect then just-friend with the swine flu before we realized we were in love and got married. (There's nothing like a shared illness and moping around to build a relationship).

Everything is more magical if you give it a cool name.

It was important to Anne to give things proper names -- from the Lake of Shining Waters to the Snow Queen outside her window, she made sure everything had a proper handle. In fact, anything that could be improved upon by imagination was by Anne, and I think that leads to a much more interesting and enjoyable life. And she never stops appreciating the smallest pleasures in life -- from the details of nature to a small success, Anne finds the best in everything in life.

Anne of Green Gables Week -- Beginning Post

I am participating in Anne of Green Gables week, hosted by Yet Another Period Drama Blog, because I love Anne (and all else L.M. Montgomery). She posted this lovely little survey, and I couldn't help but respond (I mean, better than doing homework on spring break, right?). 

1. How many of the Anne books have you read, and how many of the films have you seen?

I have read all of the books, many many times. I used to read them every summer. I have also read the Chronicles of Avonlea and Further Chronicles of Avonlea books. In fact, I've read every L.M. Montgomery novel, and quite a few of her short stories. So, I'm slightly obsessed.

I've seen the first two Anne of Green Gables films, but not the third.

2. If someone yanked your hair and called you carrots, what would you do to him?

I'd probably just ignore them, or splash water in their face or something. I wish I had red hair, so I don't think I would be too offended. 

3. What would you do if Josie Pye dared you to walk the ridgepole of a roof?

I wouldn't do it -- I'm very into safety and following rules. 

4. If you had the opportunity to play any AGG (I'm abbreviating from now on because I am a lazy typist) character in an AGG play, which role would you choose?

While I'm not the same as Anne, I think I would enjoy playing her.

5. If you were marooned on a desert island, which AGG character would you want to have as a companion? (Anne, Gilbert and Diana are not options.  Let's keep this thing interesting.  Not that they're not interesting.... oh, yay, now the disclaimer to this question is longer than the question itself.  Lovely lovely lovely.)

Now that is a tough question. I love Rachel Lynde, but I think spending too much time with her on a desert island would get trying. Same with Philippa. Matthew would be the most comfortable, I would say. 

6. If there was going to be a new adaptation of the Anne books and you could have any part in making the movie, what would you choose to do? (screenwriting, acting, casting, costume-making are a few possibilities)

Hmm, I'm not really good at any of those things. Acting would be fun, although I'm not much of an actress. We could pretend that I was.

7. What are, in your opinion, the funniest AGG book/movie scenes? (choose one from the books and one from the movies)

Hmm, I can't think of anything specifically, but I think many of Anne's teaching moments and moments with Davy were pretty funny. I haven't seen the movies in a long time, so I will skip that one.

8. What are, in your opinion, the saddest AGG book/movie scenes? (choose one of each again) 

Definitely when Matthew died. In both. 

9. Which AGG character would you most like to spend an afternoon with? (again, Anne and Gilbert and Diana are not options for this one--think secondary characters)

I think it would be fun to spend just an afternoon with Philippa and/or Mrs. Lynde. 

10.  What is your definition of a kindred spirit?

Someone who doesn't look at you like you're crazy for obsessing about whatever it is you obsess over. Also, someone you can talk to about anything. 

Why I Read... Classics (part 1)

In my mind, there are two denominations of a classic - the typical, traditional classic and the "modern classic." While I don't entirely agree with the term "modern classic" (to me, the term classic indicates the passage of some amount of time and the ability of a work to stand up to that passage of time), it is a genre that I enjoy, so for lack of a better term, I will continue to use it to classify that group of books.

However, for today, I would like to focus on, um, unmodern classics. Which for the purpose of this post, is defined as an old book (before 20th century) that has literary and aesthetic meaning and merit. 

Classics have almost always been a part of my literary diet. Hand in hand with my love of historical fiction, I grew up enjoying "old-fashioned" things. Even more old-fashioned than the stories written about the era after the fact are the stories written right in the thick of things. In elementary school I devoured every volume of the Great Illustrated Classics series that I could get my little hands on. I have no idea if this series is still in print, and unfortunately most of those books that I owned disappeared in a garage sale years ago, but I am definitely hoping that I have access to them once my children are at an age when they are an appropriate reading level. Those books introduced me to the classics and gave me a familiarity with the stories that allowed me to enjoy them later when the language got harder. (I also have to put in a little plug for Wishbone, which gave me that familiarity even earlier than the Great Illustrated Classics). 

My love of the classics in their unabridged form was ongoing throughout high school, interspersed with fantasy and sci fi, but it was intensified my senior year in AP English. Each semester, we were required to choose a classic and do a huge project on it, involving about 20 small 2 page papers and projects. The last two weeks of the semester, we all presented on our projects, aiming to give a familiarity with the canon to everyone in preparation for our AP lit test. I was lucky enough to have two very excellent books suggested to me (The Count of Monte Cristo and East of Eden) and discovered several more in the process of the presentation. Up until the last year or two, my reading was almost exclusively classics from that point. 

Anyway, I'm pontificating overmuch in this introduction. I guess to sum up, if you are even still reading, the classics are a huge part of my life. I love them.

Why I Read Classics

* Timelessness. The reason these stories have lasted is because they tell a story that appeals to many people, or explore a theme that is important across large groups of humanity. These aren't for specialized audiences - these are stories that have touched thousands and millions of people.

* Rich writing. This isn't present in every classic - sometimes the writing is thick rather than rich (now I feel like I'm talking about Yoplait). However, in general classics have beautiful, well-crafted, and sensorily appealing sentences.

* Complexity. Once again, not always the case, but many of the classics I love have many things going on, unfolding slowly over time. Love it. 

* The prestige factor. Mostly kidding. But it does lend a certain sense of pride to have finished some of the more difficult tomes. 

Recommendations

* Jane Eyre by Charlotte Bronte and Wuthering Heights by Emily Bronte - I love the Brontes. Haven't gotten acquainted with Anne yet, but I think that will also be a good experience. These Victorian slightly creepy romances are excellent autumn or winter reads and tell love stories that aren't as simple as love-at-first-sight-then-happily-ever-after. 

* Anne of Green Gables and just about everything else (excepting Jane of Lantern Hill, which I did not like) by L.M. Montgomery. These classics tell simpler stories, but I've never been able to get enough of them. They describe good, simple lives with romance, family, and personal development.

* The Count of Monte Cristo by Alexandre Dumas. Despite the 80-odd pages of history on the Napoleonic wars, this book has a powerful narrative with many intertwining plot lines. If the huge volume intimidates you, read the abridged version. It's better than nothing!

* Middlemarch by George Eliot. This isn't an easy book, but I was swept up by it. Give it a chance and skim the sections on local politics. 

For further recommendations, visit...

Dead White Guys. If you like your classics with a serving of snark, this will be your new home. 

Rebecca Reads.  Thoughtful reviews with a lot of depth. She also runs the Classics Circuit, another great resource for learning about classics in concentrated areas. 

A Room of One's Own - Jillian is one of the most passionate readers I know through the blogiverse. She is dedicatedly becoming well-read, tackling many challenging texts but also many children's classics. 

A Literary Odyssey - Allie is working through a 250-book long list of classics. She works through many of the classics that absolutely intimidate me (namely: the Greeks). Her reviews are personable and informative. 

Literary Blog Hop: Why is this soooo hard?

It has been ages since I've participated in the Literary Blog Hop, and although I'm a little late in the time frame for this one, I just couldn't resist the question. The ladies at The Blue Bookcase ask:

Must all literary writing be difficult? Can you think of examples of literary writing that were not difficult?

Obviously, this requires a bit of a definition of literary writing. The LBH itself defines literary as a text with aesthetic merit. I would elaborate on that to say perhaps that the text is also meant to do more than entertain. For example, the Sweet Valley Junior High books (which I insatiably devoured, I should add) were not written to illustrate something beautiful or describe part of the human condition that has great meaning. I'm sure the author tried to write them well (I honestly can't remember if she succeeded), but entertainment was her main focus. They came out at the end of every couple of months. They talked about drama and crushes. They were fun, but they were not literary. Does that make sense?

With that said, I don't think literary fiction has to be difficult. I am frequently irritated by people who think that a book must be inaccessible to be literary. I think many of our most inaccessible books are very literary - they are experiments in style, or part of the statement they make is in being different and difficult to digest. However, that is only one side of literariness (I didn't think that was a word and am now very pleased to find that Blogger isn't marking it as misspelled. Now I can use it in good conscience). Honestly, I think it is to the advantage of a literary work to not be too inaccessible - how can it touch people if nobody wants to read it? (Unless perhaps the author is an elitist and shudders at the thought of the uncultured masses enjoying his/her book).

The question is, do these "easy" yet literary works exist? One of the first authors that came to my mind is L.M. Montgomery, the author of the Anne of Green Gables books. These are certainly classics. I'm not sure if everyone would define them as literary because they are written for a young age, but even fifteen years after reading them for the first time I am enchanted by the language and the lovely simplicity of the lifestyle Montgomery creates. I think if they were truly only for entertainment value, the books wouldn't have held up this long.

I also thought of The Secret Garden by Frances Hodgson Burnett, which I have been slowly rereading for a book club. I first read this book when I was very young and had little appreciation for the harmony of a beautiful sentence or a strong truth in literature. However, as I've read the book a few short chapters at a time, I have been taken aback by the elegance of the writing and the humanity of the story. It is so simple a child can read and enjoy it, but it has truths about human nature and love that can evoke emotion in an adult.

So no, I don't think literature has to be hard. I don't discount the literature that is hard, because often the struggle yields a very worthwhile harvest. (Many have referenced their first exposure to Jane Austen and contrasted it to their enjoyment of her work today). But I will never turn up my nose at literature because it is too easy.

Before Green Gables

I am a die-hard Lucy Maud Montgomery fan (I mean, look at my blog title). I have read every novel she has written and a fair chunk of her short stories. So if she thought she had given enough details concerning Anne's prior life, who are we to question it?

But at the same time, I have a guilty addiction to spin-offs. I loved (and recently discovered one about Rhett called Rhett Butler's People. Dying to read it. Even though no one seems to have liked it). I read the frightfully depressing sequel to Rebecca about Mrs. Dewinter just because it was more of the story. And Jean Rhys' The Wide Sargasso Sea is definitely on hold for me at the library. So I couldn't resist this one when I came across it in the Winco checkout line, even though I think Lucy Maud Montgomery is less spinoffable then other authors I love.

But with all those disclaimers out of the way, this was an entertaining read. In Anne of Green Gables, you get hints about Anne's past. (My favorite is her constant, out-of-breath telling of how Mrs. Hammond had "three sets of twins in succession!"). I always felt familiar with these characters even though I wasn't given much background information. I always saw Mrs. Thomas and Mrs. Hammond as mean, slave-driving women. They didn't want to keep Anne (who is everyone's darling), so how could they have a shred of humanity about them?

The most redeeming quality of this book is the way it gives depth to these lesser known, stereotyped as bad characters. You see that Mrs. Thomas loved Anne's parents, even though she is harsh and angry. You see that her drunk husband tries desperately to overcome his addictions. You experience in painful detail just what having twins three times in succession is like.

The least redeeming quality is the way Budge tries to cleverly explain so many details of Anne's life. I am not sure why this bugged me, exactly. I just felt like it was too contrived. For example, Anne's teacher gives her a bottle of ipecac. "Then she gave Anne a small bottle containing a dark liquid. [...] Then Miss Henderson told Anne exactly what croup was, and exactly how to use the medicine." (pg 209). Insert knowing wink here. Honestly, this shows a great attention to detail and trying to make the book seem like it fit, but it seemed too obvious, too puzzle-perfect. Kind of like how in Harry Potter, once they learn a new spell, fifteen pages later the perfect opportunity to use it appears.

Another thing that bothered me was that there were some new significant players in Anne's life, such as previous teachers, a daughter of Mrs. Thomas, etc. Some of these people played very significant roles in the story, but obviously never appear in the real Anne books. There is a sort of blanket sweep at the end where as Anne sees Prince Edward Island rising before her, she decides to forget all her previous unhappiness and wipe it out of her mind. But this didn't seem very believable to me either.

With all that said, it was an entertaining book. I'm glad I checked it out from the library instead of buying it at Winco. But I enjoyed it. Writing a prequel or sequel to a classic is no easy undertaking, and Budge Wilson definitely paid attention to detail and developed some characters that previously had been one sided. For that I commend her. For the cheesy wink wink moments? Not so much. 3 stars.

Library Card

Today, I got my first library card in four years. Technically, I spend several hours per day in the library, but a university library isn't quite the same as a real library, and that is why, instead of cooking or doing the laundry or studying for my neuroscience midterm, I drove to the library after class, hoping they would give me a card (they are very picky! I was surprised. You have to have multiple forms of identification to get a library card).

The second I walked inside I knew I was home. I have admired the outside of this library for a couple of times, ever since the first time I drove past it on University Avenue. It is actually the original home of my university. I'm not sure if the building is the same, it might just be the site. Anyway, the arrangement of books that actually made sense (you know, alphabetically by the author's last name, as opposed to the university organization that I have never been able to figure out), the little kids coming in with bulging bags of books, the the displays of new and exciting books to try for free, all reminded me of my library, the Eagle Public Library, where I discovered so many favorites. I told myself I could get one book for each A I had gotten on midterms so far, but I got an extra. What can I say, they jumped out at me.

So why didn't I get a library card before now? I have lived here in Utah for going on five years. Part of it was that at first I thought I didn't need one. I had my school ID card and could get anything from the school library. I didn't really have time to read for fun anyway. But now that I am married, I decided I needed to stop my reckless single behavior of buying all the books I wanted and that I should start using a library so we wouldn't have to eat ramen every night. I looked for the books I wanted to read for fun, but some graduate student must have gotten their hands on them because they were checked out until January.

So... I drove down to the library and got these treasures:


Now to convince myself that I need to study instead of read...