After two years or so, the Librarian has resuscitated his plan to read, er, the Really Good Books of Western Literature. The librarian hesitates to say “The Great Books” because Newton’s Principia is not on the list. Nor, for that matter, are a number of other books guaranteed to make one’s eyes roll up and never come back down.
Something happened two years ago to impede the librarian’s progress through these volumes, and that something was Anthony Trollope’s The Warden. It just wouldn’t go down. It’s not a thick book, but, somehow, it defeated the librarian’s desire to be a better person (as misguided and as
redundant as that goal is). Somehow he made it through William James’s The Varieties of Religious Experience but the librarian choked on The Warden, stopping the plan mid-stride. Trollope has hung over the librarian’s head (fortunately not so close that his ZZ Top-like whiskers tickled) for lo these twos of years. It was impossible to go forward in the plan with Trollope there, all hanging and being all mid-nineteenth-centuryish, challenging the librarian’s hip twenty-first century tasteful, short chin beard with his own full, manly, facial hair.
There has been a breakthrough, though, and the librarian has finished The Warden. Now, the librarian would be hesitant to say any of this were he to think that his blog was made up mostly of English majors, each of whom would correct him on Trollope, saying that the book is worth it alone for the delightful caricature of Dickens, that perhaps the librarian does not understand the subtle ironies (btw, they really aren’t subtle) or delicately drawn characters (they aren’t that delicate, either). But truth is? The librarian would much prefer to read a new Augusten Burroughs book. Regardless of subtlety and delicateness. Nevertheless, The Warden was not so bad once one gets past its mise en scene.
However.
Next on the list of pretty good books that will make the librarian a pretty good person is Darwin’s Origin of Species. If The Warden seemed a nearly impossible bolus (with it’s not-so-subtle ironies and not so delicately drawn characters, but pretty good sense of place and humor) to swallow at first, Darwin is likely to choke the librarian to death.
So, here’s what happened. The librarian goes to and from work via subway. He takes a book with him for the 40-minute give or take one-way commute. (Yes, the librarian commutes because he lives in a large city. Were he to live in, say, Lafayette, IN or even Mobile, AL, he would just travel or drive back and forth to work. It’s a level of sophistication that not everyone in America can appreciate.) So, one day, he set off with Origin of Species and the latest Neal Asher novel (so late as to not be available in the US yet; once again, a level of sophistication only a few can appreciate). The Asher being a fall back, a life vest even, should Darwin become too turgid. And it goes without saying that Darwin did. Become too turgid. The Asher though, was a faulty life-saving device. Pages 59 through 88 were missing. The librarian was faced with the choice of reading Origin or staring at his fellow subway passengers. And the librarian has learned his lesson in regard to staring: the abyss that stares back is the woman with sore feet who hates her job and hates getting out of bed before 8 am and had to get her children off to the sitter after making them breakfast and had to stand for 5 minutes in 18 degree weather because the train was late. So it’s always best not to meet their eyes; shades are essential even in the tunnels.
Getting a replacement copy of the Asher, which, as the librarian parenthetically pointed out, is not yet available in America is going to be a bugger (“bugger” not being a word usually used in America is actually a level of pretension but also of sophistication that few can appreciate).
These encounters with Really Good Books has left the librarian with the, probably only vague and probably completely unsupportable if given greater scrutiny than the librarian is constitutionally able to, uh, give, idea that they are the reason that young people suck. Well, suck in a bad way, and not really in a general way, but in regard to reading and writing. These Really Good Books are why freshman papers are so bad and why younguns don’t like to read. And the fault lies with, well, the expectation that students in primary schools should get a sense of the history of literature without, first, getting a sense of where we are now.
The librarian remembers reading Romeo and Juliet, Great Expectations and Silas Marner in junior high and high school. Two of those are Really Good Books and the other is laughably sentimental especially given the sophistication of modern high school students. All of Dickens is corny and alienating to younguns. Even his more refined contemporaries thought his stories were risible (Trollope and that guy who buggered young Lord Douglas, for instance). Why should anyone forced to read about Philip Pirrip (Pip) want to explore literature any further? The creators of South Park think the idea of Pip is hilarious and so did the pre-gay-librarian back in the 10th grade. When Pip reports that his play at Miss Havisham’s consisted of waving flags, the 10 grade pre-gay-librarian clearly remembers thinking, “WTF?” Who waves flags and considers it fun? Should one enjoy waving flags, how long can one wave a flag before deciding that it has become tedious?
While Romeo and Juliet and Silas Marner were enjoyable to the adolescent librarian, the Shakespeare was enjoyable only through negative capability. The librarian had little understanding of what was said in the play and found it stiff going, but people died in it and the librarian got to read the part of Romeo in front of the class. Plus, Mr. McKinley was his teacher, and Mr. McKinley could do no wrong, him being one of a long line of teachers the librarian was in love with. Mr. McKinley was the adolescent librarian’s Juliet. Except more naked than in the play. At least in the librarian’s filthy hormonal mind.
Anyway, the point is, young readers faced with the antique diction and equally aged sentiment of the Really Good Books that are forced upon them can’t help but be alienated by literature. So perhaps we should forego history in the interest of actually getting them interested.
Finally, what brought on this round of speculation about reading and writing and the inability of young people to do either was the first two chapters of Origin of Species.
Lord! Oh Lord!
Sweet Jesus!
Could Darwin not say anything directly? Could he not make an assertion without writing “I believe”? Could he not qualify each statement as if he were afraid that a simple declarative would be ungentlemanly?
We don’t write like that anymore. Ok. The librarian does, but it’s for effect. The librarian has an advanced degree in English and is therefore a professional. He’s earned the right to be pretentious and over-written.
However, most young people are exposed to, admittedly not Darwin, but certainly to Dickens and other long dead writers writing in long dead styles. Because our interest in teaching them about the history of literature precludes the possibility of showing them how contemporary literature should be written.
So they write the way that they think good writing is done: with high Victorian diction that demurs from making a point. They don’t know any better not having reached the level of sophistication that earning an advance degree in literature can afford them. (The librarian would have written “that only a few can really appreciate,” but the truth is that one in three people have a masters degree in English, although most will fail to own up to this if asked.)
PS: Lord of the Flies and A Separate Peace were also on the librarian’s high school reading list. The one clearly says: you may be young, but you are still horrible little animals, and you would resort, probably, to cannibalism were the teacher to leave you alone for more than 15 minutes. The other says, high school boys are hot; why don’t you turn gay? Which is why the young librarian loved A Separate Peace even if he most specifically did not have a crush on his teacher that year. He did think, though, that it is probably far better to actually do the guy one has a crush on than to try to kill him, but that’s just, evidently, the way straight boys are.
PPS: Catcher in the Rye is a must to be avoided for teenagers, too. It says: I’m from an affluent family, but still I have angst. I fall upon the thorns of life; I bleed! Suck. Plus? It’s the favorite book of presidential assassins and serial killers, so go ahead and make ‘em read it, but don’t let ‘em watch Taxi Driver after.
PPPS: The librarian thinks some Joan Didion and some Iris Murdoch are good choices. Teenagers love bleakness.
PPPPS: All these PSes are because the librarian wrote the word “finally” somewhere up above, so he can’t keep making points in the main body of the post without taking out the “finally,” but that would mess up the flow of the sentence.
PPPPPS: Once he gets started, the Librarian has difficulty letting Holden Caulfield go. There is no doubt that Holden will, once he gets out of the hospital, continue his education at another prep school (one for students with a delicate disposition), will take a year off after to go to Europe and hang out, all the while feeling wounded for being, well, Holden Caulfield. Then he will attend Harvard or Yale, all angry, once again, for the constant specter of catered garden parties and August in the Hamptons. Then he’ll graduate. People will tell him to go into plastics, but they won’t understand, man (the librarian is at a loss on this one; whether to italicize “understand,” “but they won’t understand, man” or to italicize “man,” “but they won’t understand, man.” But he’s fairly sure something should be italicized there). And baby boomers will nod their heads because they think he’s right: they don’t understand, man. Plastics. Because it’s unfair for boomer children of affluence to actually have to do something. It’s all angsty-causing, man. Don’t they know about love?
PPPPPPPPPPPS: The librarian hates The Graduate also. Spoiled rotten f—ing brats.