Faust, First Part discussion

So, here's the thing; I love reading the real classic literature like Faust, Paradise Lost and The Divine Comedy, to name a few. The trouble is, when reading them and trying to discuss them with others, I hit a wall where I was being considered a literary snob for reading these books for enjoyment rather than education.

Even my partner, who is a total bookworm, was baffled at why I would want to put the effort into reading them. I admit that when I first started reading these kinds of books, I struggled initially, getting my head around the language and phrases, but I genuinely really enjoy them.

I was surprised to find that so many people think reading this kind of thing makes you pretentious and a lot of the people I spoke to seemed to think I was reading them for the 'status boost' rather than even considering the possibility that I might take real pleasure from them.

I'm interested to find out other opinions on the matter. I surely can't be the only person who actually chuckled aloud during the reading of Faust or was transported by the imagery in The Divine Comedy.

Lolo wrote: "I understand where you are coming from though. My dad used to say I'm a snob because I like classical music. "

I get that reaction a lot, as well, because of my preference for classical music over thumping drum and bass that makes my ears cry :)

I think what frustrates me the most is that I have an equal adoration for books such as Faust as I do for American Gods by Neil Gaimen and whilst my friends are happy to discuss the latter with me, as soon as I bring up the former, I become a 'snob'.

I think I understand why people may feel that way. I know that these types of books can be very hard work and a extremely out of fashion. Most readers I know that are my age haven't even heard of The Divine Comedy and turn their noses up at any mention of Oscar Wilde or Lord Byron.

I find it sad, because it's not a style of writing that we will ever see again and it feels very much like I'm watching a beloved art-form in it's own right, disappear into obscurity. Whilst modern writing has every bit as much quality and amazing new ways have been found to use the power of description, there's a kind of innocence to these types of work which I adore.

I wish more people got the opportunity to appreciate them. Sad times :(

I'd say classic literature is totally valid. I can understand some people's impatience with it, because it does take time to develop. There's a discussion in the boards for The Hobbit and Crime and Punishment that both address the same issue, actually. I find it sad that so many people miss out on such amazing stories because they lose patience so quickly with a narrative that doesn't start with a bang. The old process of building up is like its own drug--you don't know you're hooked until it's 3 a.m., you have to be up in four hours, and you're still reading, wondering what Bilbo's going to do about that bloody dragon. The old-style storytelling is much more seductive that way.

I'm lucky enough to have book nerd friends that love Oscar Wilde and Neil Gaiman in almost equal measure (with perhaps a little more love for Wilde). It's refreshing to be able to have a conversation about Dune with them one day and then delve into Les Miserablesthe next (or, in some cases, perhaps in the same conversation).

Sometimes, though, it's just about finding the proper "gateway drug" to get a reader hooked on the classics. Have you tried Dickens, perhaps? A Tale of Two Cities grabbed me by the throat and wouldn't let me go. Maybe it will get your friends reading more of the classics if it's possible to find classics they'd consider to be worth reading. It may take a straightforward, "I'll read the last book of Hunger Games if you'll pick up Dickens" sort of exchange. ;)

That's not a bad idea, Sara. I'm a huge Dickens fan, personally and I think he's a a rally good starting point for people who are already into books but not quite there with the classics.

I'd love to be able to have proper conversations with my friends about the books that I love and I'm sure they would, too if they would give it a chance.

I was partially home-schooled as well, which meant that I got to read what I wanted and I was always SO interested in the classics. I had grown up reading Dickens and Jane Austen. As I got older, I moved onto the more complex, verse-based classics like Faust and fell in love all over again.

I failed at school, really badly, but I never lost my love of classic literature. I'm glad to find I'm not as alone as I thought :)

I'm reading The Art of War at the moment, another one I've waited years to read and it's an eye-opener, for sure!

So, maybe we should have a good time putting together some lit lists that compare the popular with the classic (or at least with the literary). It would be fun to see what everyone comes up with.

For example: If they like...
The Hunger Games, they may also like H.G. Wells, Richard Matheson, 1984, The Handmaid's Tale and The Road (Do you think The Stand would count as "hard lit" yet? It's certainly more of a challenge than HG and deals with very similar topics...).

If they like...
Twilight, they might like Jane Austen, Emily Bronte, Carmilla, Dracula, The Haunting of Hill House (sort of a romance, right? ;)), and Anne Rice.

I thought I'd get the ball rolling, but does anyone else have any they want to riff on?

I understand what you`r saying, Lucy. It s the same with me, some think I`m truing to show off by reading Dante and other great "heavy" writers. I have come to the conclusion that I don t care what other people think. I m currently reading (again) "De profundis" by Oscar Wilde. Some think it s a very difficult book because of the title in latin. It s not of course. You probable read it. I love the way he expresses his frustration and love. As I m norwegian, some think I try to show off by reading english.

Lucy, you are special. Join a Classics Book Group -- they're out there. Discussions are extraordinary. Bliss out on Classics.

Well, good for me that I never had this kind of trouble. My friends read all kinds of books, one of them recently listened to an audiobook of 'The Sorrows of Young Werther' again (of course in German since that's the language we speak here in Austria).
The only thing I encountered is:
Well, sometimes I have time to read books at my working place because currently there are some changes going on that I'm not involved in preparing so there's some time. Whenever the colleague who sits across from me sees me reading she asks nonsense like "Is that for your classes?" (I visited some adult education classes until Spring 2012 and even though I keep explaining this no one seems to get that I don't have any more classes.)
It seems to be so absurd to some people that a person likes to read in their spare time that they themselves form excuses for it in their own minds.
I think that's much more severe than being called a snob for liking Classic.
Btw, I guess people who generally like novels more than non-fiction books might get the same kind of scorn from those who only prefer non-fiction books.

I think by Classics here, we mean books of fiction that have been tested over time and found acceptance and admiration across the centuries. Any one who reads that is reading sensibly as these books would allow one to grow and, hopefully, become a better human being. If somebody considers that kind of taste 'snobbery', it simply should not matter. By the way, Faust (Part I & II combined) is a great work of art and 'The Sorrows of Young Werther' shows the promise of young Goethe.

Accusations of snobbery, pretentiousness, and 'pseudo-intellectualism' are the easiest slurs in the world for certain people to hurl; and very curiously, they're also the hardest smear-campaign to wriggle out of. Its a type of jeer or jibe which is nigh-impossible to mount any defense against; because you immediately come off as 'being on the defensive'.

Also, precisely what evidence could anyone advance as proof to the contrary? If you take any descriptor and place 'pseudo-' before it; you have your target at a disadvantage. You're a pseudo-Welshman. You're a pseudo-accountant. You're a pseudo-heavy metal fan.

What is there to respond with? Especially when its an issue of character. "No, I'm not! I'm not a pseudo humanist, I really do uphold values of humanity whenever possible! I swear it!" Any rejoinder whatsoever, sounds hollow.

The only exit from the trap is to somehow turn it around and launch an offensive back towards the antagonist. For example, as far as I've ever experienced these jeers; they always seem to come from lowbrows and dilettantes. This is worth pointing out when the exchange descends to such an ad hominem level. Let them know that their gambit is corny and predictable.

And its usually abjectly the truth, as well. No one I've ever met who is adequately educated ever bothers to use 'pretentious' as a criticism; I believe that it can only come from someone not formally educated towards someone who is. You rarely if ever see it relied on from one educated person towards another. Even the bitterest of academic rivals have the sense to avoid blathering pointlessly around the unprovable.

Lucy, you are not alone!!!! I had a similar experience, as I love classics and the classical music, and the Opera in particular – of course, I love old paintings and sculpture too. No body accused me of being snob or pretentious, but as an old-fashioned man (from past centuries); however, I found many people feeling awkward and uncomfortable to talk me, but some close friend explained that I kind of intimidate those people, who might feel inferior to my level of interest. I don’t mean to be snobbish, but I love those great masterpieces and great works. I was happy to read this year, Dante’s “Inferno”, Goethe’s “Faust, part I”, and “The Sorrows of Young Whether”, Richardson’s “Pamela”, Proust’s “Swann’s Love”, and Dostoevsky “The Idiot” & “Memories from the House of the Dead’, in addition to many novels by Balzac, Zola, Gide, Austen, and Brontes; and plays by Shakespeare and Moliere, and the. And I loved a lot reading poems, plays, and the great novel of Alfred de Musset “Confession of the Child of the Century”. I finished few minutes ago Aeschylus’ “Agamemnon”, and read last week Sophocles “Oedipus Rex” and Euripides “Hippolytus” and I’m about to start Aeschylus “The Libation Bearers”. My future plans include “Iliad”, “Odyssey”, “Aeneid”, and “Don Quixote”. I feel reading such kind of books is a great joy to the soul. Finally, I love Dumas books “The Count of Monte Cristo” and “The Three Musketeers” (I read them ages ago, but I feel like rereading them), and I read Dumas fils’ novel “The Lady of the Camellias”, as well as the play holding the same name few months ago.

At least you're considered a snob only for reading classic literature. Some of us are considered weird only for reading in our free time, and reading because we enjoy it and not because it's for school/college. u.uU

Alejandra, I met such kind of people too, and some people told me that reading is a waster of time (they considered me as an alien).. As for the Opera, some said that it is a disgusting and out of mode kind of singing, and that I'd rather love modern songs..

I don't know why some people consider it to be a time waster. It's a hobby, as valid as any other hobby. If drawing or playing football or taking photos or watching movies aren't considered time wasting by those people, then why reading is?

People who think that reading is a waste of time is don't know the important effects of reading to the mind, education, knowledge..

Lucy, I think you hit a significant point when you said that even you initially struggled with the language and phrases. Some people simply are not willing to work past that, and there are a variety of reasons as to why that might be. Language is huge. I remember when I first started reading Shakespeare, it was common practice to read up till the end of Act I and start the play completely over, because that’s about how long it took to grasp the rhythm of the language.

Literature, compared to other art forms, often requires a lot more out of the onlooker before its actual beauty becomes apparent (and I don’t just mean the time it takes to read a book versus the time it takes to look a painting or listen to a song). I love Faust, but if I were to hear of synopsis of it without having read it or knowing it was a classic, I would say it sounds a little absurd or maybe even ill constructed, add to that rhythmic language that doesn’t click immediately. Or to put it another way: an intensely complex painting can be looked at and called beautiful without it being understood; the same is not usually true when applied to literature of the same caliber.

Lastly, I don’t really understand people who think reading is a waste of time. Do they think Nobel Prize winners don’t read? Do they Academy Award winners don’t read? Do they think those people who make bank on Jeopardy don’t read? Reading is prerequisite for any of these things.

Lucy wrote: "So, here's the thing; I love reading the real classic literature like Faust, Paradise Lost and The Divine Comedy, to name a few. The trouble is, when reading them and trying to discuss them with ot..."

I absolutely agree with you. But we have fun reading Faust and Hamlet more than anything by Dan Brown or King. Do not worry Lucy. You are not the only one in this. Classic Literature is more deep and profound even though we struggle with words.

so, I have all three on my list this year. About to start FAUST. any suggestions? I'm a pretty high IQ reader. then I may ask other suggestions.

additionally, I fit in a very peculiar category. .I love football, drawing, my guitar, and camping. I'm equally absorbed by gaiman add I am by Vince Flynn and James Lee Burke. When I think about my three favorite authors/series. . their are contemporary fiction thrillers or detective/spy novels. .. yet. .. the three books I recommend out refer are Fahrenheit 451, AMERICAN GODS, &THE GREAT DIVORCE. .committed to more classics entwined this year in my curriculum. About to start FAUST abd saw this thread. . feel lucky to have stumbled, or more likely, having been "drawn in". I'd love to converse more on this. .I put a list of twenty classics to get to. eager to share

Lucy wrote: "So, here's the thing; I love reading the real classic literature like Faust, Paradise Lost and The Divine Comedy, to name a few. The trouble is, when reading them and trying to discuss them with ot..."


It takes more effort to read quality literature, but I don't see it as being snobbish. People who are critical of it think that it is simply not relevant to today's issues. I disagree, and view that as their loss. I personally would rather build on the past than reinvent the wheel. Doesn't it make more sense to read something that has stood the test of time, than some best-seller that will be quickly forgotten?