I'm trying to figure out if I only need a general analysis of a novel or a deep, academic kind.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2009/ja ... ks-fiction
I have a plan to read that entire list in 5 years (I have about 132 down so far), but I know that's not feasible if I'm spending a week say going over the themes of War and Peace.
So this may be a silly question but what is a general rule for how much one should analyze? And what should be analyzed.
-
In total there are 0 users online :: 0 registered, 0 hidden and 0 guests (based on users active over the past 60 minutes)
Most users ever online was 616 on Thu Jan 18, 2024 7:47 pm
For an aspiring writer, how deep should book analysis go?
Forum rules
Do not promote books in this forum. Instead, promote your books in either Authors: Tell us about your FICTION book! or Authors: Tell us about your NON-FICTION book!.
All other Community Rules apply in this and all other forums.
Do not promote books in this forum. Instead, promote your books in either Authors: Tell us about your FICTION book! or Authors: Tell us about your NON-FICTION book!.
All other Community Rules apply in this and all other forums.
-
-
Finally Comfortable
- Posts: 51
- Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2012 7:56 pm
- 11
- Has thanked: 9 times
- Been thanked: 7 times
- geo
-
- pets endangered by possible book avalanche
- Posts: 4779
- Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2008 4:24 am
- 15
- Location: NC
- Has thanked: 2199 times
- Been thanked: 2200 times
Re: For an aspiring writer, how deep should book analysis go?
Hi Skyward,SkywardGnost wrote:I'm trying to figure out if I only need a general analysis of a novel or a deep, academic kind.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2009/ja ... ks-fiction
I have a plan to read that entire list in 5 years (I have about 132 down so far), but I know that's not feasible if I'm spending a week say going over the themes of War and Peace.
So this may be a silly question but what is a general rule for how much one should analyze? And what should be analyzed.
I consider myself a lifelong student of literature. I believe you shouldn't strive to read as many works of literature with the mind of to analyze and dissect. First and foremost, read to enjoy. Read for the journey.
Something about these lists of the so-called "best books" seems missing the point to me. Sure there are indispensable classics, such as Dickens and Tolstoy. I do love to occasionally indulge myself in a Stephen King or Elmore Leonard. Lately I'm on an Elmore Leonard kick. Regardless, there are way more books, classic and otherwise, than I'll ever get around to reading.
John Ciardi discusses the concept of reading a poem versus experiencing it. This is such a great essay. I highly recommend it.
http://www.csun.edu/~krowlands/Content/ ... ciardi.pdf
-Geo
Question everything
Question everything
-
-
Finally Comfortable
- Posts: 51
- Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2012 7:56 pm
- 11
- Has thanked: 9 times
- Been thanked: 7 times
Re: For an aspiring writer, how deep should book analysis go?
Thank you for your reply. I am reading that essay right now.
Yeah I guess I get way too over my head sometimes and forget about the experience.
Yeah I guess I get way too over my head sometimes and forget about the experience.
-
-
Finally Comfortable
- Posts: 51
- Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2012 7:56 pm
- 11
- Has thanked: 9 times
- Been thanked: 7 times
Re: For an aspiring writer, how deep should book analysis go?
I finished the essay. It was incredible beyond words. It not only answered my question but helped me understand poetry and myself better.
What's funny about this is that me and my english class once tore apart "The Naming of parts" theme by theme, metaphor by metaphor, to the point where we were essentially naming the parts, instead of taking in the coral and the bumblebees
Thank you again for sharing this essay. I thought I was being a bit silly asking this question, but if I hadn't I would probably have never seen that essay.
What's funny about this is that me and my english class once tore apart "The Naming of parts" theme by theme, metaphor by metaphor, to the point where we were essentially naming the parts, instead of taking in the coral and the bumblebees
Thank you again for sharing this essay. I thought I was being a bit silly asking this question, but if I hadn't I would probably have never seen that essay.
- geo
-
- pets endangered by possible book avalanche
- Posts: 4779
- Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2008 4:24 am
- 15
- Location: NC
- Has thanked: 2199 times
- Been thanked: 2200 times
Re: For an aspiring writer, how deep should book analysis go?
Yeah, how many poems have been murderously dissected in high school English classes? But it is a wonderful essay, isn't? It really helped me to understand how to approach a poem.SkywardGnost wrote:I finished the essay. It was incredible beyond words. It not only answered my question but helped me understand poetry and myself better.
What's funny about this is that me and my english class once tore apart "The Naming of parts" theme by theme, metaphor by metaphor, to the point where we were essentially naming the parts, instead of taking in the coral and the bumblebees
Thank you again for sharing this essay. I thought I was being a bit silly asking this question, but if I hadn't I would probably have never seen that essay.
Ciardi is a poet himself. He also translated Dante's THE DIVINE COMEDY.
Regarding the lists, I'm sure such things can be helpful. I'm kind of a slow reader myself and I'm always kicking myself because I haven't read Dickens' earlier stuff, still haven't read War and Peace, Heart of Darkness, Proust, much of Faulkner, most of Shakespeare, the aforementioned Dante, etc. There's no way you can read them all.
-Geo
Question everything
Question everything
- DWill
-
- BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
- Posts: 6966
- Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 8:05 am
- 16
- Location: Luray, Virginia
- Has thanked: 2262 times
- Been thanked: 2470 times
Re: For an aspiring writer, how deep should book analysis go?
We can always take comfort in the statement of the Romantic poet William Wordsworth, who praised the kind of literacy characterized by "good books, though few."*
If you can have books you think of as especially yours, which means rereading, that's one way around the dilemma of a mounting reading list. This far into literary history, nobody can be truly "well-read" unless they do it as a full-time job.
I wonder, to be frank, whether it is really so important to read the great books if that means reading novels. Novels began, after all, as entertainments (novelties) for the newly literate class. They were the TV of the era. They've become important culturally and now just about define reading itself. But aren't there bound to be very small differences between each of these novelties? If we can say which books might be the most important to read, might ones on history, philosophy, religion, and science be equally as, or more, important? If novels aren't entertaining to us, no matter now important they're said to be, why not skip them?
(This touches on the argument of which literary forms are the best. Perhaps poetry is the pinnacle of literature, or maybe short fiction is, maybe drama It's impossible to say, though, so all we should do is to please ourselves.)
Novels do give us a window into the daily lives and concerns of a period. That could mean that a selective list is completely fine and we don't need to worry about reading everything. I'd like to find such a selective list put together by a good literary man or woman.
*I'd always thought that "good books though few" was from Milton. Just looking it up to be sure, I found it was said by his disciple, Wordsworth, in Book 13 of The Prelude.
If you can have books you think of as especially yours, which means rereading, that's one way around the dilemma of a mounting reading list. This far into literary history, nobody can be truly "well-read" unless they do it as a full-time job.
I wonder, to be frank, whether it is really so important to read the great books if that means reading novels. Novels began, after all, as entertainments (novelties) for the newly literate class. They were the TV of the era. They've become important culturally and now just about define reading itself. But aren't there bound to be very small differences between each of these novelties? If we can say which books might be the most important to read, might ones on history, philosophy, religion, and science be equally as, or more, important? If novels aren't entertaining to us, no matter now important they're said to be, why not skip them?
(This touches on the argument of which literary forms are the best. Perhaps poetry is the pinnacle of literature, or maybe short fiction is, maybe drama It's impossible to say, though, so all we should do is to please ourselves.)
Novels do give us a window into the daily lives and concerns of a period. That could mean that a selective list is completely fine and we don't need to worry about reading everything. I'd like to find such a selective list put together by a good literary man or woman.
*I'd always thought that "good books though few" was from Milton. Just looking it up to be sure, I found it was said by his disciple, Wordsworth, in Book 13 of The Prelude.
Re: For an aspiring writer, how deep should book analysis go?
From your post, I think you're looking at this from the wrong angle. Analysis is not really supposed to be a chore and neither are the classics. Analysis is merely a way to make a story 'yours' so to say. Through analysis you can find meaning that might touch you.
For example, John Donne poems are terribly complicated. Yet the poems have stuck in my mind because of an analysis in the play, W;t. A professor scolds her student for purchasing an edition with a semicolon instead of a comma. For death is not a great proclamation, but is merely a breath, a pause. Just like a comma
Classics lists are really just recommendations. Nobody ever reads them all but it makes it easier to locate styles and genres that interest you. A classic is just a milestone that informs reader of a certain writing period.
For example, The Odyssey is a classic. I found that I really enjoyed it so I continued on with The Iliad and then to works by Aescylus, Euripedes, Sophocles and Aristophanes. These are all classics but I only read them because I knew I liked the style.
If a book bores you to tears, you don't need to analyze it. Analyzing is for stories that intrigue you. Heart of Darkness frustrated me but it didn't leave my mind. In fact, one interpretation is particularly striking. Kurz's last words are "the horror, the horror" yet the narrator tells Kurz' wife that Kurz' last words were her name and what she represents.
For example, John Donne poems are terribly complicated. Yet the poems have stuck in my mind because of an analysis in the play, W;t. A professor scolds her student for purchasing an edition with a semicolon instead of a comma. For death is not a great proclamation, but is merely a breath, a pause. Just like a comma
Classics lists are really just recommendations. Nobody ever reads them all but it makes it easier to locate styles and genres that interest you. A classic is just a milestone that informs reader of a certain writing period.
For example, The Odyssey is a classic. I found that I really enjoyed it so I continued on with The Iliad and then to works by Aescylus, Euripedes, Sophocles and Aristophanes. These are all classics but I only read them because I knew I liked the style.
If a book bores you to tears, you don't need to analyze it. Analyzing is for stories that intrigue you. Heart of Darkness frustrated me but it didn't leave my mind. In fact, one interpretation is particularly striking. Kurz's last words are "the horror, the horror" yet the narrator tells Kurz' wife that Kurz' last words were her name and what she represents.
-
-
Finally Comfortable
- Posts: 51
- Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2012 7:56 pm
- 11
- Has thanked: 9 times
- Been thanked: 7 times
Re: For an aspiring writer, how deep should book analysis go?
shuart24 wrote:From your post, I think you're looking at this from the wrong angle. Analysis is not really supposed to be a chore and neither are the classics. Analysis is merely a way to make a story 'yours' so to say. Through analysis you can find meaning that might touch you.
For example, John Donne poems are terribly complicated. Yet the poems have stuck in my mind because of an analysis in the play, W;t. A professor scolds her student for purchasing an edition with a semicolon instead of a comma. For death is not a great proclamation, but is merely a breath, a pause. Just like a comma
Classics lists are really just recommendations. Nobody ever reads them all but it makes it easier to locate styles and genres that interest you. A classic is just a milestone that informs reader of a certain writing period.
For example, The Odyssey is a classic. I found that I really enjoyed it so I continued on with The Iliad and then to works by Aescylus, Euripedes, Sophocles and Aristophanes. These are all classics but I only read them because I knew I liked the style.
If a book bores you to tears, you don't need to analyze it. Analyzing is for stories that intrigue you. Heart of Darkness frustrated me but it didn't leave my mind. In fact, one interpretation is particularly striking. Kurz's last words are "the horror, the horror" yet the narrator tells Kurz' wife that Kurz' last words were her name and what she represents.
Thank you for this. That is great