2012 Back to the Classics Challenge

  I was not successful in completing the 2011 Back to the Classics Challenge, but I am ready to take on the 2012 Challenge, once again hosted by Sarah Reads Too Much.  I was new to the whole challenge thing this year, and I think I was too ambitious, but this year I am going to be SMARTER (ha). 

  Here is the list of categories and the books I tentatively plan to read:

 Any 19th Century Classic:   Moby Dick


Any 20th Century Classic:  1984

Reread a classic of your choice:  Pride and Prejudice

A Classic Play:  Macbeth

Classic Mystery/Horror/Crime Fiction:  Frankenstein

Classic Romance:  Persuasion

Read a Classic that has been translated from its original language to your language:  Doctor Zhivago

Classic Award Winner - To clarify, the book should be a classic which has won any established literary award:  The Diviners (it won Canada's Governor General's Award in 1974 -- does that make it a classic?)

Read a Classic set in a Country that you (realistically speaking) will not visit during your lifetime:  Heart of Darkness
 
 
Several of these books are on the schedule for my library's classics reading group in 2012, so that will make completing the challenge a little bit easier!

Literary Blog Hop -- Guess Who's Coming to Dinner?

The Literary Blog Hop is hosted over at The Blue Bookcase

This week's question:

If you could invite any three literary figures from different eras to a Sunday Dinner who would they be?

 A seemingly easy, but rather difficult question; how to narrow it down to just three?  Should I invite three like-minded writers who will keep the conversation friendly, or should I invite polar opposites who will do nothing but debate and argue?  As I'm conflict-averse, I'm inclined to have the friendly party, but I think some like-minded writers can also have lively debates and make the evening so much more interesting.

So here is my guest list:

1. Margaret Atwood:  not only is she a fantastic writer but on the few occasions where I have had the pleasure to hear her speak she has proven to be quite witty.
2. Virginia Woolf:  I've only read Mrs. Dalloway, but I think she and Atwood would have a lot to talk about.
3. William Shakespeare:  I know this is probably a no-brainer, but I think it would be fascinating to hear him talk about his plays; and I think the other guests would have thoughts about some of his female characters, namely Lady Macbeth and Ophelia.

 Who's attending your literary dinner party?

   

AfterWord: Conjuring the Literary Dead

AfterWord: Conjuring the Literary Dead, Edited by Dale Salwak

Published:  2011 by University of Iowa Press

Source:  Review copy received from publisher via NetGalley

  AfterWord:  Conjuring the Literary Dead, is a collection of speculative essays of situations where modern day writers interact with authors of the past.  In the introduction, the collection's editor, Dale Salwak described the essays as "an invitation to come face-to-face with a literary personage in a new way"; and while this may be true, for the casual reader of classic literature (if there is such a thing) the collection may be taken as inaccessible, readable only to experts in a particular author or genre.

  The most interesting essay to me was Eugene Goodheart's discussion with Jane Austen about her heroine, Emma Woodhouse.  I disliked Emma immensely (the character and the novel) and the speculative explanation told by Austen via Goodheart is interesting, especially since Austen references Stephen Dedalus in her argument of why Emma is her favorite character.  When Goodheart expresses astonishment that she is familiar with James Joyce's work she responds:

You are bemused.  Well ask yourself, how is it possible that I am speaking to you, centuries after my death?  As an immortal writer (spoken plainly and without irony), I have met and will continue to meet other immortal writers who were born long after I died.

  Now wouldn't those be interesting discussions?

  Alas, because I was familiar with only the names of the other resurrected authors (but not all -- who was George Gissing?) I don't think I could properly appreciate the other essays.  They seemed too academic, focussing on minutiae of the author's life rather than his or her work; however given that the publisher is an academic press I suppose that can be expected.

War & Peace -- Done!!!

 
  Yes, can you believe it?  I have finished it! Yay me.  And it only took about two months  (compared to six months with Ulysses, a novel about 400 pages shorter).

   Did I love it?  I can't say that I did -- I think it's one of those novels that you need to re-read to fully appreciate -- but I certainly liked it.  It's not a book that one can just pick up and read a few pages here and there (at least I couldn't), so it does require a time commitment, but I think it is worth it.  The last part of the epilogue is a really dry (REALLY) essay on the significance on history of man's will (at least I think that is what it was about, my eyes glazed over once in a while), but the novel as a whole held my interest.

   People far more intelligent and articulate than I have talked about this book, so I won't make an attempt.  My classics reading group will be discussing this on Wednesday, so I'm looking forward to seeing how the others felt about it.