hatereadtheclassics - Tumblr blog

[hatereadtheclassics]

Why is it I accidentally end up reading “classics” then coming here to bitch about them? I could just... not read them.

GUESS WHO STARTED READING Rebecca BY DAPHNE Du Maurier!?

And, like. Ok. I avoided reading this in freshman high school English (subject) class because I got dumped in the AP classes and we ended up reading a bunch of classical English (country) literature instead of slightly more modern English (country) literature. I remember seeing someone in my chemistry class reading Rebecca, which had a 90′s themed red-velvet wall cover and I was whining about reading some kind of poetry. Probably Keats. Even my mom likes Keats. I just am an uncultured swine and hate all poetry. (Barring some Auden.)

All that ranted, NOT GONNA LIE, I could not have appreciated this book at the time. So far, I am 60 pages in and JFC, this main character is an absolutely insufferable person. This woman needs some kolonopin and a de-Englishing (country) STAT.

Like, DAMN GIRL. You have near-panic attacks because the moment after the present is now dull and lifeless? And because some dude hits on you - who even romance-blind aces like me would cop to after he put his arm around you in a very specific context - you have a three separate fantasies about how he is kind/a brother and how him or you leaving would make your world cold and grey... I know y’all recounting your 21-yo self, but ma’am, I think you might be well beyond the threshold of dramatique and well into medication territory.

Also, way to constantly belittle and deride yourself there, hon. Ugh. Now I vaguely want to go down a literary criticism rabbit hole to see if there is anything exploring Du Maurier’s work and the intersection of English (cultural) femininity and masculinity and if/how it is a mirror on a very specific window of English (cultural) time. If not, anyone in grad school, that one’s yours for free. I sure as eff am not reading Du Maurier’s extended work and deep diving into British cultural norms circa 1932-1939. @nellachronism, that seems more your jam.

I mean, good job at showing how deeply ingrained panic about age/manners is/was for this person during this time, I guess? Woof, this might be a ride.

[hatereadtheclassics]

I wish everyone would admit that classic literature is inherently difficult to read, and that you shouldn’t feel stupid if you don’t “get it”. Especially the dark academia/ classic lit fandoms and stuff. Like unless you have the vocabulary and pop culture knowledge of an 18th century nobleman, it’s going to be a tough read. It’ll take you longer to read; you’re not stupid if you’ve spent several months on a single book! And you don’t have to enjoy everything. It’s okay if you got bored after one chapter of Wuthering Heights, and couldn’t be bothered to read the rest. It’s okay if you want to read your favourite kids book for the 10th time instead. You’re not stupid. No piece of literature is inherently better, more “important”, more “meaningful”, or more “intellectual” than another. First and foremost, read what brings you joy.

[hatereadtheclassics]

So, I am PLOWING THROUGH Dracula on audiobook and am pretty grateful because yikes, I would have set this down forever ago if it wasn’t being told to me. It’s not that it’s bad? It’s just that it’s really, really boring? Which, lmty, was a surprise.

I mean, the atmosphere is there? It’s creepy and dark! But I am just really bad at sympathizing with dudes in classic works. I mean, reading anything I’ve posted to this sideblog will back that the hell up. I still call Darcy “Fitzpenis” in my head on the rare occasion he pops up in my life. Anyway, there is too much male pov and description of proper behavior. I mean, Mina is pretty badass and exceedingly right re: having rich friends is awesome.

On a side note, “Godalming” as a name is really annoying to listen to being said out loud.

That said, the primer in Romanian geography is pretty cool. I keep popping open a map to follow the progress.

I feel kinda bad for feeling like this is fine? But. Meh? I AM A BAD CLASSICS READER. But we knew this.

[hatereadtheclassics]

@elisaintime has a WHOLE LOT of Dracula-related content. Go have a good time!

Update: The Dude Squad makes me tired.

[hatereadtheclassics]

Dracula: Toxic masculinity fucking shit up for everyone

For real, Red was right about how no one tells Mina ANYTHING and that screws everything up for her. JFC, “Victorian Fainting Lady Disease” has a lot to answer for. *rolls eyes so hard*

[hatereadtheclassics]

I just miss Grant Imahara.

[hatereadtheclassics]

The 1800′s were chock-a-block with epistolary narrative.

For realsies, it’s like the Found Footage explosion of the late 1990′s in film. All three of the “classic” novels I’ve read this year have been a “compilation” of journals or testaments or letters between narrators. It seems like there was a solid 30+ years of fiction where journaling was the thing.

I guess that makes sense? Documenting your day seemed to be more the rage in years passed. TBF, I’ve been trying to keep a journal this year because I need to remind myself what I’ve been doing from day to day. Because 2020.

Anyway, it’s just kind of jarring from a modern perspective. I don’t hate it, but it does illustrate for me how odd it is to come across this format in modern fiction.

I’m about halfway through, and it’s a lot more interesting than The Moonstone. But that might be my Wilke Collins prejudice. (Oy, that guy.)

[hatereadtheclassics]

Sooooo, Dracula.

Hi to anyone still following this! I was introduced to the Phoebe Reads A Mystery (X) podcast earlier this year. I had been trying to read The Moonstone for a few weeks and a coworker mentioned the podcast was reading that book in a chapter-a-day format. The premise of the series being that Phoebe Reads a chapter a day of a mystery that is out of copyright. Which, if you are me and were plopped in front of Wisconsin Public Radio during lunch as a tiny child, so my mom could HAVE AN HOUR to do things, PERFECTION.

Side note, Wilke Collins is a dude with a whole lot of problems.

Anyway, turns out Phoebe read Dracula earlier last month and this weekend involved me doing a lot of mindfulness and leaning into living In The Moment. This included a lot of autumnal-related content.

I made stew, had apple cider, took a walk in the forest preserve to see leaves, bought a new sweater, and cleaned my house. I also listened to 50% do Dracula by Bram Stoker. I’ve never read any of the traditional “monster“ source material and figured, why not? Overly Sarcastic Productions told me it was pretty good, and so far...

Well. That’s for laters. 😘

[hatereadtheclassics]

Weird things come from leaving your ipod at home.

HELLO, LOVELY PEOPLE.

So, I read The Odyssey in seventh grade. I have no idea why my school district decided to tackle one of the epics of Greek literature with a bunch of twelve year olds, but I guess they have to do it some time. Might as well be when Greg Hildebrandt is making weird fantasy illustrations.

Well, that’s an interesting euphemism.

I may or may not have mentioned that my memory is pretty much an adventure every day. One of the main conundrums of my brain is that sometimes I 100% forget that I’ve read something, even if I’ve liked it. I reread Good Omens every 5-7 years because I completely forget relevent plot stuff and characters to the point that both times I’ve reread it, I’ve been delighted because it’s excellent and brand new to me! I was reminded of this quirk again recently as I accidentally ordered a Ninth Doctor reprint of a story only to get ~50 pages in - not recognizing any of it - and find out I’d reading several years before. *shrug*

Point being, I went out to do errands this last weekend and forgot my iPod, which is loaded with a bunch of podcasts I’d been meaning to listen to. Cue me rushing the closest public library to snag an audio book because battling Interstate 90 at 2pm on a Saturday is not gonna happen without something to listen to that isn’t a modern pop artist butchering something. Fortunately (for you) the audio book selection was fairly limited and the only thing that really stuck out was The Odyssey. Again, not read this since seventh grade and remember basically nothing about it except I had fond memories of the 1990′s mini series starring Armand Assante. Given my dive into YouTube to find it (see the trailer I just posted) I know that has Not Aged Well, but is amusing if just to appreciated 1990′s Eric Roberts abs.

Cheerfully, this looks to be a focused, straightforward listen. There are only 11 discs and it’s read by Sir Ian McKellen. Even about 75% of the first disc in, I’m having a hard time hating it. It’s cool that Telemecus is finally like “Yo, maybe I should do something proactive after ten years, yeah?” but man, the suitors are dicks.

Strap in, y’all, we’re going back in time!

[hatereadtheclassics]

Oh, 1996, you were an adventure.

[hatereadtheclassics]

Book wrap up: I gave it a weekend.

Right, SO!  First thing’s first.  I FINISHED The Three Musketeers!!!  I am very excited about this because, goddamn, that was a long-ass book.

Accurate representation of my feelings upon finishing this novel; I am Rose in this moment.

Let’s break this down by the good, the bad, and the wrap-up.

The Good:

Reading this as a sarcastic WTF side-eye of French masculinity during the 1700′s makes this book about 1000% better.  I’m not entirely sure that it was written with that intent (it totally might have been?  Again, my interpretation of French culture is basically tiny Nemo attempting to swim in a straight line), but if you DO read it that way, this thing is a hoot.  The protagonist is basically a hot-headed teenage boy who can’t keep it in his pants, feels like he should do things because he should do things, and generally fucks everyone over.  So, basically, he’s a stereotypical teenage boy.  And this kind of tracks with the rest of the cast too?

I mean, I keep tagging poor Tréville‘s life as being terrible, but it kind of was?  Because the Musketeers were kind of pedestaled ideas of masculinity for the time?  I’m assuming?  And by following them, Dumas laid out how they were all pretty terrible in different ways.  Hell, Buckingham gets himself killed - and nearly gets Queen Anne seriously fucked over - because he got himself wrapped up in the idealized romanticization of love, rather than dealing with and staring at reality.  His playing at ideals and ~ultimate love~ make an already bad situation infinitely worse and screws over a bunch of other people.  And that theme is actually pretty awesome?

I’ll also admit that I super liked Constance and Anne, and I’m also pretty respectful of Milady.  Constance and Anne were just women who got caught in some pretty precarious situations, none of which they had a whole lot of influence over in terms of control or inception.  Constance was a good servant to Anne and Anne was dealing with three powerful men and a pretty shit situation and all she wanted was to make it out alive and in good health.  I can not only dig that, I can applaud that.

Milady, on the other hand...  like, DAMN.  I can honestly say that I didn’t like her.  She is a villain and the ~writing style of the time~ as well as the psychology don’t do her a lot of favors.  Unlike the BBC series, we really, really don’t get much in the way of her perspective other than ~she’s evil and resourceful whoo~.  But, damn, Dumas lets her not only be evil as hell, she’s COMPETENT in ways that basically everyone else isn’t.  She manages to leverage imprisonment into accomplishing her task and fucking over at least three other people.  I find her abhorrent and awful, but I’ll throw some serious respect her way.

I also ended up honestly liking Athos.  This surprised the hell out of me because he IS a giant dick.  Still, there’s a bit of melancholy nobility that clings to him, even as he keeps ordering his lackey to stfu.  He is crushed by the crime he perceives he committed.  Yes, he likely had the right of law on his side, and yes he wasn’t required to mourn the way he did.  But he was regretful of his actions and the outcome.  Sure, it turned out his wife really was terrible and he does end up getting her executed, but unlike a lot of modern heroes and anti-heroes, he regrets his actions.

Also, his grumpypants move to have lunch in the fort so he can have five goddamn minutes to talk to his friends is like, the best introvert dick move of all time.

The Bad:

Yeah, this wasn’t a novel.  Really.  It was a serialized string of vignettes that were related and sort of petered off to a close.  Sure, there was the adventure with the diamonds and Milady (and Constance’s) fall from grace/destruction, but the connective tissue between those events was paper thin and there was a TON of extraneous prose.  I’ll 100% admit that this was a factor/function of novel structure when it was written - serialization: HORRAY! - but it was incredibly frustrating for me, as a reader.  It also made it hard to honestly connect with any of the characters as development was basically an ongoing game of tag for when the author remembered to bring it up.

A solid editor, armed with notes and a word-processing program could easily turn this into a much more dynamic and fascinating work.  Hell, the BBC series has done a great job with the spirit of the source material translated for modern sensibilities in terms of plot structure and character development.  The Milady we see there gets shading and depth from the hard-won existence of her own perspective.

Because, ultimately, what this book suffers from - for me - is a bit of a lack of human sympathy.  The language and context for emotion is different now than it was then, and that shows.

Also, D’artagnan is a huge dickhead and I only like four characters (Kitty was also great, SHE GOT OUT ALIVE).

The Wrap-Up:

About half-way through this novel, I knew that I was super mad at continuing to HAVE to read this, but I would be glad to have had read this when I was finished.  I am glad I read it.   Dumas’ writing feels a lot more modern than other writers I’ve tried during his alive time period.  He HAS a sense of pacing, even if it varies widely from adventure/vignette to adventure/vignette.  I also thing that it was a bit of a bad idea to tackle the unabridged version because there were here parts of it that could have been edited without me noticing much.  I’d be curious to pick up/flip through a ‘children’s’ version some day, just to see what got sorted where.

In the end, I’m glad I read it.  Especially as I don’t have to read it again.

Everybody have some pretty.

[hatereadtheclassics]

FINALLY. FUCKING. FINISHED.

ETA: I gave the damn thing to a random person who said yes.

[hatereadtheclassics]

WHY ISN’T THIS BOOK OVER?

Accurate depiction of my current feelings regarding this fucking book.

I’m edging in to territory where I honestly hate this book.  It’s a marathon of a read and I am just SO. DONE.  Luckily, I think I’ve hit end game because Milady just killed everybody in England rather than get exiled, which I don’t think is very accurate.  But then, my fourteenth-century European history is vaguely shite and I don’t care enough to Wikipedia it.

And now, I’m pretty sure, that Milady is going to go get Constance killed - who I still like, probably because she’s been absent for ~300+ pages - so D’ickface will Be Sad.  I just.  UGH.  Like, I did enjoy the bit with Athos WANTING FIVE GODDAMN MINUTES to talk about some shit that wasn’t other people’s business and basically agreeing to walk into a warzone and killing a bunch of people just so he could have some privacy. Honestly, Athos has grown on me through this adventure.  I mean, he’s gonna still be Mr. Alcoholic Grumpypants until he dies, but he has remorse for (supposedly) killing his wife which current day anti-heroes AREN’T EVEN FUCKING SORRY, just mopey for sympathy and shit.

D’ickface remains a giant dickface and I basically hate him and his fickle bullshit X1000.  Porthos exists and I wish Aramis would make a goddamn decision and stick with it.  I actually prefer the BBC show a lot to the original text (I mainlined the first half of season 1.)  And to be completely fair to Dumas, things like clarity in point of view and character development through an exploration of their feelings wasn’t really A Thing in fiction.  The BBC show has done a pretty good job of setting up reason and reality and motivation a lot better than the novel’s done so far.  And Constance talks and Milady has motivations, even if you want to roll your eyes and point out cool motive, still murder.

I hope Queen Anne gets out of this novel alive.

[hatereadtheclassics]

HAHA, I BET YOU THOUGHT I QUIT.

I didn’t!

Well, I did for a bit.  But, to be fair, I read four hundred pages before I had to put it down because jfc, D’ickface made me want to bathe in bleach and ALSO made me SUPER HAPPY his fictional ass has been dead for hundreds of years.

For real, D’ickface is a manwhore with zero loyalty when it comes to women.  Like, all these guys - except Athos and Tréville - are complete fuckfaces when it comes to women.  At least, Dumas pretty much acknowledges this and - I’m pretty sure - gently calls them dicks for the whole novel.

Note: I powered through the bit with D’ickface juggling three women and getting seduced and seducing Milady.  Which.  Man.  He kinda knows that Milady is Athos’ dead wife at this point and he really earns his D’ickface name.  PLUS, he watches (presumably) Constance get dragged off to who knows where, but probably her doom and has to deal with fucking over Kitty because he wanted ~revenge~ against Milady.

I am kind of annoyed that I sympathize and like Athos.  Because, by this point, I would have kicked D’ickface off a curb, not given him the $$ needed to go to war.  Well.  Maybe it’s a plot for D’ickface to be the prettiest Musketeer (IS he one? I DON’T EVEN KNOW, I THINK HE IS A GUARD?) and get shot a lot on the battlefield.

But THE REAL JOY is that I only have 250 pages left of this novel!  Here’s hoping everyone except Tréville and Constance and possibly Athos get shot a lot.

[hatereadtheclassics]

This book is not ending and I’m mad about it.

Okay.  Nearly 400 pages in and we finally have some actual characterization/plot having to do with the lead characters rather than a hootenanny with jewels and the Queen getting screwed over.  Why in the name of all that is just did I decide to read the new-translated unabridged edition of this book?  It was a good idea at the time?  NO IT WASN’T.

Man, I started out this book cheerful and curious about 19th century action-dramas as written by a dude who wasn’t a Dead White Guy, and while that last bit is still true, OH MY GOD.  Seriously??  I’ve re-named D’artagnan to D’ickface in texts with LR and I’m in the bit with Milady and his back and forth and POOR KITTY, JFC.  Also, WHAT THE HELL, CONSTANCE?  I AM MAKING ALL THE FROWNY FACES ABOUT THIS BULLSHITTERY.

For serious, as this book goes on and on, I am firmly convinced that Dumas likes women about a thousand percent more than he likes men.  AS PEOPLE.  Like, despite Milady being a duplicitous person, so far, there’s the real indication with Athos’ recitation and D’ickface’s reaction to said, that she’s a wronged-person who made due and is dealing with the fallout of said.  And Constance is pretty unilaterally shown as doing her best and getting fucked over for it.  Especially as D’ickface has the romantic attention span of a particularly stupid tom cat.

I also want to talk about Porthos and what a dick he is.  Like, okay, he’s at least upfront about it?  And is pretty comfortable in how he’s an asshat, and I can respect that.  Hate the hustle not the hustler, etc.  But still, he’s coming across as more of a particularly spoiled child, and it’s annoying.

I’m also kind of unclear on the structure of Musketeer-hood in general.  Do they not get paid for being the King’s soldiers/taskforce?  I know it makes sense that they have to outfit themselves with horses (god, do NOT get me started on the stupidity of the horse musical chairs bit, WHY DID I HAVE TO READ THAT?) and weapons and heraldry, but for real?  They’re always broke and spend most of their lives scamming, hustling, or being useless.

Which brings me to Aramis and JFC, DUDE.  MAKE SOME DAMN DECISIONS.  YIKES.

Y’all, this book is testing me.  I am SO CLOSE to putting it down and just leaving it be.  Not because it’s terrible (it’s still pretty readable, but ANYONE who goes on about the vaingloriousness of fanfic or how it’s boring and there are shopping montages or something, I’m gonna go point them at this book because JFC), but because a.) I hate espionage and b.) because it has zero contact with the modern interpretation of pacing and plot.  This is a fairly early example of a full novel and OH MY GOD do I love how far we’ve come in terms of fiction structure.

PACING IS AMAZING.  AS IS HAVING A PLOT THAT YOU INTENDED.  ALSO, WORD PROCESSING WHERE YOU CAN EDIT SHIT.

Honestly, I think I’m having one of the same problems I did with Pride and Prejudice, and that I’ll likely have with any book written prior to about 1940: I can see the bones of modern literature sketched throughout, but I like modern style and narrative better than its ancestors.  That’s just true for me.

And the only thing that’s keeping me reading this book is the desire to have read it, rather than wanting to keep reading it.

[hatereadtheclassics]

Dumas is a feminist?

I’m really puzzled about this book because on the one hand, I did do some reading for my aborted run at Count of Monte Cristo, so I know that Dumas is cheerfully indifferent (and inclusive!) to lesbianism, and that Mercedes was pretty much THE BEST and 100% why I couldn’t continue that book.  On the other hand, this was written in the 1800′s and everything I’ve ever read (admittedly, mostly by Old White Guys Who Had Reasons) about that time period lead me to believe that most men barely considered women capable of anything other than childbirth, fucking, and existence.

So, reading this is kind of it’s own adventure?  Because I’m pretty sure that the only characters we’re honestly supposed to LIKE are Tréville, Constance, and Anne.  Everyone else is kind of a dick.  Like, CULTURALLY a bit of a dick.  And as referenced last write-up, I have no idea if that’s supposed to be satire or a straight forward presentation of events, or a combination of both.  Also, I don’t like France enough to do more research and find out.

I’m also kind of happily boggled that the Cardinal is basically exemplifying abusive behaviors left, right, and center.  Apparently Anne didn’t want to bone him or accept ~kindnesses~ from his creepy ass, so he’s spent the last ~10 years making her life a living hell through a series of gas lighting, political intrigue, and isolation.  This dude is gross, fyi.  And I’m kinda glad that Dumas seems to be fine in pointing out HOW GROSS everyone is being to the queen, including her husband.

Anyway, the plots kicked off and I’m kind of pissed because I DIDN’T KNOW THIS WAS A SPY NOVEL, GODDAMMIT.  I signed up for adventures and sword fights, not political fucking maneuvering!  UUUUUUUUUUGH, WHY.  I am so bad at reading espionage stories.  All that two-faced, behind the hand talk just makes me ill and tired and I am so glad I’m a peasant, I can’t even talk about it.

Still, I’m a third of the way through this novel, so horray!

[hatereadtheclassics]

France and I are bad at cultural understanding.

Well, I’m sure France is mostly indifferent to my particular cultural preferences, but guys.  I’m having a bit of a hard time with The Three Musketeers.

I think the crux of the situation has to do with my lack of knowledge and understanding of France in the seventeenth century.  Especially when it comes to customs and mores between people.  As mentioned in my last text write-up, I’m super boggled by the fact that basically brushing by someone quickly seems to be a duel-worthy offense (but I don’t know if that’s true?  This could be satirical?) and dropping a woman’s handkerchief is too?  Because that’s come back and it has something to do with Constance doing some espionage stuff for a mysterious woman (probably the queen?) and I have no idea what to make of Aramis, and D’Artagnan remains an idiotic teenage boy.

BUT.  Maybe that’s wrong in terms of the story?  Because two of the other three musketeers are all “D’Artagnan HAS THE BEST BRAIN”?  I am super boggled by this, but I feel like I’m missing giant pieces of the puzzle when it comes to understanding this piece.  Or being a dick teenage boy was supposed to be a good thing?  IDK.

Basically, I’ve made it through the introductory adventure of this book and am now in the ‘intrigue’ and procedural adventure bit.  Which I’m guessing is just going to get more and more confusing.  That said, I think we should absolutely ban this story as formative reading for young boys because if this is the shit they’re thinking is okay?  NOT OKAY.