So, I’ll just put it out there, I *love* classics! They’re practically my favourite thing in the whole world!! But for some reason- amazing authors like to punish us with the occasional dose of boredom! I mean, I’m currently reading War and Peace and a friend of mine has just told me to watch out for the boring bit (I guess I will have to wait and see about that- and you’ll have to wait for my review!). Why do they do that and what are they playing at? It’s literally like they almost want us to give up on their work in favour of something less impressive or well-written. Don’t believe me? Well, here are some examples:
1- Anna Karenina– brilliant, brilliant book- but why does it have to begin and end with a discussion of agriculture? I don’t know why this book had to continue for another 100 pages after it was clear the story was over!
Invisible
Invisible
2- Middlemarch– another one with a lot of descriptions of the countryside. I mean that does make sense, since a huge part is dedicated to provincial life. So not only do you get the treat of these terribly dull passages- there are also lots and lots of irrelevant farmer characters to add to the boredom. No wonder I didn’t relate much to a lot of this book (but hey- if you’re a farmer, you’ll probably love it)
Invisible
3- Les Miserables– so much of this book is phenomenal- however, every other part seems to be another awfully dull description. I figure this was Hugo’s thought process: forget Jean Valjean, let’s talk about a random priest for a hundred pages… I’m a bit bored of the plot- let’s talk about the history of the Napoleonic Wars… You know what would be good right now- an intricate discussion of Parisian sewers (yes, that’s actually a whole part)
Invisible
4- Count of Monte Cristo– this is one of the most exciting books on the planet- but let’s face it, the history of telecoms bit is mind-numbingly boring. Fortunately this is the only hiccup in an otherwise stellar book.
Invisible
Invisible
5- And finally… anything with stream of consciousness. Okay if you’ve read my last post then you’ll know I’m not a fan and so this can’t come as a big surprise. I have never liked books written in this style- it doesn’t matter how well-written it is or how well-loved the book is- I really just can’t stomach it. I can’t read Virginia Woolf, or James Joyce- and now it looks like I’m adding Gabriel Garcia Marquez to the list of authors I won’t touch with a barge pole. And you know why? Because they have so many boring bits!
So yeah- writing this post has only left me with more questions! Because, really, I am stumped by this one. Don’t get me wrong- I love good writing and a dense classic will usually make me shout “bring it on!” I just don’t understand why so many fantastic writers have to make me feel like I’m being punished for trying to read their work.
What are your thoughts on this? Is it just me? Or have you noticed this trend too? Why do so many of these brilliant works of literature have to have bad bits? Let me know what you think in the comments!!
the orang-utan librarian 
I’m guessing that they just get lost in their thoughts and so this translates to the final pages of their work.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Maybe! But a lot of these bits are sandwiched in between good bits. I think with some of them they were serialised, so the need to write something to fill the weekly quota might’ve made them expand on some bits that didn’t need to be written (like with Monte Cristo). I don’t get why Anna Karenina had to have so much about farming tbh
LikeLiked by 1 person
Haha, I suppose. Passion is passion, especially when written about.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yeah sure haha
LikeLiked by 1 person
Classics are the best!!! I know what you mean about really long, seemingly pointless parts of the books, though haha.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I know right!!! I love them- but they can have some really strange unnecessary bits!
LikeLiked by 1 person
I love the history of the Paris sewers in Les Mis! Though in general I like tangents. Just depends on what they are about.
x The Captain
LikeLiked by 1 person
haha really? fair enough! To be honest- I love the tangents in things like Dostoevsky cos he just gets really philosophical and I love it. I sometimes like the historical bits- but the history of the sewers was too much for me! 😉 x
LikeLike
In some books that I’ve read, the interesting part is the cover. After which the boring bit starts, and usually doesn’t finish until the last page, at which point the back cover is usually quite interesting (I am kind of pinching this idea from Charles Dickens, but hey…)
LikeLiked by 1 person
hahaha sadly that’s true far too often!! With most of these books though, I can recommend them- just watch out for the random passages of boredom wedged in between the incredible bits! (Although I won’t pretend to recommend anything with stream of consciousness- they’re just terrible 😉
)
LikeLiked by 1 person
You love classics… You don’t say? 😉 I’m also a big fan of classics. I know we’ve had lengthy discussions about them. I have to agree with you on Les Mis. It’s ridiculously long and for no apparent reason. I’ve tried reading it but I can never seem to get through all the boring bits to finish it. I’m a big fan of the story and the musical. Some of my favorite songs are from the musical. I wish I could finish the book. It’s like trying to read Moby Dick. That book is so big it used to hurt my hand holding it open. I haven’t finished that one either. Well, Les Mis is much worse than Moby Dick. I believe that one is around 800 pages and Les Mis is like 1200 or 1300. Either way both of them are a real challenge if they’re not keeping you entertained.
LikeLiked by 1 person
hahaha yes we have! I do love les mis- but it took sooo long to get into, because the first 100 pages are totally random. And there are loads and loads of random diversions- so I didn’t like it as much as I do other classics. But you’re right- the story and (of course) the musical are what it’s all about! (I seriously, seriously love the musical- it’s the only reason I persevered through the boring opening!) Ahh I’ve not read that yet- I’ve honestly heard so many different things!! Yeah definitely- the one I can really recommend is the Monte Cristo- I know I included it on this list- but apart from that one blip, it’s one of the most exciting books I’ve ever read! 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yeah, I agree. The book is full of so much nonsense. The musical is my favorite of all time. I listen to the songs on my phone. The story is so heartbreaking. I’ve wanted to read Monte Cristo for years. I don’t know why I keep forgetting about it. I’m going to add it Goodreads now so I don’t forget. 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Definitely! I have them on my ipod too 🙂 It really is! And it’s so worth reading- it’s a phenomenally exciting book! Excellent! 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
I felt this way about Moby Dick, especially during the passages about the history of whaling, different types of whales, whale anatomy, etc. I know it’s all to provide the reader with helpful information and context, but it can be really dull! Middlemarch is one I’m hoping to get around to someday… we’ll see how that goes! Great post! 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
You know you are literally the second person to say that in the comments!! (I wouldn’t have said anything- but I just read that comment lol) oh my god- that does sound awful!!! I’ve read so many bad things about it- and this isn’t making me want to pick this up any time soon! It is good- and I really liked the vast majority of it! Hope you like it 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
I know exactly what you mean! I love classics but it’s like our 2016 minds can’t adapt to it properly anymore. I was bored out of my mind at times when I read The Picture of Dorian Graylast year despite it being a very daring and ‘scary’ book at the time. Maybe it’s just all the internetting that makes our brains crave for faster stuff, more action, get to the point-ism! 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ah that’s a shame about Picture of Dorian Gray- I love it- but I get why you might be put off. I actually can see what you mean about it just being something our 2016 brains can’t adapt to. I think you’re exactly right!! 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
So many people do! One of my friends gives every friend a copy of it because he loves it so much. While I’m just ‘meh’ :D. I’ll tell my husband you said that 😉 ❤
LikeLiked by 1 person
haha it’s usually my go to book to give to people that don’t like classics tbh 😉
LikeLiked by 1 person
Well, I’ll be damned XD. Maybe I should reread it one day and find out if I’m severely over criticizing it!
LikeLike
Hey, I sort of know the answer to your first question up there! This is half-remembered and quickly looked up, so I’m probably conflating or mistaking a few things here, but…
There was an idea early on in the novel’s existence as a form that it was meant to describe a society and its history in all its detail, something a novel could do far more clearly than poetry because of how open its structure was. For a lot of these writers, those seemingly pointless sections weren’t only a part of what made a novel a novel, they were a part of what made novel writing important in the first place, as an encapsulated window into either their own time or a point in history. The idea that a novel should only contain what is essential to tell the story is a very recent one, dating to at least post-WWI Modernism, but my mind wants to peg it even later. Like, Mid-twentieth century.
And yes, it’s still incredibly frustrating from modern eyes, even if you know why it’s happening. You kind of want to scream at them to get to the point.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ah yes- you know you’re waking up my own (admittedly rather flaky) memory of my first year Robinson Crusoe lecture- essentially where the professor justified how boring that book is with a similar argument. My professor also mentioned the importance of realism in the original novels, in order to garner interest- because there were still some rather medieval opinions of making up stories being an immoral, un-Christian pursuit. Perhaps this desire for authenticity is a hangover from that. It also plays into the idea of the author as an authority- or in some cases moral arbiter- by essentially using their novels to make a social commentary.
haha yes that’s true- I’m criticising these books through the lens of modernism- though funnily enough, one of the main things that causes my boredom is steam of consciousness (ironically a modern invention 😉 ) Thank you so much for your comment- it was so interesting- and it certainly got me to think! Hope you don’t mind my rather rambling reply 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
I would be a complete hypocrite if I opposed rambling!
And to be fair, stream of consciousness has its own societal…issues…that lead to its creation. I think that probably makes the point, though. Literature adjust to social mores and tastes as they shift, and regardless of how recent that shift was it’s really hard to look back without feeling like there’s just something a little off with a previous era’s work.
LikeLiked by 1 person
haha aww thanks! Yeah that’s definitely true!! That makes a lot of sense! Thanks so much for your insightful comments 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Interesting discussion. You see the same thing in Thomas Hardy as you do in Anna Karenina, some long detailed stuff about agriculture which doesn’t really seem to bear on the plot. The thing is, one of the central ideas of Hardy’s novels was that he was chronicling the dramatic changes to English society and I suppose there were no film makers or TV crews around to do it. Maybe Tolstoy was doing the same.
Great post.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes that’s definitely true- the reason why I didn’t mention Hardy is cos I happen to like his rambly descriptions (I’m very subjective about these things, I know) A lot of his books are about the huge social changes the industrialisation brought about- so you’re most certainly right! Thanks!
LikeLiked by 1 person
I completely agree with you on all of these! I had the same thoughts when reading these books. I’m just like, why are these here?!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you! I know right!!
LikeLike
I agree with you and with your friend about War and Peace. I have been trying to read that book for years and I always end putting it down and I can’t ever finish it. Good luck!
LikeLike
Ahh well it was really worth it in the end- it was an excellent book!! Thanks!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Haha, This was fun to read. Except that I have not read any of these except les Miserables, which I cannot recall now. Oops, too bad you didnt enjoy Gabriel garcia. I went and read your last post on 100 years of solitude. He is a favourite author of mine and I love the magical realism aspect that he brings in. Maybe he isn’t your taste for a good book. Hope you will pick some othr great reads for the rest of the month. 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ahh thanks! Yeah it was a shame cos I really wanted to like it, but it just wasn’t for me, which is a shame
I objectively can see that he writes well- but even that objectivity can’t stop me from being subjective about it (if that makes sense). I’m glad you like it anyway 🙂 Hopefully!
LikeLiked by 1 person
The Count of Monte Cristo is on my to-read list so I am glad to hear there is only one boring bit!
For me the book that comes to mind when I think of boring bits is Frankenstein… because there’s a kernel of interesting, exciting and emotional story at the centre sandwiched by a whole lot of boring framing narratives. I read somewhere that the narrative at the core of it was the original story she came up with when she and her friends had a competition to tell the best horror story. Then when turning it into a novel she added the framing narratives around it to extend it and make it appear more “serious literature” (i.e. not just a cheap horror story). Not sure if that’s true but that’s certainly what it felt like when reading it – like a lot of boring padding added in later.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes- it’s a fantastic book- I really recommend it! It’s one of my all time faves! Ah yes, I can see that- although I found that book so beautifully written that I loved it (which is strange cos sometimes I don’t like books like that). Yeah that’s true- it’s also the case that a lot of it was edited by her husband Percy Bysshe Shelley- a poet who I love- and he added in a lot of the flowery prose. Personally, I think his influence shines through- and I love his style- so I loved it. But I get that you don’t- lots of people aren’t crazy about the style 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’ve read Middlemarch twice and I…don’t remember any farmer characters…. This is awkward. But perhaps pertinent to your argument that they are irrelevant.
LikeLiked by 1 person
haha quite a lot of it is provincial, so there are more than a few farmers- but it’s not like they go by names such as “farmer john” and they’re definitely not main characters- more like characters main characters have brief, but boring convos with (I’ve read it twice too)
LikeLiked by 1 person
I remember that people talk to farmers, but that’s all I remember.
LikeLiked by 1 person
haha well don’t worry- it’s not terribly memorable! 🙂
LikeLike
Reblogged this on messymess.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I am in much agreement with you on this!! Tale of two cities is a good example of a great book with an exceptionally dull middle. However I would say i don’t remember Count of monte cristo being dull ever even with the telecoms part.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you!! Yeah that’s very, very true- I can’t even remember what happens in the middle!
LikeLike
Haha. I read your previous post too, and it seems your mood continued in this post as well. As an admirer of classics it is fine that you have been candid about your experience. I will tell you my personal take. I also once wondered about the extreme descriptions classic writers seem to get lost into, and I had found there was a norm in old ages that for a book to qualify as novel and published, it had to have more than a certain word count, giving the writers to write their heart out. I don’t recall exactly but this was the explanation I had fathomed. I mostly read classics to savor the language. I feel like feeding a fine cuisine to my mind. So I always read them slowly, little by little with no anticipation of thrill. I often use the analogy of wine for classics, drinking it for taste.And when I need thrill, I would go for whisky or rum, that is, a modern racy fiction like one by Dan Brown or Michael Crichton 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Well thank you very much! I do agree with you about classics and beautiful writing being something to be savoured- but there is a fine line between something being beautiful and being boring. I’m a huge fan of classics- but sometimes they do cross over that line. To use your analogy, it’s the difference between a perfectly balanced cuisine and something that is over-seasoned. And to use your analogy of wine- not all wine is good. Sometimes the best wines can go vinegary over time 😉
LikeLiked by 1 person
Haha! Ya i get the point! 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hey
I just went through and found it interesting.
You are invited to my blog too.
LikeLike
Cool thanks very much! 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
I have read the unabridged version of Les MIsérables. I love reading the plot, but honestly feel bored in those history lessons. I do not like being strayed away from the plot. The book is such a masterpiece, but are the history lessons really necessary? I can understand the opening with all the information about the bishop, but the history lessons?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ah yes I totally agree with you there. I was having this conversation with someone irl the other day- it’s a great book, but there are just sooo many parts where it goes off the boil. (And if you’ve studied this period of history, you might not even agree with his analysis) I agree!!
LikeLike
Despite that, I still read all of those bits without skipping over anything. Those bits are the only things I do not like about Victor Hugo’s writing style
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yeah I totally get that!!
LikeLike
It is still annoying though. Some of those were a bit too long though especially the “Waterloo” section. In those sections, I honestly did not want to pick the book those days, but my love of the musical is what motivated me to keep moving and my goal of finishing it by the end of the summer
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes!!! I agree with you so much!! I was the exact same- and I love the musical too- it definitely pushed me to continue.
LikeLike
I can see myself reading the book again, but if I read it again will not attempt to read it in a limited amount of time. Will try to read it in a longer span of time to spend more time with it
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ah yes I definitely get that!!
LikeLike
But have other classics to read first
LikeLiked by 1 person
haha yes- there’s always a neverending list, isn’t there?!
LikeLike
I already read Les Misérables, Don Quixote, Tale of Two Cities, Great Expectations, and Oliver Twist. Next up is Hunchback of Notre Dame, then Nicholas Nickleby and then David Cooperfield.
I just need to find the time to reread certain books. I want to reread Great Expectations and Tale of Two Cities as well because I honestly loved them, but could not figure out why. I want to reread Les Misérables because I think it will be a good book to read over a longer period of time
LikeLike