Literary Snobbism
By Katie Peltier
What role does reading novels play in my
life?
I can't honestly say that I'm a voracious
consumer of novels. When I do have the time to read for
leisure, I tend to pick up a book of poetry (e.e.
cummings), or perhaps I'll flip through my Norton Anthology
looking for short stories. During the semester these brief
selections provide a guiltless pleasure; I'm almost afraid
to indulge myself in the sustained reading of anything
(particularly a novel) which hasn't been sanctioned by the
stamp of "assignment." But if my appetite for novels is
fairly well satisfied (and sometimes thoroughly squelched)
by my classes, during breaks from school I tend to return
to the novel-reading habits I practiced during middle and
high school, which basically means that I read when my
house is quiet enough to accommodate my low threshold for
distractions.
My reading habits
are largely similar to what they were before I went to
college; yet my reading selections are decidedly different.
In middle and early high school I read popular fiction,
mostly Tom Clancy and Michael Crichton; by the end of my
high-school years, I was choosing my reading material on
the basis of recommendations by my friends or my
high-school teachers. As a result, my reading selections
were widely variegated, ranging from Ayn Rand to The
Bridges of Madison County to Piers Anthony, and I
honestly wasn't terribly discriminating. When I came to
college, however, I suddenly realized how much amazing
literature I hadn't read. Feeling terribly far behind my
peers, I took it upon myself to try to read only "great"
books, i.e., books which fell into some sort of canon
(whatever that means these days). My reasoning for this
method of choosing novels was bifold: the canon not only
suggested artistic merit, but it also assured me that the
little time I spent reading novels would augment my basic
literary knowledge. Of course, the canon is tremendous and
constantly expanding (and arguably obsolete); I chose
novels rather unmethodically while working within some
inclusive definition of "canonization," picking up books
which I had heard about in some academic setting or other
but had never gotten around to reading. Most often, these
were twentieth-century novels or classic World Literature,
although I do have a weakness for Dickens. This is
basically the same method of selection I use presently; I
try for varied content, although witty is good and
inspiring is even better. Most of the novels I read fit
this description, though occasionally a popular novel
recommended by a friend slips in.
When I thought about putting this all down on
paper, I realized that I must be a tremendous literary snob
who is confined by the dictates of a traditional English
major and who has forgotten how to read for leisure. And
that's partially true. But I prefer to look at it more
optimistically: my world-view may be myopically literary,
but on the upside, I make very little distinction between
my academic and personal interests. I am lucky to say that
I love my major, and it's a basic part of who I am.
Reading contemporary pop fiction may connect me with the
greater community, but I can easily achieve the same effect
(perhaps more readily) through other aspects of pop culture
("Joe Millionaire" included); so I read novels that make me
feel connected to the historical community rather than the
contemporary community and thereby assure me that there is
perhaps some permanence in this volatile world. Reading
the fiction of the past, whether "popular" or "strictly
literary" (which is likely a distinction I shouldn't make),
gives me a sense of continuity that I just can't find
anywhere else, and perhaps increases my erudition in the
process. So "literary snob," perhaps; but I hope my
time's well spent.
RETURN TO
CONTENTS