fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #3181 ]

⌈ Secret Post #3181 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06.

__________________________________________________

07.

__________________________________________________

08.

__________________________________________________

09. [WARNING for rape]

__________________________________________________

10.

__________________________________________________

11.

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 070 secrets from Secret Submission Post #455.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

By that I mean older classics.

Different language and grammar than what you are used to.

Part of it is difficulty. Part of it is that you're accustomed to different uses of language.

I think the styles of older works tend to be more formal than that of more modern books, which is daunting to the modern reader. I also sometimes find myself confused because of how much language itself has changed.

No, no we're in the same boat. I find most (but not all) of them so hard to read that it becomes a tedious chore and I rather not. But it seems to be literature types during certain periods/countries while others (generally translated from another country) I find a bit easier to follow.

Then they get so old that I'm able to follow along again. It's weird.

But many older classics it only takes a page to realise it will be a pain and to not bother with.

Could also be that we have a lot of preconceived notions about popular works because of how old they are. I know I wasn't expecting Jekyll and Hyde to be what it was, since by now the scenario is usually played quite differently. To be honest, I actually preferred the original concept! But it's definitely not what you expect, and that might throw readers off from the get go.

I had a hard time slogging through Billy Budd. I'd read the same page 3 times and still have no idea what the fuck I'd just read, so I feel you.

This is a very subjective thing. Like, I don't find Jane Austen or H.G. Wells hard to read, but Dickens? Holy shit, his books are a slog.

For some people it might be the other way around, though. So yeah, very subjective.

I love me some Dickens, actually, and while I like Jane Austen's writing moderately, I still like Dickens more. Like you said, different strokes, etc.

it depends on the book but no you're not the only one

maybe try some newer translations of old books that were written in other languages. the language might be a little more modern and flow better

i do this

i can't read anything shakespeare in english, but translate it to my native spanish and bam it all makes sense

maybe i have to take one trip or two to the dictionary but other than that, i get to feel all like "yay, i get this joke, ha ha, very funny, billy!"

Yes. When I was in HS I used to love reading older books (I loved the word usage, the atmosphere, etc.) but after taking journalism classes and getting my writing picked apart I'm so much more used to reading modern day, efficient writing that focuses on exact word choice but still paints the picture. Now, I think older books can be tedious and annoying.

They can be, yes. Sometimes the style of writing was more formal than most contemporary literature, and people weren't always big into description as they are now. Sometimes the speech patterns are really different, and of course there's the slang and figures of speech that have changed over time. Sometimes books were written for a specific purpose besides or in addition to entertainment, maybe as a moral lesson. Or maybe it was satirical and the reader lacks the social and historical context to understand all the references.

Always worth a try, though. Because sometimes you can be surprised by how accessible something still is, and even if you don't understand everything it gives you a little glimpse into the past.

Pre-1900 writing is what I think of as "slow prose," and yes, it does take more patience to read.

[ SECRET POST #3181 ]

Am I crazy, or are older books harder to read?

Re: Am I crazy, or are older books harder to read?

Re: Am I crazy, or are older books harder to read?

Re: Am I crazy, or are older books harder to read?

Re: Am I crazy, or are older books harder to read?

Re: Am I crazy, or are older books harder to read?

Re: Am I crazy, or are older books harder to read?

Re: Am I crazy, or are older books harder to read?

Re: Am I crazy, or are older books harder to read?

Re: Am I crazy, or are older books harder to read?

Re: Am I crazy, or are older books harder to read?

Re: Am I crazy, or are older books harder to read?

Re: Am I crazy, or are older books harder to read?

Re: Am I crazy, or are older books harder to read?