On Reading Old Books

A defense of classic literature, written in the style of scholastic disputation

You may recognize the title of this post. Yes, I stole it. Coming from C.S. Lewis’ famous essay (which served as the inspiration behind this article), I wanted to take a moment to address some misconceptions about preferential treatment of classic literature.

You see, whenever I throw out a snappy note about the value of classic literature, I always hear back from some dissenters. Most people heartily agree, showing their favor by hitting that treasured ‘like’ button. But without fail, I always get one or two people who respond less than favorably towards the idea that classic literature is, in general, better than most of the modern works being written today.

I don’t mind the objections as long as they are polite; they offer an opportunity for dialogue. But rather than getting into an endless tete-a-tete with a random stranger over the internet, I would like to address this topic fully in today’s article. I have gathered the most recent objections I have heard in the past and brushed them up a bit, so as to give them their best fighting chance. So, without further ado, here is my defense of the superiority of classic literature, written in the style of scholastic disputation (because why not? Also, it’s the way they do it in the classics 😉).

Question: Should We Favor Reading Classic Literature over Newer Books?

It seems we should not, for…

1. People claim that the classics offer exposure to the beliefs and customs of civilizations, past and present. But Western Civilization has largely neglected the cultures and experiences of other cultures. It is hardly reflective of humanity as a whole. Therefore, “classic literature” is very narrow and should not be held above other literature as superior in its insight into humanity.

2. The standards for what makes a book a “classic” are arbitrary. What counts as good writing changes with each age. Therefore, the classics of the past are by no means superior to the works of the present, simply because they are different or “older” in style.

3. The classics are no longer relevant, as we progressed beyond their antiquated answers to questions about human nature. We would be better served by looking to the present.

4. People revere the classics as if they alone have something to teach us about human nature. But modern works of fiction and non-fiction are exploring the universal questions of human experience just as much as the classics of the past. Therefore, classic literature ought not to be held above the rest, as if it is somehow doing a better job at this endeavor.

On the contrary…

C.S. Lewis writes that if a man has to choose between reading old and new books, he should choose the old books. Furthermore, he prescribes that for every new book read, one ought to read an old one in between.¹

I respond that…

We should answer this question by first defining what it means for a work of literature to be considered a “classic.” It seems that classic literature has at least three characteristics. First, it explores universal themes related to human experience. This causes the classics to have enduring influence in the world, regardless of when they were written or by whom. It makes them relatable to people of all cultures and backgrounds, by virtue of our shared humanity. Second, classic literature contains rich language and skillful writing techniques which are not easy to reproduce. These take time, talent, and display a unique level of mastery over language. Third, the themes are complex and they are explored through every element of the story. Plot, characters, setting, and conflict all point back to the theme in a myriad of ways that leaves the book open to various interpretations.

The most essential ingredient for classic literature, however, is its enduring exploration of universal themes. This is where C.S. Lewis comes in. In his essay, On Reading Old Books, Lewis argues that if a man has to choose between reading old or new literature, it would be better for him to read the old literature.² The reason, he says, is not because old literature is protected from error simply because it is “old.” Rather, he likens it to a conversation. If you were to walk into a room at 2:00pm and find yourself in the middle of a conversation that began at 11:00am, you would hardly be able to contribute without revealing your ignorance of what has been said before. Furthermore, the conversation may have taken significant turns at an earlier point, and without understanding these you are liable to return to old errors, ones that have already been disproved, or accept certain viewpoints without seeing the full consequence of their conclusions.

Literature too is a conversation, one which began at the start of the world (crazy) and continues to this day. If we jump into that conversation without any knowledge of what has been said before, then at best we run the risk of sounding like fools. At worst, we run the risk of accepting views that have already been proved as unworthy. (I often wonder how many of our day’s philosophical and social problems could be solved simply by more people reading the great works of Western Civilization).

Additionally, C.S. Lewis reminds us that every age has its faults. No era is exempt from this. Classic literature is not to be preferred because it is free from faults. It is to be preferred because it does not commit the same faults (or at least not in the same way) as our current day and age. If we only ever speak with the people of our age, we will never break out of our own errors. (“If a blind person leads a blind person, both will fall into a pit.”)³ We cannot access the books of tomorrow. But the books of yesterday still help us take the blinders off and see things in a clearer light.

Finally, new books are “still on trial,” as Lewis puts it. They have not yet stood the test of time. Until they do so, we cannot really and truly argue that they deserve to be counted among the great works of history. For this reason, and for many others, it is best to start with the classics.

Replies to objections…

1. The value of classic literature is not found primarily in its ability to give us snapshots of certain societies throughout history, although this is a side benefit. Primarily, classic literature is valued because it speaks to universal themes that are relevant to all people, regardless of cultural background. The humanity presented in classics is universal; this is precisely what makes them so great. It is for this reason that we can still read the Iliad and be moved to ponder the tension between fate and will. You don’t have to be an Ancient Greek citizen to do that. Humans are human, regardless of where they came from or when they lived. The universal themes explored in classics remind us of this important fact.

2. It is not the fact that they are old which makes them better. The fact is, literacy rates have severely dropped in the past decades. Education on writing and reading is not what it used to be. People are simply no longer exposed to, and therefore not familiar with, the art of language as they used to be. This is reflected in the works that are being published today. It is true that language evolves and new styles emerge. Within those new styles, mastery can be found. But we simply cannot use that as an excuse for the poor writing that is being hailed on bestseller lists today. Mastery in any art should be judged in proportion to the form being used. For this reason you can have a classic in the comic book genre as well as in the genre of Victorian-era literature. But even if the forms are different, there should still be mastery displayed in each.

3. The main response addresses this objection.

4. There are certainly books being written today that will one day be held up as the classics of our age. However, they are incredibly hard to find for two reasons. First, they have not been tested by time. A classic is a classic because it has endured. And something cannot endure unless much time has passed. A modern book may have the makings of a classic, but it will be hard to know for sure until enough time has passed, and we are able to look back on it from the lens of a changed society to see if it is still relevant. Secondly, more books are published now than ever before. In the market of fast fiction and immediate gratification entertainment, it is simply harder to find the gems of modern literature that exist. The market is over-saturated. Classics on the other hand are tried and true. They have gone through the winnowing fan and have not been discarded. This in itself indicates that they have something incredibly important to say, and we ought to listen to them.

1. C.S. Lewis, On Reading Old Books, at C.S. Lewis Institute, www.cslewisinstitute.org. (This website only displays a portion of the essay. To read the entire essay, click here. Lewis presents his views at times in the context of Christianity, but his points are broad and solid enough to be applied to all literature, not just Christian theology).

2. Lewis, On Reading Old Books.

3. NAB Matthew 15:14.