This is Classic

      According to Webster, the adjective "Classic" refers to something that is "judged to be of the highest quality and outstanding of its kind," as well as "remarkably and instructively typical." The definition also goes on to suggest that "quintessential" and "definitive" might be appropriate synonyms. Of course...so, when one of the students in my first period class spills his entire cup of overpriced coffee into the book bag of the kid sitting next to him, and said bag owner jumps out of his seat and yells, "classic move, dummy!" we are to assume this action was of the highest and most outstanding quality (if not simply instructively typical). Hmmm...something, as they say, may have been lost in the translation.

     I'm not unwilling to recognize that any language's vocabulary passes through certain chronological transitions, or that, as my British friend, Frances, is happy to point out, Americans have a knack for speeding up this process through the daily mutilation of their native tongue. As an English teacher, how many times did I circle "would of" or "couldn't not" in the midst a student essay? And when did "morph" become an acceptable verb to describe human change...butterflies, yes, but people?...Not something I want to see.

     Then there's my personal favorite: "awesome;" as in, "this book has an awesome theme," or "the end of this story was really awesome."  What does that mean, really? That you got to the end of the book and that you had a feeling of "reverential respect mixed with fear or wonder?" I used to criticize kids for using "nice" or "interesting" to describe the various aspects of a novel. Maybe I should have left that alone.

     Of course, as children of the 60s, my friends and I were once known to describe innumerable items and experiences as "neat" or "groovy." I was a lot of things as a teenager, but "neat" was definitely not one of my finest traits. And "groovy?" What did we think we were? Record albums? (For those of you who don't know, by the way, records were those large flat musical discs that could be easily scratched or broken, but for some reason, have now become collectors' items under the pseudonym "vinyl." )

     But back to "classic." When I first decided to write novels, I was determined to write a classic novel. I was quite secure in my decision, especially since I had spent a good 30 years writing the following definition on the board (and having dozens of students dutifully write it down): "Classic Novel = One that stands the test of time." Not counting the kids who immediately raised their hands to ask when the timed test was going to take place, the majority of my students did eventually learn to work with this definition quite well.

     The first challenge was to get them to apply the definition to a novel we were studying. So I would then write on the board: "Why is The Scarlet Letter a Classic Novel?" and ask them to respond to this question in writing. Seven kids wrote: "Because it's old, long, and boring," and handed in their papers. Two others wrote: "Because Nathaniel Hawthorne probably spent a lot of money on advertising." (Now that I'm a writer, I feel that may have been a distinct possibility.) Another kid wrote: "Because it was made into a movie...I think." And three more kids wrote: "Because it's really hard to read and no one gets it." Only one student spent some time trying to figure out how the characters, the plot, and the theme represented universal, unchanging ideas and values. But this was the same kid who spilled the huge cup of coffee in his friend's bag.

     They were much more enthusiastic about the task when I asked them to try and figure out which contemporary novels were most likely to become "classics." Unfortunately, in response to this, some kids wrote things like: "people will always do drugs," and "superheroes will always win out in the end." After that, I wasn't sure I really wanted to know what they were reading, but at least I knew they were reading something.

     So...how would I define a "Classic Novel?" What immediately comes to mind is (sadly) The Scarlett Letter. and then maybe The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, and certainly The Great Gatsby. And who doesn't love The Old Man and the Sea? (if, as a teenager, purely for its brevity). I know that even now, 50-100 years plus after each of these were published, I can still go to a bookstore and get a copy (if I didn't have five copies of each one already).

    As for the Classic novels on my bookshelf, they are usually more defined by the degree of yellowing on their pages and the intensity of that musty smell emanating from within, when said pages are casually flipped. I also know one of my books is a classic when I can't remember what it's about.

    So maybe I won't write classic novels after all; maybe I should just be content with creating something that has an awesome theme, or a plot couldn't not have happened in real life, or characters that would of really existed...or maybe I should just write something really groovy and leave it at that.