# Reading > General Literature >  Good classics to start with

## misterlit

Alright, I have a question, what are the best classics that are best to start with, those that are entertaining yet not very difficult to read. I have read Austin, Dumas, and some Stevenson and I loved them, but I don't really know where to go from here. I just want to know some good/easy starting points for my journey into classic literature. Any help will be greatly appreciated. I know this is all subjective but I see what you guys say and take it from there.

----------


## TurquoiseSunset

> I know this is all subjective but I see what you guys say and take it from there.


 ...Agreed.

You probably have in school, depending on your age, but have you tried F. Scott Fitzgerald?

----------


## Stargazer86

Steinbeck has several short novellas. Quite depressing but they are not at all difficult reads. Pretty to the point, in fact

----------


## bounty

the first three books that popped into my head were _huck finn, the prisoner of zenda,_ and _the scarlet pimpernel_.

----------


## Jeremiah Jazzz

I'll recommend the works of Conrad, Nabokov, Dostoevsky, and potentially Faulkner if you're feeling ready for something new.

----------


## kiki1982

Sir Walter Scott? 

Hisare historic tales like Dumas, but 40 years earlier from a more sensitive point of view and less pompous as Dumas by moments. Not very historically accurate apparently, but still nice to read... 

Hardy?

It is not packed with symblism and one can easily read it without understanding the symbolism in it.

----------


## TurquoiseSunset

June / Historical Novel Reading: Rob Roy by Sir Walter Scott

 :Smile:

----------


## wat??

Fathers and Sons - Ivan Turgenev 

Great book, and extremely readable, as well as being fairly short. 

The Great Gatsby - F. Scott Fitzgerald 

For the same reasons as Fathers and Sons.

----------


## qimissung

Here are some suggestions. These are not too long,and are fairly accessible, depending on your taste in reading material:

Fahrenheit 451, Ray bradbury
The Chocolate War, Robert Cormier
The Great Gatsby, F. Scott Fitzgerald
Of Mice and Men, John Steinbeck
To Kill a Mockingbird, Harper Lee
The Bell Jar, Sylvia Plath
The Catcher in the Rye, J.D. Salinger
Lord of the Flies, William Golding
Like Water for Chocolate, Laura Esquivel

Also, here's a college-bound reading list:

http://als.lib.wi.us/Collegebound.html

Have fun!

----------


## stlukesguild

Conrad, Dostoevsky, and Faulkner? Great writers... but I'm not certain they are where one would wish to begin when first exploring the classics.

Dumas is a good recommendation. A good deal of 19th century novels in general: Bram Stoker's _Dracula_, Shelley's _Frankenstein_, Dicken's _A Tale of Two Cities_, Austen's _Pride and Prejudice_ and _Sense and Sensibility_, Goethe's _The Sorrows of Young Werther_, Hugo's _The Hunchback of Notres Dame_ (or _Notre Dame de Paris_), Oscar Wilde's _Portrait of Dorian Grey_. I agree with the idea of seeking out some of the shorter classics as a place to start: Turgenev's _Fathers and Sons_, Robert Louis Stevenson's _Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde_, Lewis Carroll's _Alice in Wonderland_ and _Through the Looking Glass_. the tales of Edgar A. Poe, Ambrose Bierce, H.G. Wells, Rudyard Kipling, and even Tolstoy. For more contemporary works: The short stories of Hemingway, Steinbeck's _Of Mice and Men_ and _The Pearl_, F. Scott Fitzgerald's _The Great Gatsby_, Thomas Mann's Death in Venice, Anderson's _Winesburg, Ohio_, and Falnnery O'Conner's short stories. Poetry is a separate beast in and of itself and if one has little of no experience of it the best recommendation is probably to choose a good anthology. Good luck. :Thumbs Up:

----------


## Dr. Hill

I think Mann is a bit heavy for a beginner, stlukesguild. Though Death in Venice is quite short.

----------


## stlukesguild

I certainly wouldn't recommend any of his novels. I avoided Henry James for the same reason.

----------


## Jeremiah Jazzz

> Conrad, Dostoevsky, and Faulkner? Great writers... but I'm not certain they are where one would wish to begin when first exploring the classics.


Speak for yourself and only yourself, when I was at the start pointing of delving into literature, I wish I had writers with as much scope as Faulkner and Dostoevsky have, hell, even such as Proust. Call me brave or a senile child, but that's the truth of it. And besides, one can more or less take Conrad's _Heart of Darkness_ at face value and still appreciate it's merits, after all it is being taught in high schools along with texts mentioned in this thread, (Fitzgerald, even a bit of Faulkner, etc). I stand by my recommendation.

----------


## LitNetIsGreat

Hmm, I think Conrad is a bit dense, dunno.

I would go with some of the stuff already mentioned the gothic Victorian texts and perhaps some Verne. I also think _Gulliver's Travels_ and _Madame Bovary_ would be cool too.

----------


## grace86

> Also, here's a college-bound reading list:
> 
> http://als.lib.wi.us/Collegebound.html
> 
> Have fun!


I didn't realize how many of those I've read!!

My reading of the classics started with Robinson Crusoe by Daniel Defoe. After that I read Dracula (which was a good read!) and then a few others...I can't remember the order of! But I recommend those along with Fathers and Sons by Turgenev which is really a great story and easier to follow. If you're just starting out, Dostoevsky might be a little much to take in. Conrad is good, but he makes me sleepy (but definitely worth the read). Good luck in your search! Let us know if you decide to pick any up!

----------


## stlukesguild

Speak for yourself and only yourself, when I was at the start pointing of delving into literature, I wish I had writers with as much scope as Faulkner and Dostoevsky have, hell, even such as Proust.

Hmmm... The original posting reads (and I quote): "I have a question, what are the best classics that are best to start with, those that are entertaining yet not very difficult to read." Unless you are Harold Bloom you cannot tell me that _In Search of Lost Time_ would be a classic that is at once entertaining and not very difficult to read for the average person beginning to explore classic literature. The length alone would frighten off most beginning readers of classic literature. Certainly it is impossible to know what to recommend a "starting" reader without having a good idea what he or she has or has not read... what he or she likes... what he or she has experience with. Among the first classics I explored on my own were _The Odyssey, The Divine Comedy, Don Quixote, Steppenwolf, The Glass Bead Game_, and _An Enemy of the People_. Somehow I don't think these would be ideal for most people starting to read the classics either.

----------


## JBI

Start with Homer, and work down. That's the most "pragmatic" way to learn to read. Of course, though that only deals with one half of Occidental classics - the Bible filling in the other side, even though it wasn't written in the Occident (As, to an extent, Greek work wasn't as well). From there, either move outward, or downward. I prefer outward now, but personally, I moved downward - so you start pounding through first the major Roman figures, then go through middle ages - Generally, Njals Saga, Chretien de Troyes, Marie de France, and a few epics suffice - and then slowly work through the rennaissance, - from there, you can either go down through the 18th century, or skip it - I prefer skip it, though I have read my fair share of mediocre satires. Downward then, to the Romantics - and beyond.

Of course, the best place to start reading is contemporary times, but for classics, up until 1950, this method will provide the most solid grounding.

Now, if I could go back, I would have probably gone outwards - there is just so much more out there, that ultimately one ends up having to decide whether classics are really classics anymore. It's a shame too, that we are bound to translations. There are hundreds upon hundreds of translations. which are ultimately driven by the politics of the market.

----------


## qimissung

> I didn't realize how many of those I've read!!
> 
> My reading of the classics started with Robinson Crusoe by Daniel Defoe. After that I read Dracula (which was a good read!) and then a few others...I can't remember the order of! But I recommend those along with Fathers and Sons by Turgenev which is really a great story and easier to follow. If you're just starting out, Dostoevsky might be a little much to take in. Conrad is good, but he makes me sleepy (but definitely worth the read). Good luck in your search! Let us know if you decide to pick any up!


_Dracula_ is an excellent read! It's one of my favorites.

----------


## Jeremiah Jazzz

> Speak for yourself and only yourself, when I was at the start pointing of delving into literature, I wish I had writers with as much scope as Faulkner and Dostoevsky have, hell, even such as Proust.
> 
> Hmmm... The original posting reads (and I quote): "I have a question, what are the best classics that are best to start with, those that are entertaining yet not very difficult to read." Unless you are Harold Bloom you cannot tell me that _In Search of Lost Time_ would be a classic that is at once entertaining and not very difficult to read for the average person beginning to explore classic literature. The length alone would frighten off most beginning readers of classic literature. Certainly it is impossible to know what to recommend a "starting" reader without having a good idea what he or she has or has not read... what he or she likes... what he or she has experience with. Among the first classics I explored on my own were _The Odyssey, The Divine Comedy, Don Quixote, Steppenwolf, The Glass Bead Game_, and _An Enemy of the People_. Somehow I don't think these would be ideal for most people starting to read the classics either.


Now now, I did not recommend Proust but your point is clear and understandable. How can one tell? With that said, I admit I did recommend a bit of Dostoevsky, which as he is the forum's reigning hero (only rival to the _golden cow_ as one had recently deemed him on here, Shakespeare), we all know he is rarely a light or easy read. So I suppose I'm at fault. Conrad and Faulkner both have lighter works, and like I said, are being taught in high school. Perhaps, you'd agree with me, stlukesguild, isn't one of the greatest merits of literature it's actual challenge? Obviously you, and myself, have gone to lengths in search of that. Then again, maybe one is again, simply speaking for oneself.

----------


## Lynne Fees

_Anna Karenina, Gone With the Wind, Rebecca, Great Expectations, Jude the Obscure_

----------


## Josh Wardrip

"entertaining yet not very difficult." Several of the books mentioned thus far don't really meet those criteria. I'd recommend:

Sophocles, _Antigone_
Petronius, _Satyricon_

_Beowulf_
Chaucer, _Parliament of Fowls_

Marlowe, _Edward II_
Moliere, _Tartuffe_

Voltaire, _Candide_
Blake, _Songs of Innocence and Experience_

Poe, stories
Baudelaire, _Flowers of Evil_
Twain, _Huck Finn_

Joyce, _Dubliners_
Hemingway, _In Our Time_
Camus, _The Stranger_
Beckett, _Waiting for Godot_
Orwell, _1984_

A few unconventional choices, I know, but I think all could be read and enjoyed by a relatively inexperienced reader (some might require a bit more effort than others), and it covers a wide swath of Western literature.

----------


## Janine

Some Thomas Hardy for certain. I think _Mayor of Casterbridge_ an excellent read, along with _Tess of the D'Urbervilles_, _Far From the Madding Crowd._ I wouldn't agree with whoever posted _Jude to Obscure_ to begin with. That story was much heavier and difficult; in fact, after Hardy wrote the novel and had it published, he never went back to novel writing again; but he turned his full concentration to his poetry.

----------


## TurquoiseSunset

> "entertaining yet not very difficult." Several of the books mentioned thus far don't really meet those criteria.


Well really, we all have our own opinion of what's entertaining, etc. Nobody is going to interpret it the same, because it's a very subjective topic.

----------


## fb0252

start with "The Western Cannon" by Harold Bloom.

----------


## grace86

> "entertaining yet not very difficult." Several of the books mentioned thus far don't really meet those criteria. I'd recommend:


That's always going to be relative on "entertaining"...it just depends on tastes. You did mention Antigone, I'll second that.

If you're into the Classic tragedies, The Oresteia by Aeschylus was pretty good too. Robert Fagles does a translation of that I think...I recommend his translations, they're easier to read through than some others.

Glad you enjoyed Dracula *Qimmisung*! I found it quite different than how Dracula is seen in Hollywood.

----------


## Janine

[QUOTE=grace86;741498]That's always going to be relative on "entertaining"...it just depends on tastes. You did mention Antigone, I'll second that.[quote]

Grace, I read _Antigone_ years ago and loved it! Good suggestion.




> Glad you enjoyed Dracula *Qimmisung*! I found it quite different than how Dracula is seen in Hollywood.


I have never read, it but that is good to know. I should read it one of these days. It's on my list.

----------


## Janine

> That's always going to be relative on "entertaining"...it just depends on tastes. You did mention Antigone, I'll second that.


*Grace,* I read _Antigone_ years ago and loved it! Good suggestion.




> Glad you enjoyed Dracula Qimmisung! I found it quite different than how Dracula is seen in Hollywood.


I have never read Dracula, but that is good to know. It's probably a fine book. I should read it one of these days. It's on my list.

----------


## teashi

> Alright, I have a question, what are the best classics that are best to start with, those that are entertaining yet not very difficult to read. I have read Austin, Dumas, and some Stevenson and I loved them, but I don't really know where to go from here. I just want to know some good/easy starting points for my journey into classic literature. Any help will be greatly appreciated. I know this is all subjective but I see what you guys say and take it from there.


Sounds like you've already gone through the 'starting point' to me. 
I myself haven't enjoyed many of the classics I try out, and I wonder if maybe I'm just not 'ready' for them and should work myself up too. But I'll suggest To Kill A Mockingbird, it's one of the very few classics I like and it's pretty easy to read.

----------


## grace86

Hey *misterlit* which of the books you've read did you enjoy the most? Because you could also pursue authors similar to Austen, or to Dumas, or Stevenson. I mean, they may or may not have been easier reads for you, but one could recommend different books for you based off whether you really enjoyed the romance and literary antics of Austen or if you're more of a swashbuckling/adventure type for Stevenson....I think you understand  :Biggrin:  Like, which ones caught your attention the best?

----------


## eyemaker

Perhaps Dickens..

----------


## bluosean

Yes. Yes. Dickens is great. That would be my reccomendation too. Just don't read _A Tale of Two Cities_. It is boring. The least charateristic of Dickens work. Dosent have many jokes. i would rather wald through a swamp than read that again. But _Great Expectations_ is very good and not as long as _David Copperfield_. 


_Kidnapped_ (sp?) is my favorite stevenson book. He is good. Really fun to read.

meant walk. not wald. sorry write too fast.

----------


## Dark Lady

If people are recommending Dickens I would say you should start with _Oliver Twist_. Out of the few I've read it's probably the 'easiest' read, has a lot of humour in, and gets into the plot a lot quicker than the others.

----------


## My name is red

> The Great Gatsby, F. Scott Fitzgerald
> Of Mice and Men, John Steinbeck
> The Catcher in the Rye, J.D. Salinger
> Lord of the Flies, William Golding



This is a perfect list i guess.well done qimissung.But i think these are more like modern classics.
So as old classics i would also add :

Tolstoy-The Death of Ivan illych
Gogol-The overcoat (Le Manteau)
Colette-Caludine's House
Voltaire-Candid
For a start.Enjoy!

----------


## TurquoiseSunset

How about _The Old Man and the Sea_ by Ernest Hemingway?

I love that book, but's not difficult at all...

----------


## bluosean

I agree. Oliver Twist is a good book to read. A Christmas Carol would be a good one too. Anyway with all of the reccomendations she will be swamped in books for years.

----------


## Adderhead

You have to read Catch-22 by Joseph Heller. It is the most hilarious classic I have ever read!!!

----------


## libernaut

Ovid, Horace, Sophicles, plato, aristotle, marcus aurelius, nietzsche, kierkegaard, dante, huxley, george orwell, hermann hesse, ernest hemmingway, jd salinger,camus, sartre, sun tsu, lao tsu,franz kafka, shakespear, steinbeck

and since everyone is saying steinbeck here are some steinbeck titles i recommend:
Of mice and men,
cannery row,
tortilla flat,
and east of eden was my fav by him

----------


## Copernicus

Hmm, of course your taste will have a lot to do with it but I would recommend as follows:

The Great Gatsby - F. Scott Fitzgerald
Crime And Punishment - Dosteovsky
Call of the Wild - Jack London
Pride and Prejudice - Jane Austen
A Midsummer Night's Dream - Shakespeare
A Christmas Carol - Charles Dickens

I think you'll find something in there to cater for any level of reading or understanding although I echo the point that nothing need to be understood to be enjoyed. 

PS: Catch 22 is fabulous and I recommend it although not sure I it's the kind of classic you are referring to.

----------


## boye

I highly recommend 
Camile by Dumas Fils...sensational love story
Hunger by Knud Hamsun...a young man's half crazed adventures
The Time Machine..HG Wells 
The Iliad and the Odyssey by Homer...go back to the beginning of
western literature...great stuff
The Red Badge of Courage by Stephen Crane...great war novel
God's Little Acre by Erskine Caldwell...surreal southern life
The Guide by RK Narayan...exotic, mystical Indian novel

----------


## Paulclem

I'm not keen on The Time Machine - it seems so implausible now, though it does have some interesting social observation. The film from the 50s recognisd this and changed the motive force of the Morlocks to a nuclear one. 

I think there are some great recommendations in the posts.

----------

