Does It Have To Be A Classic To Be Worthwhile?

I have recently read “A Tale of Two Cities” by Charles Dickens and decided to compare it to other books that I have read recently such as the “Tomorrow When the War Began” Series. The difference between these two books is very obvious. The writing of A Tale of Two Cities is much more sophisticated compared to John Marsden’s “Tomorrow” series and Dickens’ writing is of a certain class that Marsden does not reach.

Dickens uses extended metaphors such as wine being used as a symbol of blood; and writes the book as a narration, allowing him to give his own personal opinion and thoughts. The book alludes to the character of Christ adding to the depth of the plot and overall, is an interesting but difficult read.

The Tomorrow series is written from the point of view of Ellie, the main character of the books. It is set in the near future where Australia is being invaded from an unknown country and is an easy read and to be enjoyed by most teens who read it.

Personally, I enjoyed reading the Tomorrow series more than A Tale of Two Cities, not because I couldn’t understand “A Tale” or because it was too challenging, but because “Tomorrow when the War Began” got me hooked from the start and appealed to my society more than “A Tale” does. I’m not saying I didn’t enjoy Dickens’ work; no I enjoyed it quite a lot, the storyline was interesting and being a historical novel, I learnt quite a lot. However I found it hard to relate to the characters in the book because it wasn’t relevant to today’s society.

I don’t believe a book has to be a classic to be interesting. I know some people who refuse to read anything less than fifty years old. Personally I think that modern books can be more interesting and although most won’t stand the test of time and be remembered in fifty years, they are still worth the read.

Advertisements