3 ms·

I haven't gotten the impression that most people know classics well via osmosis, and often critiques and summaries of books (classics or otherwise) are rather i

I haven't gotten the impression that most people know classics well via osmosis, and often critiques and summaries of books (classics or otherwise) are rather imprecise, inaccurate, and biased... Sometimes you can get some surrounding information about a work, but you generally cannot replace reading/viewing/playing the work, if only due to a basic law of information density.

_delirium 8y ago
For some it's better than others. I don't feel I gained a lot (besides some enjoyment, which isn't nothing) out of actually reading & seeing performances of Shakespeare, for example. A lot of that particular set of classics' importance is in the secondary effect of how it's impacted Anglophone culture, not so much in what you gain out of the original works (which to me fall in the category of, "they're fine, I guess"). Some other classics do admittedly have interesting or insightful stuff that you wouldn't have gathered second-hand from what's generally well-known about them, though, especially those where the secondary exposure is a bit less over-saturated.