Should some classics be re-written?

[Andrew Darlington]

I do agree that it would be easier for people of this day and age to read old classics if the books were re-written but I love when I can pick up a book and it has old style writing in it. It makes me feel like I am back in that age. Sometimes I do wish books had the original and re-written side by side so you could see the old vs new.

I feel this way too

[Princewill Uchenna]

am not a fan of rewriting classics. They can be difficult to read, but that is part of learning and expanding our horizons.

[Onwuesi Promise]

Yes, I think some classics uses local languages which are too complex and hard to understand. Some of them should be rewritten with a universal language for easy understanding and assimilation.

[Blueberry Dragon]

I don't know if there is a case to be made for rewriting classics but adaptations, retellings and graphic novel versions are all good ways to get acquainted with the classics for modern readers who find the originals boring.

[Christal Merkey]

I want the classics to stay as what they are and not be turned into horror movies. Now, that is what I call unnecessary rewrites!

[Leslie coccia]

This may be an unpopular opinion but, no I don’t think classics should be re-written if the language is too hard for some readers. By re writing them, it robs the book of some of the historical elements that come through regarding the language.

[Nati Jiniya]

Jane Eyre was confusing to me, and I was not satisfied with the ending, but I don't think it should be re-written.

[Diane C Johnson]

I do not think that classics should be rewritten to conform to modern sensibilities and language. They are a product of their time, and I think modernizing them would remove some of the context. If the purpose of rewriting them is to make their message accessible to current generations, then I think that removing the context would impact the relevance or change the message.

An aspect of reading is learning and expanding one's awareness, and this applies to modern works as well. As a reader from an older generation when I read, I still learn new language, both language I'm not familiar with or that is a product of a different generation be it older or younger. I still learn about cultural differences.

It’s a catch 22 to say modern readers can’t relate because of the distance in time and language from when these works were produced but by rewriting them, we remove the access to material that would teach them about these eras and language. It makes no more sense than rewriting modern works to make them more accessible to older generations. That’s not how we bridge a gap it is how we widen it.

I think modern adaptations are the solution to convey the messages from older works and ideally spark an interest in the original work the adaptation is based on.

[Carole Kendall]

Are people really advocating rewriting the classics? Then they would no longer be classics, and we would lose the opportunity to visit or appreciate an earlier time period and the richness of language and customs of that time. If the language is problematic to current readers, dictionaries exist for a reason.

[Debra Juarez]

I don’t agree with the rewriting of classics. Why would we repaint the Mona Lisa? Surely something would be changed and the masterpiece would be compromised.

[Neil Woods]

Most people seem to be on the right lines regarding this issue!

To re-write a book that entered the canon due to its specific merits would be to create a new product, an adaptation. Where any adaptation replaces the original by definition we would lose what the original offered. This is already clear in the translation world - translator's seek to represent the text as best and fully as possible, though there is an understanding that it can only be an approximation. A gateway to heaven is not heaven itself.

The idea that we should revel in our own limitations by wanting great works of art to be dumbed down, rather than rising to meet them on their own level and in context, is a sad one to consider. I would suggest we actually promote the classics more than they currently are, with tools to understand them, and seek to learn from their brilliance and our own history.

[Benita Ogarekpe]

I understand that for most people, the idea of a classic is it staying a classic and being complex to understand. As such, many people would vote against classics being rewritten if it were up for a vote, but I personally would be grateful if certain classics were rewritten. This doesn’t mean that the originals will go out of style, it just means that readers who have trouble understanding those ones can also have an option that still allows them to enjoy these books. I personally struggled with some Shakespearean pieces that were necessary for study in high school. Something more recent I read was the count of Monte Cristo. I found it easier to follow the movie adaptation, than the book itself. Hence I’d say it probably wouldn’t be the worst idea because some of this classics could use a fresh, modern take.

[Sarah Kamran]

I do not think classics should be re written. The books I read as a child are very close to me. As an early childhood educator, I have seen so many books for children that have been adapted or changed. For example, The Three little Pigs. There so many versions available and some have interesting facts missing that I read as a child. Shakespeare should be read as it is. It is just a different style of writing.

[Violet Devreaux]

No, not only are you losing the author’s voice and removing it from the context of its time period, you’re at risk of losing the core message. Look at how poorly people interpret Lolita by Nabokov. It’s easy to imagine how subtle changes in the wording by a person who didn't get the original intent could change an entire story.