I highly recommend John Finnemore’s take on Pachelbel and his canon.
Was your cello part something like this? 
Take that up with my mom’s professor.
Its major defect is popularity among “average” people. Praiseworthiness correlates with a lack of accessibility.
Yeah…no. It’s a superficial piece of chamber music and it always has been, and it was always supposed to be. There’s nothing particularly noteworthy musically or technically about the variations above the ground at any point. It sounds nice and people like it, but that’s not why it’s not “great”. And it’s fucking tedious to play.
As a point of comparison, I’ve gotten into arguments over Carmina Burana on this point, which does attract a lot of “It can’t be good because it gets played a lot and the oiks like it” snobbery. Personally I find it a remarkably good composition for what it is.
The snobs do like to play the “But it’s no [ X ]'s Requiem” card, to which I can only say that no, a piece setting a bunch of vulgar poems in vulgar tongues to music is in no way comparable to a millennia-old religious service on mortality and faith. A better comparison is probably Polovtsian Dances, and frankly Orff more than holds his own against Borodin in my opinion (not counting R-K’s orchestration, which is always stellar). You don’t have to like it but it’s a solid work nonetheless.
(Rejecting it because Orff may well have been a Nazi sympathizer is, however, a perfectly valid reason although this is still a subject of debate among scholars).
Sorry - I’ve gone off on a tangent. Anyway, Pachelbel was an excellent composer but the Canon in D ain’t great regardless.
Huh! I didn’t know this version even existed!
This is the one I saw:
I’ve read almost all the books in this thread but mostly as an adult. (Did not have very challenging English teachers.) Enjoyed them all. Personally, I love 19th-century books. They can be a slog, but you can also get a lot out of them. I find it helps if you know a lot of history so you can understand the specific milieus of the times in which the books were written if nothing else.
But if I had had to read most of them in high school? Nah, it would have been Cliffs Notes time.
I tried CliffsNotes once in high school. Turns out the faculty were well aware of their existence and wrote their tests around them. If all you did was read the CliffsNotes version of a book you were almost guaranteed to fail the exams on it. My teachers were surprisingly diligent about this. (Good high school, the teachers were not lazy at all.)
It made me wonder if the teachers had an anti-CliffNotes guide when it came to making their tests.
finnemore is brilliant! simply the best.
Mark Twain has a famous essay detailing how crappy he thought James Fenimore Cooper was: “Fenimore Cooper’s Literary Offenses” (1895). Probably tongue in cheek.
great expectations was boring and the main character insufferable because pip was held up to be everyone’s “golden child” hence the “great expectations” and the one thing he did do that was morally wrong set him up for life only for him to do the “noble” thing at the end making the whole exercise pointless The only thing he didn’t get was the girl at the end which he didn’t really want anyhow…
Also no one notices the uncle and the maid or what ever she was get away with attempted murder on the aunt becuase “she got what she deserved” becuase she was a bitch
you know ive never figured out if twain’s well-known prejudice towards Indians was exaggerated or not because he sure used it for comedic effect in his books like roughing it …
Twain wrote a second essay assailing Cooper – Cooper’s Prose Style
http://strangebeautiful.com/other-texts/twain-coopers-prose-style.pdf
I encountered this one first, and think it’s funnier. It’s not as well-known
Same here. Great concept. Great movie. But the source material not so much.
Thanks. Not sure I’ve seen this other one.
I own a CD of varous arrangements and interpretations of Pachelbel’s Canon. It’s called “Pachelbel’s Greatest Hit” [singular].
It’s still an incredibly boring piece, possibly the worst thing he ever composed.
I can’t imagine listening to an entire CD’s worth of the canon. While I don’t hate the song, it is distinctly background music and completely beige to me.
I had an aunt who was a librarian, she mostly recommended Agatha Christie, Nero Wolfe, Winston Graham, things like Lives of the Saints, books on mythology, the Illiad, and many historical novels set in medieval times. I started reading ‘great books’ on my own time in high school. Read ‘Gone With the Wind’ a hundred times. I had hardbound copies of young people classics like ‘Little Women’, ‘Heidi’, ‘National Velvet’, and many many 60’s era Readers Digest compilations. Which made me eager to read the whole book, not the Digest version. I came across ‘All Creatures Great and Small’ by myself before it became a big thing, and my parents had two huge volumes (printed on onionskin thin paper) of the complete short stories of William Somerset Maugham. Which I DEVOURED as an older teenager and went back to again and again and again. How I loved reading! I would far more have preferred to sit home and read than to out and try to socialize. … After I was married, Mr. Salinqmind and I would read something like ‘The Great Gatsby’ together.
Which was my point - in a purely fun adventure tale, Scott was doing something no other writer was. Nor was it just Rebecca, either - the other Jewish characters were written with respect. Even Isaac of York, though Scott gave him many of the common anti-Semitic stereotypes, was not a completely contemptible character.
I don’t buy that for a minute. That same tired argument is the one that gets trotted out to defend every sort of elitist preference like that- “they’re not sophisticated enough”, “they’re just ignorant rubes”, “their palate isn’t developed enough”. As if somehow being impenetrable, hard to read, and not entertaining is a sign of how sophisticated or good a book is. Same thing for cinema, food, wine, music, etc…
“Sophisticated” in this case isn’t about superiority, it’s about experience & education which affect what we appreciate in any area. It’s easier to explain using music… I recently watched documentaries on Freddie Mercury and Adele, both included discussions of specific aspects of their (not at all average) voices, how they used them, and why this mattered in their music. As someone who is totally ignorant about music (I love Canon ), I found it fascinating that there are people who can hear and understand such complexities and can explain exactly why I like these singers. They weren’t being snobs, they were simply people with extensive musical knowledge I don’t have. It’s the same with books – I no longer appreciate the books I loved as a child because my adult vocabulary, reading comprehension, grasp of nuance, etc make me a more sophisticated reader – those books seem simple & dull now. And I’m sure there are people with much more reading sophistication who appreciate books I find impenetrable. This doesn’t make my tastes inferior or invalid, but it does mean I won’t enjoy a lot of great books.
While I agree that assigning students more contemporary writing might engage them more, and they could learn a great deal from those books, the classics shouldn’t be dropped completely. As others have explained, many of these books are considered important for reasons other than ‘good story’, and those reasons are relevant to studying English literature. And that’s what English classes are for – it’s not pleasure reading, it’s learning & learning complex concepts is often hard. But worth the effort.