I finally got around to taking a look at John Bunyan’s Pilgrim’s Progress. Knew it was a piece of Puritan homiletics, but then, so was Paradise Lost, so I figured it still might be something worth reading. But when I read the first chapter . . . urk. How did this piece of crap aquire its canonical status?
I didn’t know it was considered a classic. I mean, sure it’s old but come on. I would question where wiki gets that ‘regarded as one of the greatest classics’ bit as I’ve never heard it referenced outside of fairly fundy christian circles.
In Little Women, the girls spend a lot of time acting out scenes from the book.
Because it needs translation. What the hell is slough, anyway? :dubious:
Huh. I don’t remember that at all, but then it’s probably been 20 years since I’ve read Little Women.
Into role-playing were they? Hmmmmmm…
Kinda like a marsh-y, swamp-y patch that’s hard to travel through.
And I have Little Women to thank for the fact that I now know to pronounce it “sloo”, instead of “sloff”.
They had one in Seattle.*
Much of PP’s reputation is because it was an early work and pretty good of a devotional narrative. I have seen many surveys – of English professors, not just everyday readers – where it came up as #1 was the worst classic book.
*Obscure horse racing reference.
I think it’s interesting that in my studies, Pilgrim’s Progress is referenced on a fairly regular basis by my profs (undergrad and grad) but not a single one of them has ever put it on the syllabus. It seems to be enough that we have a general understanding of what was going on.
Well, Thackeray lifted one of the locales for the title of his work, Vanity Fair.
The fact that many common expressions have their genesis in The Pilgrim’s Progress, for me, at least, qualifies it as a classic.
Calling it a “well-loved” classic might be pushing it.
It’s a much easier read in this version.
I think it’s important to remember that when Bunyan wrote his book, there weren’t exactly a whole lot of novels or storybooks floating around, and a lot of stories were regarded as morally degenerate by the Puritans. Pilgrim’s Progress provided an improving, often interesting story that was suitable for kids–and which could even be read on Sundays, when many people considered it improper to engage in any kind of entertainment whatsoever. As a result, it became favorite Sunday reading for generations of children–serving as both reading primer and moral instruction–and was frequently the only book besides a Bible that a family owned. It’s a classic in the popular sense, not because it was necessarily Great Literature like Milton, but because ordinary people read and loved it, and it formed part of the furniture of their minds and part of the common culture. At one time, it was a “well-loved classic,” but not so much any more.
Incidentally, I read it recently and liked it OK. I was particularly fond of the giants Pope and Pagan. 
There is a re-telling in picture-book format that looks to be pretty well-done, and I plan on reading it to my kids when we get around to studying that period of history. And secretly, I rather covet the reproduction edition that contains Victorian engravings and other Bunyan sermons…
Link/cite for that quote?
The one I just got out of the library includes illos by William Blake.
Oh, well, that would be better. My own copy is some ancient cheap thing with no pictures or any other information at all (not even a publisher’s name!) that I picked up off the library donation table. I did just get a neat edition of The Faerie Queene out of the library–it has lots of illustrations and was printed in honor of QEII’s coronation. I’m thinking of looking for it on abebooks, unless I can find one with more and better illustrations in color.
I haven’t read the Pilgrim’s Progress, but Nathaniel Hawthorne’s short story (I can’t recall if it was also titled The Pilgrim’s Progress, or if it was just in a similar vein) is pretty darn good. So that’s at least one good thing about it.
Have they done a Lego version yet? I’ll only read it if it’s done in Legos.
Right here. Check item #5 in the table of contents for the article.
BTW, sorry for forgetting to provide the link the first time. Sloppy of me.