Classic vs Modern Literature – Strengths and Weaknesses

By R.M. Archer

Five years ago, I balked at the idea of reading classic literature. Well, except Lord of the Rings or Narnia, since those were their own category and didn’t count as “classics”; they weren’t boring enough. And Tom Sawyer, because that one was fun. And The Scarlet Letter had interesting symbolism. 

But classics were “boring” and modern YA was full of adventure and romance and teenagers toppling corrupt governments, so clearly modern fiction was the way to go.

Flash forward to 2020 and suddenly I’m seeking out classic literature. The more I solidify my worldview, the more modern fiction loses its appeal, and all those classics I “should” read can’t be any worse, right?

That was the tipping point.

For a couple of years now, classics have been some of my favorite books and I’ve often found modern fiction disappointing in comparison. My favorite modern books these days are those that have something in common with the classics that I now love!

But as I seek to balance out my reading once more and give modern fiction another chance, I can see some of the strengths and weaknesses of each category more clearly, and it’s the differences between them that I want to look at today.

Rich Language vs. Accessible Prose

One of the things I love about classic literature is that older authors made such skillful use of words. They used a much broader vocabulary, they utilized more complex sentence structures, and they painted much more vivid images by choosing the right words instead of simply adequate words.

To quote Mark Twain,

“The difference between the right word and the almost right word is the difference between lightning and a lightning bug.”

~ Mark Twain

This is a principle that is clearly evident in classic literature. The precise use of language and the skillful way in which older authors wove their words gives the impression that these authors had a love for English and its usage.

Modern fiction, as a general rule, possesses a much simpler style. While you can find some deft wordsmiths still writing, they’re more scarce nowadays. 

Nevertheless, sometimes simpler is better. While I love classic fiction for its rich prose, I do appreciate something less demanding of my brainpower from time to time. Modern prose often draws less attention to the writing for the writing’s sake, thus placing the attention more squarely on the story alone.

Modern writing is usually more fast-paced, as well, sweeping the reader along instead of taking pages on end to describe a single tree. Personally, I enjoy the slow pacing found in, say, Tolkien’s or MacDonald’s work, but modern fiction is often better-suited for readers who prefer a faster-moving plot.

Theme vs. Action

To continue our discussion of pacing, classic literature and modern fiction often have different focal points: classic literature often highlights the themes and heart of a story, while modern fiction often highlights the plot and action of the story.

This is by no means a firm dichotomy. Both categories contain emphasis on both theme and plot. However, classic literature is more likely to wax poetic about the story’s themes, all that the characters are going through, the way the setting reflects the mood or theme, etc. Meanwhile, a modern piece of fiction generally assumes the reader will pick up on the theme as the story goes along and there’s no need to dwell on the theme for its own sake.

I think this point goes hand-in-hand with the previous. If you want to really drive home a theme, deliberate wording is your ally. If the point is simply to convey what happened and let the theme show through along the way, there’s a decreased need for precision.

Personally, I often prefer the richer, more pronounced themes in classic literature. When every element of a story points to its theme, there’s greater opportunity for more complex ideas to be explored and there’s always an intention to the story. 

On the other hand, incidental themes give you less to analyze and unpack. The story might feel less purposeful, either because the author never developed an intentional theme or because the theme is more obscured by the plot, but the themes might feel more organic to the story.

Of course, I’ve also read modern fiction where the reader gets beaten over the head with the theme because there’s no nuance. This is a situation in which a story suffers for modern literature’s simple writing style. While classics are often overt about their themes, they rarely lack nuance; in classic literature, the two (intention and nuance) often go hand-in-hand.

I like to evaluate literary themes, whether in classics or modern fiction, by the principle that Brandon Sanderson put forward:

“The purpose of a storyteller is not to tell you how to think,

 but to give you questions to think upon.”

~ Brandon Sanderson

Classic vs. Modern Worldview

The prevailing worldview of the Western world has changed significantly in the past 50-100 years. While Christianity used to be accepted as the norm, a biblical family structure was expected, and intelligent design was a given; now we live in a world that rejects Christian ideals, where biblical family structure is rapidly breaking down and man is the ultimate authority.

Inevitably, this change in worldview is reflected in literature. Older literature—even older literature written by secular authors—operates on the general assumptions of an older time, and these assumptions are often in line with Scripture to a greater degree than today’s assumptions are.

When you read a piece of classic literature, you still see ideals of chivalry, chastity as the norm, God as the creator, traditional marriage to be desired, good triumphing over evil, honor and integrity as principles to strive for.

Today, it’s a lot harder to find books that don’t glorify premarital sex, homosexual relationships, cussing, rejection of godly authority, cheating, etc. While some of these topics crop up in classics as well, they’re considered abnormal and/or wrong far more often in classics than in modern fiction.

Classics are more likely to reinforce a biblical worldview than modern books are (with notable modern exceptions, mostly by Christian authors; and notable classic exceptions by secular authors). On the other hand, modern books give us a glimpse at the broken worldview of the culture that we live in, without which we can’t hope to understand our culture’s need for a Savior or the need for believers to reflect Him in all we do.

In the end, we need both classics and modern fiction. 

We need books that challenge our reading comprehension and give us a greater appreciation for language, and we need books that are easier to follow and give our minds a break. 

We need books that take their time and dwell on themes, books that we can unpack and analyze in new ways with every reread, and we need books that reflect the truth that lessons are found everywhere in life and require us to discern the theme on our own.

We need books that reinforce our worldview and bolster our resolve, and we need books that challenge our thinking and expose us to the world’s brokenness.

What differences have you experienced between classics and modern fiction? Which category of books do you prefer?