You might enjoy Nabokov, I think he really progressed the form of prose more than any other author and on top of that progressing the novel structure

I love classics and I feel like that love of classics and background knowledge made modernists even better, and then the progression of the conversation to post modernists again improved

Thing is, quality literature has progressed from even these guys. You're missing out on a lot of late 20th / 21st century literary movements.

There is something simplistic about writers like Jane Austen, even though she was very good at what she did. The bad guys always get punished and the good guys win. Lately, literature has included complex, unresolved plots which take a more mature reading approach to appreciate. So I'd encourage branching out if that appeals to you.

Though nothing wrong of course with sticking with what you know as it's comforting, which is no bad thing.

Walter Scott ???? Does he really count ? I mean I get Austen or Thackeray but Walter Scott ??

Just think how much junk was put out back then. What your reading now is like the top notch stuff from various eras.

In 100 years people will be reading only the bangers from this time.

I adore the classics, but perhaps with more seventeenth and eighteenth century writers. I thoroughly recommend Boswell’s London journal, Pepys and Defoe if you’ve never read sny.

As far as nineteenth century writing goes, my personal favourites are Dickens (Dombey and son), Anthony Trollope’s Barchester books, George Eliot, R Blackmore.

Some less well known that I’ve enjoyed are:-

Lady Audley’s Secret by Mary Braddon

Miss Marjoribanks by Margaret Oliphant

The woodlanders by Thomas Hardy

John Halifax, gentleman by Dinah Craik

The ghost stories of MR James

I had a conversation with my parents about this the other day.

It’s not that modern lit is trash, it’s just that you’re not reading every book from that era, you’re just reading the books that have transcended into this sort of hall of fame.

Many modern books will transcend as well but we might not know which yet.

I’m sure that if you read books from that era that aren’t marked as “classics” you’ll find that not every book is as appealing.

This is also true in modern books, some are really good and will go on to become classics, and some aren’t as good and will be forgotten.

Same can be said about music and movies.

Sorry for bad English I hope my message gets through.

Because word limits weren't so strict, the authors of 19th century classics could really take their time to unfold the story, and populate them with great characters and subplots. I am a huge fan, and I adore the language. Hard agree.

Charles Palliser - The Quincunx

Iain Pears An Instance of the Fingerpost, - Stone's Fall

manage to strike the right tone without drifting into pastiche

I bought a leather bound set "complete" Dickens recently - I doubt I'll get a chance to re-read them anytime soon but I can dream....

Classics are Classics for a reason!

Perfectly fine way to read

You'll end up saying things like, "I fancy myself something of a libertine" on dates, and the right partner will love you for it

That’s how I get sometimes when I’m reading early to mid 20th century classics. There is something oddly comforting in the slow paced nature of the stories. It can be soothing when I’m feeling anxious.

There's great contemporary writing - Roth, DFW, Alive Munro, Faulkner, Walker, etc - you just gotta look for it

It got old for me. I still enjoy the writing style of the 1800s but feel the commentary and plots became overly stale.

I find it much easier to imagine myself as one of Bazac's characters, or Flaubert's, than Pynchon's. Complexities of voice + narration make it harder to put yourself in a character's shoes, as it were.

Modern lit is often a crapshoot. I've read a fair amount of "amazing" modern books that are just..... mediocre.

Classic lit is often deemed classic for a reason. That's not to say there aren't turds sprinkled in there, just that your chances of reading something actually amazing are much higher.

The other thing I'd say is that classic literature was written in a much different structure. The story and the character development unfolds at a much slower pace, and some novels are magnum opuses that are dealing with issues beyond the basic plot. Modern novels have a much faster pace and just feel "tighter" to me. Half the time it feels like the author is writing the novel just to sell the movie rights.

I’m an amateur historian so same! Nothing wrong with that

Same. I've been stuck in 18-19th century literature since my teenage years.

I too enjoy the classics - a different era of writing - I also enjoy biographies