Love of the Classic as Snobbishness?

On occasion, I get into some rather interesting conversations about the classics, and whether it's snobbish and unrealistic to expect readers to appreciate works by William Shakespeare or Charles Dickens. After all, those works are from a far-off time and place. I've heard that the struggle to get any understanding or enjoyment only serves to discourage readers (and students in particular) from reading at all.

While it's true that some works of literature are more difficult to read than others, I've worked with students who have gained a great deal of insight (and yes, even appreciation) as they made their way through required reading. I've been reading classics since my earliest reading days, and I haven't forgotten how difficult some books have been to forage my way through. I also know that I cherish some of those very books--for the wonderful treasures that I was able to unearth in those pages.

So, I can't bring myself to believe that it's at all unrealistic to encourage (and even demand) that students appreciate/love the classics: Shakespeare, Dickens, Chaucer, Whitman, Thoreau, Hawthorne--as age appropriate (but even so, why discourage students from trying books that are deemed to difficult for them to grasp?). The classics offer insight into the development of literature, into our written word, and into human nature. The times are different; the language may be fraught with archaic terminology; but many of the truths and themes are the same. We learn and grow; love and laugh; come into this world and pass away; cherish life and destroy it.

So, what does it mean to be a snob? Are you one? Am I one? Must you necessarily be a snob if you enjoy a good book--a classic, a book that was first published 50 years ago (or more)?

Take a look at Am I a Snob?, as Sean Latham explores not only the origins of the term but what it has come to mean for writers. Then, join the discussion: "Do you see yourself as a literary snob or literary elitist?"