Classic Literature Through Pop Culture: A New Approach

Introduction: Pop Culture as a Mirror of Classic Texts

When one watches Rambo: First Blood Part II, is it actually a contemporary version of the Iliad — a portrait of the ferocity of Achilles on and off the battlefield? When we watch Francis Ford Coppola's Godfather trilogy, are we really watching a modern rendering of Aeschylus's Oresteia? Is today's Jerry Springer yesterday's Euripides' Hippolytus? Is Rodney Dangerfield's Back to School really Aristophanes's The Clouds? Could flicking through the pages of Playboy be tantamount to listening to Plato's Symposium, a discourse on sex and love, or reading Castiglione's Renaissance courtesy novel The Book of the Courtier?

Richard Keller Simon, in his book Trash Culture, advocates the simultaneous study of classic literature in its traditional forms alongside its contemporary interpretations. He highlights the importance of promoting popular culture in conjunction with classic literature in order to grasp the crucial perspective in which canonical works come alive for new readers. In rejecting Stallone's interpretation and condensation of the Iliad as incapable of conveying any of the inherent messages of its classic counterpart, we deny popular culture its potential as an influential educational device.

Simon's Case for Pairing Tradition with Popular Culture

There are many proponents of Simon's assertion — literary enthusiasts who see the benefits of studying literature in pairs, both in its traditional and contemporary forms. Leslie Fiedler, in his book What Was Literature?, argued that the exclusive examination of the art novel (Joyce, James, Edith Wharton) is a passé exercise, and that our approach is flawed if it cannot accommodate the detective novel, the pornographic fancy, and the comic strip.

Marshall McLuhan placed great importance on the delivery of themes inherent in literary works. The fundamental idea behind his book The Medium is the Massage is that the message is largely shaped by its method of delivery. If the substance is overwhelmed by the medium, what we say becomes less significant than how we choose to convey it. McLuhan's conviction in technological determinism is captured in his well-known phrase: "We shape our tools and they in turn shape us."

Robert Scholes also conveyed his concern that English departments would become obsolete unless they modernized. The answer, in practical terms, is that what students love and what teachers know how to teach are not as far apart as they may seem. The future of the English discipline rests on educators' skill in bringing these two types of narratives together.

Critics of Popular Culture in the Classroom

There are also many opponents to Simon's position. Neil Postman argued that today's media often undercuts the impact of traditional literary works, and that its incorporation into the educational system should not be encouraged. In his view: "[T]elevision's conversations promote incoherence and triviality... And television speaks in only one persistent voice — the voice of entertainment.... To enter the great television conversation, one American cultural institution after another is learning to speak its terms. Television, in other words, is transforming our culture into one vast arena for show business. It is entirely possible, of course, that in the end we shall find that delightful, and decide we like it just fine."

Alvin Kernan, through his book The Death of Literature, advocated similar views. He wrote: "In the electronic age, books, words and reading are not likely to remain sufficiently authoritative and central to knowledge to justify literature.... At the deepest level the worldview of television is fundamentally at odds with the worldview of a literature based on the printed book. As television watching increases, and more and more people derive, quite unconsciously, their sense of reality from television, the assumptions about the world that have been identified with literature will become less and less plausible, and in no time will become downright incredible."

The best answer to these critics is empirical evidence. Simon is not asserting that the most appropriate method of reaching a smarter, wiser, and more impatient population of thinkers is simply to speak their language through cultural mediums. Rather, he is arguing that we should use those mediums strategically, as a bridge rather than a replacement.

Friends and Much Ado About Nothing: A Case Study

Consider the popular television sitcom Friends as a contemporary interpretation of Shakespeare's Much Ado About Nothing. Despite the difference in settings — Renaissance Italy versus contemporary Manhattan — and the fact that one is written in verse and the other in colloquial dialogue, the central characters, storylines, and themes are remarkably similar.

This may be because all comedies share certain structural qualities, particularly those modeled on Roman New Comedy. Youthful lovers defy the resistance of their families and communities to be together, often through clever deception, and in the final act there is a celebration — a wedding or series of weddings — in which all conflicts are reconciled. Many sitcoms and films rely on this Plautine structure, just as the great dramatic comedies of earlier centuries did. Even in productions catering to younger families, children outwit parents to obtain more age-appropriate rewards. (The twins in The Parent Trap, for example, conspire to reunite their estranged parents.)

But Friends shares more with Shakespeare than the conventions of New Comedy. It is Much Ado adapted to contemporary economic and cultural surroundings, and to the demands of the 30-minute sitcom format. In both works, a group of single young men and women entertain each other, trick each other, and navigate varying states of love and commitment. Some characters shy away from commitment; others seek it out. Their lives are shaped by the ever-changing dynamics of love and friendship.

Four friends in Shakespeare become six on television, but the ways in which they relate to one another are strikingly similar. Chandler is Friends' version of Benedick: the wittily sarcastic, commitment-averse bachelor who deflects intimacy by fixating on others' flaws. Benedick eventually meets his match in the sharp and confident Beatrice, who stands up to his sarcasm and ultimately marries him — just as Chandler marries Monica. Phoebe flits through scenes like a Shakespearean fool, making quirky observations and singing absurd songs that carry more depth than they first appear.

Conclusion: Modernizing the Message Without Diluting It

Popular culture can be the salvation rather than the enemy of established humanities disciplines, especially English. Simon was correct in asserting that in order for classic literature to reach a new generation of thinkers — more street-wise and less patient than those who came before — educators must make use of the cultural vehicles that have already earned those students' attention and trust. Modernizing the message does not mean diluting it.

The parallels between canonical texts and their popular descendants are not superficial curiosities; they are evidence that the central concerns of great literature — love, loyalty, deception, family, mortality — remain as urgent as ever. What changes is the form in which those concerns are expressed. As McLuhan understood, the medium matters, but the underlying message endures. By meeting students where they are — in the world of sitcoms, blockbusters, and digital media — educators can lead them toward the deeper, older conversations that those contemporary works are, often unconsciously, continuing.

Bibliography

Bloom, Harold (1994). The Western Canon: The Books and School of the Ages. New York: Harcourt Brace.

Burgess, Anthony (1984). "Modern Novels: The 99 Best." The New York Times, late city final edition, section 7, p. 1, col. 1, Book Review Desk.

Fiedler, Leslie (1982). What Was Literature? Class Culture and Mass Society. New York: Simon and Schuster.

Kernan, Alvin (1992). The Death of Literature. New Haven: Yale University Press.

McLuhan, Marshall, & Fiore, Quentin (1967). The Medium is the Massage. New York: Bantam Books.

Postman, Neil (1986). "Chapter 5: The Peek-A-Boo World." Amusing Ourselves to Death. New York: Viking Press, pp. 64–82.

Scholes, Robert (1998). The Rise and Fall of English. New Haven: Yale University Press.

Scholes, Robert (1985). Textual Power: Literary Theory and the Teaching of English. New Haven: Yale University Press.

Simon, Richard K. (1999). Trash Culture: Popular Culture and the Great Tradition. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Spectrum. "Trash vs. Treasure with Some Help from Friends: Richard Keller Simon on the Power of Pop Culture." The Sydney Morning Herald, Saturday, September 2, 2000. Australia: John Fairfax Publications Pty. Ltd.

Spitzer, Leo (1998). Hotel Bolivia: The Culture of Memory in a Refuge from Nazism. New York: Hill and Wang.