
Which is more ‘important’ reading material for a budding writer, classics or contemporary fiction? It’s a matter of more debate than I expected because I thought the answer was obvious; the classics. I was a book buyer for a small book shop and I’m now a writer, I can’t help seeing it this way.
This isn’t because the classics are objectively ‘better written’. It isn’t even to do with gaining an understanding of more ‘traditional’ narrative structures (as an apprentice carpenter might start with more simplistic wood joins and carving techniques). Though the latter is definitely worth mentioning.
For me the reason that the classics are, by far, a better use of reading time for an aspiring author comes down to natural selection.
Won’t knowing what’s ‘in’ help you get published?

Contemporary fiction is the driving operation of modern publishing. It characterises who we currently are (or at least it captures our contemporary literary culture). If an aspiring author wants to aim at being published then getting a feel for the current zeitgeist from contemporary fiction feels like the way to go.
However, maybe aiming to get published is less important than telling a good story. Connecting to the zeitgeist is great but what is it that you want to say? What place is your take on the world coming from?
About a decade back vampires became the ‘in thing’ for teen readers. I lost count of the number of vampire tales available in the ‘teen reads’ section of our book traders magazines. This went on for a few years.
However, if you were a teen author at this time there was no way for you to know how long this trend would last. To be frank it crashed hard after the release of the last Twilight book.
Wasting time being ‘trendy’
Imagine you were a ‘teen reads’ author in 2008 (the year that ‘Twilight: Breaking Dawn’ was published). You are so excited about your new book. You had the idea to jump on the vampire love train and write a great new twist on this where the girl is the vampire (breaking from Twilight, Buffy the Vampire Slayer, and Vampire Diaries).

It can easily take two to three years to get a book into a ready state and by 2010/2011 the catalogues looked very different. The vampire bubble had burst.
The writer with the vampire story in hand was me and I had put so little thought into what I was actually doing (focusing on the goal rather than my book) that my creativity suffered.
I’ve since gone back and fixed this manuscript and one day it may see the light of day. However, the thing that helped me was not reading more contemporary work, it was returning to the core works in the genre (the classics).
It was only by knowing the typical format that I could hope to rearrange it for my own purposes. It was only by becoming more aware of the expectations of this sort of book that I could hope to usurp them. In short, I needed to see what vampires really were in our culture in order to play with the concept properly.
Fiction by Natural Selection
I feel that every creative work creates forks in the literary road. The classics aren’t necessarily ‘classic’ because they’re good (though a lot of them are thoroughly engaging, well crafted works). Instead they are examples of where our literary culture has travelled.
With some degree of certainty, you can still reference great works of the past and know that the reference will make sense to a contemporary audience. Shakespeare, Austen, Dickens, even ‘newer’ works by the likes of Arthur C. Clark, Stephen King, or JRR Tolkein have reached this stage of cultural significance. Reading their work helps a writer hone in on where we’ve been and experiment with where our literary world may go next.
Contemporary fiction just doesn’t ‘fit in’ yet
Contemporary fiction hasn’t had time to catch the public consciousness. Long term success isn’t even something we can predict with awards or other honours placed on these works by peers. Contemporary fiction, by its very nature, is still in the throws of cultural natural selection.

Take the Harry Potter series for example. These books are still wildly popular. We might assume that they will go on to become markers to the culture we’ll come to be part of, but they have also received backlash from two very vocal cultural camps.
On the liberal side JK Rowling has received backlash for her views on trans women. On the conservative side (small ‘c’, small ‘l’ for both, these aren’t necessarily political concepts, more ideological) the Harry Potter books have received criticism and hatred because they depict sorcery, witches, and wizards in a positive light. This can be extremely concerning for those with a belief system that regards these things as ‘sinful’ or ‘the devil’s work’. To put books like these in the hands of children must seem truly abhorrent to those who feel this way.
We don’t yet know if there will be an ideological ‘winner’ in regards to these (not exactly overlapping) groups. If one or the other takes a leading role in the direction our literary culture may go, then there’s a chance that the Harry Potter books may be pushed aside in favour of something else when that new generation is choosing books for their children.
Instead of being cemented in cultural significance, they could slowly disappear into the margins in the same way that Enid Blyton’s Famous Five and Secret Seven books have.
Admittedly some children may still know the names of Enid Blyton’s (arguably) most famous books (including her ‘Noddy’ series). However, as someone who bought books for an independant toy/book shop for over ten years, children just aren’t reading them any more.
In another generation I find it highly unlikely that the Famous Five and their antics catching smugglers and other ‘criminal sorts’ in and around Cornwall and beyond will be remembered or known. As much as I enjoyed them as a child it’s when watching my own children read them that I see how culturally removed the Famous Five have become. Enid Blyton’s works have become too distant from modern culture to become ‘classics’.
The ‘classics’ are the works that are left once the culturally insignificant is worn away. This process is as unintentional and unpredictable as biological evolution (though it happens much more quickly). We don’t choose which things become culturally significant, history will decide that for us.
Contemporary fiction can be extremely enjoyable. It can also, obviously, teach us a great deal about the craft of writing. However, from a writer’s perspective, at best, it may help us see which things are currently proving popular with publishers.
That’s the blessing and the curse of concentrating solely on contemporary fiction; all it takes is a tidal shift and we hear things like ‘no one is reading vampire books any more’ or ‘post-apocalyptic wasteland has been overdone’.
Contemporary fiction is modern craft at it’s best (sometimes) but it hasn’t yet felt the harsh winds of cultural change. The very same winds which have tested the mettle of the classics and shown them as pillars and markers of who we are and where we’ve been.
I would never suggest skipping over contemporary fiction. There’s a lot to be gained from seeing writers rearrange expectations and norms to create something new. However, if any reading experience is to be truly useful to an aspiring author then it will come from the works that show them where our writing culture comes from.
Please feel free to debate this out in the comments below. I welcome any and all takes on this topic.
As always, thanks for reading, all the best, John


In a
Many families encourage an outlook like this regarding resources like books, toys, games, game systems, and more. A more utilitarian approach could come from a number of reasons, whether it’s a household where money is tight or simply a household that avoids conflict over leisure resources. In households where parents choose this more utilitarian approach, the children themselves may not feel that it’s appropriate to describe themselves as ‘owning’ certain toys, and perhaps books as well.
However, let’s circle back to a more real and still troubling statistic.
As an author, I obviously see a more pragmatic benefit from people buying my books for their children. Book ownership supports your favourite authors and helps ensure the publication of more books you like. Is this important for child literacy, though? No, not really.
Childhood reading can also influence your adult wage level (especially if you start off less well off). In a study for ‘The Institute for Fiscal Studies’ (
The reported one in thirteen ‘non-readers’ (7.7%) is remarkably close to the same figures regarding ‘non-readers’ in a
The 1980s study also checked in with the children when they reached 16. At this point they asked about ‘reading culture’ at home. Only 43.6% reported that their dads read books, and 57.6% reported their mums reading books. Maybe if more of us allowed our children to see us reading (and enjoying) books, they might be more inclined to do it themselves.




















