Are classics good or are they just classics?

In high school, we are required to read certain books; but some of these books were written a long time ago. Books and plays like “Romeo and Juliet,” “Taming of the Shrew,” and “The Great Gatsby” were all written in different situations than in modern times. These classics are often held in high regard, despite the outdated messages and authors.
People had different ideas of sanitation, style, and education. Black people and women were not equal to their white, male counterparts, and morality had a completely different definition. These books, despite having little to no similarity to modern times, are used for messages and education even today. But are these books still relevant, and are they good literature today?
Why are these books used in schools? Well, according to Tyler Scott, the North Book Master in the library, “The classics are still taught because the theme in the book is timeless; it resonates beyond the time it was written in.” The message in these books, according to Scott, can still apply today.
From what I’ve seen, I don’t believe this is always true. For example, “The Taming of the Shrew” seemed to have no educational message. The only value it seems to bring at first glance is humor and vulgarity, and some argue that those aren’t very valuable either. I’m not sure what I was supposed to take from it, and no messages stuck with me enough. The same can be said for “Romeo and Juliet,” seeing as most students just saw “check your lover’s pulse before poisoning yourself” as a message.
The books we read are not supposed to just be there for entertainment, however. They do have messages in them, despite them being hard for students to see. The problem with these messages is the feeling of redundancy in a student’s life. The reason I tend to complain about reading books is because they feel as if they are only there for future assignments, not for growth and learning. Having a good message that applies to our modern situations and lives can greatly improve students’ desire to read books. While students will complain about anything, and will rarely do work, I find that the ones who truly want to grow will try if they believe what they are reading will help them.
Plays like “Romeo and Juliet” and “The Taming of the Shrew” don’t have that clear message and don’t seem to expand knowledge or experience. “The Great Gatsby” was mainly used for themes (which I didn’t see) and synthesis essays, and “Romeo and Juliet” was only read because it was Shakespeare. No hate towards Shakespeare, but his plays were mainly made for the entertainment of people, not for the education of children. We may be told the themes and messages in the books, but students usually don’t gain much from them. This can greatly decrease the interest in these books.
In all my years as an English student, there has been one book I haven’t read, and that book was “To Kill a Mockingbird” in 10th grade. The message of ‘racism is bad’ is good, but the book is dull and that makes it hard to see the message.
I found that “Dear Martin” is much more comprehensive and less of a slog. “Just Mercy” is also an amazing book that details what happens to many black people in the justice system. These books provide a much more modern view and better understanding, while “To Kill a Mockingbird” is boring and outdated. There were no black voices in the book, and it might have been good 50 years ago, but it’s no longer relevant.
A book about racism in the justice system should have more than just white voices talking about it. White people cannot speak for black people and their experiences. The impact of this book is largely decreased by not having those voices included. Back when it was written, it would have been revolutionary. But now it is simply a book about racism and injustice without the voice of the group that it is talking about.
One reviewer on Goodreads said: “As a reader you are never allowed to feel with Tom Robinson, the Black man who is innocently convicted for raping a white woman, because all the Black characters in this tale are sidelined. This story should be about them, because how else would you be able to convince the white moderate (in the 1960s) that Black people are actually people,” and I think this sums it up perfectly.
“All Quiet on the Western Front” also had a message behind it, and fit into our war unit in Honors English. However, the book felt flowery, long, and one-sided. I thought “A Long Way Gone” was a better book, showing all sides of the story and detailing a boy soldier’s life in the war. They were different wars and experiences, and I don’t want to discount either, but the books and writing styles had many different effects. The dullness of the older books makes the messages fade to the back as I struggle to stay interested. I tend to skim a lot, and any big paragraphs are only read if the ending has importance.
Now, this is all my opinion. Most of the books I read in school don’t give me any value past symbolism and essay practice. They don’t provide me with joy or even intellectual value and I don’t feel as if there is a reason for me to be reading them whenever I am. It’s just as easy to look up a summary and use that instead of reading an entire book just to gain nothing. I would much rather read a book by an author who has lived in my decade, or even my century to learn about the world, because they have a better idea about what is happening in the world.
Not to brag, but I’m a pretty good student. English is my favorite subject, and I enjoy reading more than anyone I know. I push myself to get all A’s and do my best in every class I’m in. That being said, even with my high reading comprehension and even higher need to be perfect, I have trouble reading these texts. Some of them, like most of Shakespeare’s works, are just outdated language. Others, like “To Kill a Mockingbird,” are too dull for me and don’t provide me with value. I try to see the value in every book I read, even if it isn’t my cup of tea. But with many of the classic books we read in our English classes, I can’t see the reason for reading them, especially when there’s more modern books with similar if not the same message as the older ones.
Reading these books for entertainment or other education is perfectly fine. I can see the value of reading them, as they provide insight into different writings in the past. But, the quality of these books is yet to be proven to me. They seem very outdated, and have much better counterparts in the modern times.
Shakespeare could never have known that women were going to be able to vote and act, nor could he know that an image of real life could be captured, let alone animated. Reading a book written by a 21st-century author is much different from reading one by an 18th-century author.
However, AP tests do use these books to test students. This may be a main reason why schools focus on them so much. It could be argued that the AP tests need to adapt into the times that they are in. Having an older book with less value does not stimulate the mind like they might assume. Changing these tests and books might help students learn about the real world while also about symbolism and imagery.
Outside of school, classics don’t seem to have much appeal. They aren’t necessarily good, and neither are their messages. There are better books with the same message that can teach kids about the world, all while keeping them awake.
Classics are good to see what literature was back then, yes, but they do not have the moral lessons that modern ones do. At least, not in a modern time setting. Things change throughout time, and it makes literature from before that change less valuable.
To those trying to learn about the history and literature from the past, classics are a great way to do that. Otherwise, classics don’t have the value and substance that modern books do, so I say that we stop acting like they are the best books ever written.