If the classic novels of the past were written today, without the glow of nostalgia, would they still be considered great novels? or even published? Styles change. Trends change. Maybe what was great for its time back then would be disregarded today.

Look at Charlotte’s Web. Let me posit my controversial opinion that publishers would reject it today because:

• The first two chapters are about the girl Fern. But then it switches to Wilbur’s story, and she fades from the plot with no significance.
• Wilbur is a passive protagonist. First he is saved by Fern then Charlotte out of random kindness. Then he is saved by luck of winning a special prize at the fair. He does nothing to earn these; they were just handed to him.
• He makes only two decisions in the whole story: 1) He follows the goose’s advice to escape from his pen, only to change his mind and never do it again. And 2) he decides to take Charlotte’s egg sac back home from the fair. Aside from that, things just happen to him.
• Plot hole: Why aren’t people amazed by the spider that can write? Why instead are they amazed by the pig who does nothing but stand beneath the miraculous spider’s webs?
• Plot hole: Despite the miraculous webs, Mr. Zuckerman still plans to slaughter Wilber unless he wins a prize ribbon at the fair, but why? Why does a prize make any difference?
• Wilbur is whiny and naive, not the most likely protagonist to root for.
• Charlotte is two-dimensional. She’s generous and patient, but not much else.
• Omniscient narration is unfashionable today.
• The plot is thinner than most stories today.

There, have I ruined your childhood? Ha! 😈

Can you find a successful contemporary book that has the qualities/flaws above? Perhaps we give a free pass to nostalgic books, even recasting their flaws a strokes of genius.

Counterpoint

I’m not saying Charlotte’s Web is a bad book. Maybe it just demonstrates that sometimes defying the conventional guidelines can be a good thing. Cases in point:

• Favors and luck happen upon Wilbur without having to work for it, which is passive. But children love receiving good things, especially without having to work for it. Once upon a time, a boy’s parents gave him everything he wanted. The End. While that’s a dull story, it is what children fantasize about. So maybe passive protagonists are fine for young readers.
• Every kid wants to be special, especially without having to do anything. Wilbur embodies that fantasy, because, without trying, he is Some Pig, Terrific, Radiant, and Humble. So again, maybe passivity is fine for young readers.
• Charlotte is the perfect mom. She’s always kind, patient, and giving, and never asks anything of Wilbur. That may be two-dimensional, but it’s a young reader’s fantasy. No wonder they cry when she dies.