Right, my bad.
Do you honestly believe that people do on some level harbor the idea that there is something like a "genre" of classics one can choose to write? "I don't feel like writing a romance novel, nor a Sci-Fi novel. And I am not any less fed up with detective stories. Perhaps it is time for a classic - better live on in the hate of millions of children than the love of a few thousands appreciatives."
Yes that appears to be an excellent point. I found it interesting what Gori had to say on the matter. Namely, that the meticulous recitation of the build-up of the army was there for the purpose of proving authenticity.
How so? If something is "pretentious", then it implies that somebody somewhere is engaged in pretense, but I'm not sure who that would be in this case: the people using the term aren't claiming any special status for themselves, and the people being attributed this status were long-dead when the term came into use.
Which works in particular?
For the same reason that the idealized tropes regarding this era strike me as pretentious. For instance the notion that Greece "invented" democracy. Or in general that this era "invented" the ideals of civilization or some such. And I take such tropes to be the sole reason why it is called the "Classical" era in the English language. You know, classical as in setting standards or signifying an important step.
But implicitly for those that were
and actually also perhaps for themselves indirectly when they draw on classical-era-tropes to justify their own doing or views.
I am interested. Personal guidance on such a huge classic, for free? Since I am increasingly interested in literature, that sounds like an offer I should take.
