Forum Temperature: Future of literature?

[sirmyk]

I believe literary fiction is again on the rise. Yes, there are more books published today than in the years past (195,000 books published this last year? something like that?), and many of them are garbage, and maybe this increase is only due to the ever-increasing world population (6 billion yet?), but over the last few years I've noticed many literary pieces hit store shelves, dive bomb, and then head the opposite direction and become bestsellers. We need more literary fiction; there is a demand for it; culture relies on it.

 

[Motokid]

We need more literary fiction; there is a demand for it; culture relies on it.

If that is indeed true, then the laws of supply and demand will hold true.

I think I might question the "demand for it" part to some extent. I'm not hearing anybody outside of this particular forum crying about a lack of literature.

 

[sirmyk]

The book industry in general is crying...

 

[novella]

I believe literary fiction is again on the rise. Yes, there are more books published today than in the years past (195,000 books published this last year? something like that?), and many of them are garbage, and maybe this increase is only due to the ever-increasing world population (6 billion yet?), but over the last few years I've noticed many literary pieces hit store shelves, dive bomb, and then head the opposite direction and become bestsellers. We need more literary fiction; there is a demand for it; culture relies on it.

That is true. When you compare the lists of the past few years with the 70s and 80s and 90s, there's a lot more literary fiction: Ian McEwan, Ishiguro, Murakami, The Lovely Bones, J.G. Ballard.

What ticks me off is when some shite author like Sebastian Faulks is marketed as literary fiction, when it's just overwrought melodrama. Give me Pat Barker any day.

 

[Motokid]

The book industry in general is crying...

the publishers, or the people who buy the books?

When Dr. Phil's books are constantly top 10 I find it hard to believe the buying public is crying for anything other than what it's already getting...

 

[sirmyk]

the publishers, or the people who buy the books?

When Dr. Phil's books are constantly top 10 I find it hard to believe the buying public is crying for anything other than what it's already getting...

Both. There is a book audience out there that also looks at the top ten and laughs. How can Dr. Phil be in the top ten... haha. How can Patterson, or Koontz, or Nora Roberts, or Janet Evanovich (sp?) be in the top ten. Stupid people... there are many lemmings out there who rely on the top ten as their guide for books. I still wonder why The daVinci Code has been in the top for a hundred-something weeks now... and then I laugh. Stupid lemmings. Thank God (or whomever) for Oprah... at least she pushes the literary market out there (sometimes, at least; other times she pushes crap and slips around in it).

Maybe the book industry needs three categories to base their top tens: Literary Fiction, Non-fiction, and Mainstream garble.

 

[Motokid]

But I don't think what "real" readers, afficianado's (spelling?), regard as having "grand literary merit" will ever be top 10 blockbuster material.

I think the general masses will always read the stuff many here consider to be so much praddle....I could be wrong...it's been known to happen...

 

[novella]

But I don't think what "real" readers, afficianado's (spelling?), regard as having "grand literary merit" will ever be top 10 blockbuster material.

I think the general masses will always read the stuff many here consider to be so much praddle....I could be wrong...it's been known to happen...

Quite a good percentage of books that sell well have intellectual merit. Sometimes people just buy them because they want to be intellectual, but they never read them. That accounts for Stephen Hawkins selling so well, or Chaos or The Power Broker. Those books are trophies for a certain kind of person's bookshelf.

Ian McEwan is another. His publisher positions him well to be a best selling author, though he undoubtedly writes literary fiction (albeit, not masterpieces).

 

[sirmyk]

Which novels would you consider contemporary literary masterpieces? Just a question to throw out to see what stirs up...

 

[novella]

By contemporary, I'm guess you mean things published in the last ten or twenty years or so?

Off the top of my head: The Shipping News, The Quincunx, Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy, Play It as It Lays, Pat Barker's WWI trilogy . . .

I think all of these are unique, first-rate, and irreplaceable.

This is an entirely subjective list of books I think can scarcely be improved.

 

[AngusBenton]

By contemporary, I'm guess you mean things published in the last ten or twenty years or so?

Off the top of my head: The Shipping News, The Quincunx, Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy, Play It as It Lays, Pat Barker's WWI trilogy . . .

I think all of these are unique, first-rate, and irreplaceable.

This is an entirely subjective list of books I think can scarcely be improved.

Joan Didion is among my favorites. I like you more and more...even as I repulse you with my odorous bile...

 

[novella]

Joan Didion is among my favorites. I like you more and more...even as I repulse you with my odorous bile...

Yeah, I love her too. Her understatement and detachment, the way she pokes around a subject and ties it to personal experience. She has a really modern American voice, I think.

(I love the smell of bile on a forum. )

 

[sugarz]

I think we all know what the criteria is for crap fiction, but what is the criteria for great literary fiction. If we read a contemporary novel, how do we know if it is going to be the next Gatsby, Mockingbird, or even Jane Eyre or Two Cities?

 

[KristoCat]

Which novels would you consider contemporary literary masterpieces? Just a question to throw out to see what stirs up...

I can't resist. Still assuming the past 20 years are fair game...

Don DeLillo's White Noise
Salman Rushdie's The Satanic Verses
Italo Calvino's If on a winter's night a traveler
Barbara Kingsolver's The Poisonwood Bible

... to name four of my favorites.

 

[sirmyk]

I believe a literary masterpiece is something written one will remember 20, 30, or even 100 years from now.

Some memorable fiction I have read and will remember until I die (and will be able to read over and over again before then): The Life of Pi, Lovely Bones, The Poisonwood Bible, The Stand, The Shining, Ghostwritten... there are many others. These may not even be considered literary fiction to some, but they are books I will definitely remember on my deathbed.

 

[direstraits]

I have another example: Napoleon Bonaparte introduced free public education to all French citizens. Very forward thinking. A real leader. Those "tagging along" now have one of the highest literacy rates in the world.

In fact, worldwide literacy rates have increased 35% since 1980. Even if you can find a more conservative estimate (for those who doubt gov't statistics), rates have increased markedly. How do you account for that, if not the contribution of technology?

I have another example: the foundations of democratic government as conceived by a few ancient Greeks enabled a couple of millenia of generations to have a political voice, putting government at the service of the populace. Glad I was 'tagging along' for that one.

Being literate and smart these days doesn't necessarily mean you have to know how your electric toothbrush works. It means you have an ability to find and use good-quality information. Nobody has been able to know 'everything', even by reputation, at least since Milton. Even he probably couldn't get a coconut down from a tree by himself.

novella...

What motokid said was:

If the world is dumbing down, why has mankind advanced more in the last century than ever before in the existance of all earthly life?

Here's what I said:

It's the top few percent of humanity that brings the whole of mankind forward. The changes wrought by these cream of the crop propel humanity, while the rest of us are merely tagging along.

My response is in direct answer to that question. Personally, I don't think that mankind has advanced because the world, the human collective, is smarter. The real advancements come from the select few whose decisions shape the world. Your Napolean made a visionary and forward thinking decision that propelled the world. The French people didn't start picking books by themselves and started reading on their own. Well, with all due respect, they probably would, but not before Napolean's decree. Your 'few ancient Greeks' who conceived democracy reinforced my point.

I do not dispute that the average person is smarter now than before, government statistics or not. Plus I agree being literate and smart doesn't require knowing the inside of your toothbrush. But then that's not what I was talking about. Or I thought I wasn't...



ds

 

[novella]

Hi ds,
I guess what I objected to was characterizing someone who understands microchip technology as part of an 'elite few.'

My point is that there is so much information (and I think you have said the same) out there, that it must be subdivided and distributed in order to make it useful. That engineer might not understand complex software architecture or how to fix his car or fly a plane. We all rely on someone else knowing their segment.

A few hundred years ago it was actually possible for one person to seem to know all there was to know. Now that's impossible. But that's okay. We've learned, as a society, to share and use all that stuff we don't know ourselves. To me, that is a tremendous step forward.

I see that we are essentially in agreement. My examples of Napoleon and the Greeks is that sometimes a good idea does make everyone smarter. Which is nice.

 

[direstraits]

I see that we are essentially in agreement.

Good, cause I'm oh so hard at work on a piece of drivel, er, fiction, that I'd like you to comment on in Writer's Showcase.

ds