quote:Early this year, the Book Review's editor, Sam Tanenhaus, sent out a short letter to a couple of hundred prominent writers, critics, editors and other literary sages, asking them to please identify "the single best work of American fiction published in the last 25 years." Following are the results.
Beloved, Toni Morrison
Underworld, Don DeLillo
Blood Meridian, Cormac McCarthy
Rabbit Angstrom: The Four Novels, John Updike
American Pastoral, Philip Roth
A Confederacy of Dunces, John Kennedy Toole
Housekeeping, Marilynne Robinson
Winter's Tale, Mark Helprin
White Noise, Don DeLillo
The Conterlife, Philip Roth
Libra, Don DeLillo
Where I'm Calling From, Raymond Carver
The Things They Carried, Tim O'Brien
Mating, Norman Rush
Jesus' Son, Denis Johnson
Operation Shylock, Philip Roth
Indepndence Day, Ricahrd Ford
Sabbath's Theater, Philip Roth
Border Trilogy, Comnac NcCarthy
The Human Stain, Philip Roth
The Known World, Edward P. Jones
The Plot Against America, Philip Roth
I apologize for type-os in advance. I didn't watch as I typed, just went at it. These lists...who knows? Apparently, they liked P. Roth and D. DeLillo! Any comments?
Posted by arriki (Member # 3079) on :
While I have heard of several of those books listed and even attempted reading one (A Confederacy of Dunces -- couldn't get past the first chapter), none of the rest are even on my "to read" list. None of them is ever likely to have any influence on my own writing.
I assume, of course, that this Indepence Day and this White Noise bear no relation to the movies of the same name.
Sigh. I just like novels that are more interesting to read like Resonance and like Look To Windward and even Smilla's Sense of Snow.
Posted by Shendülféa (Member # 2964) on :
You know, I haven't actually read any of those and I haven't heard of most of them. I do know some people who have read a few of those titles (like Beloved), and they didn't seem to think too much of them, so I dunno. I'd have to argue that other books were better, but that may just be because I haven't read any of those titles, but, really, I don't want to. I've got a bunch of others on my "need to read" list that I want to get to sometime.
Posted by Vatyma (Member # 2749) on :
I've never even heard of these books :O
Posted by pixydust (Member # 2311) on :
Scary list. They has 25 years to choose from and that's what they picked?
Posted by TL 601 (Member # 2730) on :
A Confederacy of Dunces is one of the most brilliant books ever written. Maybe top 10 in the history of the earth. Perhaps other civilizations have produced better books. I don't know.
Posted by TL 601 (Member # 2730) on :
In fact I'm sort of surprised it only showed up once.
Should have been listed five or six times.
Posted by Smaug (Member # 2807) on :
Probably talked to a bunch of academics and literary "geniuses". Sorry, but so often books by spec fiction authors get left out of the mix--and that's a cryin' shame. Helprin is a spec fiction writer though, and I think I tried to read his book, but never finished it for some reason or other.
[This message has been edited by Smaug (edited May 13, 2006).]
Posted by rcorporon (Member # 2879) on :
I don't know a single book on that list.
Posted by tchernabyelo (Member # 2651) on :
Well, arguably, "Winter's Tale" is fantasy, though probably more accurately it's "magic realism" (that's fantasy which gets accepted by the literary elite... )
And if it's the book I think it is (and not one by the same name - does happen), "Housekeeping" is excellent, and was made into an equally excellent film.
Frankly, I find it a little worrying that there such an "anti-literary" backlash going on here. While that list is absurdly over-Phil-Rothed, and does indicate that perhaps there is in fact a paucity of "great American novelists" currently at work, for several people to remark that they've never heard of, let alone read, any of these is... disturbing. There's absolutely nothing wrong with reading and liking fantasy and science fiction. There probably is something wrong in only reading fantasy and science fiction.
Posted by colorbird (Member # 3425) on :
The only one I've even heard of is Beloved.
Are these literary fiction? I don't even know what genre these are in.
Posted by Smaug (Member # 2807) on :
quote:There's absolutely nothing wrong with reading and liking fantasy and science fiction. There probably is something wrong in only reading fantasy and science fiction.
What's wrong with it? I'm not saying that I only read fantasy and science fiction, but if I did, what would be wrong with it? Personally, I read mostly non-fiction when I'm not reading spec fiction---there's not enough time in my life to sacrifice what I truly love to read to what would make me well-read--at least as far as other fiction goes. Maybe some day. There was a time when I was on a Louis L'Amour kick, but again, that's not considered literary either. I just think the backlash when Stephen King got his award was a bit over the top, and so I think of those who love the literary as a bunch of stuffy bone heads.
Posted by tchernabyelo (Member # 2651) on :
I'm sure many of them are. You know why they're "stuffy bone-heads"? Because they only read their own genre (and make no mistake about it, "literature" is very much a genre in and of itself).
I don't read a lot of fiction, these days (and that includes fantasy and SF); like you, I read more non-fiction (the books currently by my bed are the Dictionary of Furniture and volume III of Winston Churchill's "History of the English Speaking Peoples"). But if you are serious about being a writer, I think you can learn from pretty much any genre - romance, crime, western, thriller and even "literary", and I think restricting yourself to reading just one isn't, frankly, healthy in terms of being as well-rounded as you could be.
Posted by Lorien (Member # 2037) on :
Could have, would have, should have. The fact is you can't make someone appreciate a genre if they don't want to. Call it snobbery. Call it prejudice. Whatever it is, it works both ways: from the literary elite to the sci-fi / fantasy guru. Essentially, people are going to read what they like, and there is nothing wrong with that. The problem comes when we start assuming something has “worth” based on genre alone, and naturally, the genre I am reading is clearly the most worthy. It’s not about what you read, it’s about allowing each genre to have potential.
Posted by arriki (Member # 3079) on :
I tend to not read much in the genre I'm writing in. So, right now I'm reading a lot of mystery/thrillers. I keep prowling the bookstore looking for good, well-written books of ANY kind. And they are few and far between as far as I can see.
I buy an sf book every month or two hoping to find something worthwhile, but most seem to fail expecially in the well-written category. I did read RESONANCE by Chris Dolley and was pleasantly surprised. No nano-tech. I'm getting awful tired of that. I have this feeling that writers aren't really getting to the nitty gritty part of what that would really be like. It seems an easy way out of a lot of things. Anyway, RESONANCE was a good read. A little different. It wasn't techno-dense. I didn't have to stop, go back and re-read passages or whole sections to figure out what happened.
The books on this "best" list...they all sound like the most politically correct type of social fiction. Maybe I'm wrong. But they haven't managed to sell me on themselves yet.
[This message has been edited by arriki (edited May 16, 2006).]
Posted by Silver3 (Member # 2174) on :
OK, I know the authors at least, which reassures me. I have to say I've never been able to bring myself to like Roth, but it's just me. I guess I do read literature, but not American (I was trying to remember which literary books I'd read last, and I came up with an Indian and a Canadian author ...)
The only one I've read in this list is "A Winter's Tale": I learnt a lot of new vocabulary words, and generally liked it quite a bit.
My father has the four Rabbit novels, but I haven't got to that part of the bookshelves yet.
And I really should read "Beloved".
Posted by Silver3 (Member # 2174) on :
I just want to add that if I had to make a fave books list, it wouldn't include a lot of literature (but some books might make it through).
Posted by Smaug (Member # 2807) on :
Sure, I think reading in other genres is important. It just bugs me when the elite of any genre think that theirs is the be all and end all of fiction. In the past I've been on binges of reading mysteries, detective fiction, horror, westerns, and of course scifi and fantasy. Rarely have I read many literary works, although I'm assuming a lot of the classics fall in this category and I've read a lot of those. One of my favorite books of all time is Moby Dick, and a lot of the credit for that is due to a professor whose enthusiasm in teaching the book reached me. I guess that's a "literary" book although there are certain hints of the supernatural within its 400 or so pages. Frankly, there just isn't enough time in life to waste it on things other than what is most worthwhile---and so I try to avoid things that aren't in that category for me. Not that some of the books on the list couldn't be worthwhile, but I have a huge list of recommended books in the genres I definitely like that I haven't gotten to yet, so there's the rub.
Posted by Robert Nowall (Member # 2764) on :
I've *heard* of most of the books on the list. I think I've *read* two or three of them---I say *think*, but if I did, little of them remain in memory, so maybe I didn't. I can attribute that to my misspent youth reading science fiction and fantasy---when I turn to Great Works of Literature, it tended to be in some way associated with SF / fantasy, recommended highly by someone associated with SF / fantasy, or an older generation of literary novels. (To be fair, the survey did confine itself to "the last 25 years.")
If what I remember is right, three or four of these are in some way SF / fantasy.
(Aside: I remain amused by some of the reviews I've read of "The Plot Against America," and how many of them gave great credit to Philip Roth for coming up with such an original idea as an "alternate history" of events in the 1930s and 1940s. The reviewers might not have known any better, but I'm sure Roth does. (No, it's not one of the ones I think I've read.))
Posted by MightyCow (Member # 3384) on :
The only one of those I can remember reading is Independence Day by Ford. I really wasn't impressed. It seemed like your standard, "Boo hoo, I'm middle aged and can't keep a relationship with a woman or relate to my son" kind of thing. I didn't find the writing particularly engaging, nor the message especially unique, powerful, or moving.
Edit: I can see that Philip Roth is up there about half a dozen times. This guy must shoot gold bullion out his behind, and I've never even heard of him.
[This message has been edited by MightyCow (edited May 20, 2006).]
Posted by Kathleen Dalton Woodbury (Member # 59) on :
I'd be interested to know what you all (especially arriki) think of ELANTRIS by Brandon Sanderson.
Posted by Smaug (Member # 2807) on :
Never heard of Philip Roth? Did you just crawl out from under a rock? Check this out and see if you've ever heard of any of his books: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philip_Roth#Bibliography Posted by MightyCow (Member # 3384) on :
Perhaps the news stand outside my rock refuses Philip Roth books from the publisher, but he's an author who's writing I'm not familiar with.
Maybe I'm a bad writer as a result, but there's a lot of "great writers" who are terribly boring. Style, form, and such may be paramount, but if the story works its butt off trying to convince me not to read it, it often does its job.
Posted by Smaug (Member # 2807) on :
That's definitely true!! Posted by arriki (Member # 3079) on :
You shamed me into action. I went to the library and checked out Roth's THE PLOT AGAINST AMERICA.
Yech! I managed 40 pages. That's as far as I am ever likely to reach into that novel. It was so boring.
The setting is an alternate history where Roosevelt is defeated by Charles Lindbergh for president and a regime sympathetic to the nazis is ushered in. The Jews in America get persecuted. Now, okay, the idea is interesting.
But the writing was long, dense paragraphs...and even that CAN be interesting (Pauline Gedge carries is off with style) but not here. And, despite the sf-ish story idea, the story was not an adventure but the dullest form of social fiction. Don't get me wrong. Good writing and an interesting story of social fiction will work for me. This, however, didn't.
The writing was..was so distancing. It was like watching a tv show on a screen that is covered in greasy dust. You are always aware of watching. Never of being there inside the story as so many good writers manage bring the reader inside the story these days.
I guess another big reason I hated the book(aside from the dense, turgid writing style) was that the main characters were not pro-active at all. At least in the pages I read. They went along. Maybe it gets better later. But I'm not likely to find out. It's not worth the time.
So many recommended books like that list are pure social fiction. But I bet THE LORD OF THE RINGS and even Harry Potter have more influence on more readers than any of those books chosen for the list of best.
)