In a short story I'm working on my MC is a Literary Agent and a bibliophile. (Miss Snark's blog has been a fascinating character study though she's snarkier than my MC)
I admit that though I like books, I'm not what you might call "literary" or even a bibliophile.
However in an effort to give the character depth I've been trying think of "literary" in-jokes like poking fun at Joyce for being verbose and tedious or Kipling for being overrated but I was wondering if that was too much so.
So examples of usage after having to wait an inordinate amount of time, the MC says "It was like reading Joyce"
Is this too much of an in-joke?
Anyone who's actually has an english/literature background care to give me pointers on the in jokes that people have?
Best,
Matt
Posted by debhoag (Member # 5493) on :
if joyce is too obscure, you might try tolstoy. war and peace is pretty well known as incredibly lengthy. Harder to find than Salmen Rushdie? or am i dating myself? More clean-cut than a CS lewis hero? give some examples of where you'd like to work it in, between us all, we can come up with something. Sappier than a nora roberts plot? More contributing editors than the Old Testament? (or reader's digest?) More improbable than a dan brown plot? are you looking for really literary or popular? More dispised than Malfoy? More drunks than an F. Scot Fitzgerald tale? More pathos then Truman Capote?
Posted by Balthasar (Member # 5399) on :
The problem you're going to run into with the Joyce example is that not all of Joyce is obscure. If you're talking about ULYSSES or FINNEGAN'S WAKE, then you're good to go. But Joyce did write THE DUBLINERS -- one of the best short-story collections ever assembled. And A PORTRAIT OF THE ARTIST AS A YOUNG MAN is fairly readable.
Since this kind of thing will only be used to garnish your characters, my advice would be to go to the library one afternoon and spend a couple of hours reading samples of all the BIG NAMES in literature, then figure out what kind of snide remarks you can say about them.
And as far as Kipling being overrated . . . well, let's just not go there.
Posted by Matt Lust (Member # 3031) on :
The problem is the comments are not meant to be appropriate literary criticism just a "insiders" take.
Kipling being overated is to my understanding a matter of academic debate and thus the of comment that a "literary" person might make.
Debhoag thanks for what you offered. I'm such a genre nut that I feel really out touch with the broader literary world.
Posted by RMatthewWare (Member # 4831) on :
I'd use more contemporary/popular references. You can say Rowling is overrated, if you'd like. I'd get that. If you say Joyce, I'm not going to get it, and I'm not going to look it up. That said, if it's just a small thing, and you don't do this a lot, then you can go with it. I can forgive an author if I don't get a few references. I'll get upset if I can't follow everything.
Most people read for entertainment. Not many read the classics anymore.
Matt
Posted by franc li (Member # 3850) on :
You should stick with authors people are likely to have read by the end of high school or in an introductory course in college. I'm warming up to Rowling, but I still don't see her having entered the sphere of the bon mot.
