In fact, why can't great literature be popular? The classics are classic for a reason. I fully admit that I love the classic works. I've read Shakespeare, Joyce, Faulkner and Dostoyevsky, and you know what? They're flipping amazing.
Yet I'll still read Dean Koontz and Sue Grafton, but I take them for what they are - breezy, east to read bits of escapism.
To me, the best books combine the literary craft of the classics with the entertaining storytelling of something more popular.
Novels like The Grapes of Wrath and To Kill a Mockingbird use literary devices and sharpen their word to a fine art, while telling a story that is passionate, entertaining and moving.
There is nothing wrong with reading simple, light, popular novels to escape and be entertained. Just like there is nothing wrong with watching the latest summer blockbusting eye candy, or listening to top 40 radio. But if you dare to delve a little deeper into the grand pool of High Art you may find something enlightening and beautiful.
From: DJ Radiohead
To: The Hot Topic Team
Re: Literary Vs. Popular Fiction
I have little doubt in my mind I am going to enter this conversation as the least well-read person in the group. I am not boasting. I suppose it is a little embarrassing. I should read more than I do.
As much as I enjoy writing and reading I have had very little use for 'literature.' Literature was always assigned, never chosen. I am a very lazy reader. I do enjoy reading but I am not often curious when reading. The only reason I read page one is to find out what is going to happen on page two. I am not looking for symbolism or arcane references to a this or a that. I am not interested in a 12-page description of a tree. I know what a tree looks like. Where are you taking me and who is coming along for the ride? These are the questions that propel me through a book. I love a good story.
I also have a contrarian nature. I am certainly interested in expert opinions but I am not likely to blindly accept the assertions of a critic (literary or otherwise). I find a many critics are more interested in establishing their own credentials or discussing their own biases rather than review the work and discuss whatever merits it may or may not have. That snobbery has fostered my reluctance to reach for a 'classic.'
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - DJRadiohead
Huge lumps of fuck in the stockings of the HTers absent in this discussion.
2 - Mark Saleski
ho ho ho!
3 - SFC SKI
I love to read all types of fiction, and I admit to reading much more trash fiction than literature. It's similar to eating candy bars rather than getting up and preparing a meal, in the way that you are satisfied with it afterward.
4 - Mary K. Williams
"Huge lumps of fuck"
Not sure exactly what that is, but it sure doesn't sound good.
Who knows though, the offhand BC comment of one day -- could be great literature -- in the future!
It could happen!
: )
5 - DJRadiohead
It's certainly comment of the day material.
I had some trouble coming at this from a literary standpoint because as I said I am not the well-read person that perhaps I should be.
Make this discussion musical (as Mark eludes to) and I would feel more comfortable or in my element.
6 - Mary K. Williams
On a more serious note -- and without knowing proper delineation 'tween literature and popular fiction -
I have found examples in parts of stories, or whole stories that moved me. Dean Koontz's From the Corner of his Eye is one in particular. Something about that book hit me on a very profound level. He usually writes on the basic 'good vs evi' theme, and this is no different, but the whole manner of storytelling in this particular story was very effective.
Stephen King's The Stand had a similiar sort of flavor, and not just the 'good vs evil' thing, but the way he told the story.
Great literature? Why not?
7 - Mary K. Williams
"It's certainly comment of the day material."
Heheeehe - let the lobbying begin!
Why not!
8 - Lisa McKay
There's definitely room for both types of books in our lives. There are works which seek only to entertain us, and works which seek to nourish our souls and enlighten us. This is true for most forms of art, I think, and I wouldn't want to give up one for the other, because they both have their places.
Having said that, the books I return to again and again tend to be of the more sustaining variety. A beach read is a beach read, and once is usually enough.
9 - sadi ranson-polizzotti
great article, Mark; people can be real snobs about what is literary. The whole debate reminds me of "flowers" versus "weeds." Weeds are simply what somoneone finds undeseriable in their garden - but they're still flowers if you want them. Sounds stupid, but is analagous...
thanks for this piece.
s.
10 - Mark Saleski
thanks sadi. the snobbery thing reminds me of the time i read "The Gutenberg Elegies" by sven birkirts.
i was really looking forward to the topic (the fate of reading in the electronic age) but was really, really, REALLY put off by his snobbery.
made me want to go out and read some danielle steele.
11 - Mary K. Williams
"Having said that, the books I return to again and again tend to be of the more sustaining variety. A beach read is a beach read, and once is usually enough"
Lisa - I like the way you put it. That, along with the whole post in general, is a good way to express the difference between literature and popular stories
I like the "weeds and flowers" analogy too!
12 - Mark Saleski
yes, i return to the first five pages of Ulysses once a year or so. ;-)
13 - Megan
I suspect that being younger than probably everyone commenting on this board, it's kind of ridiculous for me to be even sharing this advice. But, I think you all might appreciate it, and since it originally came from an old and wise man (he has a beard to prove it), it's not from some snotty kid.
He told me, "a writer is influenced by everything they read, consciously or subconsciously, it's all there. Often, it's less about quality and more about quanity." He told me he believes someone who wants to be a professional writer needs to attempt reading a little bit of everything, so they can learn what engages an audience and form new ideas. Literature teaches a writer to write for an eternal audience, but the popular fiction of today ala Koontz and his comrades also reminds an aspiring writer of what they also need to be accessible to the audience of today, not just the audiences of tomorrow.
So, I don't know about what literary snobs need, but I honestly believe a well-balanced diet of grocery store novels and literature (and throw in a smidge of poetry too) is exactly what any writer needs to grow and gain skill in their craft.
14 - Mark Saleski
very true megan.
15 - Mat Brewster
Looks like I'm the literary snob of the Mondo group. Ha! This anti-snobbery has got to go. I wonder if this were a musical discussion if the tables would be turned a little.
Like if I was to say Mozart was a hack and Miles Davis was a pinko commie not to mention those stupid Ramones. But Britney Spears is a freaking musical genius where would this discussion go?
Really though if it moves you in some way then that's fantastic, no matter who wrote it.
I really do read all kinds of books, but I'll agree with Lisa M in that the books that really sustain me are usually lumped into that Literary category.
And definite huge lumps coming to the absent HTers if they don't start commenting asap.
16 - Lisa McKay
Mat, I think it's reasonable to say that longevity plays a part in whether we consider a thing to be 'art' or something for popular consumption. In your music example, we've already been listening to Mozart forever, I suspect that the same will be true for Miles, and I'm guessing that Britney will be all but forgotten in a generation.
None of which says anything about people's tastes, of course!
17 - Mark Saleski
i can't even begin to compare music to books.
18 - Greg Smyth
Weren't at least some of The Ramones Republicans, rather than Commies?!
Personally, part of the issue is the lofty head-up-their-own-arsedness of the literary and broadsheet press who seem to be the diviners of What Is Literature.
Proper literature has been incredibly boring IMHO - I'd much rather read King than Dickens any day. But had I a choice I'd much rather read some Burroughs or HS Thompson or somesuch.
As far as I can see, in modern fiction there's an awful lot of unnecessarily pretentious purple prose and high-minded plots. Zadie Smith and the rest of The New Literary Movement can just fuck away off.
19 - Alisha Karabinus
This is a really great edition, guys, even if it was a bit thin on the participation (I'm in favor of the huge lumps of fuck only if it involves someone distasteful doing the distributing, otherwise, how is it a punishment??).
When I first started seriously chasing publication creds, I had a hard time figuring out what "literary" fiction is, exactly. You see the divisions there for anyone who's ever read one of the Writer's Market books:
Needs: literary, mainstream, slice-of-life vignette....
And I would be all, wtf? What IS that, anyway? I challenged the writers and editors I knew, and wouldn't you know, I got as many different definitions as answers.
I think the definitions vary from person to person, and trying to set some standard up as a bar by which one measures anything is just false snobbery. After all, if we were discussing this when Pride & Prejudice were first published, would it be considered "literary," or just a throwaway novel about society? In eighty years, will Stephen King be considered literary?
20 - Lisa McKay
Great point, Alisha. Shakespeare was writing the contemporary entertainment of his day - I doubt that he was thinking of longevity while he was doing so.
21 - Alisha Karabinus
Exactly. I think that's why "literary" fiction fails to connect with the masses in these modern times. It is by nature somewhat dry and emotionless (not all of it, and not always in my opinion, but from the opinion of those who don't like it) because the writers are trying to create something that will last instead of just writing.
22 - Mark Saleski
there was a book reviewer incident that i should have worked into this...
i was on vacation and was watching a book review panel on cspan2. man, i wish i could remember the name of the reviewer but the way he spoke just about defined 'snobby reviwer'. they were all talking about The Lovely Bones. his turn was full of things like "when one reads a novel such as 'the lovely bones', one must remember that one might...".
blah, blah, blah.
i bought a copy of The Lovely Bones the next day just to even things out.
23 - Bennett
I just emailed Mark noting that I had submitted my own sub-standard take on this subject, but it obviously was lost in transit.
Ah well, not much of a loss. These guys pretty much say it all anyway.
Cheers!
24 - Mary K. Williams
Bennett..you trying to avoid the 'lump of fuck'?
: )
25 - DJRadiohead
It doesn't get much more distasteful than me. Listen to my podcasts if you don't believe me.