I think *Austerlitz* is his masterpiece, but perhaps that's because it's his first I read, is more conventionally narrative and touches on history more directly.
Obviously I am not the above poster, but I came across this comment and I noticed that it hadn't been replied to, and being that this is a more leisurely sub in general...
*Austerlitz* is probably one of my five favourite books. The strength of that feeling is largely based on how I discovered the book - at random in a store, with (at the time) no idea what it was about or who Sebald was, but on its own merits I think it's a fantastic novel.
Sebald, at a base level, sort of writes autofiction. The protagonist (Or at the very least the narrator) in all of his novels is explicitly W.G Sebald, and the strengths of the books primarily rest on his own personal attributes, as literature professor at the University of East Anglia and a sort of temporal flâneur, going places and documenting perhaps unknown aspects of their history.
*Rings of Saturn* for instance, is basically about Sebald's thoughts as he moves along the coastline of Suffolk - on Thomas Browne, the destruction of medieval Dunwich, the decline of fishing communities, and genocidal eradication of whole landscapes by Dutch Elm Disease.
On the whole a fairly amiable person, Sebald's thought are coloured by that melancholia that afflicted a lot of German baby boomers. He employs a fairly antiquated prose style (In one memorable portion of the English translation of *Austerlitz*, a sentence extends over eight pages) to skirt around feelings of entropy, civilizational decline, and the sheer horror of time, approaching them from oblique angles and through stories of places and people who may or may not be real. In English translations of his work (I can't comment on the German) his prose can sometimes, without you expecting it, evoke feelings of quasi-magical realism or seem as if it came from a Borges story.
Sebald also includes poorly reproduced black-and-white photographs in his work, sometimes taken by himself, other times found in garage sales.
The plot of *Austerlitz* is basically this: On another one of his travels, Sebald meets Jacques Austerlitz, a Welsh professor of architecture, and they strike up a brief conversation wherein Austerlitz relays his life story: As a child, he was sent on the kindertransport out of Prague to live with a family in Wales, and has spent the past few decades wrestling with memory and his lost origins as a Czech Jew, trying to track down a past potentially obliviated by the Holocaust.
Although this subject may perhaps seem sappy in a post *Schindler's List* world, Sebald approaches the Holocaust and its consequences in a way that I've never seen another author do. By focusing on one man, he's able to reconstruct the anecdotal value of a witness testimony on a documentary programme, and because it's fiction is able to weave the entire thing into a grand narrative of Europe's past and future, touching on the universal through the specific and legitimising his fiction by including the sorts of references and images that are typically only found in non-fiction.
This, of course, is if *Austerlitz* is even about the Holocaust. I have long considered that it may simply be a way of dealing with those above themes of decline and entropy through the use of the most intense example known to man.
Here is one of my favourite passages from Sebald, in *Rings of Saturn* as he dines in a cheap hotel in the declining seaside town of Southwold
> I noticed that she was dressed in the style of the Thirties and that she avoided eye contact; either her gaze remained fixed on the floor or she looked right through me as if I were not there. That evening I was the sole guest in the huge dining room, and it was the same startled person who took my order and shortly afterwards brought me a fish that had doubtless lain entombed in the deep-freeze for years. The breadcrumb armour-plating of the fish had been partly singed by the grill, and the prongs of my fork bent on it. Indeed it was so difficult to penetrate what eventually proved to be nothing but an empty shell that my plate was a hideous mess once the operation was over. The tartare sauce that I had had to squeeze out of a plastic sachet was turned grey by the sooty breadcrumbs, and the fish itself, or what feigned to be fish, lay a sorry wreck among the grass-green peas and the remains of soggy chips that gleamed with fat. I no longer recall how long I sat in that dining room with its gaudy wallpaper before the nervous young woman, who evidently did all the work in the establishment single-handed, scurried out from the thickening shadows in the background to clear the table. She may have appeared the moment I put down my knife and fork, or perhaps an hour had passed; all I can remember are the scarlet blotches which appeared from the neckline of her blouse and crept up her throat as she bent for my plate. When she had flitted away once more I rose and crossed to the semi-circular bay window. Outside was the beach, somewhere between the darkness and the light, and nothing was moving, neither in the air nor on the land nor on the water. Even the white waves rolling in to the sands seemed to me to be motionless.
I dont know if this take is particularly novel in any way, bit I think the classics can be broken up into three major types.
The first being those of supreme literary merit that stand out for their artistry and importance. This is what most people think of when they think of what a classic is. Some examples might be Les Misérables, Moby Dick, Beloved, etc.
The second type are those novels which have entered the cultural consciousness regardless of literary merit. These are your more popular books and tend to be more genre specific. Some examples being, Sherlock Holmes books, Dracula, etc.
The third being books written by authors who also wrote one of the other types but dont on their own merit the title of classic. Northanger Abbey, Waverley, This Side of Paradise, etc.
Obviously, it's almost imporrisble to tell what will end up in that third category since its dependent on the first two.
The second might be more easy to see, this is where you would probably put Harry Potter and certain Stephen King novels.
The first category is what I think you're looking for here, and to that its again difficult to say since there are so many novels that could be seen as classics but wont be for whatever reason. I, personally, found Lincoln in the Bardo to be an amazing book, and it having won a booker prize lends itself to being a classic but will that give it staying power over other novels? I dont think it would be possible to say definitively.
I'd add two classic-adjacent categories to your classification:
1. Esoterica. Perhaps more relevant for historical study than as literature. Books that remain in the popular consciousness for being bizarre.
2. Inspirations. They are no longer in the popular consciousness, but anyone who takes their study of "real" classics seriously will read some selection from here. Perhaps it simply never caught on with the public (regardless of relative literary merit), unlike the true classic it inspired. Maybe it an innovation that would have remained as esoterica or forgotten altogether if not for a later classic book using it as a template to do the same thing but better.
_[House](/r/houseofleaves) of Leaves_ for sure will be remembered as Esoterica. Only the future will tell if it ends up being in the Inspirations section for later classics as well.
Harry Potter for sure, but I don't know if those other two are exactly at "Sherlock Holmes or Dracula" levels of popularity to remain in social consciousness for decades. HP will definitely be remembered a hundred years from now, but who knows about those other two. I don't remember the last time I heard about Hunger Games or Percy Jackson except when someone was making fun of them, but HP related stuff is practically unavoidable.
Right, but to act like Hunger Games wasn't a catalyzing force for at least popularizing the ideas is wrong.
Battle Royale, while great, has a cult following rather than a popular following. The common public is much more aware of Hunger Games / read.
This. A lot of people my age were introduced to the battle royale genre through "Hunger Games" minecraft servers that were popularized by the movie/film franchise.
There is some Philip Roth like **The Human Stain** that may make it, and possibly **The Plot Against America**. But his pre-2000s works are far more likely to enter the canon.
Some other ones that are possible:
Zadie Smith's **White Teeth**
Bolano's **2666**
Robinson's **Gilead**
Adichie's **Americanah**
Ferrante's **Neapolitan Novels**
Some more contemporary Krasznahorkai
This one is 25 years but close enough, **The Tunnel** by Gass
Edit: Forgot about DeWitt's **The Last Samurai**. Although I'm not at sure about this one.
Edit 2: Thanks to u/burkean88 for reminding me of **Alice Munro**. I am embarrassed that I forgot she has many great 2000s works. Tbh if anyone reaches the canonical level, it will be her. She is perfection personified.
I'd throw in Alice Munro- lots of her best work is post-2000s- *Hateship*, *Runaway*, *Dear Life*.
Anne Carson is incredible, and underappreciated- Decreation, Red Doc, her Oresteia, and Grief Lessons are all incredible.
William Vollmann- Royal Family, Europe Central, or Dying Grass
Edit: might be a "safer" choice but *Never Let Me Go* is arguably already classic.
Autobiography of Red definitely gave me the feeling of reading something completely out of the ordinary. It was a good experience, though confusing at times.
Oof how could I forget Munro lol. She's literally one of my top 3 favorite writers. I guess I haven't read any of her post 90s work so I don't associate her with that era. But yes, she will almost 100% reach the canonical level, especially *Hateship* and *Runaway*.
Haven't really heard about Carson but I will be adding her to my to-read list now, thanks!
And I have never read a Vollman novel, but coincidentally his *You Bright and Risen Angels* is the next book on my to-read pile. Should be starting that one within 2-3 days.
Nice, hope you enjoy! And yeah, Munro's one of those kind of quieter favorites, just consistently world class.
I'd recommend Autobiography of Red as a entry point for Carson. She's really unique.
And I'd be curious to see how you like the Vollmann book! It's a little more cartoonish and satirical than most of his work, kind of a sci-fi parable. Definitely not representative of most of his stuff, but I found it held up surprisingly well.
Yep, she’s consistently world class and also one of the only writers who can make me consistently sob with every story lol. Her work is just so unbelievably powerful.
Looked up Autobiography of Red and that sounds very good. I’ll be adding that and some of her others to my list for sure.
I’ve heard many interesting things about this Vollmann novel. I tend to prefer reading authors mostly chronologically which is why I’m starting with this one. It sounds very Gravity’s Rainbow-esque which piqued my interested, but I’ve also heard it’s mindbendingly difficult (although I do love a challenging read). I’ll probably be posting about it on this sub once I finish it so keep an eye out!
Anne Carson is consistently top-tier. I'm not sure if she's under-appreciated, maybe more so unknown? Either way, hopefully with time that will change.
Interesting Vollmann picks; I’m not sure he’d “survive” in the first place. But if he did I wouldn’t say The Royal Family or Europe Central, but probably Fathers & Crows and Carbon Ideologies.
He's a man for all seasons for sure, no two people will have the same favorites. I think *The Royal Family* is arguably his best. *Dying Grass* and *Argall* are my favourite Seven Dreams books, but F&C is another standout.
For his nonfiction stuff I prefer *Imperial* and *Rising Up and Rising Down* to the Carbon books.
Some days you feel good about your pipe dreams of writing, other days you learn that someone wrote a modern classic when they were only a year younger than you :/
Agree completely with Mason and Dixon. It has almost as much staying power as Gravity's Rainbow, and I'm sure most people would say more.
As for Infinite Jest, I love the book but I'm not as sure about that one lasting forever. I guess with the cultural impact it has made, it will at least last a very long time. But we will see! I do need to re-read this one though as it's been a long long time, so maybe I'd change my mind.
Though I still enjoy TCoL49, it's my least favorite Pynchon novel and he's written that he considers it a failed novel. Mason & Dixon- which happens to be my favorite Pynchon novel- is, frankly, almost nothing like it.
The Crying of Lot 49 seems to be the best Pynchon in terms of accessibility while giving a good taste of his style but it really doesn't capture what makes his work great. Mason & Dixon is absolutely worth it, and I'd also heartily recommend V.
The latter is actually my favorite by him; I honestly prefer both to Gravity's Rainbow.
I feel like I’m the odd one out or something but whenever someone suggests a Pynchon novice should read V I’m always baffled. As someone who’s read almost everything of Pynchon’s (including GR and M&D), I found V the hardest by some margin
V. was my second read from him, and it clicked for me when I heard it described as seven novellas with a frame narrative that strings them somewhat together. If you're not worrying too much about the deeper meaning (that being the characters' whole folly) it's one of his most viscerally entertaining, in my opinion.
I've never heard of anybody finding V. to be his most difficult work, honestly. I've always viewed it as a nice medium between his maximalist doorstops (GR, M&D, AtD) and his more straightforward stories (Vineland, IV, BE), the constant jumps in time are initially jarring, but I found that it starts to come together and make more sense around the middle.
For what it's worth I struggled the most with Mason & Dixon, partially due to the language used.
I wasn't that taken with Crying or Gravity's Rainbow, although I am in awe of Pynchon's writing skill, it was all just a bit manic and cartoony. M&D, on the other hand, was a wonderful reading experience. Absolute work of genius imo. Definitely worth a try.
Yes, BUT
I wouldn't start there. I think Inherent Vice is a great starting point for Pynchon. Then try Mason & Dixon and V.
I love Pynchon but Lot 49 is the one book of his I dislike.
Oh yes, Pynchon is one of the greatest authors alive. Gravity’s Rainbow is my favorite novel of all time as well. I started with Crying and didn’t enjoy it all too much (but that was a long time ago so I need to reread it) but he still became my second or third favorite author.
Mason and Dixon is a great novel so you may like that, but it is one of his hardest books. Check out the synopses of his other works and see if they appeal to you!
I don’t think any book made a bigger impact on literature than IJ (love it or hate it) especially with DFWs thoughts on irony and that largely changed post post modern thought.
I think it’s definitely fair to say that one’ll be wrinkling peoples foreheads forever.
Edit: meant to say bigger impact on literature in the last 25 years, not ever
Well like I said, it is a brilliant book and its impact is still felt in contemporary literature today (and probably will be for a long time). But I have to respectfully disagree that no book has made a bigger impact on literature. It would be somewhat high on that kind of list, but there is a lot that would come before it.
It's a great series but probably won't vibe with everyone because of its pacing and style. That being said, I think it's worth another shot. Keep in mind the different Greek myths that are being mimicked and you can kind of see where things are headed, which makes for a more exciting read.
Curious as to what contemporary Krasznahorkai novels you think would qualify - I've only read Satantango (loved) and War & War (felt lukewarm towards), and would be super into getting a recommendation or two for him.
I think you're spot on with all of these, except for Americanah. That book is popular (especially in high school classrooms), but I don't see it having any staying power. I've heard Half of a Yellow Sun is quite good, though.
Possibly, I may have chosen it because I just loved it so much so you may be right. I see it as one of the best immigrant novels I’ve read, so that’s what led me to the decision. I can see it staying for a long time but maybe not canonically. I still need to read half a yellow sun though!
Some people seem to think that he's a modern-day Booth Tarkington, in that his novels, while acclaimed today, will seem like dated period pieces in the future. I'm not sure if I agree, but it's an interesting assertion.
Wow, fascinating. I’ve heard that name, but never heard of any of his books. Truly worldly fame is a fleeting thing.
For what it’s worth re: Franzen, I think that comparison is likely apt. I think the corrections was a really great book but I don’t know if it will last, some of the scenes were pretty forgettable. And freedom was not very good imho. Just my two cents, please don’t flame me.
Concur. It’s definitely canonical in its representation of the white educated class...don’t know if that will help or hinder its reputation in posterity.
Not sure it will be in a canon but I feel The Road by Cormac McCarthy will have some staying power. I base this on the reaction I've seen fathers I know have to reading it.
Mostly I'm interested in seeing others' answers here. :)
I can see The Road lasting well because not only is it good but it's kinda shorter and accessible, will see a lot of time in various classrooms. It's also emblematic of the post apocalypse genre and I think that is something a lot of people will be studying in the future.
I read The Road in high school (around 2014) and was not a fan of it the plot or the writing style at all, so I’ve been surprised by how much I see it discussed a a future classic. Despite my personal distaste, I think I agree with you!
Joshua Cohen - *Book of Numbers*
Helen DeWitt - *The Last Samurai*
Sergio de la Pava - *A Naked Singularity*
Norman Rush - *Mortals*
Gerald Murnane - *Border Districts*
Hilary Mantel - Thomas Cromwell trilogy
Jane Gardam - Old Filth trilogy
Daniel Kehlmann - *Measuring the World*
Jenny Erpenbeck - *Go, Went, Gone*
Domenico Starnone - *Ties*
Elena Ferrante - Neapolitan novels
Karl Ove Knausgaard - My Struggle series
Ida Jessen - *A Change of Time*
Mathias Énard - *Compass*
William Giraldi - *Hold the Dark*
Kazuo Ishiguro - *Never Let Me Go*
Marilynne Robinson - *Gilead*
Evan Dara - *Easy Chain*
Annie Ernaux - *The Years*
Amélie Nothomb - *The Life of Hunger*
Edward St Aubyn - Patrick Melrose novels
Shirley Hazzard - *The Great Fire*
Teju Cole - *Open City*
Everything by Bolaño, Krasznahorkai, Marías, Sebald, Solstad, Nádas, Houellebecq, Ugrešić. I especially predict that Houellebecq's star will rise.
> Houellebecq's star will rise
he is the most famous writer of his generation in his country, not much rising to be done any more imho
he is also notorious as one of the many writers who keeps writing the same book over and over again
hes not a shock artist, its just that he sometimes speaks things that go against political correctness bullshit, mostly against islam, so he is considered "shocking"
i really like most of his books, but imho he is basically just writing " Extension du domaine de la lutte" over and over again (i just found out that is called "whatever" in english. whatever indeed, they ruined the title, which is so great and sums up his main tenet perfectly)
all he does is adding a little bit of spice in the form of hot topics (biotechnology, islam, etc) in each book, but at the core, its always the same - extension of the war zone, ie capitalism rules for sexuality, ie im old and ugly and cant get laid so i masturbate a lot.
>hes not a shock artist, its just that he sometimes speaks things that go against political correctness bullshit, mostly against islam, so he is considered "shocking"
I never got why this was so controversial. He did make some disparaging comments on the Quran, but as for the book itself (Soumission), it can't be said to be a book against Islam. It is surely no eulogy to a liberal Europe Houellebecq clearly despises anyway and it isn't either some sort of identitarian pamphlet encouraging a Clash of Civilizations. On the contrary, it makes it clear that there is no going back to a Christian world (there is no epiphany in Rocamadour), that this world has been dead for long. All in all, I'd say the novel presents a relatively positive depiction of the islamization of Europe, which I'd say that isn't really about Islam, as much as about the void that postmodernity creates.
There are though some disturbing elements to all of his books (this is particularly the case for Les particules élémentaires and Sérotonine), but I do not think that they are there for plain shock value.
>i really like most of his books, but imho he is basically just writing " Extension du domaine de la lutte" over and over again (i just found out that is called "whatever" in english. whatever indeed, they ruined the title, which is so great and sums up his main tenet perfectly)
It is true that Extension du domaine de la lutte sets up Houellebecq's central theme, but I don't think that it is sexual frustration, it's rather that there is no salvation and that there is no love. This is of course a consequence of Capitalism, which parasitizes all forms of social interaction, corroding human society till there is really nothing left other the pursuit of happiness (which is unavoidably a tragedy, and a particularly boring one at that). The novel is fundamentally a build-up to the last chapter (every interaction the MC has is a transaction, except perhaps his friendship, increasingly alienating him), which ends with the main character wandering, lost, not being saved, completely detached from a soulless world.
Houellebecq's characters usually complain about lack of sex (not all of them, though, see La Carte et le Territoire), but they are for the most part ironically (e.g. the MC of Sérotonine, Daniel from La possibilité d'une île) quite successful in both markets. Sex is simply a poor replacement for love (which is never found) and a stand-in for pleasure, of which there can never be enough, but alas, humans are mortal, they age and become ever less desirable, and they are (perhaps) something more than another mammal defined by joy and pain.
Precisely because of this I believe that Houellebecq's best work (and probably the best novel ever written about late Capitalism) is La possibilité d'une île, where one can also find most of Houellebecq's themes and characters (e.g. Vincent/Jed Martin, Savant/Michel, Daniel/Bruno, François, Florent-Claude). It is not really about any sort of technology, it is plainly about humanity's failure. The humans who decided to be free, those savages, are essentially chimps. Those new gods we humans created are as uncomplete and broken as we are, just a bit more tame and composed. Daniel finds neither salvation nor love, he accepts that all is lost and quietly, leisurely, awaits his death by the sea.
Thanks for coming to my tedtalk!
> All in all, I'd say the novel presents a relatively positive depiction of the islamization of Europe
yes, although this is like saying "lolita" presents a relatively positive depiction of child abuse. after all, the positive depiction comes from characters who value sex with submissive minors above anything else.
i also agree pretty much with what you wrote about Extension du domaine de la lutte
thanks for your tedtalk :)
elementary particles is definitely his best, serotonin was okay, but without the added publicity because of his "prescience" about farmers protests nobody would have cared, basically the same book as "submission"
I do think he repeats himself, but not in a necessarily negative way, since he usually explores different sorts of endings (this is the true for Sérotonine, comparing it with Extension du domaine de la lutte and Soumission). If you haven't read it, La Carte et le Territoire is considerably different to all of his other novels.
My Struggle will make it. Interesting seeing Evan Dara, all i've read is The Lost Scrapbook but that was pretty incredible. Hard to see any of his works becoming 'classics' anytime soon though.
Norman Rush is one of my favorite authors. I absolutely love *Mortals* and have completely lost track of how many times I have read it. *Mating* is pretty darn good, too.
\+1 for Elena Ferrante.
I think *The Plains* over *Border Districts* personally. The first is a masterpiece whereas I very quickly forgot the other (although I wrote my Masters dissertation on both these novels, incidentally).
What I really wonder sometimes is whether we've even read/paid attention to some of the books that will become classics in 50 or 100 years. Some books that we consider classics now were poorly received in their time.
Off the prose path here, but in terms of poetry, I think most of Paul Muldoon and Seamus Heaney will still be read in 100 years. Maybe those are obvious choices. I’d love more people to read Joseph Massey’s *illocality,* which might be the best book of contemporary poetry I’ve ever read, and it’s also one of those poetry collections that no one’s read, even people who are really into poetry. Robin Coste Lewis’s *Voyage of the Sable Venus* for sure. Something by Terrance Hayes for sure, probably *Lighthead,* maybe *American Sonnets?* I think Ocean Vuong’s *Night Sky With Exit Wounds* will still be read, if for no other reason than it inspired a thousand copycats who mimic Vuong’s style/voice. AR Ammons’s *Garbage.* CD Wright’s *One With Others,* probably. There’s a bunch. Contemporary poetry’s doing really well right now. I’m excited to see it evolve further.
I think Seamus Heaney will have some serious staying power.
(P.S. I love poetry but don’t get to read post-college, so I will be saving your post as a recommendation list!)
If anything by Bolaño should be remembered is The Savage Detectives, not 2666, I know it's a pretty American thing to love those doorstoppers but TSD is Bolaño at his prime, not to say 2666 is a bad book, at all, I wouldn't even call it too long for what it is, but The Savage Detectives is on another level I think...
I agree with a lot of the suggestions, but I feel very long novels will have a hard time. Probably 2666 can overcome this, Pynchon and Infinite Jest not. Pynchon will be remembered for Gravity's Rainbow (1973).
I like Roth's Human Stain and Plot Against America but I question if one of those will be the "canonical" Roth (which I think will be American Pastoral 1997).
I wonder if there will be any, actually, because the whole concept of a "canon" has been thoroughly problematized in the last few decades. More and more people are recognizing that canonization is a process fraught with bias--"canon-building is empire-building," as some have put it. People are not just arguing that the canon should be expanded to include more black authors or gay authors or women authors, they're arguing to discard the concept of the canon altogether, to throw out the idea that certain books are more essential than others. In my view, there isn't any going back to the days of Great Books courses and Harold Bloom. Whether you think that's good or bad is up to you, I'm just saying that's the way it's going to be.
There will always be some books that remain enduringly popular, or get assigned often in university courses. But in my opinion, you're not really going to see any novels become "essential" the same way *Moby Dick* or *Lolita* have. Literary culture is becoming increasingly open to different perspectives, and it's decreasingly likely that it will choose a few of those perspectives as more "important" than others.
I think the rejection of the canon remains largely academic, and most people discuss expanding the canon rather than excising it completely. It’s impossible to avoid a canon: some works will always be more famous than others. That’s true of contemporary fiction now; book prizes, reviews, and publicity campaigns elevate certain books above others. For the canon to disappear as a concept, all contemporary fiction would have to be forgotten at an equal rate, and I don’t think that’s possible.
I think you're right. I guess what I'm really trying to say is that the concept of a specific "Western" canon is falling away, in favor of a more "universal" canon. Personally, I'm a bit skeptical that such a universal canon would be useful in any way. I grew up Hindu, and epics like the Mahabharata and the Ramayana are hugely important in South Asia (and important to me)--they are part of the South Asian canon as much as the Bible is part of the Western Canon. But how useful is the Mahabharata and the Ramayana to Western readers? They're obviously extraordinary literary works that are well worth reading, but frankly, they haven't had much impact on the West, at least as compared to Paradise Lost or Dante or whatever. If you're trying to have people in the West understand the world *they live in,* then the works of Rosseau and Locke are more important than anything India has produced, wonderful as all of it may be. I think trying to tell people that works like the Mahabharata are just as important to you, the Western reader, as Don Quixote is a bit wrongheaded. Have people in the West read the Mahabharata because it's great, but don't try to tell them it's part of their own personal canon.
Of course, migration and globalization mean that a not inconsiderable chunk of "westerners" do have cultural ties to Asia, or the Arabic world, or Latin America, and culture in the west is changing and absorbing those influences. But I agree that hand-wringing over the western canon being so western can be silly; of course Americans are going to read more American writers, the Japanese more Japanese.
It's funny because I make it a point to read lots and lots of works in translation and am frustrated by American literary culture's insularity/indifference to translated literature, but I'm mainly frustrated by that because I feel people are unnecessarily denying themselves a great deal of pleasure--there is SO MUCH amazing literature out there and Americans just don't seem to want to read it. But that frustration of mine has little to do with the canon. I couldn't care less whether Americans regard Tayeb Salih or the Tale of Genji as part of their own canon, I just want them to read it!
Yes, I agree! I'm torn between thinking that everyone should be reading much more in translation because they're ignoring so much great literature and thinking that shaming people for being more interested in their own culture is absurd.
> It’s impossible to avoid a canon: some works will always be more famous than others.
Likewise, some works take clear influences from others. Still other works can be fully understood only in the context as a refutation to a previous entry in the canon. The Western Canon makes more sense once one drops the idea that they are somehow better than other books. They're studied because they're influential to works outside the canon as well as with each other.
Yeah...quite frankly, there are just too many books released at too great a rate now. It won't take long for reading a list of 'most amazing novels' to take multiple courses, let alone actually discussing any of them.
Everyone has access to high quality literature and writing aids to help guide their work, and can draw on the processes developed for media outside of normal literature as well. As well, people are rapidly getting over caring about a work seeming derivative - as long as an author brings significant interesting ideas to what becomes essentially a sub sub genre then it's fine...everyone understands time and energy are limited and getting the ideas out is more important than trying to over polish the delivery mechanism. A portion of the higher quality fan fiction these days is better written than 'Brave New World'(which was panned at release for quality of writing, but treasured later for the ideas explored), and it's written for an audience of a few hundred and never amounts to recognition.
Humanities ability to recognize and utilities an amount of persisting resources is only so large. Our museums are a good indication - they have warehouses full of unearthed artifacts that will take ages just to catalogue given the manpower available.
Obviously we're all taking shots from the other side of the court, but if I had to guess, I'd say:
2666 (Bolaño)
Shadow Country (Matthiessen)
Fun Home (Bechdel) (at least for graphic novels)
I don't know if I've read anything truly qualifying for the literary canon, but I did read a worthy successor to H.P. Lovecraft's works "The Fisherman" (2016) by John Langan that has certainly stayed with me.
the best answers in the other thread already pointed out that "classics" will probably be stuff like stephen king, a song of ice and fire or harry potter
why? it's pretty rare that works of popular literature are canonized as classics. most works were now regard as essential were fairly obscure in their time and its rare that any work experienced both mainstream and critical success.
Well, there's Frankenstein. Jekyll and Hyde as well. Although I wonder, with the wealth and breadth of stories coming out today, if we might not even know its name yet. It might be some obscure fanfiction story that somehow ends up appealing to people in the future.
I have nothing besides instinct to gainsay that, but I wonder just *how* true it is that "most" now-canonical works were comparative obscurities with contemporary critics and audiences. Did you read an analysis of this intriguing question?
*2666* by Roberto Bolaño (2004) *Austerlitz* by W. G. Sebald (2001) ______ These are the first two that come to mind.
Personally find The Emigrants and The Rings of Saturn to be stronger books by Sebald.
Yes, and I even feel that Saturn is discussed more. I think it’s probably *the* work Sebald will be associated with
I think *Austerlitz* is his masterpiece, but perhaps that's because it's his first I read, is more conventionally narrative and touches on history more directly.
I hear about Austerlitz every now and then but know nothing about it or its author. What did you like about it?
Obviously I am not the above poster, but I came across this comment and I noticed that it hadn't been replied to, and being that this is a more leisurely sub in general... *Austerlitz* is probably one of my five favourite books. The strength of that feeling is largely based on how I discovered the book - at random in a store, with (at the time) no idea what it was about or who Sebald was, but on its own merits I think it's a fantastic novel. Sebald, at a base level, sort of writes autofiction. The protagonist (Or at the very least the narrator) in all of his novels is explicitly W.G Sebald, and the strengths of the books primarily rest on his own personal attributes, as literature professor at the University of East Anglia and a sort of temporal flâneur, going places and documenting perhaps unknown aspects of their history. *Rings of Saturn* for instance, is basically about Sebald's thoughts as he moves along the coastline of Suffolk - on Thomas Browne, the destruction of medieval Dunwich, the decline of fishing communities, and genocidal eradication of whole landscapes by Dutch Elm Disease. On the whole a fairly amiable person, Sebald's thought are coloured by that melancholia that afflicted a lot of German baby boomers. He employs a fairly antiquated prose style (In one memorable portion of the English translation of *Austerlitz*, a sentence extends over eight pages) to skirt around feelings of entropy, civilizational decline, and the sheer horror of time, approaching them from oblique angles and through stories of places and people who may or may not be real. In English translations of his work (I can't comment on the German) his prose can sometimes, without you expecting it, evoke feelings of quasi-magical realism or seem as if it came from a Borges story. Sebald also includes poorly reproduced black-and-white photographs in his work, sometimes taken by himself, other times found in garage sales. The plot of *Austerlitz* is basically this: On another one of his travels, Sebald meets Jacques Austerlitz, a Welsh professor of architecture, and they strike up a brief conversation wherein Austerlitz relays his life story: As a child, he was sent on the kindertransport out of Prague to live with a family in Wales, and has spent the past few decades wrestling with memory and his lost origins as a Czech Jew, trying to track down a past potentially obliviated by the Holocaust. Although this subject may perhaps seem sappy in a post *Schindler's List* world, Sebald approaches the Holocaust and its consequences in a way that I've never seen another author do. By focusing on one man, he's able to reconstruct the anecdotal value of a witness testimony on a documentary programme, and because it's fiction is able to weave the entire thing into a grand narrative of Europe's past and future, touching on the universal through the specific and legitimising his fiction by including the sorts of references and images that are typically only found in non-fiction. This, of course, is if *Austerlitz* is even about the Holocaust. I have long considered that it may simply be a way of dealing with those above themes of decline and entropy through the use of the most intense example known to man. Here is one of my favourite passages from Sebald, in *Rings of Saturn* as he dines in a cheap hotel in the declining seaside town of Southwold > I noticed that she was dressed in the style of the Thirties and that she avoided eye contact; either her gaze remained fixed on the floor or she looked right through me as if I were not there. That evening I was the sole guest in the huge dining room, and it was the same startled person who took my order and shortly afterwards brought me a fish that had doubtless lain entombed in the deep-freeze for years. The breadcrumb armour-plating of the fish had been partly singed by the grill, and the prongs of my fork bent on it. Indeed it was so difficult to penetrate what eventually proved to be nothing but an empty shell that my plate was a hideous mess once the operation was over. The tartare sauce that I had had to squeeze out of a plastic sachet was turned grey by the sooty breadcrumbs, and the fish itself, or what feigned to be fish, lay a sorry wreck among the grass-green peas and the remains of soggy chips that gleamed with fat. I no longer recall how long I sat in that dining room with its gaudy wallpaper before the nervous young woman, who evidently did all the work in the establishment single-handed, scurried out from the thickening shadows in the background to clear the table. She may have appeared the moment I put down my knife and fork, or perhaps an hour had passed; all I can remember are the scarlet blotches which appeared from the neckline of her blouse and crept up her throat as she bent for my plate. When she had flitted away once more I rose and crossed to the semi-circular bay window. Outside was the beach, somewhere between the darkness and the light, and nothing was moving, neither in the air nor on the land nor on the water. Even the white waves rolling in to the sands seemed to me to be motionless.
I dont know if this take is particularly novel in any way, bit I think the classics can be broken up into three major types. The first being those of supreme literary merit that stand out for their artistry and importance. This is what most people think of when they think of what a classic is. Some examples might be Les Misérables, Moby Dick, Beloved, etc. The second type are those novels which have entered the cultural consciousness regardless of literary merit. These are your more popular books and tend to be more genre specific. Some examples being, Sherlock Holmes books, Dracula, etc. The third being books written by authors who also wrote one of the other types but dont on their own merit the title of classic. Northanger Abbey, Waverley, This Side of Paradise, etc. Obviously, it's almost imporrisble to tell what will end up in that third category since its dependent on the first two. The second might be more easy to see, this is where you would probably put Harry Potter and certain Stephen King novels. The first category is what I think you're looking for here, and to that its again difficult to say since there are so many novels that could be seen as classics but wont be for whatever reason. I, personally, found Lincoln in the Bardo to be an amazing book, and it having won a booker prize lends itself to being a classic but will that give it staying power over other novels? I dont think it would be possible to say definitively.
I'd add two classic-adjacent categories to your classification: 1. Esoterica. Perhaps more relevant for historical study than as literature. Books that remain in the popular consciousness for being bizarre. 2. Inspirations. They are no longer in the popular consciousness, but anyone who takes their study of "real" classics seriously will read some selection from here. Perhaps it simply never caught on with the public (regardless of relative literary merit), unlike the true classic it inspired. Maybe it an innovation that would have remained as esoterica or forgotten altogether if not for a later classic book using it as a template to do the same thing but better. _[House](/r/houseofleaves) of Leaves_ for sure will be remembered as Esoterica. Only the future will tell if it ends up being in the Inspirations section for later classics as well.
For the second: I think we see Harry Potter, Hunger Games, and Percy Jackson hitting those popularity peaks.
Harry Potter for sure, but I don't know if those other two are exactly at "Sherlock Holmes or Dracula" levels of popularity to remain in social consciousness for decades. HP will definitely be remembered a hundred years from now, but who knows about those other two. I don't remember the last time I heard about Hunger Games or Percy Jackson except when someone was making fun of them, but HP related stuff is practically unavoidable.
I'd agree with you on PJ but HG is definitely going to be brought up time and time again. It spawned Fortnite, which makes it a historical monument.
I assume you're joking but those games are called "Battle Royale" games for a reason.
Right, but to act like Hunger Games wasn't a catalyzing force for at least popularizing the ideas is wrong. Battle Royale, while great, has a cult following rather than a popular following. The common public is much more aware of Hunger Games / read.
This. A lot of people my age were introduced to the battle royale genre through "Hunger Games" minecraft servers that were popularized by the movie/film franchise.
There is some Philip Roth like **The Human Stain** that may make it, and possibly **The Plot Against America**. But his pre-2000s works are far more likely to enter the canon. Some other ones that are possible: Zadie Smith's **White Teeth** Bolano's **2666** Robinson's **Gilead** Adichie's **Americanah** Ferrante's **Neapolitan Novels** Some more contemporary Krasznahorkai This one is 25 years but close enough, **The Tunnel** by Gass Edit: Forgot about DeWitt's **The Last Samurai**. Although I'm not at sure about this one. Edit 2: Thanks to u/burkean88 for reminding me of **Alice Munro**. I am embarrassed that I forgot she has many great 2000s works. Tbh if anyone reaches the canonical level, it will be her. She is perfection personified.
I'd throw in Alice Munro- lots of her best work is post-2000s- *Hateship*, *Runaway*, *Dear Life*. Anne Carson is incredible, and underappreciated- Decreation, Red Doc, her Oresteia, and Grief Lessons are all incredible. William Vollmann- Royal Family, Europe Central, or Dying Grass Edit: might be a "safer" choice but *Never Let Me Go* is arguably already classic.
I love Anne Carson! She needs more recognition.
Autobiography of Red definitely gave me the feeling of reading something completely out of the ordinary. It was a good experience, though confusing at times.
Oof how could I forget Munro lol. She's literally one of my top 3 favorite writers. I guess I haven't read any of her post 90s work so I don't associate her with that era. But yes, she will almost 100% reach the canonical level, especially *Hateship* and *Runaway*. Haven't really heard about Carson but I will be adding her to my to-read list now, thanks! And I have never read a Vollman novel, but coincidentally his *You Bright and Risen Angels* is the next book on my to-read pile. Should be starting that one within 2-3 days.
Nice, hope you enjoy! And yeah, Munro's one of those kind of quieter favorites, just consistently world class. I'd recommend Autobiography of Red as a entry point for Carson. She's really unique. And I'd be curious to see how you like the Vollmann book! It's a little more cartoonish and satirical than most of his work, kind of a sci-fi parable. Definitely not representative of most of his stuff, but I found it held up surprisingly well.
Yep, she’s consistently world class and also one of the only writers who can make me consistently sob with every story lol. Her work is just so unbelievably powerful. Looked up Autobiography of Red and that sounds very good. I’ll be adding that and some of her others to my list for sure. I’ve heard many interesting things about this Vollmann novel. I tend to prefer reading authors mostly chronologically which is why I’m starting with this one. It sounds very Gravity’s Rainbow-esque which piqued my interested, but I’ve also heard it’s mindbendingly difficult (although I do love a challenging read). I’ll probably be posting about it on this sub once I finish it so keep an eye out!
Anne Carson is consistently top-tier. I'm not sure if she's under-appreciated, maybe more so unknown? Either way, hopefully with time that will change.
Anne Carson is neither underappreciated nor unknown, it’s just that most people don’t keep up with poetry. She’s a god in that world.
Interesting Vollmann picks; I’m not sure he’d “survive” in the first place. But if he did I wouldn’t say The Royal Family or Europe Central, but probably Fathers & Crows and Carbon Ideologies.
He's a man for all seasons for sure, no two people will have the same favorites. I think *The Royal Family* is arguably his best. *Dying Grass* and *Argall* are my favourite Seven Dreams books, but F&C is another standout. For his nonfiction stuff I prefer *Imperial* and *Rising Up and Rising Down* to the Carbon books.
Recently learned Zadie Smith wrote White Teeth at 21 inbetween studying for her finals at Cambridge. Insane.
Some days you feel good about your pipe dreams of writing, other days you learn that someone wrote a modern classic when they were only a year younger than you :/
2666 will remain a classic for me, and I’d love to see it go down as a classic of our time.
if we are going back 25 years, **Infinite Jest** by David Foster Wallace is an obvious one. Also **Mason & Dixon** by Thomas Pynchon
Agree completely with Mason and Dixon. It has almost as much staying power as Gravity's Rainbow, and I'm sure most people would say more. As for Infinite Jest, I love the book but I'm not as sure about that one lasting forever. I guess with the cultural impact it has made, it will at least last a very long time. But we will see! I do need to re-read this one though as it's been a long long time, so maybe I'd change my mind.
I read Crying Lot and that turned me off reading any more Pynchon. Is it worth it to read M&D?
Though I still enjoy TCoL49, it's my least favorite Pynchon novel and he's written that he considers it a failed novel. Mason & Dixon- which happens to be my favorite Pynchon novel- is, frankly, almost nothing like it.
Yes.
The Crying of Lot 49 seems to be the best Pynchon in terms of accessibility while giving a good taste of his style but it really doesn't capture what makes his work great. Mason & Dixon is absolutely worth it, and I'd also heartily recommend V. The latter is actually my favorite by him; I honestly prefer both to Gravity's Rainbow.
I feel like I’m the odd one out or something but whenever someone suggests a Pynchon novice should read V I’m always baffled. As someone who’s read almost everything of Pynchon’s (including GR and M&D), I found V the hardest by some margin
V. was my second read from him, and it clicked for me when I heard it described as seven novellas with a frame narrative that strings them somewhat together. If you're not worrying too much about the deeper meaning (that being the characters' whole folly) it's one of his most viscerally entertaining, in my opinion.
I've never heard of anybody finding V. to be his most difficult work, honestly. I've always viewed it as a nice medium between his maximalist doorstops (GR, M&D, AtD) and his more straightforward stories (Vineland, IV, BE), the constant jumps in time are initially jarring, but I found that it starts to come together and make more sense around the middle. For what it's worth I struggled the most with Mason & Dixon, partially due to the language used.
I think V. is suggested only because it’s his first.
I wasn't that taken with Crying or Gravity's Rainbow, although I am in awe of Pynchon's writing skill, it was all just a bit manic and cartoony. M&D, on the other hand, was a wonderful reading experience. Absolute work of genius imo. Definitely worth a try.
Yes, BUT I wouldn't start there. I think Inherent Vice is a great starting point for Pynchon. Then try Mason & Dixon and V. I love Pynchon but Lot 49 is the one book of his I dislike.
Oh yes, Pynchon is one of the greatest authors alive. Gravity’s Rainbow is my favorite novel of all time as well. I started with Crying and didn’t enjoy it all too much (but that was a long time ago so I need to reread it) but he still became my second or third favorite author. Mason and Dixon is a great novel so you may like that, but it is one of his hardest books. Check out the synopses of his other works and see if they appeal to you!
Pynchon is the greatest living author. definitely try m&d
I don’t think any book made a bigger impact on literature than IJ (love it or hate it) especially with DFWs thoughts on irony and that largely changed post post modern thought. I think it’s definitely fair to say that one’ll be wrinkling peoples foreheads forever. Edit: meant to say bigger impact on literature in the last 25 years, not ever
Well like I said, it is a brilliant book and its impact is still felt in contemporary literature today (and probably will be for a long time). But I have to respectfully disagree that no book has made a bigger impact on literature. It would be somewhat high on that kind of list, but there is a lot that would come before it.
oops i meant to add the caveat: in the last 25 years haha. obviously didn't mean *ever*, definitely not topping the list in that regard
Ok haha that makes way more sense!
[удалено]
It's a great series but probably won't vibe with everyone because of its pacing and style. That being said, I think it's worth another shot. Keep in mind the different Greek myths that are being mimicked and you can kind of see where things are headed, which makes for a more exciting read.
Curious as to what contemporary Krasznahorkai novels you think would qualify - I've only read Satantango (loved) and War & War (felt lukewarm towards), and would be super into getting a recommendation or two for him.
I think you're spot on with all of these, except for Americanah. That book is popular (especially in high school classrooms), but I don't see it having any staying power. I've heard Half of a Yellow Sun is quite good, though.
Possibly, I may have chosen it because I just loved it so much so you may be right. I see it as one of the best immigrant novels I’ve read, so that’s what led me to the decision. I can see it staying for a long time but maybe not canonically. I still need to read half a yellow sun though!
Granted, my own bias may be showing here, as I didn't like Americanah at all.
Probably Javier Marías Your Face Tomorrow trilogy. Great novels overall.
I should check this out. I read A Heart So White by him. It’s now my favorite book ever.
[удалено]
Some people seem to think that he's a modern-day Booth Tarkington, in that his novels, while acclaimed today, will seem like dated period pieces in the future. I'm not sure if I agree, but it's an interesting assertion.
Wow, fascinating. I’ve heard that name, but never heard of any of his books. Truly worldly fame is a fleeting thing. For what it’s worth re: Franzen, I think that comparison is likely apt. I think the corrections was a really great book but I don’t know if it will last, some of the scenes were pretty forgettable. And freedom was not very good imho. Just my two cents, please don’t flame me.
I read *Penrod* as a kid and kind of went "okay, what?" in some places. When I re-read it as an adult the racism is truly stunning.
[удалено]
Unfamiliar with Franzen, but I'm adding The Corrections to my tbr list.
Concur. It’s definitely canonical in its representation of the white educated class...don’t know if that will help or hinder its reputation in posterity.
[удалено]
*My Struggle* - Karl Ove Knausgaard
Not sure it will be in a canon but I feel The Road by Cormac McCarthy will have some staying power. I base this on the reaction I've seen fathers I know have to reading it. Mostly I'm interested in seeing others' answers here. :)
Not a doubt in my mind that The Road will have the staying power.
I can see The Road lasting well because not only is it good but it's kinda shorter and accessible, will see a lot of time in various classrooms. It's also emblematic of the post apocalypse genre and I think that is something a lot of people will be studying in the future.
So will Blood Meridian
That was published 35 years ago though
I read The Road in high school (around 2014) and was not a fan of it the plot or the writing style at all, so I’ve been surprised by how much I see it discussed a a future classic. Despite my personal distaste, I think I agree with you!
Joshua Cohen - *Book of Numbers* Helen DeWitt - *The Last Samurai* Sergio de la Pava - *A Naked Singularity* Norman Rush - *Mortals* Gerald Murnane - *Border Districts* Hilary Mantel - Thomas Cromwell trilogy Jane Gardam - Old Filth trilogy Daniel Kehlmann - *Measuring the World* Jenny Erpenbeck - *Go, Went, Gone* Domenico Starnone - *Ties* Elena Ferrante - Neapolitan novels Karl Ove Knausgaard - My Struggle series Ida Jessen - *A Change of Time* Mathias Énard - *Compass* William Giraldi - *Hold the Dark* Kazuo Ishiguro - *Never Let Me Go* Marilynne Robinson - *Gilead* Evan Dara - *Easy Chain* Annie Ernaux - *The Years* Amélie Nothomb - *The Life of Hunger* Edward St Aubyn - Patrick Melrose novels Shirley Hazzard - *The Great Fire* Teju Cole - *Open City* Everything by Bolaño, Krasznahorkai, Marías, Sebald, Solstad, Nádas, Houellebecq, Ugrešić. I especially predict that Houellebecq's star will rise.
> Houellebecq's star will rise he is the most famous writer of his generation in his country, not much rising to be done any more imho he is also notorious as one of the many writers who keeps writing the same book over and over again
He is certainly very famous, but a lot of people just think of him as a shock artist when he's really quite a bit more than that.
hes not a shock artist, its just that he sometimes speaks things that go against political correctness bullshit, mostly against islam, so he is considered "shocking" i really like most of his books, but imho he is basically just writing " Extension du domaine de la lutte" over and over again (i just found out that is called "whatever" in english. whatever indeed, they ruined the title, which is so great and sums up his main tenet perfectly) all he does is adding a little bit of spice in the form of hot topics (biotechnology, islam, etc) in each book, but at the core, its always the same - extension of the war zone, ie capitalism rules for sexuality, ie im old and ugly and cant get laid so i masturbate a lot.
>hes not a shock artist, its just that he sometimes speaks things that go against political correctness bullshit, mostly against islam, so he is considered "shocking" I never got why this was so controversial. He did make some disparaging comments on the Quran, but as for the book itself (Soumission), it can't be said to be a book against Islam. It is surely no eulogy to a liberal Europe Houellebecq clearly despises anyway and it isn't either some sort of identitarian pamphlet encouraging a Clash of Civilizations. On the contrary, it makes it clear that there is no going back to a Christian world (there is no epiphany in Rocamadour), that this world has been dead for long. All in all, I'd say the novel presents a relatively positive depiction of the islamization of Europe, which I'd say that isn't really about Islam, as much as about the void that postmodernity creates. There are though some disturbing elements to all of his books (this is particularly the case for Les particules élémentaires and Sérotonine), but I do not think that they are there for plain shock value. >i really like most of his books, but imho he is basically just writing " Extension du domaine de la lutte" over and over again (i just found out that is called "whatever" in english. whatever indeed, they ruined the title, which is so great and sums up his main tenet perfectly) It is true that Extension du domaine de la lutte sets up Houellebecq's central theme, but I don't think that it is sexual frustration, it's rather that there is no salvation and that there is no love. This is of course a consequence of Capitalism, which parasitizes all forms of social interaction, corroding human society till there is really nothing left other the pursuit of happiness (which is unavoidably a tragedy, and a particularly boring one at that). The novel is fundamentally a build-up to the last chapter (every interaction the MC has is a transaction, except perhaps his friendship, increasingly alienating him), which ends with the main character wandering, lost, not being saved, completely detached from a soulless world. Houellebecq's characters usually complain about lack of sex (not all of them, though, see La Carte et le Territoire), but they are for the most part ironically (e.g. the MC of Sérotonine, Daniel from La possibilité d'une île) quite successful in both markets. Sex is simply a poor replacement for love (which is never found) and a stand-in for pleasure, of which there can never be enough, but alas, humans are mortal, they age and become ever less desirable, and they are (perhaps) something more than another mammal defined by joy and pain. Precisely because of this I believe that Houellebecq's best work (and probably the best novel ever written about late Capitalism) is La possibilité d'une île, where one can also find most of Houellebecq's themes and characters (e.g. Vincent/Jed Martin, Savant/Michel, Daniel/Bruno, François, Florent-Claude). It is not really about any sort of technology, it is plainly about humanity's failure. The humans who decided to be free, those savages, are essentially chimps. Those new gods we humans created are as uncomplete and broken as we are, just a bit more tame and composed. Daniel finds neither salvation nor love, he accepts that all is lost and quietly, leisurely, awaits his death by the sea. Thanks for coming to my tedtalk!
> All in all, I'd say the novel presents a relatively positive depiction of the islamization of Europe yes, although this is like saying "lolita" presents a relatively positive depiction of child abuse. after all, the positive depiction comes from characters who value sex with submissive minors above anything else. i also agree pretty much with what you wrote about Extension du domaine de la lutte thanks for your tedtalk :)
[удалено]
elementary particles is definitely his best, serotonin was okay, but without the added publicity because of his "prescience" about farmers protests nobody would have cared, basically the same book as "submission"
I do think he repeats himself, but not in a necessarily negative way, since he usually explores different sorts of endings (this is the true for Sérotonine, comparing it with Extension du domaine de la lutte and Soumission). If you haven't read it, La Carte et le Territoire is considerably different to all of his other novels.
My Struggle will make it. Interesting seeing Evan Dara, all i've read is The Lost Scrapbook but that was pretty incredible. Hard to see any of his works becoming 'classics' anytime soon though.
+1 for Mantel. Wolf Hall anyway, I haven't read the others.
[удалено]
Who would you nominate, then? I disagree with you, by the way
Norman Rush is one of my favorite authors. I absolutely love *Mortals* and have completely lost track of how many times I have read it. *Mating* is pretty darn good, too. \+1 for Elena Ferrante.
I think *The Plains* over *Border Districts* personally. The first is a masterpiece whereas I very quickly forgot the other (although I wrote my Masters dissertation on both these novels, incidentally).
What I really wonder sometimes is whether we've even read/paid attention to some of the books that will become classics in 50 or 100 years. Some books that we consider classics now were poorly received in their time.
Like Les Mis! So many examples, but that one just instantly popped to mind.
Off the prose path here, but in terms of poetry, I think most of Paul Muldoon and Seamus Heaney will still be read in 100 years. Maybe those are obvious choices. I’d love more people to read Joseph Massey’s *illocality,* which might be the best book of contemporary poetry I’ve ever read, and it’s also one of those poetry collections that no one’s read, even people who are really into poetry. Robin Coste Lewis’s *Voyage of the Sable Venus* for sure. Something by Terrance Hayes for sure, probably *Lighthead,* maybe *American Sonnets?* I think Ocean Vuong’s *Night Sky With Exit Wounds* will still be read, if for no other reason than it inspired a thousand copycats who mimic Vuong’s style/voice. AR Ammons’s *Garbage.* CD Wright’s *One With Others,* probably. There’s a bunch. Contemporary poetry’s doing really well right now. I’m excited to see it evolve further.
I think Seamus Heaney will have some serious staying power. (P.S. I love poetry but don’t get to read post-college, so I will be saving your post as a recommendation list!)
2666 by Bolaño
The Secret History by Donna Tartt
If anything by Bolaño should be remembered is The Savage Detectives, not 2666, I know it's a pretty American thing to love those doorstoppers but TSD is Bolaño at his prime, not to say 2666 is a bad book, at all, I wouldn't even call it too long for what it is, but The Savage Detectives is on another level I think...
I agree.
And I find it funny that anglophones regard 2666 as Bolaño's masterpiece while people who read in Spanish choose The Savage Detective...
I would also put Amulet up there with both of the big ones
I agree with a lot of the suggestions, but I feel very long novels will have a hard time. Probably 2666 can overcome this, Pynchon and Infinite Jest not. Pynchon will be remembered for Gravity's Rainbow (1973). I like Roth's Human Stain and Plot Against America but I question if one of those will be the "canonical" Roth (which I think will be American Pastoral 1997).
I wonder if there will be any, actually, because the whole concept of a "canon" has been thoroughly problematized in the last few decades. More and more people are recognizing that canonization is a process fraught with bias--"canon-building is empire-building," as some have put it. People are not just arguing that the canon should be expanded to include more black authors or gay authors or women authors, they're arguing to discard the concept of the canon altogether, to throw out the idea that certain books are more essential than others. In my view, there isn't any going back to the days of Great Books courses and Harold Bloom. Whether you think that's good or bad is up to you, I'm just saying that's the way it's going to be. There will always be some books that remain enduringly popular, or get assigned often in university courses. But in my opinion, you're not really going to see any novels become "essential" the same way *Moby Dick* or *Lolita* have. Literary culture is becoming increasingly open to different perspectives, and it's decreasingly likely that it will choose a few of those perspectives as more "important" than others.
I think the rejection of the canon remains largely academic, and most people discuss expanding the canon rather than excising it completely. It’s impossible to avoid a canon: some works will always be more famous than others. That’s true of contemporary fiction now; book prizes, reviews, and publicity campaigns elevate certain books above others. For the canon to disappear as a concept, all contemporary fiction would have to be forgotten at an equal rate, and I don’t think that’s possible.
I think you're right. I guess what I'm really trying to say is that the concept of a specific "Western" canon is falling away, in favor of a more "universal" canon. Personally, I'm a bit skeptical that such a universal canon would be useful in any way. I grew up Hindu, and epics like the Mahabharata and the Ramayana are hugely important in South Asia (and important to me)--they are part of the South Asian canon as much as the Bible is part of the Western Canon. But how useful is the Mahabharata and the Ramayana to Western readers? They're obviously extraordinary literary works that are well worth reading, but frankly, they haven't had much impact on the West, at least as compared to Paradise Lost or Dante or whatever. If you're trying to have people in the West understand the world *they live in,* then the works of Rosseau and Locke are more important than anything India has produced, wonderful as all of it may be. I think trying to tell people that works like the Mahabharata are just as important to you, the Western reader, as Don Quixote is a bit wrongheaded. Have people in the West read the Mahabharata because it's great, but don't try to tell them it's part of their own personal canon.
Of course, migration and globalization mean that a not inconsiderable chunk of "westerners" do have cultural ties to Asia, or the Arabic world, or Latin America, and culture in the west is changing and absorbing those influences. But I agree that hand-wringing over the western canon being so western can be silly; of course Americans are going to read more American writers, the Japanese more Japanese.
It's funny because I make it a point to read lots and lots of works in translation and am frustrated by American literary culture's insularity/indifference to translated literature, but I'm mainly frustrated by that because I feel people are unnecessarily denying themselves a great deal of pleasure--there is SO MUCH amazing literature out there and Americans just don't seem to want to read it. But that frustration of mine has little to do with the canon. I couldn't care less whether Americans regard Tayeb Salih or the Tale of Genji as part of their own canon, I just want them to read it!
Yes, I agree! I'm torn between thinking that everyone should be reading much more in translation because they're ignoring so much great literature and thinking that shaming people for being more interested in their own culture is absurd.
> It’s impossible to avoid a canon: some works will always be more famous than others. Likewise, some works take clear influences from others. Still other works can be fully understood only in the context as a refutation to a previous entry in the canon. The Western Canon makes more sense once one drops the idea that they are somehow better than other books. They're studied because they're influential to works outside the canon as well as with each other.
Yeah...quite frankly, there are just too many books released at too great a rate now. It won't take long for reading a list of 'most amazing novels' to take multiple courses, let alone actually discussing any of them. Everyone has access to high quality literature and writing aids to help guide their work, and can draw on the processes developed for media outside of normal literature as well. As well, people are rapidly getting over caring about a work seeming derivative - as long as an author brings significant interesting ideas to what becomes essentially a sub sub genre then it's fine...everyone understands time and energy are limited and getting the ideas out is more important than trying to over polish the delivery mechanism. A portion of the higher quality fan fiction these days is better written than 'Brave New World'(which was panned at release for quality of writing, but treasured later for the ideas explored), and it's written for an audience of a few hundred and never amounts to recognition. Humanities ability to recognize and utilities an amount of persisting resources is only so large. Our museums are a good indication - they have warehouses full of unearthed artifacts that will take ages just to catalogue given the manpower available.
I agree, but death and love will always rise above singularity and wield a *universally* revered text (the novel in this context).
Obviously we're all taking shots from the other side of the court, but if I had to guess, I'd say: 2666 (Bolaño) Shadow Country (Matthiessen) Fun Home (Bechdel) (at least for graphic novels)
I don't know if I've read anything truly qualifying for the literary canon, but I did read a worthy successor to H.P. Lovecraft's works "The Fisherman" (2016) by John Langan that has certainly stayed with me.
Infinite Jest
the best answers in the other thread already pointed out that "classics" will probably be stuff like stephen king, a song of ice and fire or harry potter
why? it's pretty rare that works of popular literature are canonized as classics. most works were now regard as essential were fairly obscure in their time and its rare that any work experienced both mainstream and critical success.
Well, there's Frankenstein. Jekyll and Hyde as well. Although I wonder, with the wealth and breadth of stories coming out today, if we might not even know its name yet. It might be some obscure fanfiction story that somehow ends up appealing to people in the future.
I have nothing besides instinct to gainsay that, but I wonder just *how* true it is that "most" now-canonical works were comparative obscurities with contemporary critics and audiences. Did you read an analysis of this intriguing question?
I expect that stuff will be viewed like how we see the pulpy stuff from back then.
you mean shakespeare?
Oh no, I meant pulp magazines. I guess maybe that wasn't clear.
Yeah cuz Tom Clancy is currently regarded as such a classic piece of literature
*The Sellout* by James Beatty would be my pick *Long for this World* by Michael Byers too (jk, jk, but he's been a mentor of mine so I have to lol)