Novelists No One Reads Anymore

Here's one for the thread: The White Hotel by D.M. Thomas. It was very present on the literary landscape in the '80s, always saw it at bookstores and on friends' parents' bookshelves. I eventually read it, I liked it, but that was 30 years ago so who knows what I'd think now. Anyway, it was his only popular book and I feel like it's just totally disappeared.

John Barth is well on his way to this thread, smiling self-contentedly all the way. Early this year I read Lost in the Funhouse and Where Three Roads Meet, but that won't stop it.

B-b-but what about the upcoming Dalkey Arcjive Essentials edition of The Sot-Weed Factor?

Dalkey Archive of course, although now I kind of want to reuse Arcjive.

I read The White Hotel in the 80s: don't remember specifics, but it seemed refreshing.

George Saunders

I'm betting he will be regarded thirty years from now the way Donald Barthelme is today.

jane smiley

will anyone read murakami in 10 years?

John Irving

Anne Tyler, although ledge was reading something recently.

will anyone read murakami in 10 years?

― ꙮ (map), Saturday, October 1, 2022

I think so. Two of the most loved and acclaimed films of the last few years - Drive My Car and Burning - are based on his short stories, and they are destined to be remembered

Dow: yes I broadly think that earlier Amis has more energy and interest than later. MONEY is 11 years after his debut, and is now 38 years old - in that sense it's 'early'. I can't praise any of his 3 longer novels that I've read after it.

Great call on THE WHITE HOTEL - a book that was big and taken seriously and now isn't.

moving away from academia - how about VC Andrews? didn't read it myself but the vibe i got of it was that it was a particular manifestation of child abuse lit, something that fit alongside "satanic ritual abuse" really well. maybe people weren't _quite_ ready to face up to the truth that in america it was _christianity_ that was the main driver of child abuse in those days...

Bruce Chatwin. Huge in the 80s, never hear anything about him these days.

Anne Tyler has books out all the time. i tend to reread old things of hers rather than new ones but it's quite regular.

my mum is currently reading Garp

in a similar vc Andrews vein, what about Dennis Wheatley?

David Foster Wallace... is a writer I have Complicated feelings about. In one sense he's an avatar of Clever White Man literature, people who write about whatever the hell they feel like writing about. it's only white guys who ever get praised enough to start doing that sort of thing.

Well. White _AMABs_. One of the transfem tropes out there is "gifted boy -> burnout trans girl with a praise kink". My past self had a certain... lack of insight about things. The kind of person who would _notice_ that all of their favorite writers were deeply miserable white men who had killed themselves and concluded "Well, that's that, I definitely shouldn't become a writer, I have enough problems with my mental health."

What I see in the writers I loved in my younger days - writers whose writing style is the most like my own - is not just that they tended to be deeply miserable, fucked up people - yes, I do know I'm talking about _writers_ here - but men who were deeply fucked up by _masculinity_ in particular. Often in ways that perpetuate the problem. DFW is widely known and acknowledged as an abuser whose self-loathing only really seemed to perpetuate his abusive behavior patterns. All of his self-hatred about being a tennis child prodigy and wow he brings a tennis player who's a trans woman into the story and it's _the_ stereotype of the trans female athlete, just like 20 years before damn near anyone else (me included) had any idea what "gender dysphoria" actually was.

With DFW I guess what you get back to is something like "Brief Interviews with Hideous Men". The sense I get is that he thought of himself as a "hideous man", like I did, and couldn't figure out how _not_ to be a hideous man. I guess I eventually figured it out but my particular solution probably wouldn't work for most people - and none of the writers I grew up reading lived long enough to be able to have the option I wound up taking.

I don't really think that DFW is a writer who should be Read, but I think the problems he exemplified have become more, rather than less, acute since his untimely passing.

Back in the early '90s my sophomore high school English teacher, who was a Clever White Man who had a second job selling luggage at Sears and spent his spare time trying to sell spec scripts to second-rate three-camera sitcoms, assigned _A Prayer for Owen Meany_ as the summer reading assignment for the honors English class he taught. I never really read Garp, in large part I think because it had a transsexual in it and it was important to me to know as little about transsexuals as possible. (In retrospect I probably would have been fine, since the character in Garp, like most trans characters in fiction of the era, bears no noticeable resemblance to any actual trans person.)

One problem with speculating on who will be unread in the future is there's a temptation to name authors you don't think are very good - yet the literary world is full of rediscoveries of unjustly forgotten authors, so clearly it's not some platonic notion of quality that prevents authors from falling into oblivion in the first place. I guess a good exercise then is "what current authors you admire do you think will be forgotten?".

Roughly he is saying that we should accept the idea that there is a ton of culture, beyond our ken, and be happy with this abundance and diversity, rather than bothering trying to delimit the canon (which would be the 'Mount Rushmore' of literature).

I am considerably more skeptical of this argument now than I would have been when that essay was published (2007, if I'm correct?). It's immensely freeing on an individual level no doubt, and the fact that canons, no matter how well tuned to preoccupations of race, gender, etc. are always going to be oppressive on some level, makes it tempting to want to ignore them entirely. But We Live In A Society, there is a social dimension to art and the death of the monoculture seems to have resulted not so much in a world where every person has their own highly curated individual tastes but rather a situation where what is left of the "mainstream" feels impoverished. There's never been a greater time to be a specialist, you can get into dadaist poetry or 60's wuxia films or 30's swing and have more information available to you than ever before, but meanwhile those who haven't got those geeky impulses to research and look beyond are now I think much less likely to be exposed to anything that might take them out of their comfort zone. It's kind of like the nostalgia expressed on the Godard thread for TV channels showing foreign arthouse fare, probably the vast majority of ppl who came across these must have found them pointless but for a few people it may have been an entry point to explore these new worlds. So I guess that is where I see the usefulness of a shared canon, of having these works that most people get exposed to in school or whatever. This might also be viewed as a defense of the middlebrow, I guess.

"it's not some platonic notion of quality that prevents authors from falling into oblivion in the first place"

Think I agree with this. It's contingency, happenstance, politics - unsure how much quality has to do with it. Maybe it does, but then, most of us don't agree about questions of quality in the first place. If it was up to me, GRAVITY'S RAINBOW would be forgotten. Other ilxors would have the diametrically opposite view.

>>> I guess a good exercise then is "what current authors you admire do you think will be forgotten?".

Yes - agree - this kind of angle on the question is interesting.

Off the top of my head, Lorrie Moore (whom many of us love) might be a relatively good candidate for this because of her lightness.

David Mitchell - if thinking harshly I can see his work coming to be seen as youthful and brittle, more than dazzling.

I was just thinking of taking another crack at GRAVITY’S RAINBOW – after all, it can’t be as bad as V- but maybe not.

Bruce Chatwin. Huge in the 80s, never hear anything about him these days.

― Zelda Zonk, Sunday, 2 October 2022 bookmarkflaglink

A test for this thread is to get hold of the names, go to a bookshop and see whether they stock a copy.

I would say this is the case for the vast majority of the authors in here, such as Chatwin.

What is this bookshop you speak of?

In a secondhand bookshop yesterday (South London readers: the tiny cheap and chaotic BOOKS on Oglander Rd in SE15) I was inspired by this thread to take a look at a Len Deighton book, “Horse Under Water”.

On the back it had a quote, no context, apparently from LIFE Magazine:

“Next, big soft girls will read Len Deighton aloud in jazz workshops”.

I don’t know what that was supposed to mean or what readers it was meant to attract but it sure as hell worked on me, I bought it for £2.

I like this story and quotation a lot.

I also quite like that shop. We may have discussed it before.

We may well have.

Truth told, the appealing front cover of the book also had a part to play in my decision to purchase:

https://astrofella.files.wordpress.com/2014/09/fab6d-deighton20horse20under20water.jpg

LIFE magazine: “Next, big soft girls will read Len Deighton aloud in jazz workshops”.
narrator's voice:

Deighton After Dark.

I love the context-free "Next"

It's an amazing blurb.

Friend informs me that particular Deighton is set in Portugal, and at one point the main character mentions the German's uncanny ability to emulate the local language accent-free. This, I regret to say, is not true.

http://clothesinbooks.blogspot.com/2017/11/big-soft-girls-and-jazz-workshops.html?m=1

The thriller is borrowing the props of the conventional “literary” novel…
No wonder a newspaper reviewer breathlessly declared that “the vitality of the modern thriller flows directly from the bloody realities of our embattled day”. Next, big soft girls will read Len Deighton aloud in jazz workshops. The real question is not whether the new thrillers are literature (the answer is no) but whether they really do tell anything about the latest symptom of fiction’s increasing inability to get to the terrifying matters of our time.

context of the context: conrad knickerbocker (for it is he) is supplying his own implied narrator's voice (viz that this is not in fact going to happen, bcz newspaper reviewers are making too much of "the modern thriller", which knockerbocker boldly offsets against "fiction" (despites its current, viz 1964, failures)

He liked In Cold Blood though.

https://archive.nytimes.com/www.nytimes.com/books/97/12/28/home/capote-blood2.html

He was working on a Malcolm Lowry bio but committed suicide, some say as the result of a Lowry curse.

comically enough given the context of this thread what the full blurry knickerbocker review is pleading for is the arrival of the pynchonesque spy thriller (viz a form that also reflects desk-bound faceless bureaucracies at scale)

adding: george plimpton klaxon

Great cover too: Len halfway under what over here (US) signifies "watered down" to some and "Lifesaver!" to others---not the candy but the striped Cliff's Notes you read just before the big test. There are or were (when I worked in a mid-90s bookstore) even Notes for short stories, and I sold some; God forbid you risk getting lost in the five-page original when you can (well probably) cruise right through Cliff's ten. But I'd still like to look at the Notes for Finnegan's Wake before I finally try to read the whole original (which will happen, if at all, with Campbell's A Skeleton Key To).
Meant to say that Daniel's misgivings about lack of canon feel right re further fragmentation (of secular, pluralistic, in my take) social-and-even-individual cohesion.

My mother taught English, American and World Lit (in a university geared toward STEM and other non-Liberal Arts majors), and I maybe spent too much time in school, so I tend to think of canons as academic: What should be taught now, to all students, to those with certain majors, on what grade levels, secondary and college?

Just read Conrad Knickebocker's obit and feel a little unclean. Somebody posted his interview with William S. Burroughs here if you want to read: https://bluewatsons.tumblr.com/post/122329932364/conrad-knickerbocker-interview-william-s

@Daniel_Rf - Good thoughts. My feelings on monoculture are complicated, I guess I'd say. I grew up I guess with an adverserial relationship to monoculture - I guess what you could call "hipsterism", with the caveat that I was in no way anything resembling "hip". As I've gotten older, some of the stuff I liked _because_ it was opposed to the monoculture has been absorbed into the monoculture. Geeky shit, a lot of times. Comic books and so forth. There's a shared cultural context that gets lost when something gets mainstreamed.

With books I guess that doesn't matter so much - time to "canon" is longer than that. The original cultural context of Olaf Stapledon, say, doesn't play into it so much.

There's this rift, I think, between liberal and radical approaches to... life, really, just life. And I've been on both sides of that divide. The liberal approach is look, can't we just expand the divide? Let's read more Octavia Butler. (I really need to read some Octavia Butler.) The radical approach on the other hand is... the monoculture isn't just _impoverished_, it's fucking insane and is killing all of us. I like the idea of _a_ monoculture, one where we don't have this fundamentally adversarial relationship with the "other". At the same time to defend _this particular version_ of the monoculture is an exercise in defending the indefensible.

He was working on a Malcolm Lowry bio but committed suicide, some say as the result of a Lowry curse.

― Misirlou Sunset (James Redd and the Blecchs)

Always wondered what Lou Reed meant when he sang "Malcolm's curse haunts our family"

Kate otm (incl. that last scary quote)
(Despite well-earned news coverage about book bans as grassroots prairie fire in US, and this being the Deep-ass South, my sister reports that, meeting the cast of a "beautiful mumblecore" local high school production of The Glass Menagerie, she was told that they're now reading The Handmaid's Tale.)(Have also read that Banned Books lists can be good for sales.)

Now reading it as assignment, that is. Wonder if anybody's sticking to Cliff's Notes---I'm guessing some might go from those to the original, once given an indication of the details.

Those nice Vintage International early-90s paperbacks probably led to more readers of Rilke and Camus in the U.S., or at least more people getting them as birthday gifts.

and their covers made them ideal beach reading..

Anyway---first thought not nec best thought---I wanna say "The Waste Land" should be required, while pointing out that it's Ezra Pound's remix---tell 'em/maybe have 'em read some Pound, maybe have to tell what a remix is by now, show/play examples of process (demonstrating value of revision and editing), also Eliot as St. Louis->London remix, and how that affected his writing maybe (allowing them to speculate at all times). Also about shittier side of him personally, ditto Pound ("Now, class, how does this affect your reading?") Also is any of his other writing as good as "TWL," to the extent that you can appreciate why it is-was considered good, whether you enjoy it or not.

moving away from academia - how about VC Andrews?

Should I read Flowers in the Attic? I found an extremely tattered free paperback, which seems somehow appropriate.

Been meaning to type all morning that there is an implicit slipdrift in the thread title itself. Does No One mean
No one at all
No one I know
No one I care about
No one I respect

Your day breaks, your mind aches.