| |
|
From the Guardian:
quote:Is the United States a nation of "gullible morons" unable to tell the difference between good literature and pretentious nonsense? Do many literary bestsellers remain unread because they are too "intellectually intimidating", or because they are unreadable?
These are the questions prompted by a row in the literary pages of American newspapers on what constitutes good writing and whether reviewers are deliberately ignoring readable literature in favour of fashionable pretension.
Among the writers attacked are Don DeLillo, Cormac McCarthy, E Annie Proulx and David Guterson.
The row started with the publication n the latest Atlantic Monthly of A Reader's Manifesto, by Brian Myers. Subtitled "An attack on the growing pretentiousness of American literary prose", the essay described much of the canon of modern American literature as over-praised and, in some cases, meaningless.
Fifty years ago, he wrote, Christopher Isherwood and Somerset Maugham had been accepted as both popular storytellers and major literary figures, while today "any accessible fast-moving story written in unaffected prose is deemed to be 'genre fiction' - at best an excellent 'read' or 'page turner' but never literature with a capital L".
"Even the most obvious triteness is acceptable provided it comes with a postmodern wink." he argued. "What is not tolerated is a strong element of action - unless, of course, the idiom is obtrusive enough to keep suspense to a minimum."
He accused many of the leading figures in American literature of failings ignored by compliant critics because they all come from the same "cultural elite".
Myers quoted passages from literary bestsellers which he argued were meaningless when scrutinised. David Guterson, the author of Snow Falling on Cedars, "thinks it more important to sound literary than to make sense", he claimed.
Cormac McCarthy, author of the bestselling All the Pretty Horses, wrote "bad poetry formatted to exploit the lenient standards of modern prose", while Don DeLillo was guilty of "spurious profundity".
Myers concluded: "Whatever happens, the old American scorn for pretension is bound to reassert itself some day and, dear God, let it be soon."
There's more where that came from... I find this rather ridiculous and at the same time slightly worrying, for the following reasons:
1. I've not read any E Annie Proulx or David Guterson (anyone care to fill me in), but what bothers me more than the fact that I like both Don DeLillo and Cormac McCarthy, is the fact that neither of them strike me as being particularly inaccesible, esoteric or obtuse. Underworld may be a Big book dealing with Big themes, and it's deep and rich and clever, but it's not Ulysses: DeLillo's writing voice strikes me as fairly effortlessly readable, and he's writing about fairly well-established American obsessions. And Cormac McCarthy writes cowboy books: very good, poetic, achingly evocative cowboy books, but still...
2. What really bothers me about what this guy's saying however is the fear that American novels might deteriorate to the state of their British cousins if they abandonned what Myers calls their "pretentiousness". And that would be pretty dire indeed: more books about men shagging their secretary / women shagging their boss, anyone? Thought not...
But what do the American readers on the board think?
[ 22-08-2001: Message edited by: The Flyboy ] |
|
|
