Topic: Memorable Authors (Read 18517 times)

onewheelwizzard · « **Reply #50 on:** 05 Dec 2007, 01:48 »

Guys, Clive Cussler is a good writer. I'm not sure what your problem with his book is all about. In fact, he wrote it so well, all you need to do is think up a new way to threaten the world, research another important shipwreck of the past, and come up with a new way to tie said shipwreck into the solution for said threat, and you get to read it again, but for the first time! You could read this book for the first time more than a dozen times, maybe two dozen, before you exhaust what it has to offer. Clive Cussler has written a masterpiece of a novel.

I really like his books, actually. It's not the sort of thing that you read for posterity, but it's still time well spent in its own way.

I would want Tom Robbins to survive, but his legacy will only live on through word of mouth. Unless some revolution in US culture puts his books into literature classes, his work is probably not going to get any public recognition after he is gone. Likewise Robert Anton Wilson.

In terms of sci-fi, I definitely think Isaac Asimov, Robert Heinlein, and Arthur C. Clarke are going to survive past the 20th century. Philip Dick will, if there's any justice in the world. William Gibson might make it too. Within the sci-fi genre they will be the equivalent of Austen or Dumas for at least a couple centuries, but this is true of other writers as well ... I'm only including these in specific because they wrote books that were important across genres.

J. K. Rowling is really the only fantasy writer I'd put on the list. People will be reading her books 50 years from now for sure, and maybe longer. And Neil Gaiman has an impressive enough portfolio to give him a lasting name.

In terms of current or recent novelists/writers, I'd look at Thomas Pynchon, Don DeLillo, Philip Roth, Kurt Vonnegut, Toni Morrison (unfortunately), Alan Moore (yes, I think he counts, and yes, I think he'll stay important), Joseph Heller, Hunter S. Thompson, and maybe Chuck Palahniuk if he's lucky (although his books, along with most I've mentioned, will be as dated as Treasure Island in probably less then 60 years).

Dimmukane · « **Reply #51 on:** 05 Dec 2007, 07:01 »

I think Terry Pratchett and Orson Scott Card will, probably. To add to onewheelwizzard's list. Terry Pratchett hasn't really wrote anything bad yet. Critics keep comparing him to Vonnegut, him and Neil Gaiman collaborated to write one of the best books ever. Orson Scott Card is a little hit-or-miss, but Ender's Game and Ender's Shadow I think are substantial enough on there own to keep him from being forgotten.

Joseph · « **Reply #52 on:** 05 Dec 2007, 09:00 »

I really cannot see Orson Scott Card making it. His books, beyond Ender's Game, are really only read by a very select group of people, and tend not to be talked about much. Even Ender's Game recieves as much criticism as praise, if not more, and even in ten years are so, I think it will scarcely be read.

Another author that I think would be likely to last a good while in Margaret Atwood. She's widely read around the globe, has written a number of books already heavily studied, and will likely continue to write for a good while. She has enough awards to her name, and I would not be surprised if she managed a close shot at a Nobel prize at some point. Not saying she deserves it though.

Dimmukane · « **Reply #53 on:** 05 Dec 2007, 10:50 »

Really? In Maryland, a lot of the school systems are putting it up for suggested summer reading or whatever it's called now right along with The Time Machine, I Robot, and Moby Dick. I'm not saying the school board is an authority on books or anything, but typically that's a sign that's it's memorable.

Lines · « **Reply #54 on:** 05 Dec 2007, 11:05 »

The only problem I think with Ender's Game is that if someone doesn't care for sci-fi, I don't think people will like it, but I guess that could be said about a lot of books. It's not like Fahrenheit 451 or Brave New World, which I can definitely see being read 100 years from now, though. But then again, I only thought that Card's book was okay compared to those two. (I was having chronic headaches when I was reading it, which may have something to do with my not liking it as much.) And Bradbury has been one of my favorite authors for about the past 10 years.

As for horror authors, I can see Palahnuik being more successful than King down the line. King has more work, but Palahnuik's is better and personally I find it more interesting. (I like reading Stephen King every once in a while, especially his older stuff, so I don't dislike him.) Also for horror, has anyone else read The Other by Tom Tryon?

onewheelwizzard · « **Reply #55 on:** 06 Dec 2007, 00:50 »

I fully expect my child to read Ender's Game for class in middle school. I really hope so, anyway. But aside from that one book I don't think Orson Scott Card is going to have much of a lasting legacy.

Keep in mind that Ender's Game is not quite at the same difficulty level as either of the others mentioned. I'd expect a teenager to be ready to read it at least a year or two before being ready to read Huxley or Bradbury.

I really hope Terry Pratchett stays at least as popular as he is now, but he doesn't really have a big splashy masterwork, just a constantly evolving and improving fantasy universe of wondrous proportions.

Maybe Snow Crash will give Neal Stephenson a posthumous following, but I'm not holding my breath for it.

Dimmukane · « **Reply #56 on:** 06 Dec 2007, 07:26 »

I imagine Pratchett will probably be remembered in the same way that Robert E. Howard and H.P. Lovecraft are remembered. Even though Good Omens IS a masterwork....

KharBevNor · « **Reply #57 on:** 06 Dec 2007, 08:16 »

I'd go for Mort or Guards! Guards! before Good Omens, probably.

Are Huxley and Bradbury difficult? I read Brave New World and The Illustrated Man when I was 11, Fahrenheit 451 maybe a year later. The only author I remember finding too difficult and putting off for a while was Mervyn Peake, and then only 'Titus Alone', which is fucking batshit.

Mervyn Peake deserves to be remembered, actually. Gormenghast is utterly fantastic. I suspect the fantasy trappings put a lot of people off (though really, it's not fantasy at all), and also, they are quite difficult works. I don't know many people of my age who have read them.

Dimmukane · « **Reply #58 on:** 06 Dec 2007, 09:21 »

My favorite so far was Night Watch, actually, followed by Sourcery and The Last Hero, then Good Omens.

Fahrenheit 451 was basically a more abstract version of The Giver (or vice versa), which I think everyone in Maryland had to read for sixth grade (11 years old). I know not all of his books are like that, but dystopia is kinda easy to pull off, when you look at the sheer number of books/movies/video games that use it as the center element of the story. And as far as I know, The Giver is the easiest to read. Theoretically, once you've read that, you've read all of them. But a lot of people seem to get a kick out of dystopia. I wonder what that says about us?

KharBevNor · « **Reply #59 on:** 06 Dec 2007, 11:41 »

I wouldn't particularly hold The Giver up as a great example of dystopian fiction. Fahrenheit 451, 1984 and Brave New World are what I would call the canonical 'trilogy' of dystopian fiction. The reason the dystopia is so popular, and done so often (though not that often), is that it is of course a way to comment on present politics and social conditions

Also, on the subject of genre fiction, raised earlier, I would like to enquire why someone who only (or mainly) reads genre fiction (sci-fi, fantasy, horror, historical, war, detective, thriller) is so easy to criticise, but someone who never reads genre fiction is alright.

Science fiction, I would argue, has been the most important literary genre in the second half of the twentieth century, for many reasons. This is not just my own geekery talking. It has shaped our cultural discourse and attitudes to technology and its social and personal ramifications in ways no other genre has. Information technology, the internet, surveillance, conspicuous consumption, the war on drugs, the war on terror: science fiction wrote about them first and best.

Dimmukane · « **Reply #60 on:** 06 Dec 2007, 12:45 »

Of course The Giver isn't supposed to be the epitome of Dystopia stories. But seeing as that's probably the first one you'd read, you'd basically be rereading it when you do go on to read Bradbury/Huxley/Seuss/etc. They all have their own unique characters and such, but if you didn't like The Giver, you don't really have a reason to read 1984/Brave New World/Cat in the Hat/etc.

But I totally agree with you on the science fiction part. Ender's Game invented the political blog and to an extent WiMax.

KharBevNor · « **Reply #61 on:** 06 Dec 2007, 13:10 »

The Giver certainly was not the first dystopia I ever read. It wasn't even on the syllabus, as far as I remember.

Oh, and Handmaids Tale, speaking of dystopias.

Dimmukane · « **Reply #62 on:** 06 Dec 2007, 14:14 »

In my tiny state, anyways.

Lines · « **Reply #63 on:** 06 Dec 2007, 14:42 »

The Giver was on my 8th grade reading list, but I read it when I was still in elementary school. I'd read quite a bit of Bradbury by 8th grade, too, because as I said earlier, I love his work. But if I'd read Brave New World around that age, I probably wouldn't have understood it fully. I'm not insulting The Giver, I really enjoyed it, but it's a older kid's/young adult's book. It was written for that age range, while it's my understanding that the other two weren't. I can see it staying on a reading list for junior high level for a while, but I don't see it going any further than that. That's kind of how I see Ender's Game.

Now, if I don't see The Hobbit or anything by Tolkien on my kid's reading lists, I will be sad.

MusicScribbles · « **Reply #64 on:** 06 Dec 2007, 15:16 »

What about Philip K. Dick and Robert Heinlein? Where does Asimov fit in here? These guys have written controversial enough books that their memories will probably hold for a while. The real question that I have is, will we have a Shakespeare? Who will be remembered hundreds of years from now as a master of his art in front of others?

Dimmukane · « **Reply #65 on:** 06 Dec 2007, 15:54 »

Maybe Asimov??? He has books in almost every section of the Dewey Decimal system. I mean, there are some writers who can be compared to classical authors, but I haven't seen any compare to Shakespeare. Vonnegut is kinda like Swift, Asimov/Heinlein/Clarke are kinda like Verne/Wells, but I can't really think of a good comparison to Shakespeare. Wouldn't they have to be a playwright/poet, anyways? How many of those do we have now.

MusicScribbles · « **Reply #66 on:** 06 Dec 2007, 17:40 »

The big comparison I'm making is that Shakespeare is basically the go to for, as Harold Bloom would say, the 'invention of the human'. Shakespeare--whether or not he was Sir Francis Bacon--is considered to have written in the greatest examples of the English language, or used it the most beautifully. Now, my question is whether or not our time might have a writer of any kind whose influence is not seen for what it is now, but will be remembered hundreds of years from now as extremely genius as Shakespeare. This person does not need to be a playwright or poet, but that doesn't mean that they can't be. A requirement must be simply, absolutely timeless writing.
My vote goes with Philip K. Dick. This is mostly because I'm having trouble remembering all of my favorite authors. Remember that the sixties can still be considered a part of our time, considering the span of time in which Shakespeare was unrecognized. I would have liked to say, potentially Neil Gaiman, because I feel that if he continues for a while, his material might become such that much greater. Also, I say Dick because we need a sci-fi Shakespeare.

Thoughts? Personal nominations? Should this be a seperate thread?

Johnny C · « **Reply #67 on:** 07 Dec 2007, 12:27 »

Quote from: KharBevNor on 06 Dec 2007, 11:41

Also, on the subject of genre fiction, raised earlier, I would like to enquire why someone who only (or mainly) reads genre fiction (sci-fi, fantasy, horror, historical, war, detective, thriller) is so easy to criticise, but someone who never reads genre fiction is alright.

Science fiction, I would argue, has been the most important literary genre in the second half of the twentieth century, for many reasons. This is not just my own geekery talking. It has shaped our cultural discourse and attitudes to technology and its social and personal ramifications in ways no other genre has. Information technology, the internet, surveillance, conspicuous consumption, the war on drugs, the war on terror: science fiction wrote about them first and best.

Genre fiction can be decent and science fiction and fantasy both have an awful lot to offer, and they've proven this over and over again. Besides Asimov and Heinlein ther are a bunch of authors in the genre who've created great works.

But there are some brilliant people out there writing fucking incredible books that don't come with their own little genre stickers at the library and it always pisses me off to hear people ramble on about how brilliant Clive Cussler is and nobody has the taste to mention Jonathan Lethem or Michael Chabon or Mordecai Richler or Timothy Findley. Hell, since we're largely ignoring the "of the last thirty years" bit, where the fuck are Henry Miller and Charles Bukowsk and Vladimir Nabokov and Joseph Heller (and yes I know most of his stuff was released in the last thirty years)? At the end of the day these people have written masterpieces - in some cases, multiple masterpieces - and they don't get the recognition they deserve for breathing new, beautiful life into thousands of tired words.

I'd also like to meet these people that don't read any genre fiction ever. I personally don't know any of them. I do know plenty of people who only read genre fiction and series fiction.

EDIT: I forgot "be." "Science fiction can decent." AWESOME.

Tom · « **Reply #68 on:** 07 Dec 2007, 14:20 »

Sci-fiction and fantasy provide a wide array of tools and accessible to themes to explore topics that my be considered taboo, Animal Farm through political allegory, or are just hard to cope with.

Johnny C · « **Reply #69 on:** 07 Dec 2007, 14:24 »

Yeah, I know.

Quote from: Johnny C on 07 Dec 2007, 12:27

science fiction and fantasy both have an awful lot to offer

What I'm suggesting is there is so much out there that isn't science fiction that is good literature.

Tom · « **Reply #70 on:** 07 Dec 2007, 14:49 »

Please recommend me some then and I'm saying this in all earnest. Especially contemporary authors, I stopped reading a lot ofcontemporary fiction awhile ago beacause i couldn't really find anything that wasn't cliched into oblivion.

Joseph · « **Reply #71 on:** 07 Dec 2007, 15:11 »

Quote from: Dark Flame on 02 Dec 2007, 21:28

Nicholson Baker - The Fermata
Martin Amis - Money
Don DeLillo - White Noise
Colson Whitehead - The Intuistionist (I guess this could be sort of maybe argued as a science-fiction-ish thing though)
David Mitchell - Cloud Atlas (Parts of it are definitely science-fiction, so it would make a good stepping stone, maybe)

Also:

Vladimir Nabokov - Lolita
John Updire - Rabbit, Run
Carol Shields - The Stone Diaries
Julian Barnes - England, England
David Eggers - A Heartbreaking Work Of Staggering Genius
Alice Munro - Who Do You Think You Are?
Ian McEwan - Saturday
Richard Ford - The Sportswriter
John Kennedy Toole - A Confederacy Of Dunces
Iris Murdoch - The Sea, The Sea

Wayfaring Stranger · « **Reply #72 on:** 07 Dec 2007, 17:52 »

...

Life of Pi - Yann Martel
The Hummingbird's Daughter - Luis Alberto Urrea
Sputnik Sweetheart - Haruki Murakami
My Name is Asher Lev - Chaim Potok
Bee Season - Myla Golberg
Night Train - Martin Amis
The Killer Angels - Michael Shaara
Cold Mountain - Charles Frazier

The list really goes on and on. There is some great science fiction, but there is an abundance of fantastic literature elsewhere.

I do agree, however, that science fiction has made an incredible impact on our culture in the last half-century or so. For that reason, I think a lot of great science fiction authors (Dick, Bradbury, Heinlen, Asimov, etc.) have a good chance of entering the canon of classic literature. That's a big step for a genre that was barely taken seriously less than a hundred years ago.

Joseph · « **Reply #73 on:** 07 Dec 2007, 17:58 »

Except don't read The Life Of Pi.

KharBevNor · « **Reply #74 on:** 07 Dec 2007, 22:39 »

Quote from: Johnny C on 07 Dec 2007, 12:27

Vladimir Nabokov

Nabokov wrote speculative fiction.

Just sayin'.

Felix_ · « **Reply #75 on:** 08 Dec 2007, 01:08 »

Mikhail Bulgakov.

Alex C · « **Reply #76 on:** 08 Dec 2007, 07:44 »

I'd say Harlan Ellison, but I'm just not sure you can have the legs when the bulk of your work was in short stories and scripts. That and he did the bulk of his writing split between the '60s and '70s, so I'm not really sure he meets the OP criteria, but I figured he's worth a mention.

thehollow · « **Reply #77 on:** 08 Dec 2007, 15:59 »

Quote from: Felix_ on 08 Dec 2007, 01:08

Mikhail Bulgakov.

I only ever read Master and Margarita (does he even have anything else anyone's read?) and it was awesome.

Johnny C · « **Reply #78 on:** 08 Dec 2007, 16:47 »

Quote from: KharBevNor on 07 Dec 2007, 22:39

Nabokov wrote speculative fiction.

Just sayin'.

He also wrote Pale Fire and Lolita.

Mr. Boyle, allow me to break down my last post into a list so you can glean the necessary parts from it.

Quote from: Johnny C on 07 Dec 2007, 12:27

Jonathan Lethem
Michael Chabon
Mordecai Richler
Timothy Findley

Hell, since we're largely ignoring the "of the last thirty years" bit,
Henry Miller
Charles Bukowski
Vladimir Nabokov
Joseph Heller

Lethem writes science fiction on a fairly regular basis but he also writes straight fiction quite well.

KharBevNor · « **Reply #79 on:** 14 Dec 2007, 17:59 »

Speaking of which, I reckon/hope for Iain Banks to be well remembered, both for awesome pieces of non-genre fiction such as The Wasp Factory, The Bridge, The Crow Road, Complicity and Whit, as well as for awesome science fiction works such as Against a Dark Background, The Use of Weapons, Feersum Endjinn and The Algebraist.

Ozymandias · « **Reply #80 on:** 14 Dec 2007, 18:38 »

Quote from: Felix_ on 08 Dec 2007, 01:08

Mikhail Bulgakov.

Heart of a Dog, heck yes.

Also, I think Harlan Ellison will be more remembering for being an outspoken douche than his actual body of work. That's his own fault, though, because he's far louder than than his work is.

Alex C · « **Reply #81 on:** 14 Dec 2007, 19:46 »

Very true. I figured that to be such common knowledge as not to be worth mentioning, however. I mean, really, Ellison is a tiny, extremely bitter man. If I remember correctly, he had a fictional "about the Author" section in one of his books that described him spending jailtime for murdering his most outspoken critics. He went into considerable detail as to the methods used.

RedLion · « **Reply #82 on:** 16 Dec 2007, 12:54 »

With any luck, Dan Brown will be looked back on as an over-bearing, talentless nobody who doesn't understand the concept of subtlety. The Da Vinci code was the biggest piece of trash I've ever laid hands upon.

I'm sure J.K. Rowling will retain her place for quite some time, at least through Harry Potter, in the way that The Chronicles of Narnia have, for now, immortalized Lewis. Cormac McCarthy will be remembered, but likely only as a niche author, along with Thomas Pynchon. Speaking of Pynchon, "V" and "Gravity's Rainbow" will remain classic giants of literary genius in the same category as books like Les Miserables and War and Peace, not because their subject matter or writing style is in any way similar, but because only the most devoted of readers will take it upon themselves to wade through such a dense, deep, emotionally and mentally draining masterpiece.

I'm not sure about King. He could be looked back on and mocked, or he could be hailed as some kind of horror-genre hero.

Aimless · « **Reply #83 on:** 16 Dec 2007, 14:21 »

Astrid Lindgren is, and will hopefully remain, one of the most memorable writers of our time

TheFuriousWombat · « **Reply #84 on:** 16 Dec 2007, 14:52 »

Quote from: RedLion on 16 Dec 2007, 12:54

With any luck, Dan Brown will be looked back on as an over-bearing, talentless nobody who doesn't understand the concept of subtlety. The Da Vinci code was the biggest piece of trash I've ever laid hands upon.

Dan Brown will not be looked back on at all. In 20 years no one will even know his name.

Tom · « **Reply #85 on:** 16 Dec 2007, 22:56 »

How about the people who wrote Go Ask Alice and Jay's Journal. Whoever actually wrote these should be praised as unintentional comedic genii/genius.

Wayfaring Stranger · « **Reply #86 on:** 18 Dec 2007, 19:58 »

Quote from: TheFuriousWombat on 16 Dec 2007, 14:52

Dan Brown will not be looked back on at all. In 20 years no one will even know his name.

I would have hoped the same about Danielle Steele. Look how that worked out.

jimbunny · « **Reply #87 on:** 19 Dec 2007, 10:03 »

I don't know. Maybe if Dan Brown can consistantly write 3-5 books a year and target them at a very specific demographic...

Danielle Steele will probably get footnote mentions in history, but only for her prolific output and popularity. Maybe just to point out how popular culture has turned this era into one ruled by zombies.

KharBevNor · « **Reply #88 on:** 19 Dec 2007, 11:32 »

Quote from: Wayfaring Stranger on 18 Dec 2007, 19:58

I would have hoped the same about Danielle Steele. Look how that worked out.

Well, I had to wikipedia her. I've never heard of any of her books. Probably confined to the US.

Tom · « **Reply #89 on:** 19 Dec 2007, 23:20 »

Holy shit, who honestly has enough time to right that much?

THESE FORUMS NOW CLOSED (read only)

Author Topic: Memorable Authors (Read 18517 times)

Felix_