View Single Post
Old 02-24-2013, 06:17 AM   #195
Pulpmeister
Wizard
Pulpmeister ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Pulpmeister ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Pulpmeister ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Pulpmeister ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Pulpmeister ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Pulpmeister ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Pulpmeister ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Pulpmeister ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Pulpmeister ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Pulpmeister ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Pulpmeister ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
Posts: 2,838
Karma: 29145056
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Perth Western Australia
Device: kindle
Literary snobbery has been around for a long time, and will be around a lot longer.

One reason is that there is no objective measure of greatness in literature. All the usual criteria are subjective. (Which is why literary awards are not infallible guides to literary greatness.)

My own view is there is an objective measure of literary greatness--possibly more than one.

The first one, the main measure, is sustained popularity with the reading public over a very long time. By the reading public I mean people who read the books for pleasure, not because it's their job (literary academics) or because they have to (English lit students).

A second, possibly less important, measure, is the impact upon the public outside the circle of readers.

Nobody for a moment would claim that the Sherlock Holmes stories exhibit any of the characteristics much beloved of literary snobs--BUT the books still sell, are still read, and the impact has been great. Millions who have never read a word of Conan Doyle know what you mean when you say Sherlock Holmes.

The Sherlock Holmes stories, taken together, I would argue, are proven "great". (I'm not a particular fan myself, but I'm being objective here.) But Conan Doyle would never get a literary award from literary snobs, not even posthumously.

If anyone has the energy, they can compile a long list of books which sell to a keen and appreciative public year in year out, long after their authors have died. Many show no signs of fading away.

One author who gives one furiously to think is the best-selling author of all time: Agatha Christie. It is not far off 100 years since her first novel appeared; all her books are still in print and selling in vast numbers. And it's no good saying, "but look at those TV series; free advertising"; the TV series arose because the books were so enormously popular. Heaven only knows the current sales figures--I've heard over one BILLION copies. Divide by 80, and you get an average of (counting on my fingers and toes here) something like 12 million plus copies EACH.

There has to be some sort of greatness in those books (well, not all of them I agree--Elephants Can remember--aaaargh!) to sustain that level of interest for such a very long period). She made her name as long ago as 1927 with The Murder of Roger Ackroyd.

If, when Agatha's books finally enter the public domain 70 years after her death, they are still selling in outrageous numbers, it could be very hard to deny that she is a great writer.

Literary snobs will of course have no trouble denying it.
Pulpmeister is offline   Reply With Quote