View Single Post
Old 09-02-2015, 07:38 AM   #132
DiapDealer
Grand Sorcerer
DiapDealer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DiapDealer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DiapDealer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DiapDealer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DiapDealer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DiapDealer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DiapDealer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DiapDealer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DiapDealer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DiapDealer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DiapDealer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
DiapDealer's Avatar
 
Posts: 28,735
Karma: 206739468
Join Date: Jan 2010
Device: Nexus 7, Kindle Fire HD
Quote:
Originally Posted by HarryT View Post
Can you give an example of an author who you'd regard as having been labelled "literary", but not "innovative"?
To be honest, I don't know any authors who have been labeled as "literary." I don't recognize the validity of any such label that tries to use "literature" in a high-brow, genre-like manner (i.e. this author is romance, and this author is literary). Calling a book/author "literary" is a redundantly pointless distinction in my opinion. Therefore, I use what the past has decided is a "literary classic" as my (very loose) definition. Which is why I have no qualms claiming that Classic Literature is rife with uninnovative, but still beloved, works. Name your own. You can easily do so, if you divorce yourself from your preconceived notions that "Literary" is somehow inexorably tied to academia. Me naming something that you then dismiss as un-literary (with personal criteria) would be quite pointless.
DiapDealer is offline   Reply With Quote