Quote:
Originally Posted by shalym
Ok...so you didn't dismiss her. In the first quote, you hold her up as someone who made a significant contribution, and use her as a counterpoint to Pratchett, implying that they are very different. In the second post, you imply that they are very similar, in that their writing is very formulaic.
Also...if one of the ways that you define great literature is that it influences other writers, then the author of the "Twilight" books would definitely count. Hmmm...sparkly vampires as literature?
Can we just agree that different people have different definitions of "literature"? I can guarantee that my High School English Lit teacher did NOT think of Agatha Christie books as "literature", even if you obviously do.
Shari
|
"Influential" writing and "great" writing aren't the same thing at all. Christie was influential; heck, whatever the name is of the woman is who writes the sparkly vampires thing is influential, but I'm don't think either was "great". Dickens was great.
Yes, we can certainly agree that we all have different definitions. I'm telling you mine; yours may be completely different. Jon thinks Shakespeare is rubbish; I feel otherwise.