I'm confused by this 'timeless' definition of literature. I
have some questions.
Are some books 'literature' in the UK and not in the US
because they're out of print in one country and not in the
other? Is a book considered 'literature' when it's reprinted
but not while it's out of print? Since accountants and
commissioning editors largely decide what gets into print and
what stays in print, does that mean they determine what we
call literature? If an author's estate wants a larger advance
than an editor is prepared to pay, does the novel which might
have been bought cease to be 'literature' on account of the
estate holding out for more cash?
Thanks,
Al
----- Original Message -----
From:
DJ-Anonyme@webtv.net
To:
rara-avis-l@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2006 10:06 PM
Subject: Re: RARA-AVIS: letting time sort it
out
Piggybacking on Kerry:
"So, I'm suggesting that historically, by and
large, successful artists
created works to suit the taste of established,
wealthy patrons- mostly
the church and royalty."
Which is why there was a major shift in subject
matter with the
renaissance, from religion to private, as the
bourgeiosie gathered
enough money to want to show off their wealth
through the ownership of
art. This is why there were so many landscapes
and flattering portraits
that showed ownership of the same.
"Anyway, part of my point was going to be that
public literacy is a
relatively new thing, and that a popular, or
pulp, or dime-novel
publishing form, where average folks read words
from the page (as
opposed to having words read to them, as in the
case of Shakespeare's
plays) was exceptional, . . ."
Which is why the novel form was initially railed
against for diluting
literature. Asserting the consequent, it was
reasoned that it the
masses liked it, it couldn't possibly be art, it
must be pandering.
This is where the popular becomeing high class
literature argument does
work well, with works by Stern, Trollope, Austen,
the Brontes, etc.
". . . and short, and was eclipsed when
technology brought performance
into the home."
So we're in a post-literate age, now? And we're
all Luddites here for
continuing to turn pages? Maybe.
"Not that book=literature, but did Melville have
a popular audience of,
say ordinary farm workers, or even stevedores and
whalers? How many of
them could read in Melville's time?"
As I recall from long ago lit classes, I think
Melville was somewhat
popular for his "whaling tales," but nowhere near
a Stevenson, for
example.
"If a bit of art is here in the present, however
it got to be here, then
I guess it has to be better than whatever art is
not here in the present
and so cannot be evaluated at all, making Miker
right, sort of."
But better by what standards? By contemporary
standards. The works are
judged by how they relate to current standards.
So it is quite possible
that during shifts of aesthetics and the
ideologies with which they are
allied (ideologies in the big sense, not specific
political parties
sense), all sorts of great (along with the not so
great) works have
drifted off, never to be read again, for failing
to fit in with the
times, failing to continue to move and/or
entertain readers. And they
remain lost, even if times may have or may in the
future shift to a more
sympathetic mindset.
So I am perfectly willing to believe that what
survives is some of the
best of the past, but I have trouble believing
it's all of the best. I
always wonder about the masterpieces that are
lost forever, either
because no one later checked out a book that fell
out of favor (no, I'm
not volunteering to do the literary dumpster
diving to find these) or
because it was never published because it, to
quote Brian Wilson, "just
wasn't made for these times."
Luckily, there are still far more good books than
I will ever get a
chance to read, relegating all of the above to a
tangential academic
argument. I really have little reason to
complain.
Mark
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
--------------------~--> Check out the new improvements in
Yahoo! Groups email.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/6pRQfA/fOaOAA/yQLSAA/kqIolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
RARA-AVIS home page: http://www.miskatonic.org/rara-avis/
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rara-avis-l/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email
to:
rara-avis-l-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 22 Jun 2006 EDT