Posted on 06/25/2002 7:02:06 PM PDT by PJ-Comix
Okay, so far this evening we've had threads about the Worst War Movie Ever Made and about the Best War Movie Ever Made. Now I will ratchet up the discussions a notch with the BEST Novel Ever Written. Remember this is novel which means FICTION. I exclude science fiction from this category. In my opinion novel writing reached a peak in the late 40s and early 50s. Since then we've had some very good novels but not of the quality of that era.
So my nomination for the BEST novel ever written is an easy one: From Here To Eternity by James Jones. If you haven't read it, then READ IT. It is incredible beyond belief. In fact it was so good, that when Norman Mailer read it, he declared it to be better than his own The Naked And The Dead which is quite an admission for a novelist as egotistical as Norman Mailer to make.
One secret for the quality of From Here To Eternity (in addition to it's outstanding writing) is that James Jones based most of the characters on real people (including himself if you look closely). When I read From Here To Eternity I was stunned by the high quality of the writing. It was the only book I have ever read where I slowed down my reading rate because I didn't want to get to the end. I wanted it to go on and on.
Yes, the movie version was great (although the idea that soldiers would pay Donna Reed just for the privelege of chatting with her in private seemed ridiculous) but after you read the novel, it pales in comparison.
I was just thinking how interesting that the days of the "Wild West" are also the days of the Victorian era.
My favorite literary work of all time on all levels is LOTR by Tolkien, which I read once every c. 10 years.
I Read "Go to the Widowmaker" in college (30+ years ago) and loved it, have not read Jones since, though.
Know that Hemingway is vulnerable to criticism, but love him anyway, his writing had a quality, that while perhaps easy to satirize, has never been duplicated.
Jane Eyre
Cold Mountain
Atlas Shrugged
Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban (a brilliant novel ( ;)
Oliver Twist
Au Revoir,
*Belle
He wrote a series of books that are familiarly known as the "Chronicles of Amber." They are epic, and in fact your description of the "7 brothers and sisters" reminds me of Zelazny's story-universe (which I won't go into here, because that's not the point of my mentioning it). In fact, if Gaiman were honest with you, he'd probably say that the Chronicles of Amber were one of his inspirations.
But my REAL point is this: There are some absolutely fantastic WRITERS who happen to be considered "genre authors."
In the mystery category with have Dashiell Hammett. In the Horror genre, Ambrose Bierce. Westerns, Louis L'Amour (and perhaps Zane Grey).
But of all the "niche" genres in my earnest opinion, SF has the largest number of really fine writers, writers that you would put in the category of "great" even disregarding the subject or genre.
These include Theodore Sturgeon, Clifford Simak, Samuel R. Delany (one of the few black SF writers, who happens to be one of the best WRITERS, period), Gene Wolfe, Zelazny (as mentioned), Orson Scott Card, and of course Ray Bradbury.
Unfortunately, these authors STILL have an asterisk by their name simply because they labor in the field of SF. I think that's unfortunate, and I think that SF devotees are right to be a little piqued by such exclusion.
I'll give you evidence of just what I'm talking about right now. In 1998, Random House polled a group of literary critics, scholars and authors in order to come up with a list of the "100 Best Fiction Novels Published In English Since 1900." Simultaneously they allowed the PUBLIC to vote on their website. The effort garnered well over 200,000 responses.
It is FASCINATING to see the two lists side-by-side, which you can see HERE.
Note the list put together by the "experts." The ONLY books appearing in that list, that can even VAGUELY be termed "Science Fiction" are Slaughterhouse Five, Brave New World, and A CLockwork Orange. NONE of the writers I've named above have works listed in the "experts'" list (And PJ, you'll be pleased to note that From Here To Eternity shows up at No. 62 on that list).
Now, look at the list put together by the "rabble," the "great unwashed." PJ will frown upon them, because Eternity doesn't even show up at all. But look at the number of SF and Fantasy books: Battlefield: Earth, Mission Earth, Fear (the last three by the charlatan L. Ron Hubbard--who was, btw, the model for Jubal Harshaw in Heinlein's Stranger in a Strange Land); The Lord of the Rings, Dune, Heinlein's The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress, Stranger..., Citizen of the Galaxy, Double Star, Starship Troopers and The Puppet Masters; Hitchiker's Guide to the Galaxy, The Handmaid's Tale, On The Beach, Clockwork..., Slaughterhouse-Five, Ender's Game; and Something Wicked This Way Comes and Fahrenheit 451, both by Bradbury.
What does this suggest to you?
To me, it suggests the type of debate we're having here is a microcosm of the ongoing debate about "good literature" that has been raging between "the elites" and the "masses-who-read-a-lot" for a long time now.
It should be OBVIOUS that both are applying vastly different criteria. And that's what's happening on this thread, but we're sort of talking past each other because each "side" believes its criteria to be correct.
I'm sure that the "experts" (read "elites") on Random House's editorial board fairly sniffed when they saw the list of the "best books" compiled by the votes of the masses.
IMO, the ESSENTIAL difference in the criteria are these: The elites worship FORM, and the great unwashed relish FUNCTION.
Give me leave for a tiny example: On every list of "great novels," appears Joyce's Finnegan's Wake--It's No. 77 on the Random House list.
Show of hands: Anyone here ever try to actually READ "Finnegan's Wake"? I don't know from experience, but I'm told it is possible to actually enjoy the experience if you are high on some illicit substance or other, or drunk. Otherwise it is sheer lunacy to the "untrained mind."
Joyce is supposed to be a literary genius, and so (it seems the conventional "elites'" wisdom has it) the more unapproachable of his works must be the culmination of his genius.
Here's an excerpt, a scrap of the ultimate genius that is James Joyce:
. . Tys Elvenland ! Teems of times and happy returns. The seim anew. Ordovico or viricordo. Anna was, Livia is, Plurabelle's to be. Northmen's thing made southfolk's place but howmulty plurators made eachone in person? Latin me that, my trinity scholard, out of eure sanscreed into oure eryan! Hircus Civis Eblanensis! He had buckgoat paps on him, soft ones for orphans. Ho, Lord ! Twins of his bosom. Lord save us! And ho! Hey? What all men. Hot? His tittering daughters of. Whawk?O-o-o-kay. Believe me, the entire book is just like that.Can't hear with the waters of. The chittering waters of. Flittering bats, fieldmice bawk talk. Ho! Are you not gone ahome? What Thom Malone? Can't hear with bawk of bats, all thim liffeying waters of. Ho, talk save us ! My foos won't moos. I feel as old as yonder elm. A tale told of Shaun or Shem? All Livia's daughter-sons. Dark hawks hear us. Night! Night! My ho head halls. I feel as heavy as yonder stone. Tell me of John or Shaun? Who were Shem and Shaun the living sons or daughters of? Night now! Tell me, tell me, tell me, elm! Night night! Telmetale of stem or stone. Beside the rivering waters of, hitherandthithering waters of. Night!
With that in mind, is it any wonder that Finnegan's Wake does NOT appear on the "masses'" list of best books? And that Tolkien, Henlein, Herbert, Card and Bradbury DO?
Do you see what I'm driving at? The Elites' TEND to consider FORM--literary artistry--as the sine qua non of literary excellence, while the rabble...
Why, the rabble just want a ripping good yarn!
Now, personally, though I've ALWAYS enjoyed Heinlein's stories (well, MOSTLY; I think he became a dirty, senile old man and pretty much everything from I Will Fear No Evil onward was just DRIVEL), he is not a really good WRITER, to me. He is a FABULOUS story-teller, and his philosophies, which he adequately relates, are interesting. But his skills at the craft of writing belie his humble origins in the pulp novel.
But the "rabble" are FAR more interested in the STORIES told by Tolkien, Heinlein, Stephen King and the like, than they are at how appropriate the style of writing is to generate hordes of Master's Theses and Doctrinal Disseratations (check out the "web" regarding Finnegan's Wake; you'll see what I mean).
Anyway, sorry for this to be so long, but I had been thinking about it today and thought I'd bless you all with the depth of may intellect on such a topic.
Great dissertation, Illbay!
[sniff] I was not pinged....
Please tell me you are making this up... It is random word-salad.
As to the polls. I wonder how many folks in those polls even bothered to read the great literary works? Most of them seem satisfied with their little SF pills.
Try You-Know-What and The Thin Red Line. Both will ASTONISH you with the quality of the writing. Simply breathtaking. As I said, Jones based his characters on REAL PEOPLE (including himself although he denied this).
It sure is important to me. Somehow I can relate more to a story that takes place in, say, South Florida, than in Middle Earth although the latter is a fun read. BTW, I also enjoyed Elmore Leonard because many of his stories are set down here and also because of the quality of his writing. But James Jones overall reigns supreme.
Read that book and that is ALL you will want to do. BTW, I haven't heard from anybody here who has actually read From Here To Eternity. Hello?
Why, because there was sand?
I wonder how many folks in those polls even bothered to read the great literary works? Most of them seem satisfied with their little SF pills.
[big grin]
So DON'T read it. The only loser would be you. But if you do read it, you will be in total awe of James Jones. BTW, Jones was actually a visiting professor down here in South Florida at Florida International University in the early 70s. He was here about a year (mostly ignored by the media) and then left because FIU wouldn't give him a small salary raise.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.