Posted by Rizwan on 24/10/2009, 2:13:15, in reply to "Re: Where is the 21st Century?"
72.165.85.63
Generally I agree with you all on this point about recent books, but I would like to make an exception for "Gilead" (which one of you mentioned already). Even if you don't choose this book for the group, I definitely recommend you read it.
I also read the follow-up to "Gilead," and while it was excellent, it was not on the level of "Gilead."
I'm looking forward to reading "Homecoming." I think Marilynne Robinson is a brilliant writer, and I too have heard great things about this overlooked book.
--Previous Message--
:
: That's pretty much how I feel, Guillermo. One should
: almost never read books less than 20 years old.
:
: And yet, I do want to read a little contemporary
: stuff. There are, of course, active writers of long
: standing reputation. If I see some list that contains
: nothing I feel sure doesn't belong, then I'm more
: interested in the suggestions for contemporary books.
: I like to know what Harold Bloom thinks. It must seem
: like I sometimes worship the guy, but that's not it. I
: just feel he's judging on purely aesthetic standards,
: and that he's more likely to overlook something worth
: reading than to recommend something perhaps not worth
: reading.
:
: Finally, I guess prizes do mean something. I'm no
: longer quite so skeptical of the Nobel Prize as I used
: to be. Steven gave us an article last year in which
: they argued that they were not choosing politically. I
: looked into it a little and found that while perhaps
: not the greatest writers living, at least two thirds
: of the winners from the 80s and 90s did seem to have
: reputations beyond the Nobel prize. Many of them were
: poets who didn't interest me, but that's nothing
: against the prize. It is, of course, possible that the
: committee has slipped back into political judgements.
: The prize has had good and bad periods.
:
:
Message Thread:
« Back to thread