KrackerBox

so waht you guys think? do they? should they be in the same category as shakespeare, hemmingway, milton, dostoevsky, etc? or if not of the same category, do they hold any literary value other than entertainment?

Holly E. Ordway

I'm sure some of them do, while others don't have any lasting value. Sometimes a good book will be overlooked *because* it's popular, when really it is well-written and has qualities that will make it worth reading over the long run. (In my opinion, that's one of the few good ways to pin down literary quality -- are people still choosing to read it, 100 years later?)

For instance, Charles Dickens was a "pop" writer of his time -- he wrote his books in installments, often changing storylines partway through in response to his readers' preferences, and his books were HUGELY popular at the time. They're also great books that are still worth reading now, and that give a lot of insight into human nature and society, as well as the culture of the time. Who are the modern Dickens equivalents? I don't know, but I'm willing to bet that Stephen King (generally considered a "pop" writer) will stand the test of time. Certainly he'll be known for having written both excellent and lesser books, but there's real talent there IMO.

renaldow

I think sometimes literary snobs overlook pop fiction, but all of the 'classics' were generally the pop fiction of their times.

I don't believe that 200 years from now all Stephen King books will be reverred, but I do believe one or two will be taught, possibly some of his short stories as well.

KrackerBox

i think your right. i myself am guilty of being one of those literary 'snobs' at one point in my life, but i do think that some pop lit will become as on the 'classics' of our time. king is a good example of this.

KrackerBox

well i do believe time is one way to tell if it is of literary value, but i also believe some quality texts out there are still being overloooked, and may never get recognized by the public.

DigIt

I think that pop novels have little or no lasting value. I suppose that Crichton may be "taught" in the future as part of some techno-novel curriculum, but I think that King will only be a footnote in the annals of horror. None of them will make it into any general curriculum or will ever be considered classics.

tasha1

I'm guilty of being a literary snob at times, but I can be surprised. I read a story called "Green is the Color" by John M. Ford. It's based on some shared world (ugh) and when I looked up the author, his other books are Star Trek novels (double ugh--"book product"--looks like a book, but is more like velveeta). And yet that story was incredibly memorable, even in a shared world environment.

I do think King will be remembered, mainly for some of his short stories. I read a lot of "best of" and survey of horror anthologies, and let's face it, you could never do a sampling of the evolution of horror without King representing the 80's and 90's, just like you couldn't do it without Lovecraft representing the 20's. The problem with King, imo, is nobody edits him anymore.

tasha

KrackerBox

actually, king was part of my english curriculum. i thought it was interesting to have a pop novel in the reading list. mainly i think it is a good way for high school endglish teachers to kidna connect with the younger readers. cuz to many youngsters, they would prefer to read king over lets say shakspeare. i think pop novels are very useful for teaching like freshmen, sophmore levels of h.s. english because most likely they'll actaulyl read it and become engaged. which is more that other 'classic' novels can do for many people of that age level. who knows, it can open up a whole new interest for some students who would never have thought of even picking up a book for entertainment.

Eric F

What do you consider "pop" novels?

I'm reading Terry Pratchet's Discworld series now and I'm really enjoying them. Yes, he cranks out 1 or 2 books a year, and they're really popular. That doesn't mean they're bad.

KrackerBox

that is true, although you have to admit, for one to really write a complex, deep, intricate novel, one must take a good amount of time writting it. in most cases, all the good novels i have read didn't take like 6 months to write. not to say pratchet is bad, but maybe not as deep as other novels. and what do i mean by 'pop' it is just loosly defined. whatever you think or seems 'pop' novelish to you. but i think you guys get the drift of what i'm saying, i'm not gonna get too specific in who is what.

Five Cent Deposit

I think The Silence Of The Lambs willl be remembered 100 years from now.

Penny Lane

I'm a certified "literary snob," as I have a degree that says so and I'm working on another!
I liked Stephen King growing up, and I've been saying for the past three years that he'll make it into the literary canon after his death. Who knows? He is popular for a reason, though he will never be Faulkner.

CaptainMarvel

Nope. I'd like to say "yes" to delude myself, but I won't. I mainly read "pop novels", but fine art they aren't.