Turgenev, I agree, is kind of bad, at least in translation. Chekhov, Tolstoy, those are my boys. Still nothing from Ian or IntheNet. Represent, my Republican friends: have you read much or even a little of our country's fine canon?
Turgenev is preferable to Dostoyevsky. Not that either come close to being the best three Russian authors of the 19th century anyway.
What is there to appreciate about Fyodor the Madman? His stories are long and constantly lose thread, his characters are one-dimentional and often crazy, relationships between them are not developed at all, they just appear out of nowhere, start doing hell knows what, gain the center stage for a moment to unleash a frightfully silly monologue, and retire back to the corner to continue pulling their hair out. And the underlying idea of the whole thing is "Find yourself in Jesus... or Jesus in yourself... or something". Please...
I'm beginning to think that Vladimir Nabokov is still alive and posting on Bigsoccer under the screenname "Shurik."
Be kind. Uncle Volodya did have a lot of great things to say about one author and one author only: himself. I merely piss on the classics.
I was referring specifically to that generation of American writers. I'm a HUGE Dostoyevsky fan. Edited to say: yes, I contridict myself below. I should say I used to be a huge Dostoyevsky fan, and have not since re-read him in order to rethink that. But I certainly wasn't referring to him.
Who's saying Dostoyevsky's great because he's the best Russian writer? Greatest Russian Writer--that'd be Pushkin. Frankly, it's been years since I've read Dostoyevsky, and I'd be interested to see how he holds up for me. And, frankly, I didn't care as much for Brothers Karamozov as I was apparantly supposed to. But Crime and Punishment was huge for me when I first discovered it, and I look forward to reading Notes from Underground and House of the Dead with relish.
The man who's ******** at politics, ******** at cinema and certainly ******** at betting on college football. Hey, I agree. And right behind him, in the 19th century pantheon would go Lermontov and Chekhov, with Gogol to follow. To each their own. I still think Fyodor's a very mediocre writer who's description of the "Russian soul" won him a lot of plaudits. Meh.
His description of the "Russian soul" is frightening. Of course, the real Russian soul is frightening as well, but it deserves a much more talented portraying. Stick with Pelevin, and you'll see why Russians should all convert to Bhuddism.
Being that I'm a Husker fan, I have no right at this point in time to comment on the travails of Texas football. As for Fyodor, it could be we're getting different things from him. Maybe since I'm not Russian and not particularly interested in the culture, that part of his work meant less to me than the more universal issues of guilt and so forth (I haven't read Dostoyevsky since I gave up on the whole 'believing in God' thing, I must admit), so maybe that aspect of his work doens't rankle me simply because I didn't pay it much mind.
I am quite certain that of all the Americans who have read the American Canon, that the breakdown is roughly 50% Democrat, 50% Republican. I think what you are implying is just a roundabout way of saying that Republicans are not as intelligent as Democrats, the thinking is: _If these guys could only read X, because when I read X, it really moved me, and affects my political outlook._ You can not seem to understand that maybe 50% of the population reads a book and is not particularly affected for life emotionally by it. This could be an enormous debate, but the crux is, some people read for entertainment (even if that is a great work of the Western Canon). Just because X author makes some social or political points within beautiful writing, does not make the point always valid. I equate this to music--some people are able to listen to music and just value it as something to listen to, whereas others decide they must take on the dressing style of their favorite bands. It's a personality-type issue I think, with liberals more apt to fall hard for certain things on an emotional level, whereas conservatives tend to be rationalists.
That actually is not what I'm implying. What I'm suggesting is that, for as much as some (not all, or even most) right-wingers throw around accusations that we on the left are unpatriotic, there is an alarming lack of cultural literacy on the right. The books I listed are all important because they signal a distinctly American literature (again, with the possible exception of James, who wrote like a Brit), and the content of them is much more substantial than what certain members of the right hold up as totems of patriotism.
I posted the book on Cultural Literacy to make a larger point. There is a debate among educators as to whether there is a Canon of Knowledge that should be what everyone knows. The humorously odd thing about this thread -- other than the sidetrack into Obscure Russian Authors in what started out as Great Works of American Literature-- is the Lefties advocating a conservative education viewpoint. Go figure.
Erm... You are forgetting my Joseph Heller post. And this was, actually, my real response to the thread topic.
I wouldn't call Pushkin or Fyodor obscure However, I don't think teaching the literary canon is a righty thought. Its just righty at some universities, which tend to lean very liberal in the first place.
But this isn't a right-left debate. It's more of a moderate-left debate. Conservatives, for all intents and purposes, have abandoned cultural literacy. There's nothing inherently conservative about canon-advocacy. Although there are plenty of radical leftists that reject it.
It's quite obvious I need to read more. Every once in a while a thread is created in this forum that reminds me how much of a intellectual imp I am. Granted, I spend most of my reading time reading to my kids. Dr. Suess is truly fascinating.
Since I'm now officially a fascist, I guess I should answer. I've read the original list except for Moby Dick, Henry James and Native Son. And I've only read parts of Leaves of Grass (Song of Myself and one or two others poems).
Yes, I had a good laugh while in my exchange year, having a Great Works Lit class. We were assigned to read the very poorly written novel by Alice Walker, Color Purple right after Tolstoy and before Shakespeare. We also had to read the even worse writer, Richard Wright after Shakespeare. Of course, we couldn't call the writing bad, because it was written by a certain group.
Alice Walker is a bad writer, imho, Richard Wright is an excellent one. That both happen to be black is largely irrelevant.
Meanwhile.....Back to "Patriotism and American Literature" This guy almost got tossed out of America! Nobody's mentioned Kenneth Lewis Roberts, ("Northwest Passage" ) one of the most prolific authors of American classic tales. He wrote in the early to mid 1900's mostly stories that take place in the 1700's. French, Indian war. French, English war and a couple of good ones about the War of Independence. One that made me almost hate the English! and one that almost destroyed his writing career for good in the 1930's?Complete with calls for revoking his citizenship. He wrote one of his books ("Oliver Wiswell") about the revolutionary war through the eyes of an American loyalist/royalist. He said some scathing things about the mob called Son's of Liberty and had the gall to criticize George Washington hence his downfall. His books are eminently readable even by todays standards, not the stilted prose of the so called classic American authors. He made up for it with this, his next book. Some more: http://www.sea-room.com/series-old/roberts-series.html