http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071110/ap_on_en_ot/obit_mailer
He shunned machines and wrote 1,500 words a day with a pen. I wonder what kind.
Full Version: We've Lost Norman Mailer
I'm sad.
One of those guys who's real life was as interesting as his literary output!
He will be missed.
Andy
He will be missed.
Andy
I bet that within fifty years he will be out of print and completely forgotten.
QUOTE(RLTodd @ Nov 10 2007, 06:29 PM) [snapback]415759[/snapback]
I bet that within fifty years he will be out of print and completely forgotten.
Well put, little miss sunshine.
I certainly hope not, and if I am around in 50 years, I will still remember him.Kath
QUOTE(OboeJuan @ Nov 10 2007, 09:56 PM) [snapback]415931[/snapback]
QUOTE(RLTodd @ Nov 10 2007, 06:29 PM) [snapback]415759[/snapback]
I bet that within fifty years he will be out of print and completely forgotten.
Well put, little miss sunshine.
I certainly hope not, and if I am around in 50 years, I will still remember him.Kath
I thought I would drop in a bit of clarification because I expect the media to do a lot of Mailer hyping in the next week. Especially if it is a slow week.
When it comes to literature that endures history has shown that you and I don't count. It is the next generation and the one after that and on and on that will count. If you look at what as endured, what as made it into the great books lists, you will see what has made it. If you compare it to Mailer, I think it is odds against him making it. From what I have read of him, he might have developed into a enduring writer but I am currently of the opinion that he squandered his talent. As always YMMV.
On balance I think you're probably right. All Alistair Maclean's books, once so popular and filmed, are now out of print, including HMS Ulysses, widely regarded as his best by a mile.
But I think you're confusing greatness with endurance. Conan Doyle's Sherlock Holmes, and Agatha Christie's output, are scarcely great or profound literature, but they endure. Good-quality popular stuff is more likely to endure than most offerings from the intellectual-literary-luvvie clique. Will most of today's Booker Prize winners be read in fifty years? I very much doubt it. Those who might read them then will almost certainly consider them 'dated', 'stuffy', and 'hopelessly dull, darling'.
And you and I DO count. Contrary to popular belief, very few writers endure who were not popular in their lifetimes. They are rarely 'discovered' years after their deaths. There are a few exceptions like Emily Dickinson and Gerard Manley Hopkins, but they are rare indeed.
But I think you're confusing greatness with endurance. Conan Doyle's Sherlock Holmes, and Agatha Christie's output, are scarcely great or profound literature, but they endure. Good-quality popular stuff is more likely to endure than most offerings from the intellectual-literary-luvvie clique. Will most of today's Booker Prize winners be read in fifty years? I very much doubt it. Those who might read them then will almost certainly consider them 'dated', 'stuffy', and 'hopelessly dull, darling'.
And you and I DO count. Contrary to popular belief, very few writers endure who were not popular in their lifetimes. They are rarely 'discovered' years after their deaths. There are a few exceptions like Emily Dickinson and Gerard Manley Hopkins, but they are rare indeed.
QUOTE(RLTodd @ Nov 11 2007, 06:53 AM) [snapback]415955[/snapback]
I thought I would drop in a bit of clarification because I expect the media to do a lot of Mailer hyping in the next week. Especially if it is a slow week.
When it comes to literature that endures history has shown that you and I don't count. It is the next generation and the one after that and on and on that will count. If you look at what as endured, what as made it into the great books lists, you will see what has made it. If you compare it to Mailer, I think it is odds against him making it. From what I have read of him, he might have developed into a enduring writer but I am currently of the opinion that he squandered his talent. As always YMMV.
When it comes to literature that endures history has shown that you and I don't count. It is the next generation and the one after that and on and on that will count. If you look at what as endured, what as made it into the great books lists, you will see what has made it. If you compare it to Mailer, I think it is odds against him making it. From what I have read of him, he might have developed into a enduring writer but I am currently of the opinion that he squandered his talent. As always YMMV.
QUOTE(Huffward @ Nov 12 2007, 03:07 PM) [snapback]416994[/snapback]
On balance I think you're probably right. All Alistair Maclean's books, once so popular and filmed, are now out of print, including HMS Ulysses, widely regarded as his best by a mile.
Oh dear. I was hoping to get a few more of his, having just read 'The way to a Dusty Death' & thoroughly enjoyed it. Don't tell me Desmond Bagley's going the same way..
As for Norman Mailer. I'm sorry, I've started one of his books & failed to finish it. I felt as the author, he was a too intrusive presence in the story. I don't want to feel the presence of the author in any book - one reason (out of many) why I also hated the Booker nominee 'London Fields' from Martin Amis.
What makes a long lasting book?
I think it's one that contains a good story and is not too tied to a 'modern' state of mind. Fashions change, as do world events. Which is why most stories dealing with the cold war feel like ancient history, even though some are no more than 20 years old. I think fast paced 'terrorist plot' stories will be rapidly lost in the same way once the current convulsions subside.
Suggestions for modern classics: How about Harry Potter..
Regards
Richard.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.