“In other words much of the tension between high and low literature overt the last 200 years is first generated by the 1790s tales of terror.” (Miles 2002)
You’ve convinced me that I need to read the two Gothic novels you mentioned. I’ve long been a devout fan of Wilkie Collins and Doyle. What of snobbery? The quality of the writing, characterization, plot development etc determines quality literature for me, not categorization or subject matter. You mentioned Margaret Atwood. A Handmaid’s Tale has beautiful prose, superb characterization and a highly developed plot. We’re long past turning up our noses at good writing, no matter what genre. And that’s my pontification for the evening.
I think the snobbery quote Was from the Gothic tradition book. But even within the genre, I know there’s a difference between something written by Edith Wharton or Robert Aickman and some of the pulp stuff. So my next task is to try and understand for myself what it is distinguishes between excellent writing and Just okay writing within the same genre.
My vote goes to Count Fosco as one of the top five literary villains of all time. Having never attended university, I gravitated to Atwood later in life, feeling daunted by her research techniques, etc. With Surfacing, The Blind Assassin, Alias Grace, her unique talent was worth the wait. After completing each offering of Dickens (after Hemingway/Steinbeck, chronological study), a dive into Gaskell and George Eliot (both ladies of exceptional talent), the five Radcliffe novels made much more sense, as did Bronte poetry and fiction, and Austen. Three of my grandparents left England, so the effort was personal. The intertwining of genres is exciting, but my book habit values place far above person or plot. Rare air.
You’ve convinced me that I need to read the two Gothic novels you mentioned. I’ve long been a devout fan of Wilkie Collins and Doyle. What of snobbery? The quality of the writing, characterization, plot development etc determines quality literature for me, not categorization or subject matter. You mentioned Margaret Atwood. A Handmaid’s Tale has beautiful prose, superb characterization and a highly developed plot. We’re long past turning up our noses at good writing, no matter what genre. And that’s my pontification for the evening.
I think the snobbery quote Was from the Gothic tradition book. But even within the genre, I know there’s a difference between something written by Edith Wharton or Robert Aickman and some of the pulp stuff. So my next task is to try and understand for myself what it is distinguishes between excellent writing and Just okay writing within the same genre.
My vote goes to Count Fosco as one of the top five literary villains of all time. Having never attended university, I gravitated to Atwood later in life, feeling daunted by her research techniques, etc. With Surfacing, The Blind Assassin, Alias Grace, her unique talent was worth the wait. After completing each offering of Dickens (after Hemingway/Steinbeck, chronological study), a dive into Gaskell and George Eliot (both ladies of exceptional talent), the five Radcliffe novels made much more sense, as did Bronte poetry and fiction, and Austen. Three of my grandparents left England, so the effort was personal. The intertwining of genres is exciting, but my book habit values place far above person or plot. Rare air.