If you read my previous blog post, you're aware that "very literary" contemporary novels, at least according to the author of one such work, are by definition "slow and boring."
Another thing that struck me about my conversation with this writer was that she should so casually refer to herself as a writer of "literature". Or, to be more precise, as the author of a work that is "very literary." Is this something for her to decide? Or is it a judgment more properly left to posterity? I doubt that when Nathaniel Hawthorne finished writing The Scarlet Letter he said to himself, "Well, this is very literary."
Of course it could be that words and phrases such as "literature" and "very literary" have current meanings of which I'm unaware. If so, could someone enlighten me? Just hit the comment button below.
Another thing that struck me about my conversation with this writer was that she should so casually refer to herself as a writer of "literature". Or, to be more precise, as the author of a work that is "very literary." Is this something for her to decide? Or is it a judgment more properly left to posterity? I doubt that when Nathaniel Hawthorne finished writing The Scarlet Letter he said to himself, "Well, this is very literary."
Of course it could be that words and phrases such as "literature" and "very literary" have current meanings of which I'm unaware. If so, could someone enlighten me? Just hit the comment button below.