Comtemporary writers?

[Perceptor]

In comtemporary writing there seems to be only the "fluff" writers, you know romance, teenage interest, etc. Or the "thriller" writers, like John Grisham and Dan Brown, whom I do enjoy, but as I believe someone said here they are good storytellers, not necessarily good writers.

So my question to you is, can you suggest some contemporary good/great writers?

[EAP]

************************************************** *****

[lavendar1]

I like the short fiction of Nadine Gordimer and William Trevor. She's from South Africa; he's from Ireland.

[beer good]

If by contemporary you mean currently writing, I'd say there are probably thousands. Some I like:

Salman Rushdie
Don DeLillo
Philip Roth
Joyce Carol Oates
Paul Auster
Siri Hustvedt
Umberto Eco
Thomas Pynchon
Donna Tartt
Haruki Murakami
Bret Easton Ellis
Poppy Brite
Kate Atkinson
Jonathan Lethem
Jeffrey Eugenides
Jeanette Winterson
etc etc etc.

Remember, there have always been fluff writers and awful thrillers. Only 100 years later, they're mostly forgotten.

[Whifflingpin]

"Great" is probably not something that can be determined until a generation has passed.

Contemporary, good and not fluff - John Barth, J.C. Oates, U.K. le Guin, John Irving, Peter Dickinson (sometimes - sometimes he's good fluff, and I like his boks for children best) Patrick White, Colleen McCollough, Umberto Eco ("every good bookcase has at least one unread Umberto Eco") Peter Hoeg, Alison Fell (I've only read her "Pillow Boy of the Lady Onogoro," but if were all she'd written she'd warrant a place on a reading list.)

That's ten to go on with, enough, I am sure to brand me as an old fuddy-duddy with depraved tastes.

[Ryduce]

Do people consider Vonnegut contemporary.

[Xamonas Chegwe]

My bookcase has only "read" Umberto Eco. Does that make me odd?

Five of my favourites - that I would consider to be approaching great at their best - Salman Rushdie, Gabriel Garcia Marquez, Milan Kundera, Martin Amis, Ian McEwan.

I would also add a thriller writer - James Ellroy.

And yes I would consider Vonnegut contemporary - and worthy of inclusion - he's not dead yet so far as I know.

[Charles Darnay]

Vonnegut is contemp. and certainly worth looking at - Sirens of Titan is one of my favourite novels. I don't know if you're quoting me, Perceptor, or not, but I have often spoken out - and on this site - against the Hollywood-ization of novels. It's not so much that all contemp. novels are just fluff - despite the fact that this is usually the case - but that the need for a plot is overpowering the need for stylistic writing. If you take almost any contemp. novel - excluding Vonnegut amongst a few others - you could sum up the plot in one sentence - like a movie, a novelist writes a novel soely to convey their plot. Writing never used to be like that. Plot always came second to style until the takeover of the film industry.... that is what i believe is meant by "contemp. writers are good storytellers but not good novels"

[beer good]

Vonnegut has officially retired as a novelist, though.

As for the plot taking over... well, to some extent, yeah, and I agree that it's an issue to be taken seriously. But I don't think we've gotten that far yet that all contemporary writers except "a few" do it. Vonnegut is IMO far more plot-driven than, say, Winterson, Rushdie or Hustvedt (who are decades younger than he is). Of course, the easiest way to ensure that plot-driven fiction takes over is to stop reading contemporary fiction and leave that to the Dan Brown fans. Then the market forces will take care of it.

(Plus, ANYTHING ever written can be summed up in a sentence or three. See http://rinkworks.com/bookaminute/classics.shtml .)

[Ryduce]

Are you sure he's retired I just saw him on PBS the other day promoting some political book.

[beer good]

Yes, but as a novelist he retired after "Timequake". Least that's what he said at the time, and to my knowledge he hasn't released another novel since then?

[Whifflingpin]

"Remember, there have always been fluff writers and awful thrillers. Only 100 years later, they're mostly forgotten."

True indeed, looking in the "Uniform with this volume" list, of the immortal "Riddle of the Sands" published about 100 years ago, I find:
H.C. Bailey, Sir Gilbert Parker, Booth Tarkington, Barry Pain, Jaques Futrelle,
Leonard Merrick, Stewart Edward White, Mr & Mrs Williamson,
Mrs Henry de la Pasture, John O Hobbs, Beatrice Harraden, S Macnaughton.

I must admit that I have never read or heard of any of these.

On the other hand, oblivion also comes to good writers. In the same list are John Masefield, Anthony Hope, W W Jacobs, Ernest Bramah, E W Hornung; all good writers whose works no longer stand out on the shelves of the lending libraries.

Ou sont les neiges d'antan?

[subterranean]

Someone mentioned (the retired?) Vonnegut, and yes I agree. I have not read any of Ian McEwan's nor Roth's, but I heard/read many good stuffs about them. Some contemporary authours which are also worth checking, IMO, Anita Desai, Margaret Atwood, and Nicholas Shakespeare.

[Perceptor]

Thanks for the suggestions...

On the topic of contemporary writers though, how do people feel about John Grisham and Chuck Palahnuik?

[higley]

I have a weakness for some of John Grisham's books. :D

Now, I know Chuck Palahnuik (how do you say that, anyhow?) is supposed to be hailed as some master of sarcastic wit, but I've read Lullaby and part of Invisible Monsters by him and I just found his style to be a bit wearying. I don't know; that might just be me.

Ray Bradbury's still writing, that delightful man. :)