American Classic Literature

[XxDAngel19xX]

I was wondering if someone could give me a list of good books I could read that are considered 'american classic literature'. i have to read one for every grading period in my english class, and my second grading period is coming close, and I have no clue what to read. I already read 'The Scarlet Letter' by N.Hawthorne, but I want some really good books. Thanks!!

[seeker]

Ray Bradbury and/or Victor Hugo.

All of Hugo's books are very, very long and in depth, with many twists and heart tugs (Les Mesirables and The Hunchback of Notra Dame); bradbury's are more modern American abstract and filled with aestetic meaning (Something Wicked This Way Comes).

both are awsome, also if you just read 'the Scarlet Letter' try reading Arthurm Miller's 'The Crucible'

[XxDAngel19xX]

Those books do sound good! But I have to ask, are they considered American Literature? I thought The Hunchback was in France and considered French Literature?

[Scheherazade]

I was wondering that too...
Classic Americans are more like Little Women and Tom Sawyer?

[seeker]

haha yes, i just have a bad habit of reading too quickly through short posts and missed the 'american' part.

but deffinalty stick to 'The Crucible' and 'Something Wicked This Way Comes'

[mono]

Ah, where to start, where to start! Is your search limited mainly to novels, or does it include short stories and poetry?
Good American fiction I recommend: J.D. Salinger, Henry David Thoreau, F. Scott Fitzgerald, Edgar Allan Poe, Herman Melville, more Nathaniel Hawthorne, Washington Irving, Stephen Crane, Jonathan Edwards, James Fenimore Cooper, O. Henry, Henry James, Mark Twain, Ambrose Bierce, and Frederick Douglass, to name some.
If your search includes poetry: Ralph Waldo Emerson, Henry Wadsworth Longfellow, Walt Whitman, Emily Dickinson, . . . and for some reason I cannot think of many (ha-ha, oh me). I will try to post again later for poets.

[Jester]

How about As i Lay dying by william Faulkner... its pretty good.
if you can do plays i'd suggest our town, short i think its by something wilde, sorry my memories off

[trismegistus]

Do Catcher in the Rye. It's a fast read and it's definitely in the canon. Jester is right about Our Town, it's a standard (Thornton Wilder). If you're allowed drama, also consider Williams: The Glass Menagerie or A Streetcar Named Desire.

Other classics that are also good reads:
The Great Gatsby
Native Son
Huck Finn
Billy Budd
Slaughter-House Five
Deliverance
Daisy Miller
Walden
The Autobiography (Franklin)

[Scheherazade]

I think 'As I Lay Dying' is one book I found hard to read till the end... I was bored :(

[BSturdy]

Allow me to add a couple more authors: You really can't go wrong with The Call of the Wild/White Fang anything by Jack London. Maybe read a couple of his short stories (To Build a Fire etc..) to get a feel for his writing and whether it suits - this avoids feeling asthough you have given up on a book if it is not for you.

Moby Dick by Herman Melville is literally a compulsive novel considered a classic.

[imthefoolonthehill]

I like Hemmingway.

[Icarus]

Amen imthefoolonthehill. Hemingway, Hemingway, Sherwood Anderson, Gertrude Stein, and more Hemingway. I've heard the French like to take credit for Hemingway and Stein but I think you'll be fine, they were both American writers.

[Capnplank]

I'm not really checking up on whether or not these are American (which I'm not sure if means from either north or south continent, or means "U.S.A.", but going with the latter), but I believe they are. I also don't know what the qualifications for classics are, but these are all for the most part not very recent and pretty well respected as literary accomplishments...

"Fahrenheit 451" or "The Martian Chronicles" by Ray Bradbury
"The Red Badge of Courage" by Stephen Crane
"Invisible Man" by Ralph Ellison
"As I Lay Dying" or "The Sound and the Fury" by William Faulkner, two of his shorter but no less excellent works
"Slaughter-house Five", "Cat's Cradle", or "The Sirens of Titan" by Kurt Vonnegut, Jr.
"Catch-22" by Joseph Heller
"The Sun Also Rises", or "The Old Man and the Sea" by Ernest Hemingway, or "For Whom the Bell Tolls" if you're up for a longer read.
"Native Son" by Richard Wright

Oops, hit submit a bit early
Anything Twain's a good choice as well...

[subterranean]

This bit confusing since there are some posts mentioning Catch 22 and/or martian chronicles...i thught the thread title is classic..Please do correct me if im wrong.
I think Hardy's writings are awesome and so do Poe's

[rocksea]

If your search includes poetry: Ralph Waldo Emerson, Henry Wadsworth Longfellow, Walt Whitman, Emily Dickinson, . . .

am reading letters of emily dickinson which portrays some aspects of her life!! it is great,, she was one of the greatest letter writers too!

[imthefoolonthehill]

subterranean... Catch22 is a classic by my standards.

[simon]

Agree with you there fool, and at the top of my list is Mark Twain's A Connetticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court. It holds all the American witicisms, crass humour, and values. Such as the values of massive intellignece beyond all others and the ownership of all money.

[subterranean]

subterranean... Catch22 is a classic by my standards.

Well then Fool, I supposed we all need to agree on the definition first before giving comments..

[imthefoolonthehill]

... wonders if you are trying to sound praternal or some such nonesense.

[subterranean]

i was just trying to point that when a man defines situation as real, they are real in the consequences, that's all..

[simon]

Classic: a novel in literature that upholds it's impact on society and comments about society over time.

That is my impression when I hear someone say that was a classic book. Good beyond the boundaries of time.

[Capnplank]

I hesitate to mention anything because everyone's "Classics" list is always different. Sometimes it's anything commonly regarded as a great work, sometimes it's only stuff before the 1900s, and when I go to the bookstore it's only Homer, Chaucer, and Dante.
So it always helps when the person needing assistance is a little more specific...

[earth]

HP Lovecraft.

[Sancho]

Can’t give “classic” too narrow a definition or it’ll never work. The country only goes back a couple of hundred years.

[Shore Dude]

This question is extremely difficult. If you want a complete list, go to a respected high school homepage and check out both their ciricullum and summer reading lists.

If you want a taste of each grade, here is my opinion of a few highlight books from each grade...

9th grade: To Kill a Mockingbird by Haper Lee
10th grade: The Catcher in the Rye by J.D. Salinger, Death of a Salesman by Arthur Miller
11th grade: The Great Gatsby by F. Scott Fitzgerald, Of Mice and Men by John Steinbeck, The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn by Mark Twain, Ordinary People by Judith Guest
12th grade: The Scarlet Letter by Nathaniel Hawthorne, The Crucible by Arthur Miller

I spelled 'curriculum' and 'Harper' incorrectly. Sorry.

And to clarify, the original question is difficult, because there are so many great American classics.

[Jester]

woah, we did everything back wards in my school, read the crucible in tenth, and death of a salesman in eleventh and barely anything in twelth....

[Icarus]

Catch-22 IS a classic. As for the martian chronicles...

[Deep Space Bass]

I donno, I think the best American literature's been in the science fiction department.

Despite how wonderful some authors like Faulker, Hemingway, Poe, Heller, and all the Trancendentalist Era writers were, I have no qualms saying Philip K. Dick is the best American writer of all time.

Also, Asimov, Bradbury, Vonnegut, Lovecraft, Heinlein, etc.

[Scheherazade]

*bump*

What really consitutues 'American classic'? I find it easier to think of English (British) classics but have trouble with Americans, which is no doubt due to my limited knowledge of American Literature. However, I don't consider Heinlein a classic, for example.

[mono]

I prefer simon's posted definition of a classic:

Classic: a novel in literature that upholds it's impact on society and comments about society over time.
That some classics tend to come from America only states of its origin from a specific part of the world, where values, culture, and morals may seem different (or similar) to other areas.
In terms of specific writers, which I have already posted, I can certainly agree with you, Scher, not considering Heinlein as a classic, but a decent writer, nonetheless.
Others I have posted, who I consider classics, with a few additions: J.D. Salinger, Henry David Thoreau, F. Scott Fitzgerald, Edgar Allan Poe, Herman Melville, Nathaniel Hawthorne, Washington Irving, Stephen Crane, Jonathan Edwards, James Fenimore Cooper, O. Henry, Henry James, William James, Mark Twain, Ambrose Bierce, Frederick Douglass, Ralph Waldo Emerson, Henry Wadsworth Longfellow, Walt Whitman, Emily Dickinson, Robert Frost, Louisa May Alcott, Harriet Beecher Stowe, Edith Wharton, Zora Neale Hurston, Booker T. Washington, Langston Hughes, Oliver Wendell Holmes.
(whew!) :p

[Scheherazade]

OK... Would my friends who are more learned in American Literature than my humble self be willing and kind enough to suggest one book from American Literature which they would consider a must-read classic for us?

[mono]

Sorry, Scher. I had no idea you merely searched for that result. :lol:
The first fiction book that comes to mind: Moby Dick by Herman Melville.
The first non-fiction book: Walden by Henry David Thoreau.
;)

[Scheherazade]

That wasn't what I had in mind when I revived the thread, Mono... but after seeing the long list of authors you suggested, I realised that I cannot read all their works... So decided to ask for reading suggestions, which makes it less daunting (to me at least).

I read a simplified version of Moby Dick when I was 7-8... I will read it again soon. Thank you :)

[chmpman]

No one will agree with this author's style as classic, but going by Simon's definition and just to get some responses about it: anything by Hunter Thompson, preferrably nonfiction, as he has only written one work of purely fiction that I know of (the Rum Diary). New-school classicism in my view, although I don't really expect anyone to share it.

[mister_noel_y2k]

yeah moby dick is supposed to be the greatest american novel ever written so try that


:banana:

[lavendar1]

Here's a classic American writer for you -- and it's someone whose writing often doesn't get the credit it deserves --Anne Bradstreet. She was a remarkable woman who lived between 1612 - 1672. Her poetry is more than poetry; it's also a vivid record of the history of that time.

She was a Puritan; she was a wife and mother of eight children; she was educated enough to know that she couldn't show that she was educated without fear of reprisal. Her first collection of poetry was the first book written by a woman to be published in the U.S.

Here's a sample of her poetry, followed by some websites that give more information:

Verses upon the Burning of our House

In silent night when rest I took,
For sorrow near I did not look,
I waken'd was with thund'ring noise
And piteous shrieks of dreadful voice.
That fearful sound of "fire" and "fire,"
Let no man know is my Desire.
I starting up, the light did spy,
And to my God my heart did cry
To straighten me in my Distress
And not to leave me succourless.
Then coming out, behold a space
The flame consume my dwelling place.
And when I could no longer look,
I blest his grace that gave and took,
That laid my goods now in the dust.
Yea, so it was, and so 'twas just.
It was his own; it was not mine.
Far be it that I should repine,
He might of all justly bereft
But yet sufficient for us left.
When by the Ruins oft I past
My sorrowing eyes aside did cast
And here and there the places spy
Where oft I sate and long did lie.
Here stood that Trunk, and there that chest,
There lay that store I counted best,
My pleasant things in ashes lie
And them behold no more shall I.
Under the roof no guest shall sit,
Nor at thy Table eat a bit.
No pleasant talk shall 'ere be told
Nor things recounted done of old.
No Candle 'ere shall shine in Thee,
Nor bridegroom's voice ere heard shall bee.
In silence ever shalt thou lie.
Adieu, Adieu, All's Vanity.
Then straight I 'gin my heart to chide:
And did thy wealth on earth abide,
Didst fix thy hope on mouldring dust,
The arm of flesh didst make thy trust?
Raise up thy thoughts above the sky
That dunghill mists away may fly.
Thou hast a house on high erect
Fram'd by that mighty Architect,
With glory richly furnished
Stands permanent, though this be fled.
It's purchased and paid for too
By him who hath enough to do.
A price so vast as is unknown,
Yet by his gift is made thine own.
There's wealth enough; I need no more.
Farewell, my pelf; farewell, my store.
The world no longer let me love;
My hope and Treasure lies above

http://www.annebradstreet.com/
http://www.bedfordstmartins.com/litlinks/poetry/bradstreet.htm

[shortysweetp]

we talked about her in english class in high school. i like her work

[CheshireCat87]

um theres the obviouse catcher in the rye, death of a sales man, the secret garden, little women, Wizard of Oz, The Call of the wild, 1984, the great gasby. out of them i only really like 1984 or animal farm.

[chmpman]

George Orwell wasn't an American, I believe. Not quite sure of his nation of origin though. Anyone?

[mono]

George Orwell wasn't an American, I believe. Not quite sure of his nation of origin though. Anyone?
Apparently born in India, but raised in England (I had to look it up, too :p):

George Orwell (1903-1950) was born Eric Arthur Blair in 1903 in Motihari, Bengal, India. His father, Richard Walmesley Blair was a civil servant for the British government. In 1904 Orwell moved with his mother and sister to England where he remained until 1922. He began to write at an early age, and was even published in college periodicals, but he did not enjoy school. Orwell wrote about his unfavorable prep-school experiences in the essay Such Such were the Joys (1968).
(http://www.online-literature.com/orwell/)

[chmpman]

Thank you.

[ennison]

Yes Orwell's real name Eric Blair. Very English. Didn't like the Scots. See his point.

Classic I suppose means to have stood the test of time. A text still widely read within the literature from which it has sprung after say 100 years.
So yes 'Moby Dick' but it is instructive to note that Melville and that text in particular did not get the popularity it deserves while he was alive. In fact Melville was only accorded his present position in American Literature posthumously.
Personally I think you should read widely and find the things you like yourself. I read 'Typee' when I was very young and thought it wonderful. No TV then cove! Many writers at present out of favour might be 'rediscovered' and become classic. My own personal favourite among modern - 20th century - English (not those who use the language but those of that country) novelists is R C Hutchinson whom I believe to be ripe for rediscovery as a writer of classic English literature. I also feel that Richard Hughes and Joyce Cary are underrated.
I agree with the reference to Bradstreet above and would mention Taylor and Hart Crane as classic American poets.
I know this is an old thread but the question about what's classic and what's not can never be finally settled.

[genoveva]

*bump*

What really consitutues 'American classic'? I find it easier to think of English (British) classics but have trouble with Americans, which is no doubt due to my limited knowledge of American Literature. However, I don't consider Heinlein a classic, for example.

Robert Heinlein's Stranger in a Strange Land is considered a Science Fiction classic here in America.


OK... Would my friends who are more learned in American Literature than my humble self be willing and kind enough to suggest one book from American Literature which they would consider a must-read classic for us?

Really? What a hard task. For a contemporary classic, I suggest Toni Morrison's Song of Solomon.

[andave_ya]

Try the short stories of O.Henry

[livelaughlove]

I'm taking AP American Lit this year, and here are the books that are part of the curriculum: Scarlet Letter, The Great Gatsby, The Things They Carried (Tim O'Brien), Puddinghead Wilson (Twain, anything by Twain should be wonderful -- Mysterious Stranger is marvelous as well), The Minister's Black Veil, Their Eyes Were Watching God, Ceremony.

I've also read Of Mice and Men and I loved it, Steinbeck is a good choice as well. Emerson and Thoreau are gorgeous too.

[*Classic*Charm*]

Arthur Miller!!! The Crucible is my favourite piece of literature ever.

[genoveva]

I'm taking AP American Lit this year, and here are the books that are part of the curriculum:

The Things They Carried (Tim O'Brien),

Their Eyes Were Watching God,

Ceremony.


I'm so glad to see this!:thumbs_up

[cuppajoe_9]

Mark Twain, Huckleberry Finn and "Fenimore Cooper's Literary Offences"*
Ambrose Bierce, "An Occurence at Owl Creek Bridge"*
Charlotte Perkins Gilman, "The Yellow Wall-paper"*
Kate Choppin, The Awakening
Henry James, Daisy Miller and The Beast in the Jungle*
Jack London, "To Build a Fire" and "The Law of Life"
Edith Wharton, Ethan Frome*
Stephen Crane, The Red Badge of Courage, "The Open Boat" and "The Blue Hotel"*
All things Robert Frost
Gertrude Stein, Tender Buttons
T.S. Eliot, "The Wasteland"
F. Scott Fitzgerald, The Great Gatsby*
William Faulkner, As I Lay Dying and Light in August
Earnest Hemmingway, For Whom the Bell Tolls*, The Old Man and the Sea and The Snows of Kilimanjaro
Tennessee Williams, A Streetcar Named Desire
Arthur Miller, Death of a Salesman
J.D. Salinger, The Catcher in the Rye* and Raise High the Roofbeam Carpenters and Seymour: an Introduction*
Ralph Ellison, Invisible Man
Kurt Vonnegut, Slaughterhouse Five*
Sylvia Plath, all poetry and The Bell Jar*
Allen Ginsberg, Howl
Thoms Pynchon, Gravity's Rainbow

I am taking a course in American Lit this semester, so that qualifies me as an expert in the field. ;) And before you ask, no, I have not read all of those.


* indicates a personal favorite

[Brendan Madley]

I don't bother with American literature, knowing the superiority of British literature.

And Joseph Conrad is Polish/British.

There is certainly no American who can match the ability of: Shakespeare, Dickens, Chaucher, Scott, Austen, Archer, Doyle, Kipling, Buchyan, Defoe, Woolf, Conrad, Marlowe, Thackeray, Swift, Fielding, Bronte Sisters, Shelley, Stoker, Joyce, Disraeli, Gaskel, Collins, Carroll, Tolkien, Lewis, Rowling, Potter, Trollpe, Eliot and Hardy to name some British legends.

[seasong]

Why bash American lit? Britain has produced amazing literature that I love and adore. But its a big world and we don't have to limit ourselves. Not to mention Britain being around a lot longer than the US. Give it some time.

[cuppajoe_9]

And Joseph Conrad is Polish/British.

How the hell did I manage to let Conrad slip in there? Thanks Brendan.

[Virgil]

I don't bother with American literature, knowing the superiority of British literature.

Brendan, between this and your other tthread asking which country has produced the greatest literature {snipped by Logos to remove direct personal insult } Where exactly are you from that you look down on other people's literature?

[ktd222]

Yes, writer's origin first, then writer's content.:p

[Logos]

Please discuss the topic and do not post direct personal insults to other members.

[Redzeppelin]

I don't bother with American literature, knowing the superiority of British literature.

And Joseph Conrad is Polish/British.

There is certainly no American who can match the ability of: Shakespeare, Dickens, Chaucher, Scott, Austen, Archer, Doyle, Kipling, Buchyan, Defoe, Woolf, Conrad, Marlowe, Thackeray, Swift, Fielding, Bronte Sisters, Shelley, Stoker, Joyce, Disraeli, Gaskel, Collins, Carroll, Tolkien, Lewis, Rowling, Potter, Trollpe, Eliot and Hardy to name some British legends.

Then why post in this thread? American literature stands on its own and toe-to-toe with Brit lit because it does what it does equally well as Brit lit does what it does. To speak of one country's literature as being "superior" to another carries as much weight as saying "my dad's better than your dad." That statement is only true to the person saying it. cuppajoe's listing above listed works by American authors (most of which I have read) easily possesses equal mastery of writing as the authors you've listed (most of whom I've read as well).

[KidTruth]

This bit confusing since there are some posts mentioning Catch 22 and/or martian chronicles...i thught the thread title is classic..Please do correct me if im wrong.
I think Hardy's writings are awesome and so do Poe's

Don't worry, Catch-22 will definitely be considered a classic if it isn't already by more forward-thinking teachers. Catch-22 is possibly the first truly postmodern deconstructionist american text, not to mention the only American novel to add a word to Merriam-Webster.

Brilliant book. Same goes for Vonnegut, Thompson, so on. It seems that some English professors are only prepared to go as far as the Beat Poets in declaring what is classic, but the 60's and 70's will catch up soon enough and we'll see Thompson, Vonnegut, Heller, etc. added to the canon. There isn't anything better out of those decades that comes immediately to mind.

Scary to think what will be considered classic out of the 90's. O.o

[KidTruth]

I don't bother with American literature, knowing the superiority of British literature.

And Joseph Conrad is Polish/British.

There is certainly no American who can match the ability of: Shakespeare, Dickens, Chaucher, Scott, Austen, Archer, Doyle, Kipling, Buchyan, Defoe, Woolf, Conrad, Marlowe, Thackeray, Swift, Fielding, Bronte Sisters, Shelley, Stoker, Joyce, Disraeli, Gaskel, Collins, Carroll, Tolkien, Lewis, Rowling, Potter, Trollpe, Eliot and Hardy to name some British legends.

I know it's an old post, and that I'm just taking the bait by responding, but...

The majority of the writers you listed who were born AFTER Edgar Allen Poe - attribute Edgar Allen Poe for their ideas and inspiration. Grossly underestimated as an author by... well, just you I guess. Poe created not only modern horror, but also the detective story.

[ennison]

"I don't bother with American literature, knowing the superiority of British literature.

And Joseph Conrad is Polish/British.

There is certainly no American who can match the ability of: Shakespeare, Dickens, Chaucher, Scott, Austen, Archer, Doyle, Kipling, Buchyan, Defoe, Woolf, Conrad, Marlowe, Thackeray, Swift, Fielding, Bronte Sisters, Shelley, Stoker, Joyce, Disraeli, Gaskel, Collins, Carroll, Tolkien, Lewis, Rowling, Potter, Trollpe, Eliot and Hardy to name some British legends. "

Ah the ability to air one's prejudices as if one was an expert. The net is so good, not! When it comes to that ..... Disraeli? Iaskyer And as for Trollpe! Well a little trollope is always interesting.

[kelby_lake]

I don't bother with American literature, knowing the superiority of British literature.

And Joseph Conrad is Polish/British.

There is certainly no American who can match the ability of: Shakespeare, Dickens, Chaucher, Scott, Austen, Archer, Doyle, Kipling, Buchyan, Defoe, Woolf, Conrad, Marlowe, Thackeray, Swift, Fielding, Bronte Sisters, Shelley, Stoker, Joyce, Disraeli, Gaskel, Collins, Carroll, Tolkien, Lewis, Rowling, Potter, Trollpe, Eliot and Hardy to name some British legends.

Rowling?! And who's Potter?

American literature really came into its own in the 20th century. Fitzgerald, Faulkner, Steinbeck, etc.- and that's not to mention the great American dramatists, who have written some of the best plays of the 20th century.

[myrna22]

I don't bother with American literature, knowing the superiority of British literature.

And Joseph Conrad is Polish/British.

There is certainly no American who can match the ability of: Shakespeare, Dickens, Chaucher, Scott, Austen, Archer, Doyle, Kipling, Buchyan, Defoe, Woolf, Conrad, Marlowe, Thackeray, Swift, Fielding, Bronte Sisters, Shelley, Stoker, Joyce, Disraeli, Gaskel, Collins, Carroll, Tolkien, Lewis, Rowling, Potter, Trollpe, Eliot and Hardy to name some British legends.

Yes, exactly, why bother with American literature, or Australian, or Canadian or even French, German, Italian, Spanish, etc.?

Realistically: Doyle, Kipling, and especially Rowling may be legendary, but not for writing the best works of British literature, possibly for being very popular.

[ennison]

American literature contains in the the last hundred years as many geniuses (Is that the correct plural? Genius being rare it is normally singular.) as English English literature took three hundred years to produce. Only a fraction of whom are discussd or refered to in this brilliant site.

[stlukesguild]

Don't underestimate Kipling. He is nowhere near the same category as Rowling. As for arguing with Brendan Madley about the merits of American literature... that would seem a waste of time considering he last posted in 2008... and only once in that year at that.

American literature contains in the the last hundred years as many geniuses (Is that the correct plural? Genius being rare it is normally singular.) as English English literature took three hundred years to produce. Only a fraction of whom are discussd or refered to in this brilliant site.


Now while I certainly love a great many American writers, this is a rather absurd claim. While literature is no competition, I'm afraid that if it were we'd more than have our hands full with the Germans, Italians, Russians, and French... let alone the British.:)

[JBI]

American literature contains in the the last hundred years as many geniuses (Is that the correct plural? Genius being rare it is normally singular.) as English English literature took three hundred years to produce. Only a fraction of whom are discussd or refered to in this brilliant site.


Now while I certainly love a great many American writers, this is a rather absurd claim. While literature is no competition, I'm afraid that if it were we'd more than have our hands full with the Germans, Italians, Russians, and French... let alone the British.:)


I dunno; the post seems to me to just punch out an English bias against the 20th century, which is somewhat true in the second half I would argue, as the British culture to an extent seems (to me, though I am no British specialist) to have turned itself into a museum.

Then again, to suggest that American literature is somehow superior to other 20th century traditions, or that one can quantify these things... I am a little nervous (a little meaning very nervous).

As it is, the more I explore different traditions, the more I find that the 20th century just seems to have all around been a particularly literate century, most likely because of the rise of commercial printing and increasing on a wide scale in literacy. That being said, I still won't play the value game.

I am sure, for instance, that somebody could make cases for Contemporary Arabic Poetry, or Pre-war Japanese novels, or post-war Chinese poetry, as well as mid-century Italian lyric poetry, or mid-century French theatre, or Soviet Realism, or any other major genre of literature that one can think of. IT just so happens that the US has a very large population, and most people here read in English.

Really though, I am skeptical about such reading; with the exception of modern times, it would seem that the borders on traditions are less defined, and traditions hazier. The author who revolutionized printing at the beginning of the 20th century in England, for instance, wasn't English but French, Zola, likewise, Whitman as a force seems to have gone as far as South America, Europe, China, and many other places. Eliot, Pound and others actually moved to Europe, and Beckett moved to France where he wrote in French.

Then again, we could say that geography and culture may create a certain identification in American verse with the United States, and suggest that nation is more prevalent in Literature from that country. It is arguable; I would say race and ethnic background seem important in American literature in the sense that gender and sexuality seem more important in French literature, but even then I am reluctant to generalize that much.

So perhaps we may say that American geography, as being rooted between a country that they ignore/don't understand, and a country they would appear to dismiss, and spanning coast to coast with a giant, relatively strongly held imagined community (in the sense that Americans seem to identify strongly with each other despite not actually having met that many of each other) creates a sort of isolation-heavy mentality that is perhaps more dismissive of the outside, or at least not very informed. I wouldn't particularly want to argue it, though I would argue that strongly for Japan, a country which seems to be the least accepting of anything "outside" (their immigration policy will attest to this), I am unsure if that concept is supportable.

Either way, I won't deny the greatness of American literature, particularly modernist American literature (a personal preference), but still, I am reluctant to want to listen to any value games that limiting or pronounced.

I'll have to agree with St. Lukes and suggest that such a statement can be said of any other number of traditions, many of which, I will add, are just being translated and are just gaining exposure to English speaking audiences.

[Dinkleberry2010]

A problem arises when the word "classic" is used, because people disagree on the time element. Can a novel such as Gravity's Rainbow be considered a classical work when it was published less than forty years ago? And yet, it is considered by many to be one of the greatest novels of the latter twentieth century.

I think there is general agreement about classical American literature up to WWI, but after that, the agreement seems to have broken down.

[stlukesguild]

JBI... I intentionally avoided non-Western literatures for the simple reason that my knowledge of them is greatly limited and I'd be hard-pressed to defend my position vs American literature there... although I am almost certain that the literature of Persia, the Arabs, India, Japan, and certainly China might all rival the greatest literary productions of the West. I'm not too quick, however, to question the notion that certain cultures were not far more productive of great literature than others during certain periods of time. I'm far from any notion of cultural egalitarianism. While we are always limited by language... and access or translations... good translations... in comparing the literature of one culture to that of the rest, this is not so in music... and especially in the visual arts... and I have little doubt as to the central position of certain cultures during certain eras when it comes to art. I say this with a solid grounding in World Art History... including the works of Asian, the Middle east, Africa, and the Americas.

As we know... art, music, and literature often flourish together in a given culture. During the era of Impressionism we find that the arts in Paris thrive not only in painting (Degas, Manet, Monet, Renoir, etc...) but also music (Debussy, Faure, Chausson, Massenet, Reynaldo Hahn, Charles Koechlin, Ravel, etc...) and literature (Baudelaire, Verlaine, Rimbaud, Mallarme, Zola, Balzac, Flaubert, etc...). Considering the decline in the quality of art of certain cultures... including China, Japan, and India... during the 19th (not so much with Japan) and 20th centuries, I'd be greatly surprised to discover that their literary outputs had not equally declined (often in response to colonization or the influence of Western art). Then again... the Germans absolutely dominate music from the baroque until the present... and yet their literary and artistic outputs are quite sporadic in comparison.:confused:

[JBI]

I don't like to stress the nation to much, especially now thinking how more than one country writes in the same language. My point really was that cultures aren't isolates, so it is unfair to suggest, for instance, Neruda contributes to a quintessentially "Argentine" experience when he is ripping off Walt Whitman, and discussing Soviet politics, or that Eliot is somehow American, using English conventions and language, with Dante's background and a little Sanskrit thrown in.

Ionesco is Romanian, for instance, but his greatest works seem to have come out in French, in France; Pound was American, but his most famous works seem written on the continent, and he seems to have gone a bit crazy and ceased to really write "American" verse, in the sense that he draws from everywhere.

Likewise, the most significant Chinese authors were incorporating both Western and Japanese authors into their tradition, and the modern Japanese novel seems very much rooted in a sort of interpretive reading of Early-mid 19th century British fiction (according to studies and scholarship I read, I haven't done the thorough research).

Of course, some areas are quieter, and some are vibrant; early 20th century Canada, for instance, is an empty wilderness in terms of literature; the scene doesn't really kick off to a real blossoming until the 70s. In contrast, British poetry seems to die out in the second half of the 20th century.


But this is all speculation; who is to say, on I guess a per-capita level that The US itself is not an unproductive country in the second half of the 20th century? It seems a little assumptive to suggest something as defined as that, especially with, arguably, both of our linguistic limitations holding off judgments.

As it is, the most significant writers from China, for instance, are only just beginning to be published. The classic authors, with the exception of a half dozen or so poets, and some pre-Qin military authors and philosophers are only just beginning to surface in translation. The so called "great traditions" are only great if they can be accessed, and it is a long, slow process, made more difficult now with a very ambivalent relationship to contemporary China itself.

Though, it must be said that American Sinologists are perhaps the most significant translators and scholars outside of China itself; certainly institutions like Berkley, Columbia, Harvard, Princeton and Yale have done great jobs at giving the world a greater exposure to world literature as a whole, but even that seems limited to a subclass of area specialists and peculiar literary communities.

You for instance just got a new copy of Gu Cheng's verse; Gu Cheng is though just one in 50 or so poets within a movement, and arguably not even the best one. What exists behind the curtain is almost mysterious, to the point where I think it is safe to say that one shouldn't make sweeping statements about developments and whatnot; it is too dangerous; the most famous Chinese novelists of the 20th century, even the ones with domestic sales that put Twilight and Dan Brown to shame, have yet to be translated - so how can people really judge; I can't, so I will stay away from all this chatter.

It seems nice to compare cultures like this too, but I don't even think nation is the most significant factor in literary discourse, unless you are dealing with literature with a strong national element, so something like Blood Meridian, or Soseki's Kokoro (which has been translated, and is definitely worth a read if you (anybody reading this) haven't read it).

I like to categorize more in terms of genre than anything else, and I like to compare authors based on the styles and images they use, rather than languages or cultures they write from. Perhaps that is just a poetry reader's idiosyncrasy, but it makes more sense to read Coole in the Wild Swans at Coole as being everywhere, not just in Ireland, and the experience as being everybody's potential experience, not just the poet's. In that sense, I would compare him with his generation, with French Symbolists, with Romantic poetry as a convention, and then I would compare the poem based on theme, and imagery with any other number of other poems. The categorization based on nation is ultimately designed with flawed intention.

If one keeps categorizing by nation, what essentially happens is less populated, or smaller countries are kicked out, and not accepted as being part of a significant tradition. I see no reason why American poetry cannot be directly compared, or linked with Canadian or British poetry, except that American poetry in some cases tries to limit itself to an American experience, as does some Canadian poetry (particularly politically-motivated verses).

Why shouldn't we compare Gu Cheng to Lermontov, or whomever? What is this bias for categorizing based on nation?

[ennison]

There's no such thing as British literature and the Continentals are excluded in the oroiginal statement of how the English are so much better than the Americans. It's too obviously bonkers as to be a waste of time to engage with.

[Jozanny]

Don't underestimate Kipling. He is nowhere near the same category as Rowling. As for arguing with Brendan Madley about the merits of American literature... that would seem a waste of time considering he last posted in 2008... and only once in that year at that.

I know discussing Kipling is off-topic, but I agree with you here. He may veer toward jingoism, but I reread The Man Who Would Be King around the same time I started Ferguson's interesting defense of the British Empire, and the 19th century superimposed with the modern argument is interesting. I don't know much about Kipling, but he was contrarian about the effectiveness of imperialism.

[ennison]

Kipling's brilliant

[stlukesguild]

I don't like to stress the nation to much, especially now thinking how more than one country writes in the same language. My point really was that cultures aren't isolates, so it is unfair to suggest, for instance, Neruda contributes to a quintessentially "Argentine" experience when he is ripping off Walt Whitman, and discussing Soviet politics...

Argentine? Chilean!! Borges was the Argentinian.

Ionesco is Romanian, for instance, but his greatest works seem to have come out in French, in France; Pound was American, but his most famous works seem written on the continent, and he seems to have gone a bit crazy and ceased to really write "American" verse, in the sense that he draws from everywhere.

Historically, the cities and states that have become major cultural centers have been those open to outside influences... as a result of trade, immigration, and/or military conquest.

Likewise, the most significant Chinese authors were incorporating both Western and Japanese authors into their tradition, and the modern Japanese novel seems very much rooted in a sort of interpretive reading of Early-mid 19th century British fiction (according to studies and scholarship I read, I haven't done the thorough research).

I know that with Japanese, Chinese, and Indian art the influence of Western art was actually quite detrimental in that the Asian artists seem to have become so enamored of Western art (especially of the Western "illusionism" or realism) that it essentially supplanted the native traditions. This is quite in contrast, for example, to the influence of Japanese art upon Western painting and print, in which the outside influence was admired... but absorbed into the native traditions. There is actually a term for the Japanese art of the early 20th century which is essentially Western in style (although I don't have the time to look it up). Asian literature and music were just as profoundly impacted by the contact with the West at this point and I wonder... again I am not stating anything for a fact not having done any in-depth reading or research in the field... whether Asian literature might have been just as stymied by this contact.

As it is, the most significant writers from China, for instance, are only just beginning to be published. The classic authors, with the exception of a half dozen or so poets, and some pre-Qin military authors and philosophers are only just beginning to surface in translation. The so called "great traditions" are only great if they can be accessed, and it is a long, slow process, made more difficult now with a very ambivalent relationship to contemporary China itself.

Certainly.

If one keeps categorizing by nation, what essentially happens is less populated, or smaller countries are kicked out, and not accepted as being part of a significant tradition. I see no reason why American poetry cannot be directly compared, or linked with Canadian or British poetry, except that American poetry in some cases tries to limit itself to an American experience, as does some Canadian poetry (particularly politically-motivated verses).

Why shouldn't we compare Gu Cheng to Lermontov, or whomever? What is this bias for categorizing based on nation?

Of course the scale or population of nations is not necessarily a deciding point. Britain and Japan are both island nations with limited populations (in relation to their immediate neighbors) and yet their cultural achievements and influences certainly far outstrips that of man larger nations. Again, I would assume that the greatest deciding element appears to be wealth and connection with other cultures. This surely explains Italy during the Renaissance, Spain and Holland's artistic rise in tandem with their positions in international trade, etc...

Of course the discussions of the comparative merits of the cultural achievements of this or that nation or culture are simply an element of nationalism or pride of heritage. This, in itself, is absurd, for surely the achievements of my American ancestors say nothing about me... and I did nothing worthy of puffing myself up with pride. But such is a common human foible we are all guilty of. Dante, I recall, spoke directly of 3 types of pride: pride in national heritage, family heritage, and personal achievement. He also admitted that this was the one area in which he would most certainly be serving the most time in Purgatory atoning for. As another poster noted, the attacks upon the achievement's of one nation or another... and the declarations of the superiority of the achievements of one nation or another smack of childhood playground disputes: "My Dad's better than your Dad" or "My Mom's prettier than your Mom" or "My big brother can kick your big brother's a$$":lol:

[Scheherazade]

Just a reminder:
I was wondering if someone could give me a list of good books I could read that are considered 'american classic literature'. i have to read one for every grading period in my english class, and my second grading period is coming close, and I have no clue what to read. I already read 'The Scarlet Letter' by N.Hawthorne, but I want some really good books. Thanks!!Further off-topics will be deleted without further notice.

[cookiesandmilk]

"American Classics" was the name of one of my first year semester modules, we read Mark Twains Huck Finn, Vladimir Nabokov's Lolita, and F Fitzgeralds The Great Gatsby, all great books

[myrna22]

I was wondering if someone could give me a list of good books I could read that are considered 'american classic literature'. i have to read one for every grading period in my english class, and my second grading period is coming close, and I have no clue what to read. I already read 'The Scarlet Letter' by N.Hawthorne, but I want some really good books. Thanks!!

These are books that may be more readible for teenagers than things like Moby Dick or The Scarlet Letter. They also all express 'the American experience.'

To Kill a Mocking Bird, Harper Lee
In Cold Blood, Truman Capote
Atlas Shrugged, Ann Rand
The Awakening (esp. for girls), Kate Chopin
The Grapes of Wrath (or any novel by John Steinbeck)
The Catcher in the Rye, JD Salinger
On the Road, Jack Kerouac
The Electric Cool-Aid Acid Test, Tom Wolfe
Breakfast at Tiffany’s (esp. for girls) Truman Capote
The Heart is a Lonely Hunter, Carson McCullers
The House of Mirth (or anything by Edith Wharton)
Uncle Tom’s Cabin, Harriet Beecher Stowe
The Maltese Falcon, Dashiel Hammet
An American Tragedy, Theodore Drieser
One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest, Ken Kesey
Native Son, Richard Wright
The Great Gatsby, F.Scott Fitzgerald

Kids tend to especially love IN COLD BLOOD and THE CATCHER IN THE RYE. They are definitely American classics.