What is american literature?

[Quagmire]

Ok, I admit it, Im upset with you. There has been over 200 views within these past few hours, (where I've needed the most help) and yet, only the same people (who have been helping, so I greatly appreciate it so far) have continued to post. hmmmmmmm sumting wong hear

What exactly is "American Literature"?

I'm not looking for any answer like 'everyone is different and, thus, has a different perspective on things' or like 'American Literature cannot actually be really defined'
I am trying to gather as many influential factors of American literature that make it stand out. Not only literary movements such as Romanticism, Gothic, Harlem Renaissance, Puritanic, but things that make them American

Ya its pretty abstract but this should further all of our knowledge of literature.
The more in-depth and more characteristics you add to the list will be added to the list.
You dont have to put down a million things, but just find one thing that sticks out to you or is very influential of American literature that makes it, American.


list is on 3rd post



EDIT, please look at page 5, I post all my information there, its extremely important

[chasestalling]

Trunk and truck as opposed to boot and lorry, that's American Lit.

[Quagmire]

Trunk and truck as opposed to boot and lorry, that's American Lit.

well hey thats something, but what does it go to? like what movement?





also from here under Ill begin a list so its easier for everyone to see

- American idiom

- Individual struggle

-"guilt", a tradition perfected by Hawthorne, appropriated by Faulkner and very well written about by the recently deceased William Styron.

-the "lone wolf" hero who triumphs though the world is against him is an idea given its fullest expression in American Lit.

-Even narratives where the hero is not alone still see the hero and his companions fighting against nature and a hostile world. See Huckleberry Finn. This is an idea rooted in the Old West. Though the Western's most natural medium is film, it has influenced literature as well, and the idea of a lawless wilderness where every man is for himself and control is held by the strongest for good or ill has become hugely romanticised in American literature.

-The influential texts by famous American literature writers (I will look for some ways they helped create the 'American' part of American literature)

- (In a nutshell) American literature is the product of a 'melting pot,' consisting of literary movements that took place in America that blended into each other. People followed these movements (either literature changed lifestyle / vise versa ect..) both evolved from one movement to another having specific qualities that make it American and not, say European. Past styles, forms, *idioms (cant think of the word) which remained in American literature which still influenced following movements, mixed together into the 'Melting Pot' which is what American literature really is.

-regionalism

- uncertanty

- Change (of time, movements? ect)

- transience and impermanence

[chasestalling]

I don't know about movement, but the American idiom is quite distinctive from other English speaking worlds with the possible exception of Canada. Certain expressions and intonations are distinctively American, so that you won't likely hear a Briton say "you know what I mean" "and stuff like that", much less write them.

[patrickbeverley]

I don't like that big Rules thing at the top. Almost made me leave the thread just to make a point. I think you'll get more responses if you edit it out.

But in any case I can't leave a thread on American Lit alone, because it is my speciality, despite my being British.

American Lit is very much defined by individual struggle. In other literary traditions -- the English, for example -- it is common for the protagonist to be assisted by many other characters, but the "lone wolf" hero who triumphs though the world is against him is an idea given its fullest expression in American Lit. Whether the protagonist triumphs or fails is entirely down to him. (I use a generic "he" not out of laziness or sexism but because the "lone wolf" is a very masculine character.) See Moby-Dick, The Catcher in the Rye.

Even narratives where the hero is not alone still see the hero and his companions fighting against nature and a hostile world. See Huckleberry Finn. This is an idea rooted in the Old West. Though the Western's most natural medium is film, it has influenced literature as well, and the idea of a lawless wilderness where every man is for himself and control is held by the strongest for good or ill has become hugely romanticised in American literature.

Overall I would say the most important books in American literature are (in order of publication, not of importance):

The Last of the Mohicans — James Fenimore Cooper
Moby-Dick — Herman Melville
Little Women — Louisa May Alcott
The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn — Mark Twain
Leaves of Grass — Walt Whitman
The Great Gatsby — F. Scott Fitzgerald
Their Eyes Were Watching God — Zora Neale Hurston
The Grapes of Wrath — John Steinbeck
The Catcher in the Rye — J. D. Salinger
Howl and other poems — Allen Ginsberg
To Kill a Mockingbird — Harper Lee
Slaughterhouse-Five — Kurt Vonnegut
The Color Purple — Alice Walker

[Trekker114]

Ralph Waldo Emerson.

[Quagmire]

I don't know about movement, but the American idiom is quite distinctive from other English speaking worlds with the possible exception of Canada. Certain expressions and intonations are distinctively American, so that you won't likely hear a Briton say "you know what I mean" "and stuff like that", much less write them.

yes thats something that deffinantly makes American literature different. thanks


I don't like that big Rules thing at the top. Almost made me leave the thread just to make a point. I think you'll get more responses if you edit it out.

But in any case I can't leave a thread on American Lit alone, because it is my speciality, despite my being British.

American Lit is very much defined by individual struggle. In other literary traditions -- the English, for example -- it is common for the protagonist to be assisted by many other characters, but the "lone wolf" hero who triumphs though the world is against him is an idea given its fullest expression in American Lit. Whether the protagonist triumphs or fails is entirely down to him. (I use a generic "he" not out of laziness or sexism but because the "lone wolf" is a very masculine character.) See Moby-Dick, The Catcher in the Rye.

Even narratives where the hero is not alone still see the hero and his companions fighting against nature and a hostile world. See Huckleberry Finn. This is an idea rooted in the Old West. Though the Western's most natural medium is film, it has influenced literature as well, and the idea of a lawless wilderness where every man is for himself and control is held by the strongest for good or ill has become hugely romanticised in American literature.

Overall I would say the most important books in American literature are (in order of publication, not of importance):

The Last of the Mohicans — James Fenimore Cooper
Moby-Dick — Herman Melville
Little Women — Louisa May Alcott
The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn — Mark Twain
Leaves of Grass — Walt Whitman
The Great Gatsby — F. Scott Fitzgerald
Their Eyes Were Watching God — Zora Neale Hurston
The Grapes of Wrath — John Steinbeck
The Catcher in the Rye — J. D. Salinger
Howl and other poems — Allen Ginsberg
To Kill a Mockingbird — Harper Lee
Slaughterhouse-Five — Kurt Vonnegut
The Color Purple — Alice Walker

Well I can deff. see that your very knowledgeable in the subject.
And yes, I made the rules big to get attention, I knew it would do somewhat the opposite of what their there for, but I (personally) feel like its insulting when a thread gets hudnreds of views, but only 2 responses. Ya I know, its nothing personal, but you get the point.

[stlukesguild]

Overall I would say the most important books in American literature are (in order of publication, not of importance):

The Last of the Mohicans — James Fenimore Cooper
Moby-Dick — Herman Melville
Little Women — Louisa May Alcott
The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn — Mark Twain
Leaves of Grass — Walt Whitman
The Great Gatsby — F. Scott Fitzgerald
Their Eyes Were Watching God — Zora Neale Hurston
The Grapes of Wrath — John Steinbeck
The Catcher in the Rye — J. D. Salinger
Howl and other poems — Allen Ginsberg
To Kill a Mockingbird — Harper Lee
Slaughterhouse-Five — Kurt Vonnegut
The Color Purple — Alice Walker

Louisa May Alcott, Zora Neale Hurston (who?), Salinger's "masterwork" of teen angst, Ginsberg, and Alice Walker... and no Emerson (almost certainly THE central figure in American literature), Hawthorne, Poe, Emily Dickenson, T.S. Eliot, Wallace Stevens, Robert Frost, Henry James, Hart Crane, Hemingway, Faulkner... surely you jest.

[JBI]

I'm skeptical about Hart Crane as a truly central figure (not saying his work is bad, just stating that he isn't as central as the rest you named, because of his thin output, and extreme difficulty(, but surely American means everything written in American (if we are talking in the tradition, and not in the English tradition) after and around of Emerson. His contemporaries were as American too. Irving seems the first real American voice, I find. American poetry doesn't seem to really begin until Bryant, and doesn't really become what it is until Emerson, and the poets, Whitman, Melville, Dickinson, and yes, to a lesser extent since his major contribution seems to be to prose, Poe surrounding him.

[patrickbeverley]

Excellent! A dispute! This ought to lend spice to the topic.

Louisa May Alcott, Zora Neale Hurston (who?), Salinger's "masterwork" of teen angst, Ginsberg, and Alice Walker
Louisa May Alcott is in there because she deserves to be. Little Women
is a seminal and influential work in American Lit.

Zora Neale Hurston has not received the credit she deserves, because she was black and a woman, writing in the 1930s and writing about more than just the fact that she was black and a woman. However, her work has become better-known and more widely-read recently.

Say what you like about The Catcher in the Rye -- and personally I love it -- but you can't deny it marks an important point in the evolution of American Lit.

I'd say Ginsberg was the best poet of his era. He certainly managed to convince the court of appeal to remove the obscenity ban on Howl, not by convincing them it was not obscene, but by showing that its obscenity was justified by "overwhelming cultural importance". I've always thought that was rather impressive.

Okay, so I confess, I just like The Color Purple.


... and no Emerson (almost certainly THE central figure in American literature), Hawthorne, Poe, Emily Dickenson, T.S. Eliot, Wallace Stevens, Robert Frost, Henry James, Hart Crane, Hemingway, Faulkner... surely you jest.

Okay, reading your list of what ought to have been on there, I would now add:

The Scarlet Letter — Nathaniel Hawthorne
Essays and Poems — Ralph Waldo Emerson

I didn't include Hemingway on my first list, though I admire him greatly, because I wanted to keep it short. But since you mention him as one of importance,

A Farewell to Arms — Ernest Hemingway

and I guess

The Sound and the Fury — William Faulkner

should be there as well.

I excluded Eliot because despite his upbringing in America, the character of his poetry was essentially that of his adopted homeland, England. Edgar Allan Poe, Wallace Stevens, Robert Frost and Henry James were just good writers: reading them is not essential to understanding American Lit. I dislike Emily Dickinson's poetry, and find the story of her life more intriguing than much of her work. Hart Crane, I must confess, I am not familiar enough with to venture an informed opinion.

[chasestalling]

but the "lone wolf" hero who triumphs though the world is against him is an idea given its fullest expression in American Lit.

And then there is "guilt", a tradition perfected by Hawthorne, appropriated by Faulkner and very well written about by the recently deceased William Styron.

[kelby_lake]

you won't likely hear a Briton say "you know what I mean" "and stuff like that", much less write them.

A lot of Britons use those phrases. Some, a bit like me, feel the need to add 'you know what I mean' to the end of every sentence

Of the American literature I've read, it's more tragic than British Lit. People strive for ideals but end up losing. If we're going to add drama in, which I believe counts as literature, we could also add that
it's more dramatic and exaggerated than British stuff. When things happen in American Lit, they happen big. And American happy endings.

[EricP]

Personally, I consider Langston Hughes and James Baldwin as central figures in American literature.

[patrickbeverley]

I'm not much of a Langston Hughes fan myself, but yes -- he is hugely influential and not mentioning him was a huge oversight.

James Baldwin I don't know much about. Could you point me in the direction of something of his I ought to read?

[stlukesguild]

Louisa May Alcott is in there because she deserves to be. Little Women
is a seminal and influential work in American Lit.

Minor... at best. Hawthorne's and Poe's tales, Henry James, Melville, Emerson, Faulkner, Hemingway and any number of others are aesthetically superior and far more influential upon subsequent American literature.

Zora Neale Hurston has not received the credit she deserves, because she was black and a woman, writing in the 1930s and writing about more than just the fact that she was black and a woman. However, her work has become better-known and more widely-read recently.

Race, sex, and the personal hardships faced by the writer are irrelevant in considering their artistic merit. Even if this were not so there would be choices that are far more central to the American "canon". Female: Emily Dickinson, Flannery O'Conner, Elizabeth Bishop, Marianne Moore. Black: Langston Hughes, Ralph Ellison's Invisible Man, and Toni Morrison's (black and female) Song of Solomon. Personally, I read for intellectual and aesthetic pleasure and almost never for socio-political reasons so I have little use for reading something (far too much out there to read) primarily to rectify some perceived inequality.

Say what you like about The Catcher in the Rye -- and personally I love it -- but you can't deny it marks an important point in the evolution of American Lit.

The Catcher in the Rye is one of those books like Animal Farm, Brave New World, The Lord of the Rings... maybe even Poe's poetry, that seem greatly over-rated... no doubt due to the admiration of adolescents. personally I don't see it marking any important point in the evolution of American literature. Surely Saul Bellow, Norman Mailer, Donald Barthleme, Philip Roth, or any number of others mark such sch a point far more.

I'd say Ginsberg was the best poet of his era...

Perhaps the most famous poet of his day... but then again, Frost was still alive... but best?! There are any number of other American poets far more deserving of that title: Marianne Moore, Elizabeth Bishop, Richard Wilbur, John Ashberry, C.K. Williams, W.S. Merwin, A.R. Ammons, Anthony Hecht, Richard Howard, James Merrill. I don't think that any of these poets, let alone Ginsberg, can begin to compare with the giants of the early 20th century: T.S. Eliot, Wallace Stevens, Robert Frost, and perhaps Hart Crane... let alone Whitman and Dickinson, who both have far more influence on subsequent American (and non-American) poetry than any other American poets.

Okay, reading your list of what ought to have been on there, I would now add:

The Scarlet Letter — Nathaniel Hawthorne

I prefer the his tales myself, but certainly Hawthorne cannot be excluded.

Essays and Poems — Ralph Waldo Emerson

Yes, his poems are worthy as well... but certainly his essays rank as almost the American Bible.

I didn't include Hemingway on my first list, though I admire him greatly, because I wanted to keep it short. But since you mention him as one of importance,

A Farewell to Arms — Ernest Hemingway


Again... I would go with Hemingway's short stories before any of his novels.
and I guess

The Sound and the Fury — William Faulkner
should be there as well.

The choice of which Faulkner would be open to continual debate. The Sound and the Fury is great... although I still prefer As I Lay Dying, myself. Faulkner establishes a dark strain of American literature that will contue through Flannery O'Conner and Cormac MacCarthy.

I excluded Eliot because despite his upbringing in America, the character of his poetry was essentially that of his adopted homeland, England...

Unfortunately this greatly confuses matters. By this standard Henry James is also a British writer... and Ezra Pound? British? French? Italian? And Nabokov? American? Samuel Beckett? Irish? French? And Picasso? A French artist, not Spanish? In Eliot's case I would take into consideration that he was born and educated in the US and did not move to Britain until adulthood.

Edgar Allan Poe, Wallace Stevens, Robert Frost and Henry James were just good writers: reading them is not essential to understanding American Lit.

"Just GOOD writers?!" I might give you Poe... although that is arguable with regard to the best of his tales, and his influence upon others... even outside the US (Baudelaire, Rimbaud, Gautier) can in no way be underestimated. Henry James is a giant figure. One of the great 19th century novelists (although I would give it to Moby Dick as being THE central American novel) as well as a brilliant short story writer. Harold Bloom rates Wallace Steven as "the best and most representative American poet of our time" and places Steven and Robert Frost along with T.S. Eliot and perhaps Hart Crane as the greatest American poets of the 20th century. I certainly concur. Harmonium ranks along with Eliot's Wasteland as one of the most seminal collections of poetry of the century. Stevens is certainly the poet who has best absorbed the lessons of Emerson, Whitman, and Dickinson. Steven's impact is probably second to none. (although an argument might be made Eliot... and even Pound). No subsequent American poet comes near to equaling or surpassing Stevens... although arguments have been made for Ashberry.

I dislike Emily Dickinson's poetry...

Acckk! Actually... I was more turned off by the way Dickinson was taught... by the manner in which she is presented in an almost sentimental manner as the "Spinster of Amherst" or as the great hero to feminists everywhere... with all the intimations of possible lesbianism, etc... When I finally sat down and just read her work I found that it shocked me as most of the greatest works of art do... as something far more than the stereotype presented. Her poems reminded me of the equally original art works by Joseph Cornell: taut, diamond-hard, rigorous little poems that continually challenge and throw you off... both formally and in terms of "meaning".

[JBI]

I'm not much of a Langston Hughes fan myself, but yes -- he is hugely influential and not mentioning him was a huge oversight.

James Baldwin I don't know much about. Could you point me in the direction of something of his I ought to read?

Langston Hughes isn't as influential as you seem to be implying. His style seems heavily dependent on Sandburg, who in turn relied on Whitman as a major influence. Hughes is good, to be honest, but really, not a major poet.

If you are looking for solid African American poets, for contemporaries, Jay Wright, Thylias Moss, and Rita Dove.

Seriously though, Hurston is a good novelist, but her excellence has been overstated because of her background as both Woman and African American.

[wessexgirl]

I may be a lone voice on this thread, but to me great literature is great literature, regardless of country. You all seem to be setting up rigid rules as to what qualifies as "American literature". While I agree that a writer's background and culture will certainly influence their whole way of thinking, it doesn't mean that those traits which they embody in their work are unique to Americans alone. There seem to be a lot of broad generalisations as to what constitutes American literature. Surely any work which can be deemed as specifically AL can only be done so on external grounds, i.e. where a story is specifically set, and at what time. Anything which can be regarded as a classic, is by deeming it such, universal, in it's appeal, it's timelessness, it's recognition of human nature etc.

[Drkshadow03]

Langston Hughes isn't as influential as you seem to be implying. His style seems heavily dependent on Sandburg, who in turn relied on Whitman as a major influence. Hughes is good, to be honest, but really, not a major poet.

If you are looking for solid African American poets, for contemporaries, Jay Wright, Thylias Moss, and Rita Dove.

Seriously though, Hurston is a good novelist, but her excellence has been overstated because of her background as both Woman and African American.

Hughes was influenced directly by Whitman. Influence, however, doesn't mean the end of creativity or uniqueness. It sounds like you're implying that influence = work being derivative.

Since Hughes was centrally interested in race that is going to make a huge difference in content, if not style. Hughes is one of the biggest names out of the Harlem Renaissance and was extremely influential as I understand it on later African American writers.

Mostly, though, I'd be careful with overemphasizing style and influence--that's part of literary importance certainly--but there is still much to say about content too. Not every writer created a revolution in style like a Joyce or a Hemingway.

I think it's complete folly to play the important/more important game with figures that are for the most part generally considered Canonical because then what you're doing really is stating your own personal opinion. "Faulkner is so much better than Shakespeare!" "Wrong! Shakespeare is far superior to Faulkner!" "Homer is far better than Hemingway!" What a waste of precious typing.

[patrickbeverley]

St Luke's Guild: I put Their Eyes Were Watching God on my list because it is an important novel of its type. Nothing to do with the fact Hurston was a black woman. I mentioned those facts as an explanation for why you hadn't heard of it.

Wessex Girl: It's not about what's great literature. T. S. Eliot was a great poet, but what we're looking at here is what gives American literature its distinctive character, and trying to understand it through that; Eliot is (I think) not very useful for that kind of study, as he was more English than American. I wouldn't make the claim for James Fenimore Cooper as one of the greatest writers of all time, but The Last of the Mohicans is a book that helps one to understand other American novels.

Drkshadow03: Actually, yeah, you're right. Let's get back to discussing what constitutes "American literature", rather than which specific books are the best. We can all cite examples according to our own taste.

[Drkshadow03]

I may be a lone voice on this thread, but to me great literature is great literature, regardless of country. You all seem to be setting up rigid rules as to what qualifies as "American literature". While I agree that a writer's background and culture will certainly influence their whole way of thinking, it doesn't mean that those traits which they embody in their work are unique to Americans alone. There seem to be a lot of broad generalisations as to what constitutes American literature. Surely any work which can be deemed as specifically AL can only be done so on external grounds, i.e. where a story is specifically set, and at what time. Anything which can be regarded as a classic, is by deeming it such, universal, in it's appeal, it's timelessness, it's recognition of human nature etc.

Basically it comes down to whether the writer was born in the United States and wrote in the U.S. There are a few writers who went abroad during their careers: Henry James, Virginia Woolf, T. S. Eliot, to name a couple who might equally be considered British literature.

There have been challenges to the title "American literature" before but usually on grounds that American need not equate only to the U. S., pointing out that South America is American and Canada is a part of the American continent. That Texas and New Mexico are hybrid cultures of Mexican influence and U.S. influence. Likewise restating the abroad problem in a different way: what about a writer born in Africa who lives in the U.S. all his or her life and writes in English. Though, these arguments usually happen more in the context of American Studies than American literature.

The good thing about isolating a region is you can follow how a particular culture's national literature developed. Plus it's convenient for study purposes in higher education. I specialized for example in American 19th and 20th century texts broadly for my Masters degree. Generally you pick a region American or British and a period 18th or 19th or 20th century. Of course at certain schools you have more options than just American and British, and possibly more extensive periods.

[Quagmire]

Drkshadow03: Actually, yeah, you're right. Let's get back to discussing what constitutes "American literature", rather than which specific books are the best. We can all cite examples according to our own taste. lol thanks

and to wessexgirl and drkshadow's ^^ post, thats the thing, defining American Literature under these terms is very very abstract.



also, it upsets me that theres been over 200 views.. and not over 100posts =[ and on top of that, I dont have many of their souls, Hey pat, you want to help me get them?

[Kafka's Crow]

Excellent! A dispute! This ought to lend spice to the topic.

Edgar Allan Poe, Wallace Stevens, Robert Frost and Henry James were just good writers: reading them is not essential to understanding American Lit. I dislike Emily Dickinson's poetry, and find the story of her life more intriguing than much of her work. Hart Crane, I must confess, I am not familiar enough with to venture an informed opinion.

You have already pulled the heart out of the US literature by excluding the above writers. They are not only "good writers" they are American Literature, exclude them and you have nothing left except Hemingway and the dramatists (O'Neil, Miller, Wilder, Williams etc).

Major themes in America Literature:

Regionalism:
We find a strong sense of locale in this writing. Be it the descriptive writing by as thoroughly American a writer as Papa Hemingway or the the ex-pat Nabokov, the sense of geographical location is always there. The wide-open country as opposed to the nondescript but beautiful locations in English Literature (where is Wuthering Heights?) Russian writers go to the trouble of disguising the names of places or using letters instead of real names of places. American writers marvel at the big country and take special pleasure in describing places.

Uncertainty:
There is a great sense of danger and uncertainty as well as sense of wonder and opportunity in American writings. The major metaphors of 'road' and 'woods' are repeatedly used to express these themes.

Lone Hero:
Oh yes, this one has been mentioned before. As opposed to the collective effort of other societies (for example the Russians), American hero is a loner. No wonder he has no chance against the unstoppable 'system.' Be it in The Grapes of Wrath or O'Neill's The Hairy Ape or Millers Willy Loman, this lone hero is so charismatic that his defeat becomes insignificant.

Change, transience and impermanence are also some of the major themes in American Literature.

[Quagmire]

Thank you kafka I'll add those to the list.
Now, one of the major 'factors' (? not sure if thats the exact word I'm looking for) is how the themes, styles, authors (well thats the obvious one), literary movements influenced the literary movements that followed.





Also, I've been putting a little bit here and there to this, and I added a little bit during my lunch. Here's what I've scraped up


American literature is the product of a 'melting pot,' consisting of literary movements that took place in America that blended into each other. People followed these movements (either literature changed lifestyle / vise versa ect..) both evolved from one movement to another having specific qualities that make it American and not, say European. Past styles, forms, themes and *idioms (cant think of the word) which remained in American literature which still influenced following movements, mixed together into the 'melting pot' which is what American literature really is.
Contrary to popular belief, American Literature is not only literature that is defined by the writing styles of Mark Twain, Ralph Waldo Emerson, and Emily Dickinson, but is can be defined through the abundant amount of diverse literary movements such as Puritanism in New England, the Harlem Renaissance, Native American Literature, Romantic, Gothic and Transcendentalist literature, among other literary movements and styles are what makes American Literature, American.
Finding a needle in a haystack has to be easier than describing American Literature in simple words. What is described today as American Literature, comprises movements like Realism, Naturalism, Nationalism, Gothic/Dark Romance, Romanticism and Transcendentalism among others, all of them co-existing. In just one word, American Literature is rich. It is impossible to define what American Literature exactly is. America itself is classified as a “melting pot,” because of the diversity of people, religions, cultural beliefs and literature. It is the people that create literature, and with America being a melting pot of people, it creates a melting pot of literature. Thus making the exact definition as to what American Literature exactly is, however, the major components or its major movements can provide insight as to what was, became, and is.

[Virgil]

Excellent! A dispute! This ought to lend spice to the topic.

I agree. A dispute! :eek: Excellent!! I'm ready for it. :D


Zora Neale Hurston has not received the credit she deserves, because she was black and a woman, writing in the 1930s and writing about more than just the fact that she was black and a woman. However, her work has become better-known and more widely-read recently.
This may be the one place I agree with you Patrick. While i haven't read Their Eyes Were Watching God (it's been on my reading list for the longest time) it has really risen in critical aclaim. I agree that the reason she has been under the radar since her life is because she was an black woman not writing from a acepted black perspective.


Say what you like about The Catcher in the Rye -- and personally I love it -- but you can't deny it marks an important point in the evolution of American Lit.
I deny it. It's a fun read, but it's hardly revolutionary. It's a book for adolescents. It doesn't really push beyond that. I would say some of Salinger's short stories are more mature.


I'd say Ginsberg was the best poet of his era. He certainly managed to convince the court of appeal to remove the obscenity ban on Howl, not by convincing them it was not obscene, but by showing that its obscenity was justified by "overwhelming cultural importance". I've always thought that was rather impressive.
Oh please. Ginsberg is so over rated. Except for "Howl" which is quite good, the bulk of his poetry is so undiscplined that he's hardly a great master. Not sure what you consider his era, but Wallace Stevens is head and shoulders better and more important, and certainly Frost, and Robert Lowell and even Theodore Roethke.


Okay, so I confess, I just like The Color Purple.
Eh. :sick: If you wanted to pick a black woman's novel i would have picked Tony Morrison's Beloved. But where on your list is the most important African American novel, Ralph Elison's The Invisible Man?



Okay, reading your list of what ought to have been on there, I would now add:

The Scarlet Letter — Nathaniel Hawthorne
Essays and Poems — Ralph Waldo Emerson

I didn't include Hemingway on my first list, though I admire him greatly, because I wanted to keep it short. But since you mention him as one of importance,

A Farewell to Arms — Ernest Hemingway

and I guess

The Sound and the Fury — William Faulkner

should be there as well.
In fact there are at least four more Faulkner novels that should be on that list.


I excluded Eliot because despite his upbringing in America, the character of his poetry was essentially that of his adopted homeland, England.
I guess that's the prevailing opinion, but I disagree. I do think "Prufrock" is more American than British and while i do think "The Wasteland" is very much European, so would be closer to British, I feel "The Four Quartets" recall much more of America than England.


Edgar Allan Poe, Wallace Stevens, Robert Frost and Henry James were just good writers: reading them is not essential to understanding American Lit.
I have no idea where that is coming from. I can't think of more American writers than Poe, Frost, and Stevens. James perhaps blurs the line, but he too, especially in his early work, is very American conscious.


I dislike Emily Dickinson's poetry, and find the story of her life more intriguing than much of her work. Hart Crane, I must confess, I am not familiar enough with to venture an informed opinion.
Dislike Emily or not, she is a very important poet. Crane is probably arguable, but is definitely American conscious.

I agree with some of the other posts here that have included other writers as well. To mention some that have not been mention yet i would include Stephan Crane's and Sherwood Anderson's short stories. i would also go with hemingway's short stories over his novels. And I would include Truman Capote's In Cold Blood as a key American novel. If i think of more I'll come back.

[JBI]

It's actually strange, but Willa Cather still hasn't been mentioned, and she certainly was part of the Americanism that shaped the way we say American literature. But, as it seems, prairie literature is secondary in the mindset of American in general, predominantly because of the influence of such big names as Emerson, Whitman, Melville, etc.

In truth, American literature can be categorized beyond this to sub-categories, such as African-American, Southern, and Eastern (north-eastern). In truth, Faulkner and O'Conner have very little in common with Fitzgerald and James.

[Drkshadow03]

If you're really looking for a list and a place to start this site covers an overview of American literature pretty well:

Outline of American Literature (http://usinfo.state.gov/products/pubs/oal/oaltoc.htm)

I noticed a complete absense in this discussion of Colonial literature. No Edward Taylor? No Anne Bradstreet? What about works by Thomas Jefferson? Or Ben Franklin? Should The Declaration of Independence be considered a work of literature?

Another interesting look at books and writers that might be worth checking out can be found here: The Teaching Company's lecture on Classics of American Literature (http://www.teach12.com/ttcx/coursedesclong2.aspx?cid=250&pc=Literature%20and%20English%20Language)

[JBI]

Honestly, Robert Hayden said, "There is no such thing as Black literature. There's good literature and bad. And that's all." In terms of poetry, Hayden is far more developed than Hughes by far. Hughes is good, and deserves a spot, but lets be honest, "I Too Sing America" is hardly the greatest piece of literature. A lot of his stuff is mediocre, and his better works seem to be the ones where he breaks away from the whole Civil Rights and racism, and goes towards more global themes.

There are plenty of other, excellent African-American poets, and authors. Hurston isn't a bad novelist, but she isn't Baldwin. Hughes isn't bad, but he is not Hayden. Angelou, Giovanni, Brooks and others in my opinion shouldn't be taken too seriously as poetry.

As for the declaration of Independence, it is studied by poli-sci courses, and makes its way into courses on American literature for contexting purposes. As literature, it is not really "aesthetic" in terms of enjoyability of reading, but as backgrounding, and contexting, it is essential to the canon.


My bringing up of the Sandburg references on Hughes weren't to put down people who have influences, but merely to point out that the distinction for his work seems to be because of his place as "poet of the African American", which isn't really true. Like I said before, he has great moments, but they aren't that common relative to his output, and he isn't as major as other African American poets, only more accessible, and more famous.

[NickAdams]

If you're really looking for a list and a place to start this site covers an overview of American literature pretty well:

Outline of American Literature (http://usinfo.state.gov/products/pubs/oal/oaltoc.htm)


Thanks for the link.

[Quagmire]

If you're really looking for a list and a place to start this site covers an overview of American literature pretty well:

Outline of American Literature (http://usinfo.state.gov/products/pubs/oal/oaltoc.htm)

I noticed a complete absense in this discussion of Colonial literature. No Edward Taylor? No Anne Bradstreet? What about works by Thomas Jefferson? Or Ben Franklin? Should The Declaration of Independence be considered a work of literature?

Another interesting look at books and writers that might be worth checking out can be found here: The Teaching Company's lecture on Classics of American Literature (http://www.teach12.com/ttcx/coursedesclong2.aspx?cid=250&pc=Literature%20and%20English%20Language)

Ya I've been using that site, its highly credible.

[patrickbeverley]

Kafka's Crow, you make an excellent point about regionalism. To be fair to Emily Brontë, Wuthering Heights is in Yorkshire, and to be fair to Dostoyevsky, all that "K. Bridge" stuff was due to censorship; nevertheless, it is American writing that really puts the great emphasis on place. Many novels are located unmistakably in a certain part of America, from Eudora Welty's sagas of the South, to Hunter S. Thompson's Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas, featuring a place name in the title and another in the first sentence: We were somewhere around Barstow on the edge of the desert when the drugs began to take hold.

I think the theme of danger and uncertainty is connected, like the "lone hero" one I mentioned before, to the Old West.

[Karl Rommel]

Major themes in America Literature:

Regionalism:
We find a strong sense of locale in this writing. Be it the descriptive writing by as thoroughly American a writer as Papa Hemingway or the the ex-pat Nabokov, the sense of geographical location is always there. The wide-open country as opposed to the nondescript but beautiful locations in English Literature (where is Wuthering Heights?) Russian writers go to the trouble of disguising the names of places or using letters instead of real names of places. American writers marvel at the big country and take special pleasure in describing places.

Uncertainty:
There is a great sense of danger and uncertainty as well as sense of wonder and opportunity in American writings. The major metaphors of 'road' and 'woods' are repeatedly used to express these themes.

Lone Hero:
Oh yes, this one has been mentioned before. As opposed to the collective effort of other societies (for example the Russians), American hero is a loner. No wonder he has no chance against the unstoppable 'system.' Be it in The Grapes of Wrath or O'Neill's The Hairy Ape or Millers Willy Loman, this lone hero is so charismatic that his defeat becomes insignificant.


Exemplified in Jack Schaefer's Shane1957

For my English degree one module that is difficult for me to avoid (I might have to change faculty to study Gender Family and Household 1600-1800 instead!) is America in the 1950s :( That's not what I'd choose to incorporate in an English Degree. Why is it there?

[kasie]

[QUOTE=Drkshadow03;586796]Basically it comes down to whether the writer was born in the United States and wrote in the U.S. There are a few writers who went abroad during their careers: Henry James, Virginia Woolf, T. S. Eliot, to name a couple who might equally be considered British literature./QUOTE]

...and there was me thinking Virginia Woolf - born in London, lived in Bloomsbury, later moved to Sussex - was British.....

[patrickbeverley]

Personally, I've always thought people just read Ginsberg to "show" they were unconventional
{edit}

"Howl" is beautiful and moving. So are several of Ginsberg's other poems. If you disagree, fine, but how dare you accuse me of pseudery because my taste differs from yours?

[patrickbeverley]

Sweet-pie, you said people who read Ginsberg do so to show off about their personality, not because they like his poetry -- in your personal opinion. I find that offensive and I want an apology.

"just because we don't like a poet you do like" -- nothing to do with it. People have hated Ginsberg all over this discussion. But only you saw fit to make a generalised insult against all Ginsberg fans. THAT is insulting.

[PabloQ]

It's interesting how the authors here, for the most part cover the 19th century up to about 1880s and picks up again around 1920. With maybe the exception of James. I know my focus tends to the novel, but I'd like to offer up William Dean Howells (at the forefront of American realism) and Frank Norris (forefront of American naturalism). In particular, Norris's The Octopus is a powerful, well-written novel, although I'm not sure how much it influenced authors that followed him, but I can see where Steinbeck got some of his influence.

[Scheherazade]

Please address any personal issues you have in your PMs.

Further posts containing personal comments will be deleted.

[patrickbeverley]

I would say The Catcher in the Rye is of interest to more people than just adolescents. But then again, I'd make the claim that What Katy Did is of interest to more people than just children.

[Scheherazade]

But then again, I'd make the claim that What Katy Did is of interest to more people than just children.As is Where is Waldo?.

[patrickbeverley]

As is Where is Waldo?.
Oh, a fantastic series. I think it reached its zenith with Where's Waldo in Waldo-land?

[_Shannon_]

Did anyone mention Dos Passos or Dreiser or Anderson or Thomas Wolfe? I think all of those guys are super important, though currently out of vogue.

Poetry- I don't think insofar as we're talking about distictly American poetry it gets more important than WC WIlliams...

[_Shannon_]

When I read Sister Carrie--I was blown away. I felt cheated that no one had ever insisted that I read Dreiser!

Those guys get sorely overlooked, but we an important bridge betweeen realism and modernism.

[_Shannon_]

Any mention of important playwrights? O'NEill, or Wilder, or Arthur Miller or Tenessee Williams?

Surely that's part of distinctly American literature.

LOL! Notice how I am totally side stepping the definition issue....

[_Shannon_]

I think Sister Carrie is even better than An American Tragedy.
I haven't finished American Tragedy--Have you read any of the trilogy??

Those guys were all (with the exception probably of Wolfe)- really important to writers who wrote at the same time and just after them. That wouls be an interesting list- the writer's who were vastly influential, but who are now mostly overlooked...like Anthony Powell...

[Virgil]

Regionalism is a finer tunng of what's American, but each writer, no matter from what region, still is distinctly American. I think there is a greater division of American literature over time (as evolving in themes) than by regions.

[Virgil]

Did anyone mention Dos Passos or Dreiser or Anderson or Thomas Wolfe? I think all of those guys are super important, though currently out of vogue.

Poetry- I don't think insofar as we're talking about distictly American poetry it gets more important than WC WIlliams...

Absolutely WCW. And to add a few more names not yet mentioned, Ezra Pound, Marianne Moore, and Elizabeth Bishop. Oh and how could I forget Sylvia Plath.

[_Shannon_]

Absolutely WCW. And to add a few more names not yet mentioned, Ezra Pound, Marianne Moore, and Elizabeth Bishop. Oh and how could I forget Sylvia Plath.

I always hesitate to call Pound "American" to me he's so like Henry James in that regard---both, however, are the heights of greatness!

[JBI]

Honestly, stop accusing Antiquarian of being rude, and a philistine, as she seems to speak the truth, in an accurate statement not just about Ginsberg, but the Beat generation in general.

As for Ginsberg's place in the canon, loudness doesn't mean art, and protest songs aren't really canonical music. As far as I am concerned, he offers nothing much beyond politics, most of which are becoming dated.

If you compare him with the big names of his time period, the biggest probably being Lowell, and then Bishop, Roethke, and Merrill, amongst others, you'd notice that he really wasn't so significant beyond his culture context. His poetry is innovative in a few ways, but he still is overly dependent on Whitman, rather simple, and, to put it bluntly, rather dull and boring. How many times can you read a poem about how much the government sucks?

[Jozanny]

I am not so steeped in Beat literature as to get my blood up over Ginsberg, although I appear in a nothing lit mag with him in the 80's, and I'm proud of that, but I prefer Creeley, who I've met.

But if I can dare to offer a slight critique of OLF threads, I am not much for superlative open-ended big questions like what is American Literature?

The question is too large, really, and obviously open to argument, since no one tailored their thoughts. Are we talking about when European descent peoples first published? Do we include Native American oral tradition? Or, following the consensus canon, when it came into its own with Hawthorne and Melville? Maybe I should look at the first post.

[Jozanny]

The question is too large, really, and obviously open to argument, since no one tailored their thoughts. Are we talking about when European descent peoples first published? Do we include Native American oral tradition? Or, following the consensus canon, when it came into its own with Hawthorne and Melville? Maybe I should look at the first post.

Now having done that, I still don't think we can boil it down to a few overarching themes about American Lit, sorry. The scope of it is too varied.

[Quagmire]

Now having done that, I still don't think we can boil it down to a few overarching themes about American Lit, sorry. The scope of it is too varied.

So then choose.
(I mean no disrespect by that- just in case if you take it the wrong way)

thank you for going back to the main topic, and ya, its pretty abstract.
let me post the exact question, since I am tired, and more than likely wont be going to sleep tonight, at all.

Here is exactly what I wanted to insight to
~~


In a work of INTERESTING and EFFECTIVE LITERARY CRITICISM, please answer the following question:

What is exactly is “AMERICAN LITERATURE”?

Any response that lacks specific textual support or that makes use of trifling, one-dimensional arguments like “everyone is different and, thus, has a different perspective on things” or “American Literature cannot actually be really defined” will not be accepted

[Quagmire]

Yes authors and their works are a part of this, but exactly how their influence and the literary movements their in, affects other literature is what the main topic of this thread was meant to be, so now we just need to focus on more things

[Jozanny]

In a work of INTERESTING and EFFECTIVE LITERARY CRITICISM, please answer the following question:

What is exactly is “AMERICAN LITERATURE”?

Any response that lacks specific textual support or that makes use of trifling, one-dimensional arguments like “everyone is different and, thus, has a different perspective on things” or “American Literature cannot actually be really defined” will not be accepted

Quagmire,

I am going to pass, with apologies, but pass anyway, because my argument against your question is this:

There is no way, at least to my mind, to say what American authors have in common, from their colonial birth pangs--say Thomas Paine, to their rise in guilt consciousness, Hawthorne and Melville, to their explorations of 19th century capitalism and exploitation (Dos Passos, Steinbeck and their ilk), through the rise of regional giants, like Faulkner, to modern literature which follows.

The closest thesis I can come to about what American Literature is, and this is stretching it, is dealing with blood guilt--one can even find that in Alice Hoffman, who, while nothing like Melville, she has the marvelous ability to shred the American Dream to so much confetti.

Maybe others can help you. Maybe it would be easier if you thought about genre (novel, poetry, memoir, etc) and historical period.

Now me done!;)

[Virgil]

I always hesitate to call Pound "American" to me he's so like Henry James in that regard---both, however, are the heights of greatness!

I tend to disagree. I think Pound and James and to a lesser extent T.S. Eliot are American at their core. It's easy to see James. His central characters are all mostly American, either learning or becoming disillusioned with Europe. Pound is distinctly American in his voice, diction, and rhythm. Read this from one of his Cantos and listen to the American voice:



Canto XLIX
by Ezra Pound

For the seven lakes, and by no man these verses:
Rain; empty river; a voyage,
Fire from frozen cloud, heavy rain in the twilight
Under the cabin roof was one lantern.
The reeds are heavy; bent;
and the bamboos speak as if weeping.

Autumn moon; hills rise about lakes
against sunset
Evening is like a curtain of cloud,
a blurr above ripples; and through it
sharp long spikes of the cinnamon,
a cold tune amid reeds.
Behind hill the monk's bell
borne on the wind.
Sail passed here in April; may return in October
Boat fades in silver; slowly;
Sun blaze alone on the river.

Where wine flag catches the sunset
Sparse chimneys smoke in the cross light

Comes then snow scur on the river
And a world is covered with jade
Small boat floats like a lanthorn,
The flowing water closts as with cold. And at San Yin
they are a people of leisure.

Wild geese swoop to the sand-bar,
Clouds gather about the hole of the window
Broad water; geese line out with the autumn
Rooks clatter over the fishermen's lanthorns,

A light moves on the north sky line;
where the young boys prod stones for shrimp.
In seventeen hundred came Tsing to these hill lakes.
A light moves on the South sky line.

State by creating riches shd. thereby get into debt?
This is infamy; this is Geryon.
This canal goes still to TenShi
Though the old king built it for pleasure

K E I M E N R A N K E I
K I U M A N M A N K E I
JITSU GETSU K O K W A
T A N FUKU T A N K A I

Sun up; work
sundown; to rest
dig well and drink of the water
dig field; eat of the grain
Imperial power is? and to us what is it?

The fourth; the dimension of stillness.
And the power over wild beasts.

T.S. Eliot does blur the line between American and English. I maintain that "Prufriock" and "The Four Quartets" have a predominantly American perspective while "The Wasteland" is much more English than not.

[Quagmire]

Quagmire,

I am going to pass, with apologies, but pass anyway, because my argument against your question is this:

There is no way, at least to my mind, to say what American authors have in common, from their colonial birth pangs--say Thomas Paine, to their rise in guilt consciousness, Hawthorne and Melville, to their explorations of 19th century capitalism and exploitation (Dos Passos, Steinbeck and their ilk), through the rise of regional giants, like Faulkner, to modern literature which follows.

The closest thesis I can come to about what American Literature is, and this is stretching it, is dealing with blood guilt--one can even find that in Alice Hoffman, who, while nothing like Melville, she has the marvelous ability to shred the American Dream to so much confetti.

Maybe others can help you. Maybe it would be easier if you thought about genre (novel, poetry, memoir, etc) and historical period.

Now me done!;)

I dont blame you whatsoever :lol:
Anyways, this is what I have been able to come up with
I'll add something under this post

removed, Ill tell why later

[Quagmire]

I tend to disagree. I think Pound and James and to a lesser extent T.S. Eliot are American at their core.
How?

It's easy to see James. His central characters are all mostly American,


Pound is distinctly American in his voice, diction, and rhythm. Read this from one of his Cantos and listen to the American voice: what makes that American?

[stlukesguild]

I think Pound and James and to a lesser extent T.S. Eliot are American at their core.

With Eliot one must also consider that he was certainly deeply influences by other American writers: especially Pound and of course Whitman (in spite of his own attempt at denial of this).

[stlukesguild]

The closest thesis I can come to about what American Literature is, and this is stretching it, is dealing with blood guilt--one can even find that in Alice Hoffman, who, while nothing like Melville, she has the marvelous ability to shred the American Dream to so much confetti.

Certainly, the shredding of the American Myth/American Dream has become as much a theme of American literature as the creation of the same was to earlier writers. Surely Faulkner did a good job at tearing the myth apart... and perhaps the finest example of such by a living writer is to be found in Cormac McCarthy's Blood Meridian which I find blends several central themes of American literature: religion, violence, religion and violence, the transcendental beauty and heroic splendor of the American landscape, the loss or destruction of the American Myth.

[Jozanny]

Quagmire, if you are doing a topic paper, and need to parse what sets American Lit off, what are your melting pot examples?

Go with what you know, not what other posters know.

[Virgil]

How?


what makes that American?


:lol: Are you serious? For a poet to write with American diction, rhythm, and voice is everything. Voice is everything to a poet. And as to James, like I said his central characters are mostly American, seeing the world from an American perspective. If you're looking at the world from an American perspective in a predomince of your works, then you are essentially an Amereican writer. Frankly I fail to see how you consider them not American. If Hemingway lived in Cuba for a number of years, does that make him a Cuabn writer? His language, themes, and perspective is distinctly American. The only auther mentioned that I would possibly see as English is T.S. Eliot. He really did blur his voice and perspective. But there is still American there in many places.

St Lukes, you're right Cormac McCarthy. How could he escape me?

[Jozanny]

St.luke, I think you and I posted with each other in the past. Does Joanne ring a bell? I ran off from a lot of Yahoo Groups some years back.

Settled down some since my mom died in 05 and I nearly disfigured my head in a burn accident that following winter, but got lucky, and only my shoulder looks like one of Toni Morrison's tree scars!

Anyway, if I have you pegged, hi again, and I have yet to treat myself to Cormac's alluring stylized violence. Nice to read a familiar voice.

[Quagmire]

Heres what is required
removed, Ill tell why later

[Quagmire]

:lol: Are you serious? For a poet to write with American diction, rhythm, and voice is everything. Voice is everything to a poet. And as to James, like I said his central characters are mostly American, seeing the world from an American perspective. If you're looking at the world from an American perspective in a predomince of your works, then you are essentially an Amereican writer. Frankly I fail to see how you consider them not American. If Hemingway lived in Cuba for a number of years, does that make him a Cuabn writer? His language, themes, and perspective is distinctly American. The only auther mentioned that I would possibly see as English is T.S. Eliot. He really did blur his voice and perspective. But there is still American there in many places.

St Lukes, you're right Cormac McCarthy. How could he escape me?

Yes I'm serious, there's no provided definition as to what American literature is so how can you call it American, nor have you provided reasons as to why it's American.

[JBI]

The Wasteland is very American. The whole thing reads like an almost homage to Whitman's Lilacs, with much of the imagery and structure, in addition to the word choices, borrowed from it. All the X-Pats at the core were all American. Though, I think Pound did the best at covering this up, by going crazy, and by throwing in a billion allusions from the far corners of the earth.

[Quagmire]

The Wasteland is very American. The whole thing reads like an almost homage to Whitman's Lilacs, with much of the imagery and structure, in addition to the word choices, borrowed from it. All the X-Pats at the core were all American. Though, I think Pound did the best at covering this up, by going crazy, and by throwing in a billion allusions from the far corners of the earth.

But what exactly makes it American?

[Virgil]

That's not too bad Quagmire. I mena this is such a broad question. There are volumes of books on the subject, i wonder how a teacher can assign it as an essay question. If you're really focused on melting pot works, look up James T. Farrel's Studs Longan Trilogy.

[stlukesguild]

The Wasteland is very American. The whole thing reads like an almost homage to Whitman's Lilacs, with much of the imagery and structure, in addition to the word choices, borrowed from it. All the X-Pats at the core were all American. Though, I think Pound did the best at covering this up, by going crazy, and by throwing in a billion allusions from the far corners of the earth.

I couldn't say it better.:lol:

[Virgil]

The Wasteland is very American. The whole thing reads like an almost homage to Whitman's Lilacs, with much of the imagery and structure, in addition to the word choices, borrowed from it. All the X-Pats at the core were all American. Though, I think Pound did the best at covering this up, by going crazy, and by throwing in a billion allusions from the far corners of the earth.

I tend to disagree with you JBI on both points. My ear hears much more Americanism inPound than Eliot's Wasteland. But we each have our opinion. Here's a section of Wasteland.


When Lil's husband got demobbed, I said—
I didn't mince my words, I said to her myself, 140
HURRY UP PLEASE IT'S TIME
Now Albert's coming back, make yourself a bit smart.
He'll want to know what you done with that money he gave you
To get yourself some teeth. He did, I was there.
You have them all out, Lil, and get a nice set, 145
He said, I swear, I can't bear to look at you.
And no more can't I, I said, and think of poor Albert,
He's been in the army four years, he wants a good time,
And if you don't give it him, there's others will, I said.
Oh is there, she said. Something o' that, I said. 150
Then I'll know who to thank, she said, and give me a straight look.
HURRY UP PLEASE IT'S TIME
If you don't like it you can get on with it, I said.
Others can pick and choose if you can't.
But if Albert makes off, it won't be for lack of telling. 155
You ought to be ashamed, I said, to look so antique.
(And her only thirty-one.)
I can't help it, she said, pulling a long face,
It's them pills I took, to bring it off, she said.
(She's had five already, and nearly died of young George.) 160
The chemist said it would be alright, but I've never been the same.
You are a proper fool, I said.
Well, if Albert won't leave you alone, there it is, I said,
What you get married for if you don't want children?
HURRY UP PLEASE IT'S TIME 165
Well, that Sunday Albert was home, they had a hot gammon,
And they asked me in to dinner, to get the beauty of it hot—
HURRY UP PLEASE IT'S TIME
HURRY UP PLEASE IT'S TIME
Goonight Bill. Goonight Lou. Goonight May. Goonight. 170
Ta ta. Goonight. Goonight.
Good night, ladies, good night, sweet ladies, good night, good night.

That sounds very British to me.

[Quagmire]

That's not too bad Quagmire. I mena this is such a broad question. There are volumes of books on the subject, i wonder how a teacher can assign it as an essay question. If you're really focused on melting pot works, look up James T. Farrel's Studs Longan Trilogy.

thanks for taking the time to read it, I appreciate it. I know I could have done sooo much more and made it better, but this has been my week of finals, so I havent been able to fully commit to it, and just had family problems :( Ill leave it at that. Ugh its driving me crazy as to how I just cant think or work or anything :flare: but thank you for the compliment, that made me feel that it might not be as horrible as I think

just chekd the site, and ya I have that one open

[JBI]

Yes, but look at this:



APRIL is the cruellest month, breeding
Lilacs out of the dead land, mixing
Memory and desire, stirring
Dull roots with spring rain.
Winter kept us warm, covering 5
Earth in forgetful snow, feeding
A little life with dried tubers.
Summer surprised us, coming over the Starnbergersee
With a shower of rain; we stopped in the colonnade,
And went on in sunlight, into the Hofgarten, 10
And drank coffee, and talked for an hour.
Bin gar keine Russin, stamm' aus Litauen, echt deutsch.
And when we were children, staying at the archduke's,
My cousin's, he took me out on a sled,
And I was frightened. He said, Marie, 15
Marie, hold on tight. And down we went.
In the mountains, there you feel free.
I read, much of the night, and go south in the winter.

What are the roots that clutch, what branches grow
Out of this stony rubbish? Son of man, 20
You cannot say, or guess, for you know only
A heap of broken images, where the sun beats,
And the dead tree gives no shelter, the cricket no relief,
And the dry stone no sound of water. Only
There is shadow under this red rock, 25
(Come in under the shadow of this red rock),
And I will show you something different from either
Your shadow at morning striding behind you
Or your shadow at evening rising to meet you;
I will show you fear in a handful of dust.

Compared with this:


Coffin that passes through lanes and streets,
Through day and night, with the great cloud darkening the land,
With the pomp of the inloop’d flags, with the cities draped in black, 35
With the show of the States themselves, as of crape-veil’d women, standing,
With processions long and winding, and the flambeaus of the night,
With the countless torches lit—with the silent sea of faces, and the unbared heads,
With the waiting depot, the arriving coffin, and the sombre faces,
With dirges through the night, with the thousand voices rising strong and solemn; 40
With all the mournful voices of the dirges, pour’d around the coffin,
The dim-lit churches and the shuddering organs—Where amid these you journey,
With the tolling, tolling bells’ perpetual clang;
Here! coffin that slowly passes,
I give you my sprig of lilac. 45

7

(Nor for you, for one, alone;
Blossoms and branches green to coffins all I bring:
For fresh as the morning—thus would I carol a song for you, O sane and sacred death.

All over bouquets of roses,
O death! I cover you over with roses and early lilies; 50
But mostly and now the lilac that blooms the first,
Copious, I break, I break the sprigs from the bushes;
With loaded arms I come, pouring for you,
For you, and the coffins all of you, O death.)

8

O western orb, sailing the heaven! 55
Now I know what you must have meant, as a month since we walk’d,
As we walk’d up and down in the dark blue so mystic,
As we walk’d in silence the transparent shadowy night,
As I saw you had something to tell, as you bent to me night after night,
As you droop’d from the sky low down, as if to my side, (while the other stars all look’d on;) 60
As we wander’d together the solemn night, (for something, I know not what, kept me from sleep;)
As the night advanced, and I saw on the rim of the west, ere you went, how full you were of woe;
As I stood on the rising ground in the breeze, in the cold transparent night,
As I watch’d where you pass’d and was lost in the netherward black of the night,
As my soul, in its trouble, dissatisfied, sank, as where you, sad orb, 65
Concluded, dropt in the night, and was gone.

The style is too similar. Eliot trying to be British to me reads like Gatsby trying to fit in with the old rich. He has the nice house and suit, medals from the war, and pictures from Oxford, but his over-the-topness, and clear pretending give him away. The Hollow Men and such try to be British, but in truth just end up being American.

The thing with Eliot, is he seems to have peaked after the Wasteland, and then sort of gone into a comfortable decline. The Prufrock collection seems his most enduring series of short poems, and is his first. It is very American, and displays American imagery and style (though has aspects borrowed from British sources, of course). His work reads like an Americans, being that it doesn't really fit in with the English tradition of Poetry.

The distinction problem really comes from separating poetry and society. In terms of views on society, we can interpret Eliot as British, though I hesitate on that, in terms of poetics though, he (in my opinion) never broke out of his Americanism, and just went into a long decline until his death after leaving.

[Jozanny]

I think the ethnic qualities of good old Eliot's voice get immersed in Modernism, which I know isn't saying much, but you could put Eliot, Joyce, Proust, Woolf, Musil and company in a room and get a suicide note which could be parsed til the next nova.

[Jozanny]

Quagmire,

I skimmed, you seem to touch on the main isms, and apologize again for not understanding that you created this thread on an instructor's laziness. There are much better ways to frame the question about the characteristics of Amer. Lit.

Good luck.

[Virgil]

The style is too similar.
To be honest, I'm not sure I see it. They are both in free verse, but I do see the American phrasing in Whitman's but Eliot there could go either way. It still sounds Britishy to me. Pound by the way sounds very much like that Whitman. But I agree there are Americanisms in The Wasteland, but I see the British too. I still think it sounds more British than American. Have you ever heard Eliot's readings of his poetry? You should listen to it.


Eliot trying to be British to me reads like Gatsby trying to fit in with the old rich. He has the nice house and suit, medals from the war, and pictures from Oxford, but his over-the-topness, and clear pretending give him away. The Hollow Men and such try to be British, but in truth just end up being American.
That's very funny.


The thing with Eliot, is he seems to have peaked after the Wasteland, and then sort of gone into a comfortable decline.
I happen to think The Four Quartets are his great masterpiece. But most do think The Wasteand is the greater work. I find The Four Quartets transcendant. And it does sound more American.


The Prufrock collection seems his most enduring series of short poems, and is his first. It is very American, and displays American imagery and style (though has aspects borrowed from British sources, of course). His work reads like an Americans, being that it doesn't really fit in with the English tradition of Poetry.
I completely agree about this.


The distinction problem really comes from separating poetry and society. In terms of views on society, we can interpret Eliot as British, though I hesitate on that, in terms of poetics though, he (in my opinion) never broke out of his Americanism, and just went into a long decline until his death after leaving.
In essence I agree, though I think Eliot blurs the English/American line much more than Pound and Henry James.

[JBI]

Oh, that is true, no doubt, but he still is American. Pound returned to America, if you remember. If you are looking really for the American of the time period though, Williams, Stevens, and Frost seem to be the big ones, though Harold Bloom insists we throw in Crane to the mix, though I think that is just one of his idiosyncrasies (though I don't doubt Crane is canon-worthy, I doubt he is as integral as the rest).

But seriously, comparing Eliot to the British writers of his time, Lawrence, Smith, Housman, and Auden, he doesn't seem to really fit in there. The section you clipped from The Waste Land to me reads like an American interpretation of American society run through a British clothes shop. Eliot doesn't seem to have ever shook off his rooted mythology, which created itself out of his American life.

[Jozanny]

How would Crane not be as integral as Frost or Williams? We all have various tastes, true, but Crane does his part to implode Western tropes, in as far as I can tell.

[Virgil]

Oh, that is true, no doubt, but he still is American. Pound returned to America, if you remember. If you are looking really for the American of the time period though, Williams, Stevens, and Frost seem to be the big ones, though Harold Bloom insists we throw in Crane to the mix, though I think that is just one of his idiosyncrasies (though I don't doubt Crane is canon-worthy, I doubt he is as integral as the rest).

But seriously, comparing Eliot to the British writers of his time, Lawrence, Bowen, and Auden, he doesn't seem to really fit in there. The section you clipped from The Waste Land to me reads like an American interpretation of American society run through a British clothes shop. Eliot doesn't seem to have ever shook off his rooted mythology, which created itself out of his American life.

I would probably include William Carlos Williams in that group. I haven't read Crane in a long time, but I thought he was good. He died young and had not completely reached maturity. I should reread him. Completely agree with Eliot not shaking off his American roots.

[Quagmire]

Quagmire,

I skimmed, you seem to touch on the main isms, and apologize again for not understanding that you created this thread on an instructor's laziness. There are much better ways to frame the question about the characteristics of Amer. Lit.

Good luck.
Yes I know, I first asked it so it wouldnt seem that I was asking about a Final, but now its due tomorrow morning and sooooooo I dont give a 'hoot'

But what did you think of the paper itself??? Any ideas for the title?

[JBI]

How would Crane not be as integral as Frost or Williams? We all have various tastes, true, but Crane does his part to implode Western tropes, in as far as I can tell.

His influence isn't that great, and his essentialness to the canon is questionable. This predominantly stems from the fact that even most of his supporters can't really understand him. But lets be honest, he has his place, it is just on a lower pedestal. Not all poets can reach the same level, though they both be good. He is essential to the period, but not as essential, not as necessary. The Bridge is, I would argue, less important than the Wasteland, in the sense that it didn't achieve the same lasting success, or significance. Crane, I am afraid, is just too dense a poet for most people to handle. He makes even Joyce's Ulysses look like a piece of cake, and easily competes with Finnegans for complexity.

[Virgil]

His influence isn't that great, and his essentialness to the canon is questionable. This predominantly stems from the fact that even most of his supporters can't really understand him. But lets be honest, he has his place, it is just on a lower pedestal. Not all poets can reach the same level, though they both be good. He is essential to the period, but not as essential, not as necessary. The Bridge is, I would argue, less important than the Wasteland, in the sense that it didn't achieve the same lasting success, or significance. Crane, I am afraid, is just too dense a poet for most people to handle. He makes even Joyce's Ulysses look like a piece of cake, and easily competes with Finnegans for complexity.

OK, I guess I agree, since it's not fresh in my memory. ;) But just because one isn't an influence doesn't mean he's not a fine poet.

[Jozanny]

His influence isn't that great, and his essentialness to the canon is questionable. This predominantly stems from the fact that even most of his supporters can't really understand him. But lets be honest, he has his place, it is just on a lower pedestal. Not all poets can reach the same level, though they both be good. He is essential to the period, but not as essential, not as necessary. The Bridge is, I would argue, less important than the Wasteland, in the sense that it didn't achieve the same lasting success, or significance. Crane, I am afraid, is just too dense a poet for most people to handle. He makes even Joyce's Ulysses look like a piece of cake, and easily competes with Finnegans for complexity.

Ah. I cannot defend Hart Crane Virgil. I was thinking of Stephen Crane:blush:, but maybe reading Hart at some point isn't a bad idea. Tonight my head is more in the novelists and fiction writers than the poets.

I am not that well read when it comes to Harold Bloom's pronouncements either, and pretty much have gleaned him second hand, re: The New Republic, his dour whining about American theocracy on Charlie Rose, my umbrage at his dismissal of Morrison as a dime store novelist (she isn't).

I have been told Bloom is the father of American Modernism. I take it, but with a grain of salt.

Is there a decent Hart Crane website around where his works are available?

[Virgil]

Ah. I cannot defend Hart Crane Virgil. I was thinking of Stephen Crane:blush:, but maybe reading Hart at some point isn't a bad idea. Tonight my head is more in the novelists and fiction writers than the poets.



Haha, I thought you might be referring to Stephan Crane. ;)

[Quagmire]

Hey JBI, what do you think of what I've written so far (for my final)? Any idea's as to what I could add to make it better

[JBI]

Can you edit and break the paragraphs? I find it hard to read in that clump.

Edit:

I have read it over twice, and now some pointers. A) your essay needs serious editing for structuring and argumentation. The style and mechanics are quite clunky as of now. B) The sources you used seem to be running you into trouble as a) they are unreliable, do to the fact that they are not really literary, and don't really present any real form of scholarship (putting Whitman as a Romantic? surely you jest). You really need to use sources beyond Google, as those sources have provided you with some inaccurate, or poorly contexted information.

As for your thesis itself, I personally do not agree, and you seem to contradict yourself by arguing against the melting pot, but surfacing it over and over again as your thesis. Your points on ethnic diversity (many of which lack supportive evidence, and strong enough distinction) go against the theory of melting pot, which you seem so fixated on arguing about.

As for the general flow, your thesis fails because it doesn't really fit in with what you are trying to say. You seriously need to read some scholarship on the American tradition(s) if you wish to write this essay, and those propaganda overviews from the government don't really count, as they offer biased, and quite unscholarly work.

As for your argument, it is rather unconvincing because it is inatequetly thought out and presented, and doesn't really culminate into a central thread, or flow. The thing seems to be stuck together without order or citation.

I sincerely hope it is not due tomorrow, or that this is not a university paper. Your argument doesn't put forth any weakness or differing opinions to your work, so it essential reads like a narrative. You need to choose fewer focus points, and take clearer examples, with far sturdier sources if you wish for this to be the best it can be.

Sorry to tear it apart, feel free to take this with a grain of salt, or not at all, this is just my opinion. Really you should be mentioning the concepts of American identities, American trends, and American influences, and it wouldn't hurt to look into Whitman and Emerson (in addition to the other transcendentalists) as well as American modernism, African American literature, homosexual and Female literature if you wish to argue on the lines of American literature being multifaceted, and diverse, and uncategorizable.

[Quagmire]

Can you edit and break the paragraphs? I find it hard to read in that clump.

lol I'll try. Some of the paragrpahs are meant to be rediculasly long, well most of them are supposed to be I dont know why but the name of this style escapes my mind at the moment.

[JBI]

lol I'll try. Some of the paragrpahs are meant to be rediculasly long, well most of them are supposed to be I dont know why but the name of this style escapes my mind at the moment.

I read over it, check my back page for comments.

[Quagmire]

Can you edit and break the paragraphs? I find it hard to read in that clump.

Edit:

I have read it over twice, and now some pointers. A) your essay needs serious editing for structuring and argumentation. The style and mechanics are quite clunky as of now. B) The sources you used seem to be running you into trouble as a) they are unreliable, do to the fact that they are not really literary, and don't really present any real form of scholarship (putting Whitman as a Romantic? surely you jest). You really need to use sources beyond Google, as those sources have provided you with some inaccurate, or poorly contexted information.

As for your thesis itself, I personally do not agree, and you seem to contradict yourself by arguing against the melting pot, but surfacing it over and over again as your thesis. Your points on ethnic diversity (many of which lack supportive evidence, and strong enough distinction) go against the theory of melting pot, which you seem so fixated on arguing about.

As for the general flow, your thesis fails because it doesn't really fit in with what you are trying to say. You seriously need to read some scholarship on the American tradition(s) if you wish to write this essay, and those propaganda overviews from the government don't really count, as they offer biased, and quite unscholarly work.

As for your argument, it is rather unconvincing because it is inatequetly thought out and presented, and doesn't really culminate into a central thread, or flow. The thing seems to be stuck together without order or citation.

I sincerely hope it is not due tomorrow, or that this is not a university paper. Your argument doesn't put forth any weakness or differing opinions to your work, so it essential reads like a narrative. You need to choose fewer focus points, and take clearer examples, with far sturdier sources if you wish for this to be the best it can be.

Sorry to tear it apart, feel free to take this with a grain of salt, or not at all, this is just my opinion. Really you should be mentioning the concepts of American identities, American trends, and American influences, and it wouldn't hurt to look into Whitman and Emerson (in addition to the other transcendentalists) as well as American modernism, African American literature, homosexual and Female literature if you wish to argue on the lines of American literature being multifaceted, and diverse, and uncategorizable.


I hate you, you ruin my life!! Im going to cut my wrists so deep that I wont be able to write this thing!!

On a less serius note, thanks. And I mean that as an appreciative thank you. Unfortunately, just about everything you've said is what I've been thinking.. I've had a reallllly tough time writing these past few months due to, er 'negative writing traumas' that recently happened to me, so every time I have to write a wonderfully long essay, I cant put it together, I get the idea, just cant glue it together. Its like building a house of of lollypop sticks without elmers glue ='[
Then theres the family problems but w/e I dont want to really use an excuse..


and yes, I have 2 hours to write this during my exams tomorrow. I'll be using a laptop, and we can only use an outline.

[JBI]

I hate you, you ruin my life!! Im going to cut my wrists so deep that I wont be able to write this thing!!

On a less serius note, thanks. And I mean that as an appreciative thank you. Unfortunately, just about everything you've said is what I've been thinking.. I've had a reallllly tough time writing these past few months due to, er 'negative writing traumas' that recently happened to me, so every time I have to write a wonderfully long essay, I cant put it together, I get the idea, just cant glue it together. Its like building a house of of lollypop sticks without elmers glue ='[
Then theres the family problems but w/e I dont want to really use an excuse..


and yes, I have 2 hours to write this during my exams tomorrow. I'll be using a laptop, and we can only use an outline.
How long is the essay supposed to be and a) for a high school or university level course, and b) what do you want your thesis to be exactly, before I help you reform the thing?

[Quagmire]

How long is the essay supposed to be and a) for a high school or university level course, and b) what do you want your thesis to be exactly, before I help you reform the thing?doesnt exactly havfe a limit, but he prefers 8-10
(I was planning on doing something like 20, but thats not going to happen)
High school Junior, but he's the 2nd hardest teacher in the school and everything he gives us harder than what the AP Seniors do, versus my CP Junior class
HE said the melting pot was a good idea if I can support it, and yes I know its contradictory =/ but I havent researched one specific thing, such as the lone wolf hero or anything. I feel like such a faliure, but I'm actually trying which make's me feel worse =/

[Quagmire]

So far its up to 7 pages, so I still need to add to the conclusion. I'm going to add a transcendtal and gothic section, although they wont be the best, their going to be done.And I need to works site my stuff now. Oh and then put it into outline. that shouldnt take too long though

[JBI]

You first of all, I think, have misinterpreted what the melting pot is, or misused it, I am not to sure. Really though, your paragraphs should be about American identity, and your thesis should be more personal, and less based on your teacher's suggestions. Take a thesis of what you think creates the American literary identity, create 8 or so points to support it, each with 2 good examples, and then go from there. Memorizing this essay won't really help as much as knowing what you are going to say, and recreating it there.

You should look into American identity, you cut your time really short, but you could perhaps use Wikipedia or something to get a decent overview of the American trends, and then apply them. You are better off looking at central figures, such as Emerson, Whitman, Eliot, Douglass, Dickinson, Morrison, Stevens and Faulkner, and then go from there. That'll give you a decent range, and then you can put all those players into a prospective.

Seriously though, you cut your timing a little short, and should probably have worked on this last week if you plan to memorize it. As is it lacks coherency and development, and a solid thesis.

[Quagmire]

You first of all, I think, have misinterpreted what the melting pot is, or misused it, I am not to sure. Really though, your paragraphs should be about American identity, and your thesis should be more personal, and less based on your teacher's suggestions. Take a thesis of what you think creates the American literary identity, create 8 or so points to support it, each with 2 good examples, and then go from there. Memorizing this essay won't really help as much as knowing what you are going to say, and recreating it there.

You should look into American identity, you cut your time really short, but you could perhaps use Wikipedia or something to get a decent overview of the American trends, and then apply them. You are better off looking at central figures, such as Emerson, Whitman, Eliot, Douglass, Dickinson, Morrison, Stevens and Faulkner, and then go from there. That'll give you a decent range, and then you can put all those players into a prospective.

Seriously though, you cut your timing a little short, and should probably have worked on this last week if you plan to memorize it. As is it lacks coherency and development, and a solid thesis.
Ya I know, I've been working on it for the past few days.. He doesn't allow any Wiki, but I know what you mean, look for what they have cited.
I dont need to memorize it, I can have my works cited and outline done to the fullest extent, I just cant have my essay pre written.

yes identities, something of what I was putting on the first page? I did want to look for that stuff, but I trailed off, and started getting to broad or something.

[JBI]

Just look up some key figures, and try to place where their influence lies. I would tell you to use JSTOR or a library, but it seems to late for that. What you really needed was a Norton Anthology or something of the sort.

[Quagmire]

Just look up some key figures, and try to place where their influence lies. I would tell you to use JSTOR or a library, but it seems to late for that. What you really needed was a Norton Anthology or something of the sort.

My school has the Norton Anthology for only African American literature, which i used for my last 20pg project, I got a 95 :)
JSORT, thats at the college about a half hour away from my house, so I couldnt really get a chance

[JBI]

It is available online if your library has baught access, and allows you to access it. But yeah, it isn't available to the public without some sort of paid entrance. You really needed to read through a text book to be honest, or I guess to use what your teacher taught you, and his examples.

[kelby_lake]

I'm not much of a Langston Hughes fan myself, but yes -- he is hugely influential and not mentioning him was a huge oversight.

James Baldwin I don't know much about. Could you point me in the direction of something of his I ought to read?

'Giovanni's Room', totally landmark book for homosexuality. Very nicely written.

[patrickbeverley]

Honestly, stop accusing Antiquarian of being rude, and a philistine, as she seems to speak the truth, in an accurate statement not just about Ginsberg, but the Beat generation in general.

Moderator? The above is another comment on a personal note.

It's also the first comment in this thread to use the word "philistine" of Antiquarian. Nobody else said anything about philistines.

To cite the best of Ginsberg's poems, Howl isn't about how the government sucks, or it mostly isn't. A generalised insult is an insult to every member of the group being insulted, and when one knows it isn't true, one has a right to take offence.

[Karl Rommel]

For me this has been a fascinating thread, but I was ignorant as to when the author's work appeared. So for my own benefit, and I hope yours too if you, like me, am a novice, here are some selected authors and roughly when they were prolific:
Steven Crane 1800s
R W Emerson 1800s
Dickinson 1800s
N Hawthorn late 1800s
Falkner 19th C. early 20th
T S Elliot 1917-1959
R L Frost early 20th C.
Wallace Stevens '30s - '40s
Tennessee Williams '40s - '50s
Theodore Roethke '40s - '50s
Wallace Stevens '30s - '50s
Robert Lowell '40s - '70s
Kurt Vonnegut '50s - '60s
J D Salinger '50s -'60s

I have missed out the Beat Generation authors and if you are itching to add more especially if they will pop up in my English degree module: America in the 1950s, please feel free to add some more.

[Jozanny]

For me this has been a fascinating thread, but I was ignorant as to when the author's work appeared. So for my own benefit, and I hope yours too if you, like me, am a novice, here are some selected authors and roughly when they were prolific:
Steven Crane 1800s
R W Emerson 1800s
Dickinson 1800s
N Hawthorn late 1800s
Falkner 19th C. early 20th
T S Elliot 1917-1959
R L Frost early 20th C.
Wallace Stevens '30s - '40s
Tennessee Williams '40s - '50s
Theodore Roethke '40s - '50s
Wallace Stevens '30s - '50s
Robert Lowell '40s - '70s
Kurt Vonnegut '50s - '60s
J D Salinger '50s -'60s

I have missed out the Beat Generation authors and if you are itching to add more especially if they will pop up in my English degree module: America in the 1950s, please feel free to add some more.

Henry James, 1870-1916
Edith Wharton 1930's
Howells, roughly James' contemporary
Hemingway, 30's thru 60's
Kerouac, 50's

[kelby_lake]

Fitzgerald- 1920-1940

[Virgil]

Henry James, 1870-1916
Edith Wharton 1930's
Howells, roughly James' contemporary
Hemingway, 30's thru 60's
Kerouac, 50's

Hemmingway's first published work I believe was 1922.

[slobone]

The principal Beat authors from the 50's are Ginsberg, Kerouac, Burroughs, and Corso. Other interesting/important authors associated with them are Leroi Jones (Amiri Baraka), Gary Snyder, Lawrence Ferlinghetti, Michael McClure and maybe Diane DiPrima.

I just read an excellent biography of Ginsberg, by Barry Miles (I believe there's also a newer one.) It will really put you in the picture if you're going to go into that era in depth.

[NickAdams]

Hemmingway's first published work I believe was 1922.

Three Stories & Ten Poems published in 1923.:)

[Virgil]

Three Stories & Ten Poems published in 1923.:)

Ha! I was only off by a year. :D

[antonia1990]

Overall I would say the most important books in American literature are (in order of publication, not of importance):

The Last of the Mohicans — James Fenimore Cooper
Moby-Dick — Herman Melville
Little Women — Louisa May Alcott
The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn — Mark Twain
Leaves of Grass — Walt Whitman
The Great Gatsby — F. Scott Fitzgerald
Their Eyes Were Watching God — Zora Neale Hurston
The Grapes of Wrath — John Steinbeck
The Catcher in the Rye — J. D. Salinger
Howl and other poems — Allen Ginsberg
To Kill a Mockingbird — Harper Lee
Slaughterhouse-Five — Kurt Vonnegut
The Color Purple — Alice Walker

Louisa May Alcott, Zora Neale Hurston (who?), Salinger's "masterwork" of teen angst, Ginsberg, and Alice Walker... and no Emerson (almost certainly THE central figure in American literature), Hawthorne, Poe, Emily Dickenson, T.S. Eliot, Wallace Stevens, Robert Frost, Henry James, Hart Crane, Hemingway, Faulkner... surely you jest.


Good list, but don't forget about "Uncle Tom's Cabin." In my opinion it is an influential book, especially taking into consideration the historical context in which it was published.

[stlukesguild]

Originally Posted by stlukesguild View Post
Overall I would say the most important books in American literature are (in order of publication, not of importance):

The Last of the Mohicans — James Fenimore Cooper
Moby-Dick — Herman Melville
Little Women — Louisa May Alcott
The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn — Mark Twain
Leaves of Grass — Walt Whitman
The Great Gatsby — F. Scott Fitzgerald
Their Eyes Were Watching God — Zora Neale Hurston
The Grapes of Wrath — John Steinbeck
The Catcher in the Rye — J. D. Salinger
Howl and other poems — Allen Ginsberg
To Kill a Mockingbird — Harper Lee
Slaughterhouse-Five — Kurt Vonnegut
The Color Purple — Alice Walker

Actually that list was not mine... but just quoted by me from another poster. If I were to offer my own list it would retain Melville, Twain, and Whitman and ditch almost everything else (with the possible exception of the Fitzgerald).

[antonia1990]

Originally Posted by stlukesguild View Post
Overall I would say the most important books in American literature are (in order of publication, not of importance):

The Last of the Mohicans — James Fenimore Cooper
Moby-Dick — Herman Melville
Little Women — Louisa May Alcott
The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn — Mark Twain
Leaves of Grass — Walt Whitman
The Great Gatsby — F. Scott Fitzgerald
Their Eyes Were Watching God — Zora Neale Hurston
The Grapes of Wrath — John Steinbeck
The Catcher in the Rye — J. D. Salinger
Howl and other poems — Allen Ginsberg
To Kill a Mockingbird — Harper Lee
Slaughterhouse-Five — Kurt Vonnegut
The Color Purple — Alice Walker

Actually that list was not mine... but just quoted by me from another poster. If I were to offer my own list it would retain Melville, Twain, and Whitman and ditch almost everything else (with the possible exception of the Fitzgerald).


Your own list is good.

I'd add Harriet Beecher Stowe, Alcott and Poe to it. "The Catcher in the Rye" is overrated, in my opinion.

[Drkshadow03]

Originally Posted by stlukesguild View Post
Overall I would say the most important books in American literature are (in order of publication, not of importance):

The Last of the Mohicans — James Fenimore Cooper
Moby-Dick — Herman Melville
Little Women — Louisa May Alcott
The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn — Mark Twain
Leaves of Grass — Walt Whitman
The Great Gatsby — F. Scott Fitzgerald
Their Eyes Were Watching God — Zora Neale Hurston
The Grapes of Wrath — John Steinbeck
The Catcher in the Rye — J. D. Salinger
Howl and other poems — Allen Ginsberg
To Kill a Mockingbird — Harper Lee
Slaughterhouse-Five — Kurt Vonnegut
The Color Purple — Alice Walker

Actually that list was not mine... but just quoted by me from another poster. If I were to offer my own list it would retain Melville, Twain, and Whitman and ditch almost everything else (with the possible exception of the Fitzgerald).

Yeah, unfortunately Cooper has gone down in critical acclaim, which is a shame because his works are doing lots of very complex and interesting things.

Part of it has to do with his sexism and racism. It's so very blatant at times in his works.

[stlukesguild]

Since the above list keeps popping up with my name attached... which certainly

Nathaniel Hawthorne- Collected Tales
Edgar Allan Poe- Selected Tales
Ralph Waldo Emerson- Collected Essays and Poems
Walt Whitman- Leaves of Grass-Collected Poems
Herman Melville- Moby Dick/Short Stories/Poems
Mark Twain- Huckleberry Finn
Emily Dickinson- Collected Poems
Henry James- Collected Short Stories
F. Scott Fitzgerald- The Great Gatsby
Ernest Hemingway- Collected Short Stories
William Faulkner- As I Lay Dying/The Sound and the Fury
T.S. Eliot- The Wateland/Collected Poems
Wallace Stevens- Collected Poems
Robert Frost- Collected Poems
Saul Bellow- Sieze the day/Augie March
Cormac McCarthy- Blood Meridian

Beyond these I'd have a hard time choosing any other figure that was absolutely essential or part of the core of American literature... with the possible exceptions of Hart Crane, Philip Roth and Thomas Pynchon. As much as I admire Flannery O'Connor, Thomas (not Tom) Wolfe. W.S. Merwin, Anthony Hecht, Gore Vidal, Elizabeth Bishop, Ambrose Bierce, and a goodly number of others, I am somewhat doubtful as to their centrality to American literary achievement.

[kelby_lake]

Your own list is good.
"The Catcher in the Rye" is overrated, in my opinion.

It's not whether we think something is bad. I, as everyone probably knows by now, dislike Mockingbird but it is very American and so should go on the list. It's surely what we think is a representation of American writing.

[ctalerico]

I agree with much of what you wrote but you must not fail to mention Walt Whitman who is among the most influential poets in America and his work has aspects of both, Transcendentalism and Realism. His major work, Leaves of Grass (1855) is a major American Transcendental epic.

Hart Crane must also be included in any serious consideration of American literature. He was greatly influenced by Whitman. Though ill received after its first publication in 1930, The Bridge is a lengthly major influential work. Using the Brooklyn Bridge in New York City (that connects Manhattan to Brooklyn and which was the first steel-wire suspension bridge in the world) as a mythical symbol for America, it becomes a unifying symbol in Crane's heroic attempt to bridge the past with the present, myth with reality, and art within urban industrialization.

These two poets rank high among their peers and must be considered if one is to better understand and appreciate the woven pattern that is American literature.

Others may disagree about the critical quality of their work but none can deny the enormous impact each had on American writers who came after them.

[Fins45]

American literature? My uncle, who has just read the whole of Henry James, says it's an oxymoron...