Which contemporary writers will be still talked about 100 years from now

[kev67]

Who are the big guns in your country at the moment? Who do you think may still be discussed in 100 years time? It's interesting to see who makes it and who doesn't. Who's heard of George Meredith now, but he was one of the top writers of his time and place.

I have to ask about the country, because here we hear the same authors talking on the radio, who are all British, and possibly needing the money. Therefore I don't know the most important writers are from around the world. The most important writers from right here, right now would appear to be Martin Amis, Ian McEwan, Will Self, Hilary Mantel and JKR Rowling.

[Volya]

Stephenie Meyer. Although possibly for the wrong reasons.

[mortalterror]

Gabriel Garcia Marquez, Haruki Murakami, plus possibly Cormac McCarthy, David Mitchell, or Roberto Bolano.

[SilvanDitties]

Toni Morrison, David Foster Wallace and Philip Roth.

[Lokasenna]

I would imagine Thomas Pynchon would be a main one. Perhaps Salman Rushdie as well? I also hope that Umberto Eco attains long lasting fame.

[krishna_lit]

J.K.Rowling, for sure. I hope Chetan Bhagat and Amish Tripaty from my country (India) will be remembered too. Malcolm Gladwell for his outstanding social science books.... and Dan Brown of course and many others too...!

[PeterL]

Rowling is a good guess, but she may fall from favor. I suspect that Poul ANderson may still be read, also. Most of the authors now are very much into lovcalized matters, and few of them have written about such things in ways that lead to universality. The current phase in fantasy may bring an occasional negative comment in the future, but not enough that anyone would be encouraged to read them.

It is interesting to look at what was popular 100 years ago and consider how little of it is known now. H.G. Wells was very big, and he wrote about 100 books, but maybe a hafl dozen of his novels are still remembered. And take a look at the writings of A. C. Doyle; he thought that the Professor Challenger series would be what people would read now.

[WICKES]

Maybe the English-British poet Geoffrey Hill? Stephen Hawking's Brief History of Time? It's an interesting question and difficult to answer since so many great writers enjoy a far greater reputation after death than before.

[PeterL]

Maybe the English-British poet Geoffrey Hill? Stephen Hawking's Brief History of Time? It's an interesting question and difficult to answer since so many great writers enjoy a far greater reputation after death than before.

A Brief History of Time has already become outdated; even Hawking disagrees with some of what he wrote.

And the ones who later become noted aren't always the ones who were noted in their own times.

[LitNetIsGreat]

I would guess there's no chance the likes of Martin Amis. Hillary Mantel and Will Self will be remembered. I would be surprised if these are read in 25 or 50 years time let alone 100. Meyer has to be a joke a bit like saying New Kids On the Block will be listened to in 90 years time. 100 years is a long time.

[kev67]

I wonder if Neil Gaiman will be remembered. All the booktubers (book reviwers on YouTube) rave about him and children's book can stay around a long time.

[Emil Miller]

I would guess there's no chance the likes of Martin Amis. Hillary Mantel and Will Self will be remembered. I would be surprised if these are read in 25 or 50 years time let alone 100. Meyer has to be a joke a bit like saying New Kids On the Block will be listened to in 90 years time. 100 years is a long time.

Have to agree with this. It's a good indication of the paucity of worthwhile books being published nowadays that they are are held up as front-runners in the reading stakes.

[Lokasenna]

I wonder if Neil Gaiman will be remembered. All the booktubers (book reviwers on YouTube) rave about him and children's book can stay around a long time.

I think there's a good chance he will, if only as part of the modern 'Medieval Revival'.

[hannah_arendt]

What do you think about G. R. R. Martin? Personally, I don`t like him but do you think that "Games of the thrones" will be remembered?

[Calidore]

What do you think about G. R. R. Martin? Personally, I don`t like him but do you think that "Games of the thrones" will be remembered?

Don't know if GoT will last 100 years (probably partly depends on whether Martin lives to finish it and how good it ends up being), but Martin himself has been a force in science fiction for over 40 years and has won numerous awards, so I think his longevity among genre fans is pretty certain.

[hannah_arendt]

Don't know if GoT will last 100 years (probably partly depends on whether Martin lives to finish it and how good it ends up being), but Martin himself has been a force in science fiction for over 40 years and has won numerous awards, so I think his longevity among genre fans is pretty certain.

I liked two first parts of GoT. I wonder whether he knows how to end the story.

[JBI]

I liked two first parts of GoT. I wonder whether he knows how to end the story.

There's a difference though from reception as an author and as an adapted author. I would wager many people who have taken to the tv series would not take well to the books.

As for cultural resonance, well, I think his works are particularly plot driven, and do not really excite beyond a plot level, but that is just my opinion.

[hannah_arendt]

There's a difference though from reception as an author and as an adapted author. I would wager many people who have taken to the tv series would not take well to the books.

As for cultural resonance, well, I think his works are particularly plot driven, and do not really excite beyond a plot level, but that is just my opinion.

You are right, I think. It`s just a story without any deeper thought, philosophy and so on. However it can be a good material for a series.

Have you read something of David Gemmel?

[NedSiegel]

That is a very good question. Certainly not the Dan Browns of the world. For the English language, Maybe Salman Rushdie. He has a unique enough style.

[IJustMadeThatUp]

I will second Murakami.

Perhaps Eugenides also?

[JBI]

I suspect the short list will be 5-6 names. That's generally how literature gets sifted. 5-6 authors will remain, and about a dozen poets, in an anthology sized kind of book. We really have too many works and not enough time - nobody in 100 years will be able to read and talk about all these authors, regardless of how good. It's like the Renaissance, how many English language sonnet writers do we have? How many are discussed? Discussion involves a sort of community of readers, for the nonspecialist that limits every age to less than a dozen authors.

[MorpheusSandman]

There are several I could name that I hope will be talked about, but when I really look at things objectively, I don't see how the poetry of John Ashbery can be forgotten. He was arguably as influential to the second half of the 20th century as Eliot was to the first half, and, IMO, even more original, challenging, and brilliant.

[mande2013]

As for there only being 5-6 major figures per generation I'm not so sure. If we look at the early 20th century, say before World War II, there are certainly more than that. We have Joyce, Faulkner, Woolf, Eliot, Pound, Kafka, Yeats, D.H. Lawrence, Proust, Gertrude Stein, Henry Miller, F. Scott Fitzgerald, and Hemingway, and I'd say every single one of the aforementioned figures is here to stay. As for writers currently living it's hard to say, but I'm sure Pynchon will stand the test time. I'm not too sure about Rushdie. I just can't take a guy who marries the hostess of Top Chef seriously, no matter how literary his work is. Cormac McCarthy might endure. Don DeLillo as well. Ian McEwan, Martin Amis, Philip Roth, Toni Morrison, and even Gabriel Garcia Marquez are seen as being "middlebrow" by way too many intellectuals for me to be sure they'll survive. Nobody ever calls Pynchon or DeLillo "middlebrow". Although he's only a film critic, I think Jonathan Rosenbaum remains a brilliant arbiter of culture in general and an intriguing counterpart to the often reactionary Harold Bloom.

[AuntShecky]

Assuming that there will be such a thing as "100 years from now," I wonder if the question should be "Will people still be reading?" Despite the emergence of up-to-the-minute electronic devices posed to make books obsolete and the undeniable popularity of on-line surfing, maybe reading for pleasure will be an esoteric activity enjoyed by a precious few. By way of illustration, the teaching of penmanship, a skill once considered a quality of an educated person, is disappearing from school curricula.

What happened when movies arrived? I hate to burst anyone's treasured bubble, but movies killed Vaudeville. They said television would make movies obsolete. On the other hand, the movie industry are still going strong -- at $10 a ticket! And tv watching is surviving despite -- or maybe because of --the saturation of DVDs, cable, and the Internet.

So maybe books ( in some form) will always be around as well. At least, let's hope so.

[JCamilo]

Aunt, books wont be always around us simple because they werent here for more than 2000 years of literature. Be the air, be the press, be the internet, texts will be there for people to read.

Now, all those names, the thing I guess we can for sure say is that memory is form of forgetfullness. We forget, we remember. Then all those guys today should first give us a break and be in some dark place, where we cannot remember it for while. If they return, then, they may survive for quite awhile.

[kev67]

As for there only being 5-6 major figures per generation I'm not so sure. If we look at the early 20th century, say before World War II, there are certainly more than that. We have Joyce, Faulkner, Woolf, Eliot, Pound, Kafka, Yeats, D.H. Lawrence, Proust, Gertrude Stein, Henry Miller, F. Scott Fitzgerald, and Hemingway, and I'd say every single one of the aforementioned figures is here to stay. As for writers currently living it's hard to say, but I'm sure Pynchon will stand the test time. I'm not too sure about Rushdie. I just can't take a guy who marries the hostess of Top Chef seriously, no matter how literary his work is. Cormac McCarthy might endure. Don DeLillo as well. Ian McEwan, Martin Amis, Philip Roth, Toni Morrison, and even Gabriel Garcia Marquez are seen as being "middlebrow" by way too many intellectuals for me to be sure they'll survive. Nobody ever calls Pynchon or DeLillo "middlebrow". Although he's only a film critic, I think Jonathan Rosenbaum remains a brilliant arbiter of culture in general and an intriguing counterpart to the often reactionary Harold Bloom.


Well Dickens was middlebrow and he still survives.


What happened when movies arrived? I hate to burst anyone's treasured bubble, but movies killed Vaudeville. They said television would make movies obsolete. On the other hand, the movie industry are still going strong -- at $10 a ticket! And tv watching is surviving despite -- or maybe because of --the saturation of DVDs, cable, and the Internet.


Unless civilization breaks down altogether (which it might) then books will survive. Books have already survived radio, cinema, TV and computer games. I think there will always be people who want to read.

[maxphisher]

I'll go ahead and toss Kazuo Ishiguro into the hat...