Easy Literature

[cacian]

What do you classify as 'easy' literature?
what books would classify as easy read?
easy listening comes to mind.

[YesNo]

Something is easy if I understand it immediately and can go on to enjoying it. If I have to make sense out of it prior to enjoying it, then I look at is as hard. It would apply to anything.

[cacian]

Something is easy if I understand it immediately and can go on to enjoying it. If I have to make sense out of it prior to enjoying it, then I look at is as hard. It would apply to anything.

hi YesNo do you have a book in mind that you would qualify as easy read?

[mal4mac]

Easy listening music is popular music that is tuneful and undemanding, so 'easy literature' doesn't exist. It's all demanding!

[cacian]

Easy listening music is popular music that is tuneful and undemanding, so 'easy literature' doesn't exist. It's all demanding!

would you say Mozart music is demanding and complicated?
also is literature meant for thinking or for easy reading?

[luhsun]

Foundation saga

[Mohammad Ahmad]

Easy literature as I know, is the introduction to literature, everyone can write in easy style.
let me say; perhaps you had confusion between easy and essay in literature which also it means trying ...
Yes it is essay in literature i.e. the introduction, the first attempts of a person in literature
Writers differ from one to another, for example some of them tend to the tradition others tend to print their personal impression, thus it is something of personality.
Thank you for the conversation...

[JBI]

A Shropshire Lad - Housman. Simple, not simplistic - deep, yet accessible. Expansive yet welcoming.
Ruan Ji - Song's from the Heart (yonghuai poems) - basically the closest we can come to symbolism in the pre-medieval world. Pure lyric almost.

[cacian]

Foundation saga

what is that?

[cacian]

Easy literature as I know, is the introduction to literature, everyone can write in easy style.
let me say; perhaps you had confusion between easy and essay in literature which also it means trying ...
Yes it is essay in literature i.e. the introduction, the first attempts of a person in literature
Writers differ from one to another, for example some of them tend to the tradition others tend to print their personal impression, thus it is something of personality.
Thank you for the conversation...
do you think that writing is easy because literature is?

[cacian]

A Shropshire Lad - Housman. Simple, not simplistic - deep, yet accessible. Expansive yet welcoming.
Ruan Ji - Song's from the Heart (yonghuai poems) - basically the closest we can come to symbolism in the pre-medieval world. Pure lyric almost.

are those the foundation of quick and concise literature?

[Whosis]

Easy listening is music for anybody, but easy literature can be children's literature, like Dr. Seuss and Shel Silverstein. Books that don't use complicated words and are for beginners like Boxcar Children I would consider easy literature. Some adult literature may fall into this category, like Ernest Hemingway.

[JBI]

are those the foundation of quick and concise literature?

Literature isn't ever quick, though concise yes. They are poems, however, that linger after you read, which for me is pretty much the big criterion for good verse. If poetics, especially lyric works, can keep me thinking and feeling them throughout the day - that is, can totally rework my mood to the point that I have a clear change in feelings - that to me is the ultimate verse. Now, some poets can do that to the uninitiated more easily. I feel though that the strength of the verse lies more in its expansiveness.

Think of it like good quality tea; the taste remains in the mouth after the beverage is already consumed.

Now, for being concise, Chinese verse generally ranges from 20 syllables to 56 syllables (compared to 140-154 in the English sonnet). That, however, does not make the verse more "quick", or "easy". Generally such terms deal with the inviting nature of the poetry itself.

Someone like Hardy, for instance, is not a welcoming poet. He withdraws, and recoils from you, he backs away, and turns around. Someone like Tennyson in In Memorium is welcoming though.

[cacian]

Literature isn't ever quick, though concise yes. They are poems, however, that linger after you read, which for me is pretty much the big criterion for good verse. If poetics, especially lyric works, can keep me thinking and feeling them throughout the day - that is, can totally rework my mood to the point that I have a clear change in feelings - that to me is the ultimate verse. Now, some poets can do that to the uninitiated more easily. I feel though that the strength of the verse lies more in its expansiveness.

Think of it like good quality tea; the taste remains in the mouth after the beverage is already consumed.

Now, for being concise, Chinese verse generally ranges from 20 syllables to 56 syllables (compared to 140-154 in the English sonnet). That, however, does not make the verse more "quick", or "easy". Generally such terms deal with the inviting nature of the poetry itself.

Someone like Hardy, for instance, is not a welcoming poet. He withdraws, and recoils from you, he backs away, and turns around. Someone like Tennyson in In Memorium is welcoming though.

you have read the whole of Memoriam?!!
I mean the style is rather corny in the sense that it comes as the bible reading itself but not at the same time.

[cacian]

Easy listening is music for anybody, but easy literature can be children's literature, like Dr. Seuss and Shel Silverstein. Books that don't use complicated words and are for beginners like Boxcar Children I would consider easy literature. Some adult literature may fall into this category, like Ernest Hemingway.

interesting because I would have thought children's literature the most difficult to write.
Hemingway however never assumed easy. what makes you think that?

[Mohammad Ahmad]

do you think that writing is easy because literature is?

Of course, no, but easy literature what should it be?
Literature is most difficult text between all others texts; the scientific text, the legal text and so on>
Just I thought that you are confused between easy and essay. Is it?

[cacian]

Of course, no, but easy literature what should it be?
Literature is most difficult text between all others texts; the scientific text, the legal text and so on>
Just I thought that you are confused between easy and essay. Is it?

Hi Mohammad not I am not confused. it is easy that I meant.
I was wondering what made literature difficult and other times easy.
the reason I ask is that reading is related to writing. the more obscure the read the less inclination we are to write.

[PeterL]

I could have answered this question quite easily in the past, but I have found that even detective stories sometimes have layers of knowledge in them, But I would say that certain sub-genres are easier to read, because there is not as much hidden within them. I think that crime fiction in general is fairly easy, but some is very difficult, and romance novels are by their nature easy, but again there can be more layered into the basics; although the publishers prefer romances purely by the specifications.

[cacian]

I could have answered this question quite easily in the past, but I have found that even detective stories sometimes have layers of knowledge in them, But I would say that certain sub-genres are easier to read, because there is not as much hidden within them. I think that crime fiction in general is fairly easy, but some is very difficult, and romance novels are by their nature easy, but again there can be more layered into the basics; although the publishers prefer romances purely by the specifications.

are you suggesting one writes according to the publisher?

[sandy14]

J G Ballard is "easy" literature. He has this way with sentences that do so much, yet the text is so clear and easy to read. His writing is not dense at all, but contains wonderful ideas. I would imaging writing like that would take a lot of effort.

I'd suggest Ian Fleming in this camp as well.

[sandy14]

are you suggesting one writes according to the publisher?

Iain Sinclair has said that he has done so. The publisher wanted more of his psychogeography type stuff as it was selling well and kept on sending back stuff he'd written with a narrative.

Iain said he'd written some narrative work, but the publishers didn't want it.

[PeterL]

are you suggesting one writes according to the publisher?

No, I am suggesting that publishers publish what they want to publish. Publishers are looking for certain characteristics in literature that they think will maximize sales, and they usually can find the sorts of things that they want.

That comment was in regard to romances, but publishers in general publish what they want, and publishers want things that sell.

[cacian]

No, I am suggesting that publishers publish what they want to publish. Publishers are looking for certain characteristics in literature that they think will maximize sales, and they usually can find the sorts of things that they want.

That comment was in regard to romances, but publishers in general publish what they want, and publishers want things that sell.

well that is saying the publisher dictates what the writer is to put on paper.
it is kind of cliché to think one is able to write the way they wanted. this makes writing rather predictable.

[cacian]

are you suggesting one writes according to the publisher?

Iain Sinclair has said that he has done so. The publisher wanted more of his psychogeography type stuff as it was selling well and kept on sending back stuff he'd written with a narrative.

Iain said he'd written some narrative work, but the publishers didn't want it.

I wonder why. the publisher is not the public. in fact the public buys what is given to them.

[PeterL]

well that is saying the publisher dictates what the writer is to put on paper.
it is kind of cliché to think one is able to write the way they wanted. this makes writing rather predictable.

One may write whatever one wishes to write, but the publishers will publish whatever they want to publish. Readers can read what ever they want to read, as long as it has been published. Everyone has the freedom to do what he wishes.

What I wrote about there being specifications for romances refers only to that sub-genre; other types of fiction are treated differently. but publishers do publish what they want and that's all. Publishers have statistics and prejudices that tell them what sells, so they publish those things, even though 90% of books published are losers.

[cacian]

One may write whatever one wishes to write, but the publishers will publish whatever they want to publish. Readers can read what ever they want to read, as long as it has been published. Everyone has the freedom to do what he wishes.

What I wrote about there being specifications for romances refers only to that sub-genre; other types of fiction are treated differently. but publishers do publish what they want and that's all. Publishers have statistics and prejudices that tell them what sells, so they publish those things, even though 90% of books published are losers.

Ok let's consider Fifty Shades of Grey I would imagine the publisher strictly put on a wish list of what would be contained in a book and the writer obliged.
and the book is out.
the publisher wants to make money and so tells one what to put on a book and so the writer does. it is easy that way and Fifty Shades of Grey is born.
the publisher is the upper hand and the money is dispensed.
such is literature today.

[PeterL]

Ok let's consider Fifty Shades of Grey I would imagine the publisher strictly put on a wish list of what would be contained in a book and the writer obliged.
and the book is out.
the publisher wants to make money and so tells one what to put on a book and so the writer does. it is easy that way and Fifty Shades of Grey is born.
the publisher is the upper hand and the money is dispensed.
such is literature today.

I am not sure if that would fit the mold of a "romantic novel he specifications for a romantic are general with certain details; they include the types of characters and the general flow of the plot. The goal of all of those is the male and female main characters to become sexually involved. The length is within a certain range, but the author has plenty of latitude with respect to the characters, as long as they end up with each other by a suitable point in the book. There can be, and should be, subplots, and there should be other characters. The writers who write such things write many of them, and they are all the same, so there is no wish list, nor do publishers call authors and request; the authors are constantly sending things in. These specifications are only for "romantic novels". Most novels are written as the author wishes, and the author then begs publishers to see how wonderful it is.

Harlequin guidelines. click on a particular type for moew details.
http://www.harlequin.com/articlepage.html?articleId=538&chapter=0

[sandy14]

I wonder why. the publisher is not the public. in fact the public buys what is given to them.


The publisher had the sales figures and their readers were asking for more stuff "like this". Iain Sinclair's stuff was eruditely written and fairly unique - so the publishers gave the public what it wanted. Iain explained that he sent stuff in with narrative and the editor sent it back, saying no, we want more stuff like this so Iain wrote it for them.

Thing is folk seemed to think he'd abandoned narrative writing, when he hadn't. It was just that his narrative stuff wasn't getting published.

[cacian]

The publisher had the sales figures and their readers were asking for more stuff "like this". Iain Sinclair's stuff was eruditely written and fairly unique - so the publishers gave the public what it wanted. Iain explained that he sent stuff in with narrative and the editor sent it back, saying no, we want more stuff like this so Iain wrote it for them.

Thing is folk seemed to think he'd abandoned narrative writing, when he hadn't. It was just that his narrative stuff wasn't getting published.

have you ever as a reader proclaimed for certain books? have you ever been involved in asking for certain books?
the proof is in the pudding??

[Emil Miller]

Publishers have statistics and prejudices that tell them what sells, so they publish those things, even though 90% of books published are losers.

I doubt that 90% of published works are losers; if that were so, publishers would go to the wall. Cheap romantic novels are the bread and butter of publishing, as their proliferation indicates. It also shows why publishers are suspicious of writing that doesn't automatically conform to other easy-to-read formats; thereby highlighting why so many currently acknowledged great novels were consistently rejected before some, often small and literary, publisher's took them on. It should be remembered that publishers have for many years not been the primay recipient of mss submitted by writers, because they rely on agents to sort out the ( profitable ) wheat from the chaff, and getting anythig worthwhile accepted by an agent is virtually impossible without a personal connection.

[cacian]

Emil how do you qualify your literature to be?
easy difficult or in between?

[Emil Miller]

Emil how do you qualify your literature to be?
easy difficult or in between?

A good question. As you may have noticed, my postings on this forum vary from the serious to those that attempt to amuse.
Writers of adult novels usually get inspiration from their own experience and, as life has its amusing instances as well as its
more sombre moments, I find that novels that are entirely negative are not a true reflection of life, even though they may
be otherwise well written. So, as with my musings on the forum, the three novels I have written contain comedic elements
to a greater or lesser degree according to the seriousness of the subject matter.
In answer to your question, I like to think that my writing falls within the easy to in between categories.

[PeterL]

I doubt that 90% of published works are losers; if that were so, publishers would go to the wall. Cheap romantic novels are the bread and butter of publishing, as their proliferation indicates. It also shows why publishers are suspicious of writing that doesn't automatically conform to other easy-to-read formats; thereby highlighting why so many currently acknowledged great novels were consistently rejected before some, often small and literary, publisher's took them on. It should be remembered that publishers have for many years not been the primay recipient of mss submitted by writers, because they rely on agents to sort out the ( profitable ) wheat from the chaff, and getting anythig worthwhile accepted by an agent is virtually impossible without a personal connection.


The exact percent that lose money varies from year to year, and there are some types that almost always make money, but the overall percent of books that make money is consistently below 25%, and it has been below 10% i some years. If I run into the details, then I will post it. Publishers regularly go belly up. The cost to enter the business are relatively low, but it isn't a get rich quick scheme.

[PeterL]

A good question. As you may have noticed, my postings on this forum vary from the serious to those that attempt to amuse.
Writers of adult novels usually get inspiration from their own experience and, as life has its amusing instances as well as its
more sombre moments, I find that novels that are entirely negative are not a true reflection of life, even though they may
be otherwise well written. So, as with my musings on the forum, the three novels I have written contain comedic elements
to a greater or lesser degree according to the seriousness of the subject matter.
In answer to your question, I like to think that my writing falls within the easy to in between categories.

I just thought of this again, so I did a little search and found the relevant information. Click on this link http://www.ibisworld.com/industry/default.aspx?indid=1233 The headkine numbers tell the story: sales $29 bn and profit X.X %. Publishers don't make any profit from publishing books.

see also:
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Is_publishing_a_book_profitable?#slide=1
http://thefutureofpublishing.com/industries/the-future-of-book-publishing/

[Whosis]

I consider Hemingway easy because he writes in short simple sentences with little difficult vocabulary (there is some) and a lot of dialogue, which tends to be short.

[RobbyA]

I find Dickens really easy and enjoyable to read. I think you can read classic literature on different levels - 1) purely for the story and 2) reading between the lines and digging into hidden meanings/metaphors/allegories etc.

[missylovalova]

I reckon it depends entirely on the reader...

During my pre-teens, fairytales and fantasy fiction meant a lot less to me than they mean now. A big reason for that is the more I've learnt, the more those 'easy' books have disclosed new secrets.

Then there's interpretive fallacies. For example when you associate with a certain theory of reading, i.e. marxist, you will naturally trace that line of thought with lesser difficulty than say a feminist.

Finally, it depends what you're reading for... you won't be in interpretive mode if you're reading for pleasure, so anything will be a lot easier to read (except Finnegan's Wake.. anything but Finnegan's Wake!). If you're reading for an essay or research... you will fall into mode 2 where even a seemingly uncomplicated book will necessarily be scrutinized.

[Whosis]

Dickens, huh? That's surprising. He tends to write long sentences, so it seems to get lost in the process and have to start back at the beginning.

[Vota]

It's difficult to quantify literature because some seemingly simple works can actually be far more complex than your first encounter with it would indicate. It really depends on your education, life experiences, and past readings. A good example is Gullivers Travels. The basic story is simple to follow, but what is being said and what is being communicated between the lines is substantially more complex than it initially appears. These are the types of books that can grow with you as you grow. Hemingway is an author that tends to communicate with easy to understand words, but says a lot without spelling it all out for you.

[cacian]

Dickens, huh? That's surprising. He tends to write long sentences, so it seems to get lost in the process and have to start back at the beginning.

that is exactly what I thought.