I don't think occasionally including women and/or POC on their "Capital L" literature lists counterbalances the domination of Straight White Dude angst.
Literary Buffistas 3: Don't Parse the Blurb, Dear.
There's more to life than watching Buffy the Vampire Slayer! No. Really, there is! Honestly! Here's a place for Buffistas to come and discuss what it is they're reading, their favorite authors and poets. "Geez. Crack a book sometime."
Although, for what it's worth, I remember Barnes & Noble as having both "fiction" and "literature" sections, in addition to all of the ones in that sentence you quoted (and more).
I don't think occasionally including women and/or POC on their "Capital L" literature lists counterbalances the domination of Straight White Dude angst.
Right. Including Toni Morrison is textbook exceptionalism, not a redefining of capital-L "Literature."
It's mostly Straight White Dude Angst, but the line for me usually falls between Books They Will Give Nobels and Bookers To, and Books They Won't.
Right. Including Toni Morrison is textbook exceptionalism, not a redefining of capital-L "Literature."
I was surprised to see more POC than expected when I looked at the list of all Nobel Prizes in Literature. I thought Toni Morrison was, like, the only one ever, which is why David called her out, but there are several.
It's mostly Straight White Dude Angst, but the line for me usually falls between Books They Will Give Nobels and Bookers To
Except the Booker is more apt to be non white guys than the Nobels (probably because it is for the book not the author's body of work). Hence a historical fiction turning Thomas Cromwell into an amazingly page-turning bromance is a Booker winner. Twice.
I think the Capital-L literature is more about un-fun character studies as opposed to fiction which is about engaging plots. It's like oatmeal books vs. cheeseburger books.
I missed that Doris Lessing died yesterday: [link]
I don't disagree with the author's points about Twilight, but I think she completely misses the mark when it comes to Katniss Everdeen. And as much as I love Little Women (and I still do), her ideas about Jo March really don't seem to consider that Jo is a trailblazer only within a very limited framework.
Grumble grumble.
Katniss didn't transcend? That's an odd stance to take. I think there's a lot she didn't do that you might ask out of a hero's journey, but she transcended okay for me.
Mockingjay's ending is problematic from a character development perspective though. In terms of the author's thesis - that Katniss did not have dreams that transcended her current circumstance, I probably would not agree with that. Initially, she wanted to survive and ensure the safety of her sister. After that, I think she was trying to protect her sister and Gale and Peeta and then eventually the whole government/oppression became her enemy .