Heathcliff seems like Rochester 2.0.

Um, well, the rest of the book will cure you of that impression.

I actually have one shelf of novels on my bookshelf arranged by books I read mostly for the language at one end, books I read mostly for the plot at the other, and the 40 or so books in between arranged by where they fall on that spectrum. (Other shelves are arranged in similarly odd fashions, but it makes sense to my brain. No one else can find anything without searching every shelf, but I know exactly where everything is.) Whenever I've tried explaining that system to anyone, they'll look at that shelf, and just about everybody will contest my placement of at least a few books -- some where I thought the language was paramount, someone else thinks of first as a great adventure story; some that I read almost solely for the plot, someone else will be totally puzzled as to why I didn't notice how intoxicating the language is. So, using that as a definition of "literary fiction" seems somewhat subjective. (Which, I suppose, any attempt to categorize books beyond "these are books" will be.)

Hil, that is such a cool way to shelve books. You are teh awesome.

Whereas my shelving is more like "Oh look! There's an available surface over there!"

Hmmm. Use of language will turn me off a book, and books that don't seem to go anywhere can be redeemed through the use of language. I can seperate it from plot, but not character. What I mean is I'm not sure I mind if nothing "happens" but someone paints a beautiful picture for me with the words. But, I wonder if that means that if there is a character and the language is well used- that character is necessarily also painted beautifully.

Okay, that settles it. I'm rereading Wuthering Heights this weekend.

And if the emphasis *is* on language over character, that really seems -- to me -- to be the authorial equivalent of masturbation. This is simply *my* opinion, and I have known to be totally crack-headed, but I think in any work of fiction, character is paramount. They drive the plot, make the writing compelling.

I value worldbuilding far more than character. I'm sure that's related to the fact that I read mostly sci-fi, but if I don't believe in the book's universe, I'm not going to be reading anything else by that author. Much of the best worldbuilding also contains incredibly compelling characters -- Lois Bujold and James Alan Gardner are both fantastic character writers -- but Alastair Reynolds, who is easily my favorite working sci-fi author today, is less about individual characters and more about the big political/technological picture. (I just recently reread Red Mars, and was left with the same impression -- the characters are believable and well-drawn, but they're not in charge.)

Pleeeeiiii! Okay, I haven't actually read any Sean Stewart books, but he was the head writer of the A.I. web game, so technically I know what a great writer he is. Also, he knows my name. Well, he's probably forgotten it by now, but he addressed me by name in the post-endgame chat, and it surprised the hell out of me. Apparently, people take note of people named "Polter-Cow."

That is so. freaking. cool.

I adore his writing. Have since Passion Play came out. At his best, he's simply amazing.

I also think in fifty years it will be clearer what in Chabon and Stevenson are about our time instead of the past they ostensibly cover (I say this as an article of faith; I haven't read either).

You should read K&C. If I were putting together a class, I'd assign that and Comic Book Nation for the same week.

But I'll say: Margaret Atwood (I'd opt for Cat's Eye but I haven't read Surfacng)

I tend to put Surfacing in because of the way it deals with gender and identity. In some respects, I feel it is the most "Canadian" of her novels, which is to say, I recognize within its pages a lot of the various tensions and resentments towards los Estados Unidos that I see in my family.

Amazon keeps recommending Siddhartha to me. Which I think is a fair call (I've read it before), but I believe they have reached it by a misleading route (it's based on a book I bought someone else).

Amazon's recommendations for me are almost always wonky because of gift-buying. You'd think they could factor things like "purchased off someone else's wish list" or "shipped to an entirely different name and address" into their algorithm. Not that I really care, because I don't go to their site expecting to get ideas for what to read next, but as a former Marketing major, I'm puzzled that they don't think it worth their while to refine the system.

The only Amazon recs that ever make sense to me are the ones for things I already own. The others all tend to be recommendations for bestsellers. ("Customers who purchased Farscape, Season 4, Volume 5 also purchased The Da Vinci Code.")

PLEI -- I insent to your profile addy last night.

I value worldbuilding far more than character. I'm sure that's related to the fact that I read mostly sci-fi, but if I don't believe in the book's universe, I'm not going to be reading anything else by that author.

I totally understand this with sci-fi and fantasy -- I'm sure if I read much in those genres, worldbuilding would be key also. Well, like Harry Potter. I *so* totally believe in Platform 9 3/4, for instance.

I can't believe there's no one in here to squee with me over the antique KSM. 1893 people!!! I should try to scan it so y'all can see it.