Position:Home>Books & Authors> Who agrees Philip Roth is the only actual novelist anymore?

Oh for the love of god! What is this recent cult of Roth!? Philip Roth is undoubtedly a fine novelist!. He is, however, far from being the only novelist!. In fact he is no longer even one of the best novelists!. Many people writing today are not only just as talented and skilled, they are far more relevant!. These authors include, indisputably:

Tim O'Brien
Don DeLillo
Bret Easton Ellis
and yes,
Cormac McCarthy and Thomas Pynchon are, at the very least, equals of Roth!.

Plenty of other people are also worthy of mention, and are most certainly real novelists, writing real literature!. For you to assert otherwise indicates nothing more than your own ignorance and the shallowness of your experience!. We all enjoy finding someone about whom we can be enthusiastic, and hero worship is natural, particularly in our youth!. You serve yourself poorly, however, by narrowing your outlook this much!. An open mind is the greatest gift for which a reader can ask!. I suggest you cultivate one for yourself!.

I also suggest that you conserve your energy for that pursuit rather than squandering it on the likes of Meyers!. No one in their right mind is making any attempt to elevate her to the realm of literature, and it is pointless to struggle against the tide of a sweeping fad such as Twilight has proven to be!. Don't waste your time worrying about it, it doesn't matter, it will pass!. Roth doesn't care, why should you!? Www@QuestionHome@Com

---

---

I don't agree with that--at all!. I think there are many great authors out there today!. They are just (sadly) being overshadowed by teen-writers just as Meyer!. But Chuck Palahniuk is still alive, and a brilliant writer, as is Tim O'Brien!.

And I've never read any of Cormac McCarthy's works (though he does have a few books on my 'to read' list), but if he wrote 'No Country for Old Men', then I'm having trouble believing that you would even put him in the same -sentence- as Stephanie Meyer!. That's a bit extreme, isn't it!?Www@QuestionHome@Com

---

---

There are all kinds of novelists!.!.!. a novelist is is someone who writes a novel! To say that many people who work VERY hard on their books are worth nothing!.!.!. THAT is madness! For example Stephanie Meyer writes about love and death and madness: (Bella loves Edward, they fear death in ALL the books, and they go mad)!.!.!. to me it sounds like you think your opinion is the only one that matters!.!.!. and that is wrong! Read more variety, that's all I can say!.!.!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

---

---

That's ridiculous!. I can accept him being your favorite, but there are thousands of American novelists, some of them very fine, and many who write about life and death and love and madness!. Maybe you should read more widely!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

---

---

you forgot about


Richard Ford
John Updike
Mitch Albom
James Lee Burke
Michael Chabon
Joan Didion
Elizabeth Gilbert
Nathan Philbrick
Anne Dillard
Sara Gruen
Richard Risso
Scott Turow
Jan KaronWww@QuestionHome@Com

---

---

First of all, you are confusing your terms a bit!.

A novel is "an extended fictional work in prose!."
A novelist is "one who writes novels!."
An author is "someone who writes for pay!."
Literature is "creative writing of recognized artistic value!."

Therefore, your question is not quite logical!. Anyone who writes and gets paid for his work is an author, anyone who has written a published novel is a novelist!. Literature is something else entirely and quite subjective!.

Your definition of literature is not entirely accurate, either!. Yes, literature is about life in some form!. "He's dead," doesn't make for an engrossing work of literature!. However, there are works of literature that don't specifically deal with death (because of the human condition, death is always present somewhere but not necessarily spotlighted), some include no insanity, some aren't primarily concerned with love (though any time there is a relationship, there is love of one description or another!.!.!.not necessarily romantic love)!. Literature, to me, is a work with timeless appeal, dealing with emotions and situations and conditions with which man of every era, age, nation and religion can identify!. Works of literature generally have more to recommend them than theme and plot; they are beautifully or cleverly written, have great wit or great wisdom or have some other qualities not easily imitated by another!. Obviously, there is much more to it than this, but my point isn't to write a dissertation about literature!. For example, Jane Austen never wrote of madness and seldom touched on death, but any scholar worth anything would consider her books classic works of literature!. If you don't agree, perhaps that tells me you have a certain type of book you like and refuse to see the merit in any other!.

To go back to your question, I don't believe you could possibly have read every single American author who is writing today, so how can you judge so harshly!? When you mention "suspense garbage," do you mean mysteries/thrillers such as those once written by Agatha Christie and Sir Arthur Conan Doyle (both British, of course) or do you grant them the status of having written literature!? Most scholars do!. What they don't do is judge whether a book could be considered literature by whether or not they, personally, enjoy the subject matter!. (Comparing Thomas Pynchon to Cormac McCarthy to John Grisham and to Stephenie Meyer is to compare four totally different authors!. They don't belong in one category!.)

No, Philip Roth is NOT the only author whose works are worth anything today!. I can't give you an entire list, since I haven't read all of them yet!.

I also believe you are being a bit of a literary snob!. I, personally, love a rip-roaring adventure, a fast-paced thriller, or a great mystery when I'm not reading works of literature!Www@QuestionHome@Com

---

---