Great essay and I agree with everything you say. For me, it was Animal Farm and then 1984. Great stories, but also a powerful indictment of communism/authoritarianism.
Nothing irritates me more than going to a literary reading where people were taught to drone because inflection might spoil the text. Or to an MFA class where absolutely no one understands how a basic scene even works.
The funny thing about Ulysses is it seems to be written to troll these very academic types. Meanwhile the best academic writing is also immanently readable — that doesn't necessarily mean simple (as Pinker argues), but clear (as Hart argues).
Right? Sometimes when I'm hanging out in "literary" spaces, I feel like everyone is trolling me. Like I'll go to a reading where nothing being read makes any sense and I'll just be looking around at people like: does anyone else actually know what's going on? Is this supposed to be fun?
I didn't know that Joyce was making fun of academia in Ulysses, that endears the work to me a bit more. Thanks for sharing that tid bit. It's always been the impossible read in my mind. That, and Infinite Jest.
I'm super curious about academic writing you find readable. I want to read those! Can you recommend a few for me?
Most of the time, the atmosphere of pretense and the preservation of a caste is the whole point. It's just book country club, which bores me worse than country clubs. And I hate country clubs and love books.
I don't know that Joyce was, but it has that vibe to me. Or consider Finnegan's Wake. Like literally that book starts with "riverrun, past Eve and Adam’s, from swerve of shore to bend of bay, brings us by a commodius vicus of recirculation back to Howth Castle and Environs."
And it ends: "End here. Us then. Finn, again! Take. Bussoftlhee, mememormee! Till thousendsthee. Lps. The keys to. Given! A way a lone a last a loved a long the"
With things like, "The fall (bababadalgharaghtakamminarronnkonnbronntonner ronntuonnthunntrovarrhounawnskawntoohoohoordenenthurnuk!)" coming after the first line.
So you literally have some obscure Edenic lines and a sentence _broken_ by the entire book, which, when put together, is, "A way a lone a last a loved a long the riverrun, past Eve and Adam’s, from swerve of shore to bend of bay, brings us by a commodius vicus of recirculation back to Howth Castle and Environs."
The book forms a cyclic Eden, which includes a cyclic fall. That forces a kind of incessant rereading and combine with all of the absurd use of language, it seems to me to be nothing more than the book version of Tomb of Horrors for academics:
Infinite Jest is a loving joyful take on addiction recovery. Read it for that, not because everyone else *says* they did. Or should. Or don't read it: follow your bliss and read the classics first.
"Readable" means a lot of different things. At one end of the spectrum, I'd say David Bentley Hart and at the other I'd say something like A Pickpocket's Tale.
Dune was my watership down. Maybe American Gods and Ender's Game too? And the Sandman and Watchmen if comics count. Also maybe Watership Down, but it didn't make me think, I just really enjoyed a story about rabbits.
Good write For me, CS Lewis was that. As a young kid reading Narnia was exciting. Then his other novels captivated me. What’s interesting is matching your style of writing sometimes reflects from who you enjoy reading from.
Noor, I loved this article! I enjoyed Watership Down too, but I read it as an adult, so my mind was already spinning with political ideas, haha. As a child, I unfortunately read Animal Farm, which I believed was a cute animal story …. I was horrified but also engaged. At the time, I didn't consciously think about this, but the story also mirrors that paradox irl: When a group has been oppressed for so long, they may rebel. Which sounds satisfying on the surface, until they go too far and become murderous…
You see that reflected in China's cultural revolution. It's exciting to think about bringing rich people to their knees and elevating the poor… Until you realize this means killing lots of people, including innocent people, in the process. (It just became a political bloodbath.). I'd like to think that while we want justice and equality, we at least don't want rampant killing of people… whether they are rich or not.
Oh another book that was “for adults” that I read as a child, was White Fang. It's about a part dog, part wolf who lives with his mom in the wild at first. His mom is half dog, half wolf, and his dad is pure wolf. White Fang later gets taken by an evil human and trained to become a merciless killer, to get the man money in dog fights. White Fang becomes an unbeatable fighter. Until one day… After White Fang’s defeat, he's later adopted by a kind man. Gradually, he learns a different life. One of kindness, peace, rather than killing and brutality. I feel like the message is explicit enough without me needing to spell it out, haha.
But yeah for stories like The Ulysses, or worse, Finnegans Wake, they remind me of Dadaism, which was also a rebellious, anti-establishment movement. I can get behind the sentiment, but can I really appreciate a urinal as a piece of art? Or a can of literal artist's shit? Ew. I get they were trying to prove a point, but that shit went too far (pun intended).
With literary fiction, I can sympathize with the rebellious and experimental movement, especially as they make us question writing norms. That doesn't mean we have to enjoy it, though! I mean, I love Falkner but also have trouble understanding The Sound and the Fury, even though I enjoyed it but my tastes were peculiar and at times masochistic. But at least his book had this ominous, thrilling story behind it, even if it's hard to figure out without “cheating” by googling the meaning.
Another thing I thought of, is how happy endings are seen as the norm now in 21st century English language literature. But with literary fiction, tragic or ambiguous endings seem to be the norm… Again, the masochistic side of me enjoys it. But normally I'd want to read happier endings. Some are written in exciting ways, like Margaret Atwood's stories (well, she writes sci-fi as well). And The Goldfinch by Donna Tartt was intriguing and for me, enjoyable to read too, though it was depressing and nihilistic (to me). Still, Atwood and Tartt wrote their literary novels in a way that's engaging rather than boring. That sounds like a way to balance the complex and the understandable! Great food for thought, Noor! :)
Thanks for this Sieran, it made me feel like I was back in an English Lit class (in a good way) back in college where we had meaningful critical discussions about the books we were reading. I'm realizing now that I miss that! Maybe this is why people join book clubs in adulthood. I've never been in one, but I think I might benefit from it now.
I love your puns by the way. "That shit went too far." LOLOLOLOL
No problem! Jami Gold and I regularly had discussions like this on her blog, lol. So yeah on some blogs or forums about fiction writing, you can join (or create your own) discussions about books you like in the comments!
interesting… I think this also brings into question why readers want what they want. It’s so important to be both entertaining and educational about the human condition, but why have the masses been more interested in one more than the other? Should we give up on trying to write the next modern day classic, which, I’m sure, were considered entertaining when they were published? Food for thought.
ooo i loved this post. truman capote is my ideal of a “fun” author who is remarkably literary. i posted about this not too long ago–i get why virginia woolf is a master but also i have a literature background, and thats the requirement to enjoy her work. that doesnt appeal to me.
As someone with a literature degree who read Ulysses (and you really, genuinely, have no idea what it is about, based on your description; like you are simply describing a book that doesn't exist) and also reads science fiction, popular fiction, crime novels, and modernist writers, all for pleasure, I have to disagree with you entire premise, even if I can understand why and how you might feel that way. Modernists certainly took themselves very seriously, and the culture of the time encouraged them to, but the USA Trilogy is also dynamic and fun, and Faulkner's prose a gorgeous drawling cadence that inhabits an entire region and way of life. Etc.
For me, one book that had the effect you mention was Clans of the Alphane Moon by Philip K. Dick. Another was Let Us Now Praise Famous Men, by James Agee and Walker Evans, a work of high modernism and glorious tactile pleasure to read. A third was Andre Breton's Nadja and Mad Love (two books but on similar and related themes that are in dialogue with each other). A fourth was Dune, a fifth I Have No Mouth and I Must Scream, by Harlan Ellison, and a sixth Muriel Spark's the Prime of Miss Jean Brodie.
The gatekeepers are in your mind, and the barriers are all internalized. Read. Write. Fuck 'em.
Interesting post! I definitely agree, we are similar in that way. I want to write work that is exciting and thought provoking and i respect your drive to do the same. Although I think there is a level that we must never step down to. Being on substack, reading Ayn Rand for fun already puts us in a category of reader that is uncommon. The world has been tiktok-ified, attention spans are low. Look at the top 100 shelved books on goodreads. The largest demographic of people who DO pick up books are reading smut and YA fantasy that doesn't require a lot of transformation or reflection. Imo it's a losing battle to try to chase the tastes of a culture that is continually degrading. Thanks for the post definitely got me thinking!
There are books that are anointed great literature, but also huge fun to read. I read Catch 22 at school and was blown away. I didn't know literature was allowed to be funny -- and not the way we're told that literature is actually very funny if you really understand the historical context, bla bla bla, but the most uproariously funny book I've ever read. It does all the annoying literary things (it jumps around in time, and God knows if there's a plot), but it's stupidly entertaining. And it has the line that perfectly captures the literary disease: "He knew everything about literature except how to enjoy it."
Great post! It’s been something I’ve been wrestling a lot with as a writer: is my prose readable? Do people care about my characters? By making my writing more accessible am I sacrificing my original voice? But there’re a lot of “hard” books even in the “genre” field. Book of the New Sun is an easy example, which draws more from Borges than “The Dying Earth” which it claims as its influence. Still, the book has a more devout following than any of Sally Rooney’s books which although easier to read, are applauded in literary circles for their politics (which are obvious and discussed in a boring way). Now, I would be remiss if I didn’t encourage you to give Ulysses a go, as it was written outside the mainstream and challenged it.
Great essay and I agree with everything you say. For me, it was Animal Farm and then 1984. Great stories, but also a powerful indictment of communism/authoritarianism.
Thank you FranB! I also love Animal Farm and 1984, excellent examples of really powerful storytelling and also influential.
Nothing irritates me more than going to a literary reading where people were taught to drone because inflection might spoil the text. Or to an MFA class where absolutely no one understands how a basic scene even works.
The funny thing about Ulysses is it seems to be written to troll these very academic types. Meanwhile the best academic writing is also immanently readable — that doesn't necessarily mean simple (as Pinker argues), but clear (as Hart argues).
MFAs are killing literature
Depends on the MFA, but there are many that hurt it.
Right? Sometimes when I'm hanging out in "literary" spaces, I feel like everyone is trolling me. Like I'll go to a reading where nothing being read makes any sense and I'll just be looking around at people like: does anyone else actually know what's going on? Is this supposed to be fun?
I didn't know that Joyce was making fun of academia in Ulysses, that endears the work to me a bit more. Thanks for sharing that tid bit. It's always been the impossible read in my mind. That, and Infinite Jest.
I'm super curious about academic writing you find readable. I want to read those! Can you recommend a few for me?
Most of the time, the atmosphere of pretense and the preservation of a caste is the whole point. It's just book country club, which bores me worse than country clubs. And I hate country clubs and love books.
I don't know that Joyce was, but it has that vibe to me. Or consider Finnegan's Wake. Like literally that book starts with "riverrun, past Eve and Adam’s, from swerve of shore to bend of bay, brings us by a commodius vicus of recirculation back to Howth Castle and Environs."
And it ends: "End here. Us then. Finn, again! Take. Bussoftlhee, mememormee! Till thousendsthee. Lps. The keys to. Given! A way a lone a last a loved a long the"
With things like, "The fall (bababadalgharaghtakamminarronnkonnbronntonner ronntuonnthunntrovarrhounawnskawntoohoohoordenenthurnuk!)" coming after the first line.
So you literally have some obscure Edenic lines and a sentence _broken_ by the entire book, which, when put together, is, "A way a lone a last a loved a long the riverrun, past Eve and Adam’s, from swerve of shore to bend of bay, brings us by a commodius vicus of recirculation back to Howth Castle and Environs."
The book forms a cyclic Eden, which includes a cyclic fall. That forces a kind of incessant rereading and combine with all of the absurd use of language, it seems to me to be nothing more than the book version of Tomb of Horrors for academics:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tomb_of_Horrors
Infinite Jest is a loving joyful take on addiction recovery. Read it for that, not because everyone else *says* they did. Or should. Or don't read it: follow your bliss and read the classics first.
"Readable" means a lot of different things. At one end of the spectrum, I'd say David Bentley Hart and at the other I'd say something like A Pickpocket's Tale.
LOL “book country club” that is perfect.
True? True.
Dune was my watership down. Maybe American Gods and Ender's Game too? And the Sandman and Watchmen if comics count. Also maybe Watership Down, but it didn't make me think, I just really enjoyed a story about rabbits.
I have a book called the secret life of rabbits, it's basically the reality version of Watership Down
This reminds me of the quote from Einstein: “If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough.”
Good write For me, CS Lewis was that. As a young kid reading Narnia was exciting. Then his other novels captivated me. What’s interesting is matching your style of writing sometimes reflects from who you enjoy reading from.
Noor, I loved this article! I enjoyed Watership Down too, but I read it as an adult, so my mind was already spinning with political ideas, haha. As a child, I unfortunately read Animal Farm, which I believed was a cute animal story …. I was horrified but also engaged. At the time, I didn't consciously think about this, but the story also mirrors that paradox irl: When a group has been oppressed for so long, they may rebel. Which sounds satisfying on the surface, until they go too far and become murderous…
You see that reflected in China's cultural revolution. It's exciting to think about bringing rich people to their knees and elevating the poor… Until you realize this means killing lots of people, including innocent people, in the process. (It just became a political bloodbath.). I'd like to think that while we want justice and equality, we at least don't want rampant killing of people… whether they are rich or not.
Oh another book that was “for adults” that I read as a child, was White Fang. It's about a part dog, part wolf who lives with his mom in the wild at first. His mom is half dog, half wolf, and his dad is pure wolf. White Fang later gets taken by an evil human and trained to become a merciless killer, to get the man money in dog fights. White Fang becomes an unbeatable fighter. Until one day… After White Fang’s defeat, he's later adopted by a kind man. Gradually, he learns a different life. One of kindness, peace, rather than killing and brutality. I feel like the message is explicit enough without me needing to spell it out, haha.
But yeah for stories like The Ulysses, or worse, Finnegans Wake, they remind me of Dadaism, which was also a rebellious, anti-establishment movement. I can get behind the sentiment, but can I really appreciate a urinal as a piece of art? Or a can of literal artist's shit? Ew. I get they were trying to prove a point, but that shit went too far (pun intended).
With literary fiction, I can sympathize with the rebellious and experimental movement, especially as they make us question writing norms. That doesn't mean we have to enjoy it, though! I mean, I love Falkner but also have trouble understanding The Sound and the Fury, even though I enjoyed it but my tastes were peculiar and at times masochistic. But at least his book had this ominous, thrilling story behind it, even if it's hard to figure out without “cheating” by googling the meaning.
Another thing I thought of, is how happy endings are seen as the norm now in 21st century English language literature. But with literary fiction, tragic or ambiguous endings seem to be the norm… Again, the masochistic side of me enjoys it. But normally I'd want to read happier endings. Some are written in exciting ways, like Margaret Atwood's stories (well, she writes sci-fi as well). And The Goldfinch by Donna Tartt was intriguing and for me, enjoyable to read too, though it was depressing and nihilistic (to me). Still, Atwood and Tartt wrote their literary novels in a way that's engaging rather than boring. That sounds like a way to balance the complex and the understandable! Great food for thought, Noor! :)
Thanks for this Sieran, it made me feel like I was back in an English Lit class (in a good way) back in college where we had meaningful critical discussions about the books we were reading. I'm realizing now that I miss that! Maybe this is why people join book clubs in adulthood. I've never been in one, but I think I might benefit from it now.
I love your puns by the way. "That shit went too far." LOLOLOLOL
No problem! Jami Gold and I regularly had discussions like this on her blog, lol. So yeah on some blogs or forums about fiction writing, you can join (or create your own) discussions about books you like in the comments!
Superb writing. I appreciate it very much. I learnt a lot. Thank you
interesting… I think this also brings into question why readers want what they want. It’s so important to be both entertaining and educational about the human condition, but why have the masses been more interested in one more than the other? Should we give up on trying to write the next modern day classic, which, I’m sure, were considered entertaining when they were published? Food for thought.
ooo i loved this post. truman capote is my ideal of a “fun” author who is remarkably literary. i posted about this not too long ago–i get why virginia woolf is a master but also i have a literature background, and thats the requirement to enjoy her work. that doesnt appeal to me.
I loved this!
Animal Farm… it was super fun! And short.. it tells its story in less than 100 pages! That’s amazing literature for me.
As someone with a literature degree who read Ulysses (and you really, genuinely, have no idea what it is about, based on your description; like you are simply describing a book that doesn't exist) and also reads science fiction, popular fiction, crime novels, and modernist writers, all for pleasure, I have to disagree with you entire premise, even if I can understand why and how you might feel that way. Modernists certainly took themselves very seriously, and the culture of the time encouraged them to, but the USA Trilogy is also dynamic and fun, and Faulkner's prose a gorgeous drawling cadence that inhabits an entire region and way of life. Etc.
For me, one book that had the effect you mention was Clans of the Alphane Moon by Philip K. Dick. Another was Let Us Now Praise Famous Men, by James Agee and Walker Evans, a work of high modernism and glorious tactile pleasure to read. A third was Andre Breton's Nadja and Mad Love (two books but on similar and related themes that are in dialogue with each other). A fourth was Dune, a fifth I Have No Mouth and I Must Scream, by Harlan Ellison, and a sixth Muriel Spark's the Prime of Miss Jean Brodie.
The gatekeepers are in your mind, and the barriers are all internalized. Read. Write. Fuck 'em.
Interesting post! I definitely agree, we are similar in that way. I want to write work that is exciting and thought provoking and i respect your drive to do the same. Although I think there is a level that we must never step down to. Being on substack, reading Ayn Rand for fun already puts us in a category of reader that is uncommon. The world has been tiktok-ified, attention spans are low. Look at the top 100 shelved books on goodreads. The largest demographic of people who DO pick up books are reading smut and YA fantasy that doesn't require a lot of transformation or reflection. Imo it's a losing battle to try to chase the tastes of a culture that is continually degrading. Thanks for the post definitely got me thinking!
There are books that are anointed great literature, but also huge fun to read. I read Catch 22 at school and was blown away. I didn't know literature was allowed to be funny -- and not the way we're told that literature is actually very funny if you really understand the historical context, bla bla bla, but the most uproariously funny book I've ever read. It does all the annoying literary things (it jumps around in time, and God knows if there's a plot), but it's stupidly entertaining. And it has the line that perfectly captures the literary disease: "He knew everything about literature except how to enjoy it."
Great post! It’s been something I’ve been wrestling a lot with as a writer: is my prose readable? Do people care about my characters? By making my writing more accessible am I sacrificing my original voice? But there’re a lot of “hard” books even in the “genre” field. Book of the New Sun is an easy example, which draws more from Borges than “The Dying Earth” which it claims as its influence. Still, the book has a more devout following than any of Sally Rooney’s books which although easier to read, are applauded in literary circles for their politics (which are obvious and discussed in a boring way). Now, I would be remiss if I didn’t encourage you to give Ulysses a go, as it was written outside the mainstream and challenged it.