[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 51 KB, 750x600, 1271850003716.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1674316 No.1674316 [Reply] [Original]

/lit/,

Has a chart for essential 2000s literature ever been made?

If yes, could someone please post it?

If no, can we start working on one now, instead of arguing over tripfags and the zine? I know creating a chart requires a lot of collective effort and usually takes at least a couple of days, but I think it would be worth a try.

I suggest doing an English-language fiction one for a start. From House of Leaves to Freedom, what do you say?

>> No.1674321

Why would we limit it to English language fiction?

I would think since the chart is not even going to span a decade, it should include non-English works too.

>> No.1674332

im trying my hardest to think but from > 00 i think ive only read Twilight which was ok.

>> No.1674334

>>1674321
I suggested English-only for a start simply because otherwise it would be a huge-ass chart. The last decade has seen a great number of valuable works. But of course we could just start posting our suggestions and see what happens.

>> No.1674341

infinite jest

>> No.1674353

>>1674341
Thank you for your contribution. However, I would like to inform you that the book you have named was published in 1996.

>> No.1674356

>>1674353
Why don't you start listing some then, OP?

>> No.1674369

>>1674356
I will. I was trying to come up with a more 'systematic' list but I think I'll just start posting authors off the top of my head. It will take some time to remember all the good stuff I've read that's been written in the 2000s.

>> No.1674373

Everything is Illuminated
After Dark
Kafka on the Shore
Curious Incident of the Dog in Night Time
Jonathan Strange and Mr Norell
Atonement
The Road
Never Let Me Go
Life of Pi
Cloud Atlas
Oryx and Crake
The Yiddish Policemen's Union
White Teeth
The Brief and Wonderous Life of Oscar Wao
The Namesake

etc, etc.

>> No.1674382

So, I'll start with the 2 authors I've mentioned:

Mark Z. Danielewski - House of Leaves (2000)

Jonathan Franzen - The Corrections (2001); Freedom (2010)

I'd fight for the inclusion of The Corrections; not so much for Freedom. Still, while it may not be as well-written as The Corrections and somewhat derivative, maybe it deserves recognition.

>> No.1674400

Out - Natsuo Kirino

>> No.1674401

>>1674373
Thanks for this. I was about to mention Zadie Smith; I'd definitely include On Beauty (2005) too.

Since you mentioned Atwood -- I immediately thought back to The Penelopiad, which brought me to the Canongate Myth Series (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canongate_Myth_Series).). I wonder which other books from the series /lit/ finds valuable.

>> No.1674443

Everyman
Baudolino
The Mysterious Flame of Queen Loana
Against the Day
My Name is Red
The Brooklyn Follies
Going Postal
Night Watch
Balzac and the Little Chinese Seamstress
2666
The Savage Detectives
Let the Right One In
The Housekeeper and the Professor
The Feast of the Goat
The Raw Shark Texts

>> No.1674451

This just means I have to work harder.

>> No.1674461

Some random names/titles:

Kiran Desai - The Inheritance of Loss 2006
Fay Weldon - Auto Da Fay 2002 (technically an autobiography, so it might not qualify but I really liked it)
Philip Roth - The Dying Animal 2001
Jonathan Foer - Everything is Illuminated 2002
Karen Russell - St. Lucy's Home for Girls Raised by Wolves (might not be 'essential' but I was greatly impressed when I read it; looking forward to Swamplandia!)
Anthony Doerr - The Shell Collector 2002 (as with Russell - not a big name but really good)
J.M.Coetzee - Elizabeth Costello 2003

>> No.1674467

Thanks to everyone who contributed so far. Could I suggest writing names and dates along with titles to make life easier? Some personal comments/justifications would be welcome, too :)

>> No.1674479
File: 37 KB, 423x436, dsfdsf.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1674479

This is my opinion...

The Time-Traveller's Wife
Under The Dome
The Feast of the Goat
House of Leaves
Ender's Shadow
Shadow of the Giant
Shadow of the Hegemon
The Delivery Man
2666
Last Evenings on Earth
Freedom
The Corrections
Oryx and Crake
The Year of the Flood
The Robber Bride
Song of Susannah
The Brief Wondrous Life of Oscar Wao
Jonathan Strange and Mr Norrell
Kafka on the Shore

Like I said, all just my opinion. Some are good, some very good, some great.

>> No.1674485

I'm noticing some common books emerging.

>> No.1674511

>>1674479
Thanks! If we're going to include non-English-language authors up there too, then I'd definitely argue for at least one of two other books by Llosa, The Bad Girl (2006) and The Way to Paradise (2003). I realize neither of them are Aunt Julia and the Scriptwriter and the former has been criticized for being banal or unoriginal but I do like both a lot.

>> No.1674534

Some names for possible discussion:

Judy Budnitz
Gary Shteyngart
ZZ Packer
Uzodinma Iweala

I haven't read any of their novels yet and am looking forward to your opinions and suggestions. Frankly speaking, I started this thread -- among other reasons -- out of need to hear about good or influential books that I have missed.

>> No.1674601
File: 43 KB, 640x480, 1272653195885.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1674601

Bump. Need to leave you guys now. Hope this stays until tomorrow.

>> No.1674623

bump for discussion of literature

>> No.1674631

>>1674511

Can you tell me more about them? I'll consider adding them to my books to read for this year.

>> No.1674701

on beauty is awesome

also, amazing adventures of kavalier and clay, a visit from the goon squad by jennifer egan, I hotel by karen tei yamashita

>> No.1674702

>Brooklyn Follies
Uh....no
>Balzac and the Little Chinese Seamstress
cute book, but no.
>Let the Right One In
No
>Under The Dome
No stephen king
>House of Leaves
No Danielewski
>Ender's Shadow
No Card parallax shit.
>Shteyngart
Huge no from me personally. But, I have to admit that there could be an argument for him as an essential '00s writer... My vote is no.
>Bolano
My vote is no, again, but I don't know the body of work well enough to say if Savage Detective or 2666 are essentials.

Lorrie Moore - A Gate at the Stairs?
For some reason, that book really felt to me like it summed up the '00s...

Jonathan Franzen=yes. Personally I thought Freedom>Corrections.

If we're just talking about authors who came out in the 00s, then
David Mitchell: Cloud Atlas, Black Swan Green, number9dream
Foer=Everything is Illuminated, yes.

More to come...

>> No.1674712

the kite runner

>> No.1674717

>>1674479
Half of these books are fucking awful. Christ.

>> No.1674736

>>1674717
ah, the collaborative spirit

I am particularly interested in non-English recs for the 2000s cos tbh I have been completely shitting my drawers when it comes to keeping up with that shit

>> No.1674755

Fuck you all, I say 'Name of the Wind'

>> No.1674775

A Song of Ice and Fire, fucking obviously

>> No.1675606

Cloud Atlas +1000000

>> No.1675986

Bel Canto by Ann Patchett

>> No.1675992

>>1674321
>Why would we limit it to English language fiction?

...because most people on this board only read English?

Why ask stupid questions you already know the answers to?

>> No.1675996

Can it include the 90s?
Infinite Jest should be on this list.

>> No.1676010

>>1675996
Why would our chart for essential 2000s literature include books from the mid-90s just because they're really good and you didn't read them until a decade and a half later. Why, Jesus.

>> No.1676014

Pale King. Unless this is 2000-2010

>> No.1676020

Deniro's Game by Rawi Hage
Oracle Night by Paul Auster

>> No.1676023

>>1676014
>herpderp, 1961 was in the 50's, so 2011 is in the 00's

>> No.1676025

>>1676014

is this out for real?

>> No.1676041

>>1676025
i think i read that amazon's shipped preorders already, at least

>> No.1676044

>>1676010
I was 8 when IJ came out. 8.

>> No.1676050

Will Self, The Book of Dave, 2006. He should be included and I'd nominate this book in particular for the chart.

>> No.1676060
File: 8 KB, 251x221, ralph wiggum meh.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1676060

>>1674755
Name of the Wind had good prose, but it was corny. it was an Oprah book. i did not care for it.

>> No.1676065

>>1676044
which explains why you can't tell the difference between "when you read it" and "when it was published."

You probably didn't read Joyce until this decade, should we put him on the list as well??

>> No.1676071
File: 21 KB, 340x574, god is dead bonk.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1676071

seconding Everything is Illuminated and Oscar Wao. also, pic related.

>> No.1676076
File: 111 KB, 200x293, 200px-Jarhead_(novel).png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1676076

>> No.1676082

>>1676065
I know the difference.
And no, because it Ulysses is completely irrelevant to this argument. I'm just saying, what's the difference of four meager years?
You sir, are just an asshole.

>> No.1676086

>>1676082
god help me, but 9/10. i raged, briefly

>> No.1676096

>>1676010

What sort of moron breaks up literature according to decade anyway? It's not as though those are meaningful divisions that you have identified.

It makes much more sense to divide literature by genre, movement etc. Decades are meaningless.

>> No.1676105

>>1676025
Yeah, I have a copy

>> No.1676108

it hurts my brain that you'd even entertain the notion of including house of leaves op but i'm going to go ahead and nth 2666 b/c shit rules

>> No.1676127
File: 46 KB, 317x317, tumblr_liy4lvjNnt1qzqhfwo1_400.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1676127

>>1676096
Pretty much this

>> No.1676778

>>1675996
I'm pretty sure everyone on this board already knows Infinite Jest is worth reading, or will get the hint after 15 minutes on /lit/.

>> No.1677055
File: 43 KB, 470x328, 1287850370709.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1677055

>>1675996
>>1676010
>>1676023
OP here. It's a shame this thread sort of degenerated into a discussion of the meaning(lessness) of doing a 2000s lit chart. To be honest, I just wanted us to name some praiseworthy or interesting books that are fairly recent.

The point, really, is for us to learn about new literature. Sure, Infinite Jest is a great novel and we could go on to enumerate dozens of books written in the 90s off the top of our heads. I'd like us to do something else here: make an effort and think of more recent books that we enjoyed. Not necessarily great names, not necessarily spectacular debuts (for example, I mentioned Karen Russell and Anthony Doerr in one of my earlier posts in case any interested /lit/fags is searching for some new names) -- simply books we enjoyed.

In short - I feel there is not enough discussion of recent literature on /lit/ inb4 there is not enough discussion of literature on /lit/.

>>1674631
Sunhawk, I'll get back to you once I take a shower, though by now you've probably read all the amazon reviews and such.

>> No.1677187

To be honest, very little good literature was made in this decade.

Definitely no fucking Danielewski is going on this list. It is the sort of thing the Sci-Fi/Fantasyfags read and tell themselves 'gosh, I read literary fiction too, hyuck hyuck hyuck', when in fact all they're reading is pretentious masturbation in print. The same goes for The Raw Shark Texts.

No fucking Terry Pratchett, either. The man is a self-indulgent dolt.

This is the list of stuff that is perhaps worthy of such a list:

Everything is Illuminated - nice. Tries to be a bit clever, but does so without being especially irritating.
Cloud Atlas - an elegant collection of short stories. Somewhat pretentious, but to a permissible extent.
Freedom - a good novel.
The Road - yeah, ok, maybe.

>> No.1677197

>>1676096
It's vaguely useful to look at how literature has changed over time. Notice, for example, the increase in plays and novels set in the recent past when mobile phones became the norm (since a character just being able to send a text to overcome a problem can ruin tension, and it introduces a whole different kind of dialogue). This would be a change observed over the 00s.

>> No.1677200

>>1677187
Dear lord, we've found him! The person whose shit does not stink!
Teach us more of your wisdom!

Danielewski deserves to be on there because he's a writer who wrote a book which received critical and popular recognition.
Your taste is not a standard, fascist.

>> No.1677204

>>1676082
It is a list of 'essential 2000s literature'. If a book is not released in the 2000s, then it is not the right book for the list. It might well be suited to a list of 'essential 1990s literature', but that's neither here nor there.

>> No.1677206

>>1676041
Yup, got mine Friday.

>> No.1677209

>>1677200
You're right. My taste is not a standard - it is a goal to which most can only aspire.

>> No.1677212

>>1677187

You live in a very tiny bubble.

Also, those arbitrary limits on pretension you have are quite asinine.

>> No.1677215

>>1677209
> it is a goal to which most retards can only aspire
ftfy

>> No.1677223

>>1677209
You are just adorable. You're like D&E except completely lacking a basis of intellectual credibility instead of mostly lacking.

>> No.1677225

>>1677212
Describing a lack of tolerance for pretension as 'asinine' is an amusingly twisted idea. Is it unreasonable to dislike literature that pretends to be something other than what it is?

>> No.1677234
File: 18 KB, 224x299, 1292914558266.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1677234

>>1677225

I was referencing this, which contradicts your earlier statements of dislike for writers like Danielewski.

>Cloud Atlas an elegant collection of short stories. Somewhat pretentious, but to a permissible extent

Do you have a chart of permissible pretension? Is it color coded?

>> No.1677235

>>1674631
>>1677055 cont.

So Sunhawk, I don't know what you've read by Llosa and how much of it, but I'd say The Way to Paradise is on a par with some of his best writings. As for The Bad Girl, I am not so sure -- for the simple reason that it was the first novel by Llosa that I'd ever read and I'd probably have to re-read it to form an opinion. What I have now is not really an 'opinion'; it's more of a memory, an impression, and that impression was tantamount to "Wow, this is fantastic."

Of the two novels, The Way to Paradise is probably the more ambitious project. As you presumably know, its protagonists are Paul Gauguin and his grandmother, Flora Tristan, a somewhat obscure socialist/feminist activist who lived in the first half of the 19th century. Even though at first I was suspicious of the seemingly tedious framework of the novel (one chapter for Gauguin, one for Tristan, and so on, and so forth), I think Llosa once again showed that he's a master of structure. What starts out as an apparently simple contrast of two "ways to paradise" mapped out by two very different characters soon proves more intricate, more subtle and, quite simply, very moving.

to be continued...

>> No.1677237

>>1677235
The Bad Girl is different. There are some typical, undeniably recognizable "Llosan" elements in it: Miraflores -- check; passionate and elusive love -- check; sex and fantasies -- check. The narrator works as a translator/interpreter, which some critics -- my favorite John Crace of "Digested Read" among them! -- have deemed a shoddy metaphor; for me personally, it was one of the things that made the novel so captivating. Back then, I was taking my first steps as a translator and was slowly but surely becoming aware of all the dilemmas faced by those who enter the profession. I believe many of these matters can be thought-provoking for pretty much anybody who's interested in literature... Now that I think of it, I'd like to re-read the novel simply to see what I can relate to after I've taken some more steps in the profession. I'm afraid, however, that the highly contrived love story that's central to the plot would leave me indifferent.

Looking forward to your opinions, if you ever get to read these two!

>> No.1677238

>>1677223
...so you're suggesting that it is only retards who don't share my excellent taste? I agree. You'll go far.

>> No.1677241

The Road
Cloud Atlas
Atonement
The Gone-Away World
City of Thieves

>> No.1677242

>>1677225
It is when your identification of what it is and its pretense are both bullshit.
But we don't know that your identifications are bullshit.
So here's your chance. Consider my interest piqued.

>> No.1677263 [DELETED] 

>>1677242
Cloud Atlas is a pleasant group of stories with an enjoyable sort of thematic unity. Particularly enjoyable are the ones about the clone and the ones about Robert Frobisher. Individually, they're well-written and effective, and as a group, they are cohesive in a rather satisfying way. The pretension comes in when it begins to try to get at all 'deep'. The thing about them all being 'reincarnations of the same soul' falls flat on its face, and things like the shared tattoo distract from the book's main vision rather than add to it.

In this way, the book is simultaneously good and a bit pretentious.

>> No.1677267

>>1677242
Cloud Atlas is a pleasant group of stories with an enjoyable sort of thematic unity. Particularly enjoyable are the ones about the clone and the ones about Robert Frobisher. Individually, they're well-written and effective, and as a group, they are cohesive in a rather satisfying way. The pretension comes in when it begins to try to get all 'deep'. The thing about them all being 'reincarnations of the same soul' falls flat on its face, and things like the shared tattoo distract from the book's main vision rather than add to it.

In this way, the book is simultaneously good and a bit pretentious.

>> No.1677271 [DELETED] 

>>1677263
So it's The Fountain?

>> No.1677274

>>1677187
Thanks for the input. I shouldn't have used the word "essential" in my original post; I think I mindlessly used it because it appears in chart threads all the time.

My idea was to include not only books that are "good" according to one taste or another but also provocative, refreshing, controversial ones, or simply those that got literary or academic hype. I want a chart as full of diverse books as the arse is full of assorted farts.

BTW, I liked House of Leaves a lot (I hardly ever read fantasy or Sci-Fi, if you think that's relevant information). :)

>> No.1677278

>>1677274
I guess under those criteria it wouldn't be a bad idea to include it. I just feel that /lit/ could be corrupting an entire new generation of readers!

>> No.1677325
File: 90 KB, 409x687, 1275053177362.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1677325

>>1677278
I don't think /lit/ has that much impact on anybody :)
What I'd worry about more is that the board breeds non-readers instead of readers. Pic related.
Finally, if you read a lot, no single book can turn you into a retard. I believe that House of Leaves can be a really good starting point for the discussion of literary theories, fashions or tropes; and if readers of fantasy use it for masturbatory purposes, then let them have their fun.

>> No.1677379

OP here again. I just realized that the last time I supervised the making of a chart was when I practically lived on /lit/. Now, with a full-time job and a part-time uni course, I don't have as much time but I'd still like to see this chart, or at least a (chronological?) list, done. So I'm still looking forward to your suggestions, preferably with an explanation of some sort. Any help with making of the list or chart would also be appreciated. See you soon, /lit/, and good night for now!

>> No.1677549

>>1677187
wasn't danielewski a finalist for the national book award at some point

say what you will about lit awards but I'm pretty sure they don't hand that one out at dragoncon

>> No.1677554
File: 28 KB, 200x301, 200px-Amazingadventuresbook.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1677554

Surprised this hadn't showed up yet (or I skimmed the thread too quickly)

>> No.1677881

>>1675996
Are we doing non-fiction too, because if so we can just include Consider the Lobster so everybody knows that We Like David Foster Wallace

>> No.1677889

water for elephants

>> No.1677897

>tl;dr
>busy
>interested

I'll check the sticky in a few days.

>> No.1677916

>>1676060

whoa, whoa--disregard that, I suck cocks.

>>1677902 made me realize I was talking about SHADOW of the Wind.

never heard of Name of the Wind. so, no opinion. whoopsie.

>> No.1679557

Against the Day
Kafka on the Shore
idk, the Corrections?
prolly not

not much good, but AtD is awesome

>> No.1680287
File: 103 KB, 656x873, SedarisMonkeySMALL.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1680287

>> No.1680319

>>1680287
his best stuff dates to the 90s imo but i'm gonna be real - that picture is adorbs

>> No.1680463

Since a vote was retracted for it, I'm going to throw my vote in with The Name of the Wind. Probably the best fantasy of the decade.

>> No.1680469

Stop talking about Kafka on the Shore.

Please stop.

If you think it's good you either:
a) Haven't read it and only heard things about it
or
b) Haven't read any other Murakami

It's not worth mentioning.

Thank you.

Have a nice day.

>> No.1680477

>>1677554
<3

>> No.1681259

BUMP

>> No.1681370

despite how much you guys might hate him, I think looking back in 20 or so years Tao Lin will probably be some one you would talk about when retrospecting for a list like this. Deal with it faggots

>> No.1681426

>>1681370
man i don't even have beef with tao

but

that would surprise me a lot. maybe if he'd actually been carles!

>> No.1682291

>>1677237
>>1677379

Thanks. I'll think about getting them, you make them sound interesting. I also want to get The Green House, which looks good. How many prizes has Llosa won for his writing? I know he got the Nobel Prize for Literature for The Feast of the Goat.

>>1681370

Tao Lin won't be looked back on as a good writer in 20 years time, although his modern works might be good. I read Richard Yates and it was mediocre. I don't know why this board talks about him so much if they dislike him, although people do like to do things they don't like and then complain about them afterwards. I never figured out why.

>> No.1682673

OP here again, I'm glad this thread is still alive but I'm afraid the chart/list won't get done unless someone takes over. Yeah, OP is a faggotrix, I guess.

>>1682291
>you make them sound interesting
This was so nice to hear, Sunhawk!
Have you read anything else by Llosa? As I probably said a million times on this board (back when I had no life, haha), Aunt Julia and the Scriptwriter is my favorite novel of his. Notebooks of Don Rigoberto follow closely.

Did he win the Nobel Prize for a specific book? I thought nobody did anymore.

>> No.1684332

saving this from page 15 for this poor schmuck >>1684308

>> No.1684395

irvine welsh?
chuck palahniuk?

>> No.1684398

i enjoyed
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amaryllis_Night_and_Day

>> No.1685539
File: 14 KB, 214x197, ballard.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1685539

>> No.1685558

To be honest I don't think it would surprise me to see tao on a list like this. Now this dosnt make me to happy because I'm not a big fan of him and tend to find him over rated [everywhere but here, where I seems to be under rated] but he has a very distinctive style and writes what some would call post- postmodernism (lol) which is supposed to be the literature of tomorrow for attention span lacking generation.

It's all highy controversial but it's safe to say he is one of the beat doing this new style of lit.

>> No.1685799

The Solitude of Prime Numbers? maybe