LSS: Literary Snobbery Series, Whatnot
Comments 15

A Final Bit on Literary Snobbery

Last week, I had an offline chat with one of our friends. We discussed what we have discussed at the two previous installments. Please don’t think of it as a loony idea because online and offline conversations are different and therefore, have different results.

I told her (okay, it’s Kristel) that I’m doing this series on literary snobbery because of something ambitious. I will reveal the reason later because it is less exciting than what we have discussed. I wish I had a tape recorder so that I wouldn’t have the sad trouble of recalling the details of our conversation. But then, we would have been conscious of the things that we were saying and I would have uploaded the recording instead as an amateur podcast episode.

We tried to identify the kinds of literary snobs. I have addressed this in my questionnaire, in one question. I admit that I should have expanded on it, but during that moment, it didn’t interest me to name them because I think that snobs operate on the same ground. They limit their reading lists to period, nationality, acclaim, et cetera, in the belief that this is what would constitute great literature. They only read ancient texts, nonfiction, translations, et cetera. Their “great literature” is limited to these, and that doesn’t have to be a bad thing because we have different definitions. On the contrary, it’s interesting to find out what their criteria are, what ticks them off, what biases and prejudices they have, et cetera. It’s a topic for a great conversation, so long as there is no condescension involved.

But why do snobs aspire to read only great literature? Now this is a complicated question because there are so many things to consider and they can be very personal. So let me answer that for myself. When I was in college, I was a Pulitzer snob. I was, and still am, a slow reader so I wanted to make sure that the time I spend on reading is worth it. I no longer wanted to read the books that I read in high school. I felt that a literary prize would qualify a book as something that wouldn’t be a waste. The award didn’t matter; I could have picked the Booker Prize or the Hugo Award or the Newbery Medal. It was really a matter of chance. The day I decided that, I saw around five Pulitzer Prize winners at the book store I was at.

I only read and bought Pulitzers. When I gained a considerable number of Pulitzers, I decided to expand and include other literary prizes. Then I added works by Nobel laureates. Then I checked out those Top 100 lists. Then I joined a book club and made friends. Then I considered their recommendations. And here I am. I didn’t end up in a bad state. It’s not so bad. And oh, would you believe that I am considering getting a Kindle because I so want to read a lot of new books? Our local book stores can’t be really counted on regarding that, but yeah, I guess I kind of surprised myself when I wondered if I should get the Kindle Paperwhite or the Kindle Voyage. Any thoughts from the eReading friends out there?

After all that time basing my reading on a combination of prize-winners and lists, I learned to set my definition of great literature. I’ll put it simply: when I tell myself upon finishing a book that someday, when I have time, I’m going to reread this, that’s my great literature. It no longer has to be something of great reputation, for I have learned that I should not feel bad if I didn’t like “canon” works. This thought has nagged me before. It has taken me some time to reconcile my conflicting feelings on this matter. Although I never pretended to like what I didn’t like, I still felt silly and stupid for not liking them. But what the hell, I’m kind of over it. Goodbye, Henry Miller.


So what else have Kristel and I discussed? A lot of things. We even talked of using certain books as barometers to measure the literariness of other works, but this is merely specifying what I have already iterated above regarding great literature.

Because I could no longer recall other specifics of our conversation, here’s why I’ve introduced the Literary Snobbery Series (LSS). I’m going to have to give you a background. Too much suspense, I know, but anyway, I had coffee with a friend, one of my kind, and a local writer. We were talking of the books that we were excited to read. We chorused The Bone Clocks. Sadly, I still don’t have a copy of David Mitchell’s latest. Our bookish talk went elsewhere until the local writer suggested that we list our 100 books for the snob. Why? According to her, and I have to agree, it’s because lists attract responses. We chose snobbish books merely because we like them. The writer even offered to put our lists in a section of her blog.

That was all in passing but it stuck with me. I am not hoping for added publicity. In fact, I’m scared of creating this list because it seems like a daunting responsibility. But hey, why not put up the list for the fun of it? Literary critics have put up lists and made a lot of readers follow them. I’m following four of these lists myself, and it would be fun to show my list to people who bother about lists.

One thing is for sure. This is not an attempt to outsnob other snobs, so to speak.  I would even like to call it an introduction of sorts to literary snobbery (i.e. my recommendations). With so many books to choose from, I worked on some guidelines. Here they are:

  • I should have read the book and at least liked it. Look, we can name a lot of books that are so snobby but we probably would not read. What’s the point in that? So yeah, this list is a list that I could truly call my own, although it wouldn’t necessarily include all my super favorite books.
  • I would limit the list to novels, novellas, and short story collections written or translated to English. Prose fiction, yeah. I’m still wondering if I should include published drama or plays, and poetry collections. I haven’t read a lot of those though. The problem I see here is that because of the differences of prose, play, and poetry in form, they are not in an equal playing field and therefore must be in separate lists. What do you think?
  • I would only include one book per author. This is tough. But yeah, there must be constraints and I enjoy working around them anyway. For the affected authors, I would choose the book that I think is the snobbiest, according to the snob-meter.
  • I am still in the process of finalizing my formula for the snob-meter, so the inaugural list will probably have eyebrow-raising numbers. That said, the list is going to be ranked.
  • I still can’t decide if I should only include works that are published in at least two countries. If yes, most local works will be excluded. But then, I haven’t read a lot of local works. What do you think?
  • The list is going to be revised by the end of each year. December looks like a good month for revision and it would be something that I’ll look forward to at the end of each reading year.

The inclusion and exclusion of the books on this list are largely based on my understanding and definition of great literature. Also, if you don’t see the books that you think should be on the list, please reread the first three guidelines. You may even point them out to me and who knows, I might include them in my to-read list.

But hey, don’t look at it too hard in that snobby way. Look at it as a recommendation list from yours truly. I’ll post the entries in batches of ten until I complete the list by December.


This is part of the Literary Snobbery Series (LSS).

Advertisements

15 Comments

  1. I’m quite honored to be namedropped in a post like this ahaha. Excited for that list!

    You’re right to point out that some snobbery is simply a way to winnow or curate the amount of reading that you want to accomplish. All of us are inundated by so much stuff, not just in the book world but with pop culture in general. So in that case “snobbery” is an attempt at time management.

    I guess one way that it can be harmful is if you are in a place of cultural prominence and use only your personal metrics to decide what gets billed as “important.” It’s also problematic if you’re a publisher or editor who decides that, say, only realist fiction should be accepted for publication, because you end up affecting people’s livelihood. But as long as I don’t have a direct hand on which people get paid or not, I’ve learned not to care too much (though I care a little :P) about how people think of my tastes.

    When it comes to local works, does your “must be published in more countries” rule count if it’s available as an ebook? There are several local books now that are available for digital download internationally but aren’t available as physical books in other countries. Though you could say that “snobby” Filipiniana books tend not to be available digitally.

    Like

    • Hmm, e-publishing should make publishing global but since I don’t have an eReader yet, I cannot consider that format. Maybe when I finally decide to get one (and have read more local works).

      Like

  2. Get ka na ng ebook reader, preferably kindle na hindi fire para walang distraction. I know, it doesn’t feel as good to read an ebook and blah blah blah, but it’s nice to have around.

    I don’t think much of book awards but the award-winning books I’ve read turned out to be really, really good. Sana may literary award na parang Oscars, best supporting literary heroine or something. La lang.

    Like

    • I was thinking of getting a Kindle Voyage, then this morning, I listened to this podcast reporting that there are now more people using iPads than Kindles for electronic reading. I’m at a loss! I have 700-something books, 60-something % are still unread and gathering molds and dust. So I think I have a lot of books to read and time to think before I make a decision on this e-reader debacle.

      Masaya yang awards charla, kaso masakit sa utak because there are so many books published every year and ayaw kong maging judge (as if invited ako). Panonoorin ko na lang ang awards night!

      Like

  3. Ayy wag iPad (unless gusto mo lang talaga ng iPad). I think if I had an iPad for a reader I wouldn’t really use it for reading. But that’s just me. Mag-Paperwhite ka na laaang. Besides, Amazon store is the best. I don’t mind having an unread stack. But it’s your life! Get what you want. :D

    Well, kung ang mano-nominate lang eh yung mga na-shortlist sa Pulitzer, Man Booker, etc, madali lang!

    Like

    • That’s a good point regarding the iPad. I’m not getting one because I’m not dependent on games and apps. I think I want a Kindle mostly because of vanity. I feel incomplete; what kind of a reader is one without a Kindle (or an e-reader)? I guess I’m an old-fashioned reader? Medyo nahihilo nga ako when I read on electronic devices (unless if it’s for work or if it’s just mindless surfing).

      Like

    • It’s nice to have an iPad and of course you can download the Kindle app from there, but if it’s really really just for reading get a Kindle. It’s like having a library with you all the time. Shar!

      Even though I love Kelly my Kindle Fire, I still buy books and I never not buy the books that I want to have just because I already have the ebook. I just download/buy e-books that are not within my reach aka wala sa bookstore at wala sa piratebay. If anything, it will increase your library because you can browse the store, compare prices, check availability, book specs, and get suggestions, etc. In short, get na. :)

      Like

Thoughts? Feelings?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s