The National Book Society in New York is awarding Stephen King the Medal for Contribution to American Letters. As a result, the literary world is abuzz with controversy. Many people in the literary world believe his prose do not measure up to the prestige of the award he is being given, but Lev Grossman makes some excellent arguments in King’s defense in his article in Time Magazine.
Grossman points out that the reading world has divided books into “two exclusive categories” those which qualify as worthy literature, and the rest which is labeled as “trashy.” Grossman goes on to point out that the latter category is substantially larger than the former. He lists a number of respected literary giants such as Dickens, Poe and Tennyson who were “wildly successful” in their day and received little criticism for writing what was “popular” instead of what we would today call “worthwhile literature.”
If a tome is difficult, it does not mean it is literary- though that is at times an excellent indication. However, there is marvelous writing to be read in the sometimes labeled “lesser” novels of J.K. Rowling, Orson Scott Card, and yes, perhaps even Stephen King. I am not much of a King fan, I think the last time I read a book of his was sometime in elementary school. However, I am a great enthusiast of writers like Rowling and Card and believe their writing deserves much more literary credit than they receive. Indeed, the principle which Grossman defends applies to King and a myriad of other authors who have not yet reached the status of “literature.” Just because a book is popular, easy to read and highly entertaining does not discount it from being a worthwhile and rewarding work.
Respond to this posting
Back to top