Toni Morrison

Actually terrible. The most egotistical writer I've seen taken seriously.

Everything she writes about is essentially just focused on being black, a woman, or being a black woman.

She lacks any sort of creativity or originality; no discernable talent.
All those people are non-entities, you realize that right?

Lol, always a butthurt esl crawling out of the woodowork

lol if ur ok with beloved being the best american novel since 1990 and you think theres nothing wrong with that be my guest. stay pleb friend.

also im american sooooo

Yes, American lit is crap, so 'Beloved' is the best of a bad lot.

which is exactly my point in reading comprehension much?

I was agreeing with you, shitbird. Relax.

>beloved is better than anything by Roth, Updike, Salinger, Bellow
lol, and I'm sure you've read all of those books right?

Wow great criticism

>All those people are non-entities, you realize that right?
The following people are *all* non-entities?

The Judges:

Kurt Andersen, Roger Angell, A. Manette Ansay, James Atlas, Russell Banks, John Banville, Julian Barnes, Andrea Barrett, Rick Bass, Ann Beattie, Madison Smartt Bell, Aimee Bender, Paul Berman, Sven Birkerts, Harold Bloom, Bill Buford, Ethan Canin, Philip Caputo, Michael Chabon, Susan Choi, Mark Costello, Michael Cunningham, Edwidge Danticat, Don DeLillo, Pete Dexter, Junot Diaz, Morris Dickstein, Andre Dubus III, Tony Earley, Richard Eder, Jennifer Egan, Dave Eggers, Lucy Ellmann, Nathan Englander, Louise Erdrich, Anne Fadiman, Henry Finder, Jonathan Safran Foer, Paula Fox, Nell Freudenberger, Carlos Fuentes, David Gates, Henry Louis Gates Jr., Julia Glass, Nadine Gordimer, Mary Gordon, Robert Gottlieb, Philip Gourevitch, Elizabeth Graver, Andrew Sean Greer, Allan Gurganus, Jim Harrison, Kathryn Harrison, Alice Hoffman, A. M. Homes, Maureen Howard, John Irving, Ha Jin, Thom Jones, Heidi Julavits, Ward Just, Mary Karr, William Kennedy, Frank Kermode, Stephen King, Maxine Hong Kingston, Walter Kirn, Benjamin Kunkel, David Leavitt, Chang-Rae Lee, Brad Leithauser, Frank Lentricchia, John Leonard, Jonathan Lethem, Alan Lightman, David Lodge, Ralph Lombreglia, Phillip Lopate, Janet Malcolm, Thomas Mallon, Ben Marcus, Peter Matthiessen, Ian McEwan, David Means, Daphne Merkin, Stephen Metcalf, Rick Moody, Lorrie Moore, Geoffrey O'Brien, Chris Offutt, Stewart O'Nan, David Orr, Cynthia Ozick, Ann Patchett, Tom Perrotta, Richard Gid Powers, William Pritchard, Francine Prose, Terrence Rafferty, Marilynne Robinson, Roxana Robinson, Norman Rush, Richard Russo, George Saunders, Liesl Schillinger, Joanna Scott, Jim Shepard, Karen Shepard, David Shields, Gary Shteyngart, Lee Siegel, Curtis Sittenfeld, Jane Smiley, Wole Soyinka, Scott Spencer, William Styron, Studs Terkel, Deborah Treisman, Anne Tyler, Mario Vargas Llosa, William T. Vollmann, Edmund White, Tom Wolfe, Tobias Wolff.

did you even click the fucking link

Literally who

But your whole shitty argument revolves around their being right.
>also im american sooooo
autistic tbqh

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

There are a few good names, and dozens of nonenitites. He never said they were all nonentities, you fucking illiterate, but the it's the same effect.

It's not about my opinion, user. It's the consensus opinion of the greatest writers working today.

type like this yeah

>He never said they were all nonentities, you fucking illiterate

He literally said "All those people are non-entities". Are you fucking retarded?

there are not 10 great writers living

Well, number 1 is certainly Toni Morrison. On that, at least, we can agree.

>He literally said "All those people are non-entities". Are you fucking retarded?
Are you? It was probably hypberbole.
Why go for a pedantic literal interpretation when the main point stands? Your mind is not quite adequate lol

Why would we? Shit post tbqh, reported for trolling

wew

Has nothing to do with my point, since he obviously did not vote for it to be number one.

>The following people are *all* non-entities?
Essentially, yes. She's an extremely dull writer with some technical skill and a minority/woman card (that she plays like a master); that crap draws the attention of modern academic-types.

And as others have said before, modern American literature is a joke.
popular =/= great

You aren't making a good case for yourself, Toni. The majority of your fans are agenda-pushers that attempt to mask that selfish behavior through academic posturing.

>And as others have said before, modern American literature is a joke.
Bellow and Updike were good imo

Here are the full results.

>THE WINNER:
Beloved - Toni Morrison (1987)

>THE RUNNERS-UP:
Underworld - Don DeLillo (1997)
Blood Meridian - Cormac McCarthy (1985)
Rabbit Angstrom: The Four Novels - John Updike (1995)
American Pastoral - Philip Roth (1997)

>THE FOLLOWING BOOKS ALSO RECEIVED MULTIPLE VOTES:
A Confederacy of Dunces - John Kennedy Toole (1980)
Housekeeping - Marilynne Robinson (1980)
Winter's Tale - Mark Helprin (1983)
White Noise - Don DeLillo (1985)
The Counterlife - Philip Roth (1986)
Libra - Don DeLillo (1988)
Where I'm Calling From - Raymond Carver (1988)
The Things They Carried - Tim O'Brien (1990)
Mating - Norman Rush (1991)
Jesus' Son - Denis Johnson (1992)
Operation Shylock - Philip Roth (1993)
Independence Day - Richard Ford (1995)
Sabbath's Theater - Philip Roth (1995)
Border Trilogy - Cormac McCarthy (1999)
The Human Stain - Philip Roth - (2000)
The Known World - Edward P. Jones - (2003)
The Plot Against America - Philip Roth - (2004)

HOLY SHIT. Just admit you fucked up, moron.

I thought beloved was really good. I dont get why you guys have a problem with her writing about black women, she is a black woman, most white male writers write about white males and no one thinks that's weird so

>makes a general point
>point out irrelevant shit
Yeah nah, fuck off cunt

>I don't care who they are! If they don't agree with me, they aren't Important!

>Agenda pushing

As if lit isn't full of agenda pushing faggots who are either alt right or of the opinion that reading a classic book made them intellectually superior

Never heard of her.

How is that relevant to my point?
Please don't start shitposting.

>I dont get why you guys have a problem with her writing about black women
True art is universal, pseud.
> most white male writers write about white males
They write about those who happen to be white males. Even then, you're wrong. Many of the best books by men are about women as well - Portrait of a Lady, Anne Veronica, The Scarlet Letter etc

Are you drunk?

>either alt right o
What the fuck does this have to do with the obvious fact that there are not even a dozen great writers or critics living, much less a couple of hundred.

The larger the group gets, the more mediocre it is.

"Beloved" by Toni Morrison is the consensus pick for best American novel of the past 40 years.

On fucking up cunts like you.
Here's a word of advice fatfuck: don't come to this website again until you're ready to have an actual discussion.

Reported for shitposting and general trolling

So of these which are worth reading would you say?

My guess.

Underworld - Don DeLillo (1997)
Blood Meridian - Cormac McCarthy (1985)
A Confederacy of Dunces - John Kennedy Toole (1980)
White Noise - Don DeLillo (1985)

>not even a dozen great writers
You = illiterate moron.

Learn how to read before spouting off on a Veeky Forums thread.

>consensus
>on art

>You = illiterate moron.
This looks like something a caveman would write.

My post btw is a Bloom quote, so take it up with the great critic whom you find to be so illiterate.
im in the thread btw, not on it

Black authors do the same thing, you're really stretching to fit some pathetic view of the world.

Ignore them bro, they're shitposting morons. Beloved is trash lmao

These people don't fucking care about that logic, all they want to do is proclaim that all black people write about race which is why they are bad so that you'll ignore the fact that race affects black people so much every day that its constantly in their culture.

This is lit

If they aren't old enough to be classic they are shit
If they are too popular that means it's shit.
If they dont agree with the user, they are shit.
If they don't look like user they are shit.
If they beat out an author that they really liked for an award, they are extremely shit.
If they are considered good in a genre, that means the genre is shit.

Better get used to it

Don't pretend like agenda pushing doesn't exist everywhere around us

>implying texts about black women cannot be universal
>implying "universal" means anything in this sentence
>implying that policing admission to True Art is the mark of intellectual authenticity

>Black authors do the same thing
lolno
None of her characters happens to be black. It is always a defining characteristic. It is simple mindedness, pure and simple.

Here's some advice buttercup. Go out in the world and fuck it up beautifully. Design clothes so hideous that they can’t be worn ironically. Horrify us with new ideas. Outrage outdated critics. Use technology for transgression, not lazy social living. Make me nervous! Visit bath houses and wreck what came before. Oosh. It's 2016.

As lit would say, they are all shit, but if the nigger won then she's more shit than the rest of the shitty shits.

Let's review the conversation thus far.
---------
>ME:
"Beloved" is universally considered the greatest American novel published since 1980 (according to "a couple of hundred prominent writers, critics, editors and other literary sages")

>Some idiot:
All those people are non-entities, you realize that right?

>ME:
The following people are *all* non-entities? (list of judges)

>YOU:
He never said they were all nonentities, you fucking illiterate

>ME:
He literally said "All those people are non-entities". Are you fucking retarded?

>YOU:
Are you? It was probably hypberbole. Why go for a pedantic literal interpretation when the main point stands? Your mind is not quite adequate lol
---------

Let that sink in for a minute. Reread it a few times if you have to.

To summarize: you are either very drunk or deeply retarded.

Stephen King sticking out like a sore thumb lmao

>implying texts about black women cannot be universal
Never implied that, learn to read.
>implying "universal" means anything in this sentence
Use dictionary if you don't know the word.
>implying that policing admission to True Art is the mark of intellectual authenticity
Never implied that, learn to read

did you really think you were saying something there?

>The following people are *all* non-entities? (list of judges)
Retarded post because that was not the main point. Let this sink in: you are technically right but totally stupid.

You are like a man who, on being asked by a beautiful girl to come up for cofee, replies with "no I do not like cofee." Technically you are right, totally you are an idiot.

Reading her book summaries, she seems kind of one-note.

I tried reading the bluest eye... I liked how miserable and self-loathing it was, but I didn't think it went far enough.

Those are all garbage, especially the McCarthy.

Updike and Roth are the only good runners-up.

>consensus opinion
You do realize that it's only the consensus opinion because she's a sassy black woman, right? I'm not even an outright Morrison hater: the last I've read of her was Jazz, and it was total dogshit, but The Bluest Eye is unironically good, and for all I know Beloved might be too. However, she's just not even in the same league as Roth, McCarthy, DeLillo and Tommy P. She could never write something as touching as The Human Stain, for instance, because Roth's compassion extends to the world and everyone in it; Morrison's only compassion is towards herself and other dark-skinned women. She's a niche author, and it's only consensus opinion that she's "the greatest" because U.S. cultural life has basically become a bone-throwing machine for minorities at this point.

>cant refute my post
>"i-it's nothing!"
lolsad

Song of Solomon > Sula > Beloved >The Bluest Eye > Jazz > Paradise >>>> Tar Baby > everything else

She's a great novelist, not an amazing artist I think.

Put the booze down and go to bed, son.

Roth and updike, white noise was meh

>Say Black authors dont do what you say they did
>continues arguing about Toni Morrison

m8 you werent even on the same page as me so lets not

Do you not see my point? Your nitpicking has nothing to do with the discussion, it is pure dogshit.

>implying your platitude depends on a use of language precise enough to call for reference to dictionary definitions

let's have a conversation about universality

>True art is universal (in this context writing about black women is not universal)
You said writing about black women was not universal. How did you not imply that? Maybe you should learn to read, or maybe write if you don't understand how sentences convey thoughts.

>Say Black authors dont do what you say they did
Morrison is only an example. Ellison, Hughes, Wright, etc, it's all the same social issue poshlust trash.

Mason & Dixon is shockingly absent.

Too much Roth. Never cared for him. Writes artless, insular nonsense about Tri-state semites.

Toni Morrison and Junot Diaz are living proof that literary critics are agenda-driven.

Actually that poster was right you fucking spud.

You said that they were all non entity as if to say all unimportant, and then realizing how fucking stupid that was you said it was hyperbole so you can maybe say a lot of them were unimportant

>let's have a conversation about universality
Why would we focus on a single word? I merely meant to say that true art can appeal to people regardless of skin color or social class.
>implying your platitude
Why have a conversation is this is a platitude? You know it is a platitude, but you don't understand what I'm saying. You seem dumb senpai

you really can't compare them. for example between her and Ellison he views blackness as an existential problem where she feels that's missing the point, that it's a failure of community.

lol /pol/ is leaking

>Roth
>artless
Fuck off, American Trilogy-era Roth has some of the best traditional prose the U.S. have ever produced.

>race affects black people so much every day that its constantly in their culture.
Go back to Tumblr please, your agenda has no place here.
I didn't say otherwise.

lmao a Morrison fan can't read; an absolute classic.
>Some idiot
Morrison fails at being literature by forcing her blackness into her work. Similarly, those new-fangled genre fiction writers fail at writing entertainment because they force their whatever into their work.

There's allowing one's culture to exist within their work, and forcing it in and having it be the absolute ham-fisted focus.

She can write, sure, but she just isn't any good.
There is more than one person laughing at you, user.

Those people all are unimportant. I completely doubt that a single one's influence will live past the 21st century.

>You said writing about black women was not universal.
No I did not, learn to read peasant.
>You said that they were all non entity as if to say all unimportant
okay, how's this for an intelligent conversation:
>all nazi governmental official were evil tbqh, I don't care about their opinions
>"actually this one guy..."
It's technically right, but totally stupid. Try to fit it into that small head of yours.

You also implied that writing about black women couldn't achieve appeal to all people and then backpedaled.

>he views blackness
This is my whole point in a nutshell, it is inartistic to "view" "blackness"

Definately. This is not what I expected when started the thread. Only 0.056456% of posters replied something to the point.

Pretty much every author writes about their perspective and feelings on a certain thing in one way or another.

I think people only let it slide if that person is white, go figure

"Traditional prose" is garbage. I'll take Faulkner over Hemingway any day.

>You also implied that writing about black women couldn't achieve appeal to all people and then backpedaled.
No, you simply failed to comprehend my post.

>Pretty much every author writes about their perspective and feelings on a certain thing in one way or another.
The point is that she writes mainly about these things, you imbecile.
You read Anna Karenina and don't see how that book can appeal to people of all races? What poverty of thought

Aaaah, so you're one of those edgy, meme-chasing, "I only read books written after modernism" plebs. Noted.

why? because you said so?

So does Langston Hughes work, and so much in the world of music, just stop posting

>post a shit writer
>lol /pol/ if u disagree!
This thread is on point, fuckface. Unless "on point" means you agree with what is being said
nice try senpai

It comes down to who you trust: Veeky Forums, or the consensus of world's top writers.

>So does Langston Hughes work
No, it doesn't. His work has no appeal outside the black community, it is pure balderdash. He has no technical skill.
Because it is obvious
Art is about emotions-what emotion is unique to blackness?

Another user here. Morrison's problem is not that she writes about black women. It's that she has been writing the same tearjerking, melodramatic, Wardine-be-cry book for over 30 years.

>Faulkner
>after modernism
People are more honest when anonymous and not when they're posturing under a microscope

Let's direct this absolute dogsshit you've just give me.

I said race affects black people so much that it is constantly in their culture. I didn't say racism I didn't blame anyone, you still took it wrong and made a non argument telling me to go to tumblr.

Point 2
You complained about the Morrison's fans agenda like agendas are a bad thing but you don't even care about the other agendas.

Point 3
Influence to whom? You understand that the authors you dickride have absolutely tiny influence to the rest of the world except you and your fellow fans?

I read A Mercy and it was pretty good.