Progressive Literature

How would you define progressive literature? To me, literature à la Clancy, Grisham, King etc is associated with commercial, low-quality pop-music. Giants such as Dickens, Scott, Shakespeare are likened to classical rock (Queen and Deep Purple). But there are also "progressive" authors -- John Fowles, for example. Or good old Laurence Sterne. Or maybe Huxley, although I've not read him yet, but I suspect he must have a "progressive" touch. Of course, I am naming only English (or British) authors, but this is because I am only embarking on other nations' literature (my French is getting stronger every day, and my Swedish and Czech too; curiously although I know Russian, I never read much in Russian) ... Although recently I was told that Alain Robbe-Grillet is as special as Fowles -- maybe he's progressive too. I only started to read him two days ago, in French, of course.

What do you think? Which authors are "progressive" to you? How to define progressiveness in literature?

grisham and clancy suck, (although clancy is techmically brilliant when it comes to the military, in that w**king DT sense), but I wouldn't classify Stephen King as strictly commerical.  His stuff is pretty damn scary, and some of his more poetic stuff can chill me like nothing else.

and don't forget Dickens is pretty fluffy also, he got payed by the word for god sakes-----uchhh

CaincelaOreinim wrote: Heh...you asked the right person for this one, least I think, if I don't say so myself...  Try: William Faulkner, David Foster Wallace, James Joyce, William Gaddis, Thomas Pynchon, William S. Burroughs, Samuel R. Delany, Arthur C. Clarke, Samuel Beckett, Clive Barker, Stephen King, Dean Koontz, Mary Coponegro, Ursula K. LeGuin, Herman Melville, Vladimir Nabokov, Neil Gaiman, Kurt Vonnegut, Jorge Luis Borges, Fyodor Dostoevsky, Franz Kafka, Josephn Conrad, Umberto Eco, William H. Gass, Aldus Huxley, Tom Robbins, Andre Breton, Albert Camus, Paul Auster, Barth... All I can think of at the moment.

Urusla K. LeGuin is wonderful

most of the heavy science fiction writers are (not that poppy Star Wars crap but real Science Fiction)

NetsNJFan wrote: CaincelaOreinim wrote: Heh...you asked the right person for this one, least I think, if I don't say so myself...  Try: William Faulkner, David Foster Wallace, James Joyce, William Gaddis, Thomas Pynchon, William S. Burroughs, Samuel R. Delany, Arthur C. Clarke, Samuel Beckett, Clive Barker, Stephen King, Dean Koontz, Mary Coponegro, Ursula K. LeGuin, Herman Melville, Vladimir Nabokov, Neil Gaiman, Kurt Vonnegut, Jorge Luis Borges, Fyodor Dostoevsky, Franz Kafka, Josephn Conrad, Umberto Eco, William H. Gass, Aldus Huxley, Tom Robbins, Andre Breton, Albert Camus, Paul Auster, Barth... All I can think of at the moment. Urusla K. LeGuin is wonderful most of the heavy science fiction writers are (not that poppy Star Wars crap but real Science Fiction)

You know, somebody (person whose opinion I respect) told me to read Robert Heinlein, "Puppet Masters" and it was so weak and silly ... maybe the worst novel I read in the last 5 years. 0 stars out of five! OK, maybe a half! But some Mr. More-Brawn-Than-Brains saving the Earth from a stupid alien invasion ... with the president of US involved ... and with people in 2014 having neither computers nor internet yet!

Now this person is set to have some heavy thrashing from me!

Can you recommend some more progressive science fiction than that?

I can recommend you the Strugatsky brothers - they are 120% literary prog -- wrote more than 10 volumes of sci-fi novels. They should be translated into English from Russian. In Russia and Ukraine they are immensely popular in intellectual circles.

I think I'll admit to King's overall work being pretty sub-par OUTSIDE of his work relating to The Dark Tower (for those who don't know, a good chunk of his work coincides with it). 

Saul, to me at least, is more a doppelganger and subaltern to King more so than Koontz is.  Koontz tackles a lot more governmental cabalistic mind-control arenas that I'm sure King hasn't touched as frequently.  And Saul, haven't read much, but what I have was pretty somnolent I thought.  

Arteum, in terms of Joyce, I've always looked at reading him (and perhaps somewhere in his grave he'll agree with me or turn over; one or the other hah) as whatever YOU want to make of it; he wrote for himself mostly - ahah he started writing Finnegan's Wake using crayons on little slips of paper as a smack in the face to literary Academics - and I respect that...no holds barred modernist "madness."  Like Surrealistic literature, when you read him you just have to let go of reason, comprehensibility, and the "so called do's" of literary standards heh.

A note on LeGuin; I've read around 3-4 of her books, mainly her sci-fi...and knowing her background (+ see her poetry) I think it gets to the point where they're more mediums to express her poltical views/ideas than they are...out there.  Haven't read much of her fantasy stuff.

Also meant to mention Mark Z. Danielewski's House Of Leaves if you want to go on a rollercoster ride of veneer, belletristic, and gimmicky literature (it's more fun than serious).  Paul Bowles is also an interesting read for the most part (I base this on two reads) dealing with culture shock and annihilation of self really heh.  One more even though I'm not a huge fan: Ayn Rand.