The CanLit Dilemma

Posted 23 October, 2007 in Literary Criticism |

Spent last evening at the IFOA party, where I finally got to meet George “Bookninja” Murray face-to-face; he proved to be as cool in person as he is on his site.

I’m not in the best head space this morning — too much red wine and too many looming deadlines are not an ideal combination, I’ve discovered — so in lieu of reading my blather, I’ll point you in the direction of a Toronto Star article by Stephen Marche, which was brought to my attention by novelist Claire Cameron. Marche compares Brooklyn authors to Canadian authors and finds that while their NY counterparts are relentlessly innovative, curious, and interesting, the Canadian authors, and the books they produce, are, well, boring. In Canada, Marche argues,

Innovation, whether in language or form, is a dirty word. Foer, Krauss, and Eggers always innovate. They always do something new in their books. That’s why they’re called “novels.” Even more significantly, they are celebrated for their boundary-pushing, both by critics and by the book-buying public. Brooklyn’s books are like toys, meant to excite and give pleasure and challenge a little bit. In Canada, we are the oatmeal of world literature. We are on the cutting edge of blandness.

Speaking of which, I’m not making much headway on my Giller pledge, but more of that anon.

1 comment to “The CanLit Dilemma”

Panic, October 23rd, 2007 at 12:59 pm:

• Some of my workmates went, but I passed it up in favor of a nap. Heh. Too bad, it would have been nice to meet you and George, though I’m not sure how we would have recognized each other.

Your comment:

Name (required)

Mail (requried)

Website

Security code (Required)*
To prove that you're not a bot, enter this code