50 Forgotten Novels

September 4, 2007 12:05 PM

50 forgotten and overlooked novels as chosen by 50 Anglophone writers, including Lionel Shriver, Hari Kunzru, Michael Chabon, Siri Hustvedt, A. S. Byatt and Philip Pullman (part two).
posted by Kattullus (59 comments total)

Great post. I would like to add Raymond Carver's "Where I'm Calling From" to the list. Most bookstores don't carry Carver anymore (at least in the mid-sized bookish city where I live), and on more than one occasion a shop clerk, puzzled, has asked me: "Who's Raymond Carver?"
posted by KokuRyu at 12:13 PM on September 4, 2007

Even though not all the books are novels, I decided to go with "novels" because most of them are. My own choice, if forced to pick just one, would probably be John Dos Passos' USA Trilogy. A collage of picaresque narrative, poetry, newstext, stream-of-consciousness, factual essays and a healthy dose of socialism, it is like nothing else.
posted by Kattullus at 12:13 PM on September 4, 2007

Donoso's Obscene Bird of Night, suggested in that list by Nicola Barker, is my answer to anyone who asks me "What's the greatest 20th century work of Latin American literature I haven't read?"
posted by vacapinta at 12:14 PM on September 4, 2007

Weird, I recognized more of the forgotten works and authors than I did the contemporary contributors.
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 12:23 PM on September 4, 2007

Anytime I'm reading one of Lawrence Durrell's "Alexandria Quartet" novels and have to explain to someone what they are, I'm baffled and disappointed by how little known they are now-- particularly since I read that they were monstrously successful when they came out.
posted by hermitosis at 12:39 PM on September 4, 2007

"How did we miss these?"

I think I know. We've choked the landscape with MFA mc-workshops and chain bookstores that push minimalist short fiction and self-help manifestos? That is, we want reading to be either "useful" or "over quickly," and most of these books (and most books worth reading, I find) don't give in to such demands.
posted by kid ichorous at 12:44 PM on September 4, 2007

Hunger (1890)

Knut Hamsun

Oh come on. If you're going to tout a Hamson book as obscure at least go for something like The Mysteries (which yes, everybody should read).

But wanky nitpicks like that aside, it's an interesting list. I'd never heard of Elizabeth taylor before, who shows up three times.

(Well, yes I've heard of that Elizabeth Taylor.)
posted by Lentrohamsanin at 12:56 PM on September 4, 2007

I'm glad something by William Boyd made the list. I've always thought his 'The New Confessions' was terribly underappreciated (I'd easily rank it among my favourites, but then, I'm not a literary critic).
Actually 'Any Human Heart' seems to be essentially a rewrite of The New Confessions - Boyd must have also felt overlooked and wanted another stab at it.
posted by Flashman at 1:08 PM on September 4, 2007

My one nominee to the list would be Eureka St. by Robert Mcliam Wilson. Great, great novel, perhaps the first I've read that revolves around the crush on a city.
posted by micayetoca at 1:13 PM on September 4, 2007

A good list. I have to say that there are many on the list I've not read, most. A High Wind In Jamaica would be my pick, although I think it is more read in the US since the republication by the NYRClassics imprint.
posted by OmieWise at 1:25 PM on September 4, 2007

Anytime I'm reading one of Lawrence Durrell's "Alexandria Quartet" novels and have to explain to someone what they are, I'm baffled and disappointed by how little known they are now

I have at least 3 copies of the Quartet laying around the house. I've found most truly literate people I know, know about them. But, yes, I'm surprised too that they're not *generally* known.
posted by vacapinta at 1:35 PM on September 4, 2007

That's so funny, I have several copies of the Quartet on hand as well! Mostly so I always have one to push at anyone who gets too close or stays too long.
posted by hermitosis at 1:44 PM on September 4, 2007

Another forgotten book that totally spoke to me when I read it:

Zoo Station, by Ian Walker.
posted by KokuRyu at 2:03 PM on September 4, 2007

vacapinta, i have a bone to pick with you... you recommend "el obsceno pajero de la noche" on askme. i bought it this weekend, found the first page tough reading and now see that in english (quoting from first link) It would be a crass understatement to say that this book is a challenging read; it's totally and unapologetically psychotic. It's also insanely gothic, brilliantly engaging, exquisitely written, filthy, sick, terrifying, supremely perplexing, and somehow connives to make the brave reader feel like a tiny, sleeping gnat being sucked down a fabulously kaleidoscopic dream plughole.

in a thread where i was looking for detective novels to help with my middling spanish...

so 10/10 for style, but minus several million for practicality, hmm? :o)
posted by andrew cooke at 2:27 PM on September 4, 2007

ooops... i assume it's pajaro, and that few people here know chilean slang!
posted by andrew cooke at 2:28 PM on September 4, 2007

Hey, I was going for the Chilean angle. In any case, that mini-review overstates the case. Although I see that you disagree...Sorry.
posted by vacapinta at 2:45 PM on September 4, 2007

D'oh! Only read two on that list, and one of those was the not-in-the-tiniest-bit obscure Hunger, by Knut Hamsun.

As Lentrohamsanin correctly points out, they could, at least, have gone with Mysteries. Hamsun, and Hunger, in particular, are often cited alongside Dostoyevski as the progenitors of modern psychological literature, without which a large chunk of 20th Century writing would not have been possible.

It's about as obscure as the chance meeting on a dissecting table of a sewing machine and an umbrella.
posted by UbuRoivas at 2:48 PM on September 4, 2007

Honestly. Rasselas as a forgotten book? It's rather famous, no? If I were to pick a forgotten novel, it would be something by Samuel Butler, such as Erewhon, which was one of the most influential precursors to the modernist novel.

Ah well.
posted by honest knave at 2:56 PM on September 4, 2007

Also, I suspect that for the authors who made the selections, this list is extremely self-un-self-conscious in a hipster kind of way-- just like trying to find important bands nobody has heard of.
posted by honest knave at 2:59 PM on September 4, 2007

i'll keep trying - it sounds like i *should* read the thing. just found the description rather amusing (it was hard to read because my spanish isn't good enough, not because i object to the style).
posted by andrew cooke at 3:01 PM on September 4, 2007

As a rule, if a book list includes anything by Alasdair Gray on it (especially Lanark), it's a list worth reading.

Also, I have nothing but respect for the literary tastes of Michael Chabon.
posted by billypilgrim at 3:42 PM on September 4, 2007 [1 favorite]

MJ Hyland

A Good Man Is Hard to Find (1955)

Really, who hasn't heard of this, and it's funny remix "A Man is Good to Find Hard"
posted by Eekacat at 5:39 PM on September 4, 2007

Honestly. Rasselas as a forgotten book? It's rather famous, no? If I were to pick a forgotten novel, it would be something by Samuel Butler, such as Erewhon, which was one of the most influential precursors to the modernist novel.

Shit, you beat me to it --- that's what I was going to say.

The list seems kind of dumb, really. It should be styled, "books I love that the average Joe on the street probably hasn't heard of."

Am I the only one sick of the "neglected masterpieces" meme? There seems to be a growing belief that, since popular novelists like John Grisham sell a billion copies of every book they write, a literary novelist whose book sells five or ten thousand copies is underappreciated. That's stupid. For some reason, it irritates me to read reviews where the reviewer comments on this or that writer as "sadly neglected." Too often, that seems to be code for, "Why don't more people share my elevated tastes?"
posted by jayder at 6:01 PM on September 4, 2007

Wow, I thought I was the only person who knew Christopher Okigbo's Labyrinths, a wonderful book of poetry that's unlike anything else you've ever read. Great list, great post—thanks, Kattullus!

Man, people here will snark about anything. "I'm so superliterate I don't consider Rasselas obscure—take that!" Uh, guys, if you'll get your heads out of the university library and go ask random readers on the street, I think you'll have to go pretty far before finding anyone who's read even a paragraph of it. I certainly haven't. But enjoy your elevated tastes! And come on:

There seems to be a growing belief that, since popular novelists like John Grisham sell a billion copies of every book they write, a literary novelist whose book sells five or ten thousand copies is underappreciated. That's stupid.

No, it's simple logic, unless you're claiming that if a book doesn't sell well it's not worth much, which I don't think you are. Frankly, your whole comment is pretty hard to parse; you seem to be against pretty much everything. But I guess that's par for the course here at MeFi.
posted by languagehat at 6:13 PM on September 4, 2007 [2 favorites]

MetaFilter: against pretty much everything
posted by UbuRoivas at 6:31 PM on September 4, 2007 [1 favorite]

Surprised to see Flannery O'Connor's A Good Man Is Hard to Find; then I remembered it was a British list. Seems hard to imagine her on a U.S. list like this. Or do only Southern lit types read her?
posted by mediareport at 6:48 PM on September 4, 2007

KokuRyu: "I would like to add Raymond Carver's "Where I'm Calling From" to the list."

Both the English-language and translation? I'm assuming you're in Japan. Oh, and have you read Murakami's translation of Carver? How is it?
posted by Kattullus at 7:29 PM on September 4, 2007

In my work I make allusions to books that nobody else has read,
music that nobody else has heard,
and art that nobody else has seen.

I can't help it, because I am so much more intelligent and well-rounded than everyone who surrounds me.
posted by Nahum Tate at 7:45 PM on September 4, 2007

I would add Malcolm Lowry's Under the Volcano.
posted by beagle at 7:53 PM on September 4, 2007

i just realised i have been confusing raymond carver with raymond chandler!
posted by andrew cooke at 7:55 PM on September 4, 2007

This is probably incredibly stupid of me, but I had no idea Russell Hoban wrote grown-up books. I just knew he was the Frances the Badger guy. I love Frances. I doubt this has much bearing on how I would feel about his novels, but it's reason enough for me to try one.

And yeah, in what world is A Good Man Is Hard to Find obscure? I had to read that in high school.
posted by naoko at 8:34 PM on September 4, 2007

And yeah, in what world is Under the Volcano obscure? It's out in freakin' Penguin, for chrissakes.
posted by UbuRoivas at 9:05 PM on September 4, 2007

Languagehat --

I'd expect anyone with a decent liberal arts education to have at least heard of Rasselas; it's the best-known book by one of the greatest English men of letters (well, except for his Dictionary). How is it "snarky" to disagree with the assertion that it's obscure? Has the definition of snark been broadened to mean "to disagree"?

And as to my other comment, on the basis of which you characterized me as "against pretty much everything." This discussion just brought to mind how I get irritated by these plaintive laments about the "unjust neglect" of this or that masterwork. It seems everyone has their favorite, neglected Latin American Boom writer whose reputation sorely needs resuscitation. And it seems that Dalkey Archive is forever unearthing yet another daring Latvian or Finnish experimental novelist from the twenties whose unjust neglect is a ringing condemnation of today's literary philistinism and vacuity. Such laments suggest that members of society have a moral obligation to appreciate a given artist or work of art. I don't think people have any such obligation. (But to be fair, the linked piece in the Guardian does not use that phrase; it touts the books as "brilliant but underrated.")

(Although, now having made that little speech, I am sure that an examination of my posting history would turn up a comment in which I decry the damnable neglect of this or that book.)
posted by jayder at 10:12 PM on September 4, 2007

Put more simply, if you write high-quality literary works, and your works are enjoyed by five or ten thousand people, I'd say you are appreciated by just about the right number of people, given the state of literary taste and education. That doesn't mean you'd "underappreciated."

I can't quite put my finger on it --- maybe I'm full of crap --- but it seems that people who bandy about the "underappreciated" and "neglected" labels are basing their assessment on completely arbitrary standards.

People say, for example, that Richard Yates was neglected. But he got published, and we're talking about him now, and his books were published and talked about when he was alive ... so where is the neglect? ... Is it in the fact that he wasn't adored by the same numbers of fans who read Cheever or Hemingway? Why should outliers be used to determine what is the right amount of appreciation a writer receives?
posted by jayder at 10:22 PM on September 4, 2007

not-in-the-tiniest-bit obscure Hunger, by Knut Hamsun.

As Lentrohamsanin correctly points out, they could, at least, have gone with Mysteries.

I see these as two halves of the same book.
posted by Wolof at 1:06 AM on September 5, 2007

nah, not really. the protagonists are too different, unless the one in Mysteries is about 20-30 years older than the one in Hunger, which could work. Pan is much closer to Mysteries, imho, although in strict realism terms, the same character cannot really die twice.
posted by UbuRoivas at 2:20 AM on September 5, 2007

languagehat: fair 'nuff. It is, after all, a newspaper. But presumably also, by posting on the blue, there's an expectation that people might disagree or discuss the list, yes? I enjoy the nuance introduced by your valuable academic perspective on language; I would hardly call it myopia.

If I had recommended Jean Merrill's The Pushcart War, a truly wonderful book, would your response have been different? The works we read as children can have a profound influence on interests and even literary style. It's interesting to me that no one suggested works primarily marketed to young people.

The question of obscure writers & works is an interesting and important one, because it's useful to continually look back, question the lists, and update them. People who just read what's well-known won't do badly for themselves, more good stuff has been published than anyone can ever read.

Blake and Herbert were obscure at one point. Zora Neale Hurston's works are said to be underappreciated. Are people still reading Graham Greene? Do they read Okri instead of Soyinka or Achebe? Why?

The works people think are important or unimportant can tell us much about them and their literary influences (these are authors after all, who are in the business of reading as much as writing). The case of Butler is interesting to me for this reason, because in four years of academic literary study, I had *never* heard of him. Over a very short period, however, I also started to see very old copies of his books in libraries everywhere-- in Carnegie libraries in remote parts of North Dakota, in collections of the Everyman's Library, in the collections of people whose parents bequeathed them books, as well as in the libraries of universities of a certain age. I also started to run across early twentieth-century writers who talk about the great influence of his books: writers such as GB Shaw, EM Forester, George Orwell, and Virginia Wolf.

You're right; I do keep my head in the university library quite often. And I like it. But surely that doesn't disqualify me. My apologies if in my enthusiasm I wrote in too condescending a manner.
posted by honest knave at 2:26 AM on September 5, 2007

(curiously, Hamsun dedicated Pan to the protagonist in Mysteries, whose name escapes me right now...)
posted by UbuRoivas at 2:29 AM on September 5, 2007

My apologies if in my enthusiasm I wrote in too condescending a manner.

(or misspelt Forster & Woolf)
posted by UbuRoivas at 2:34 AM on September 5, 2007

Eep!
posted by honest knave at 2:40 AM on September 5, 2007

(sorry, i'm sure it was an honest mistake)
posted by UbuRoivas at 2:47 AM on September 5, 2007

Some years ago, in the middle of a pretentious dinner-party conversation about whether X was a 'major' or merely a 'good minor' writer, I suddenly experienced a blinding flash of revelation. I thought: who cares? Since then, I've given up playing the literary reputation game -- and now I try to get on with reading novels, and forming my own opinion about them, without caring too much whether the novelist in question is 'over-rated' or 'under-rated'. (No doubt I'd feel differently if my livelihood depended on the sales of my books -- but luckily I am only a mere reader, not a professional writer.) I find the question of literary reputation very interesting from a historical point of view, but I try not to let it prejudice my opinion of what I'm reading.

I get irritated by these plaintive laments about the 'unjust neglect' of this or that masterwork .. Such laments suggest that members of society have a moral obligation to appreciate a given artist or work of art. I don't think people have any such obligation.

Well, yes and no. I entirely agree with you that we shouldn't confuse art with morality. But these plaintive laments about unjustly neglected masterpieces do, I think, serve a useful purpose. Forming your own taste means going outside the bestseller lists and doing a bit of research to find the novelists you like. Do this, and you will quickly come across excellent and neglected writers who have fallen off the literary map. Why not stand up for them? Why not share your enthusiasm with other readers?

In this spirit, here are a few of my own favourites:

Polly Redford, The Christmas Bower. An utterly delightful children's book about a little boy called Noah who wants to be an ornithologist and work in a museum. I loved it as a child, and when I returned to it as an adult reader I fell in love with it all over again. Although it's written for children, it is in some ways a very subversive book about adult snobbery and social distinction. It is a wonderful novel, and I have never encountered anyone else who has ever read it.

Robert Liddell, Stepsons. A semi-autobiographical novel about two young boys and their wicked stepmother; at one level it's a very shocking depiction of an adult cruelly mistreating two sensitive children (psychological, not physical mistreatment, and all the more shocking for that), but it also manages to be a very funny novel, and even affirmative in the way it shows the two boys learning to resist abuse and even, in the end, pitying the abuser. A great novel -- out of print, alas.

Sybille Bedford, A Legacy. A brilliant historical novel set in Germany before the First World War: an extraordinary recreation of a vanished society, sometimes deadpan funny, sometimes casually cruel, with much of the plot conveyed through dialogue (so you have to concentrate quite hard to work out exactly what is going on -- there are bits of the story I'm still not quite sure I understand). After being out of print for many years, it's recently been reprinted (in Penguin Classics) so perhaps more people will discover it.
posted by verstegan at 2:56 AM on September 5, 2007

I was one of the contributors to the Observer article. I took it as an opportunity to suggest a writer that I admired to interested readers who might not have come across her, or forgotten about her, as we do. Awareness of books and writers seems to cycle.

It is also the case that in bookshops (here in the UK if not in the States) there is no longer much opportunity to browse and come across all kinds of titles. Many novels go out of print almost instantly, based on sales, and bookshop space is now paid-for advertising. If the publisher is not buying the tablespace then if you're lucky a single book might be available on the shelf stored alphabetically. The chances of coming across it if you don't know it has been published are very slim. Used to be that I'd go to a bookshop and spend an hour or so looking at the books published that month that were all displayed.

Books are now entirely commodities. Publishers even check these days with the big stores and distributors before committing to publish. This depresses me as a writer (obviously), as a reader and as a teacher. Any way that one can talk about books for their content rather than their popularity is beneficial.
posted by jennydiski at 3:38 AM on September 5, 2007

A Legacy is a truly extraordinary novel.
posted by OmieWise at 4:20 AM on September 5, 2007

jayder: "I'd expect anyone with a decent liberal arts education to have at least heard of Rasselas; it's the best-known book by one of the greatest English men of letters (well, except for his Dictionary). How is it "snarky" to disagree with the assertion that it's obscure?"

Ah, but the criterion used for the list isn't "obscure" but "forgotten and overlooked," which doesn't quite mean the same thing. Rasselas may not be all that obscure compared, say, with the short stories of Pamela Zoline, but it's certainly forgotten and overlooked.
posted by Kattullus at 4:32 AM on September 5, 2007

nah, not really

Was ist das? I don't see it that way? How exactly do you know this?

My (small) nomination -- G.V. Desani's All About H. Hatterr. Insane. Métèque. Verbose. And yet oddly pedantic.
posted by Wolof at 4:44 AM on September 5, 2007

Nikita Lalwani nominates Bear v. Shark and asks:

Whoever said that post-modern musing had to be vacuous and futile?

I've no idea but I suspect is Lalwani, rhetorically, just then. However vacuous and futile is a pretty good description of Bear v. Shark which is a sort of feeble imitation of Don DeLillo.

My own answer to the question of best overlooked books is always Schooling by Heather McGowan. It got good reviews but I don't think anyone actually read it.
posted by ninebelow at 5:07 AM on September 5, 2007

Ooh, and the short stories of Pamela Zoline are wonderful. 'The Heat Death Of The Universe' is my all time favourite short story.
posted by ninebelow at 5:09 AM on September 5, 2007

This discussion just brought to mind how I get irritated by these plaintive laments about the "unjust neglect" of this or that masterwork. It seems everyone has their favorite, neglected Latin American Boom writer whose reputation sorely needs resuscitation.

So? I just don't understand what you could have against this, unless you believe that everyone should ignore everything but the current best-sellers. How could it possibly be wrong to say "You may not be aware of X, but it's really good and I think you might like it"? How else do you find out about things? Were you born with a knowledge of everything worth reading, hearing, etc.? What the hell is wrong with wanting to share stuff you love and think isn't widely enough known?

but presumably also, by posting on the blue, there's an expectation that people might disagree or discuss the list, yes?

Yes, of course, but there's a big difference between disagreement that accepts the value of what's being linked but wants to discuss the details, which is what your comment was (though the answer to "Rasselas as a forgotten book? It's rather famous, no?" is "No," which is why I think you should get out of the library more), and disagreement that takes the form of "The list seems kind of dumb ... Am I the only one sick of the "neglected masterpieces" meme? ... That's stupid ... it irritates me." That's snark, and it irritates me.
posted by languagehat at 5:33 AM on September 5, 2007

Ooh, and the short stories of Pamela Zoline are wonderful. 'The Heat Death Of The Universe' is my all time favourite short story.

Yes indeed, a wonderful writer and story!
posted by languagehat at 5:34 AM on September 5, 2007

nah, not really

Was ist das? I don't see it that way? How exactly do you know this?

I don't know it; it's a personal opinion. Pretty much like everything in the linked article & subsequent discussion.
posted by UbuRoivas at 5:59 AM on September 5, 2007

in bookshops (here in the UK if not in the States) there is no longer much opportunity to browse

is that why the lrb store opened, or does that have to follow the same kind of pressures?
posted by andrew cooke at 6:00 AM on September 5, 2007

is that why the lrb store opened?

Yes, it keeps books in stock that none of the chains would even have in the first place. I doubt that it makes a profit. It's a deliberate alternative to what has happened to Waterstones and Borders. Pissing in the wind, I suppose.
posted by jennydiski at 6:14 AM on September 5, 2007

"No," which is why I think you should get out of the library more.

:-) Yes, I suppose that's rather how I meant it, as a kind of shorthand for, "or have I been spending too much time in the library?" It's good to know one answer :-)
posted by honest knave at 6:32 AM on September 5, 2007

Mark Helprin's 'Winters Tale' anyone?
posted by Mintyblonde at 12:28 PM on September 5, 2007

This month's The Atlantic has an article on this Elizabeth Taylor.

Also, I second "A High Wind in Jamaica", which was mentioned in "The Diary of a Provincial Lady" to good effect.
posted by of strange foe at 2:57 PM on September 5, 2007

Lud in the Mist, by Hope Mirrlees.

Peace, by Gene Wolfe.
posted by Iridic at 3:44 PM on September 5, 2007

I don't know it; it's a personal opinion. Pretty much like everything in the linked article & subsequent discussion.

*raises eyebrow*

Read back. The literal sense of what you wrote was that you don't believe that I believe what I said what I believe, because it's all opinion.

Which is fine, but, you know, a bit, well, hell.
posted by Wolof at 5:33 AM on September 6, 2007

If subsequent readers could remove the superfluous second "what", I'd be pleased -- it's an artefact of my (extremely) mild irritation.
posted by Wolof at 5:37 AM on September 6, 2007