American Literature vs British Literature

TS Eliot was from Kansas City. Shaw was Irish. Nobody mentions modernists like Ralph Ellison or anybody in the postwar era after my brief perusal of this thread. British people are essentially ignorant of Am lit and just assume that their writers are superior, just like they ignorantly assume the same thing about other aspects of their culture.

Maybe people should google the debate that came up to potentially allow Americans to compete for the Booker Prize a few years ago and see what the experts think, instead of the semi-literate nationalists at antimoon.

<<That's wrong. BE is mother language. Imagine, if America is not a super power, who gives a toss to American English. I can bet my life that British English would have been the most popular and taught language all over the world. All great poets, novelist and accents are belonged to the great land of England! Envy us, you monotonous sounding Americans and Canadians!>>

Congratulations, you completely missed the point the person was making. American English is not derived from modern British English. Since the founding of the American colonies, the language has essentially been split and allowed to grow and evolve in two separate regions of the world. The Americans were native speakers of English and are just as much heirs to the legacy of the language (at least all that came before the founding of the United States) as the British.

<<URIEL:
For some reason, I've always thought YOU do that...I mean some of you. :-) >>

Actually, it's only used by pretentious people who are trying to ape what they think of as the "correct" BRITISH usage. Because for an American like me, the answer to this: "The aspirated or unaspirated "h" - surely it's easier to say "an historical fact" than "a historical fact"? " is a resounding NO -- it is harder (and downright unnatural-sounding!) for me to try to say "an h-something". I would never do that in normal speech.

<<The problem with us over here is that we automatically think that everything American literally started on 7 July 1776>>

I believe that we now allow that history began in 1492. ;P Previous to that, there were cavemen....

"British people are essentially ignorant of Am lit "

Does America have a culture?

There's more interesting culture on a toilet bowl than there is in America.

"The problem with us over here is that we automatically think that everything American literally started on 7 July 1776"
That's true, actually. As there was no American before 1776. Anything written in the 13 original states before 1776 was British.

<<There's more interesting culture on a toilet bowl than there is in America.>>

A bit harsh there Adam, don’t you think? I dont mind bashing the yanks myself from time to time, but it should be done with a warm hart and some humour as well as respect.

<<"British people are essentially ignorant of Am lit " >>

In my case that is not true, however; I do prefer English literature since I find it more linguistic and vocabulary appealing. That said; you should first read literature that has been written on both sides of the pond, prior to dismissing either one as being "garbage" ready for the bin.

Trust our dear pal ADAM to go a bit OTT. :-) The guy is an English National Treasure and should be awarded the freedom of the Borough of Bolton for services to International Insulting (and I include Scotland in that!) . Don't we just love him!

Personally I am a great fan of British Literature - I can immerse myself in it and never surface again, ever. It's what I know and what I'm familiar with it having grown up with it. That does not mean it is "superior" to any other from elsewhere in the world - it's just that it is probably the most well known universally for one reason or another - the former British Empire having carried it to all four corners of the world.

I will maintain however, and I don't think anyone can dispute this however proud they may be of their own national works of literature, - there never has been, nor ever will there ever be, a playwright and poet as illustrious or as emninent or who has had his works as widely read and internationally performed as England's very own lad from Stratford-upon-Avon - WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE.

Practically every foreign tourist visiting the UK and travels around in this country includes Stratford on their itinerary. After London, it is the second most popular destination here, so that bears out my point. Next on the list comes Edinburgh (Scotland's capital city) but I would include that wouldn't I? :-) Loads of literary connections here.

Bath figures largely because of it's beautiful architecture, its Abbey, its Pulteney Bridge, its Roman baths, etc.... but also because of its strong links with Jane Austen.

No one seems to be interested in the proofreading I mentioned.

Who decided that Shakespeare was the greatest poet/playwright of all time? I mean, my gosh, some of his stuff is truly wretched and even the good stuff is not that extraordinary if you ask me. I know you're probably thinking I'm one of those ignorant Shakespeare bashers who doesn't like him because I can't understand him. That's entirely untrue. I am a very good reader, started on Shakespeare when i was thirteen, and haven't given him up yet. That said, I simply don't like his work that much and fail to recognize its "greatness". All of his comedies have basically the same plot, i.e. a woman dressing up as a man and subsequent confusion, with the exception of Much Ado About Nothing of course. His histories are entirely biased and entirely boring. Besides, he couldn't come up with an original plot to save his life. From what I've read every single one of his plays were based on a folktale or old legend.

I love British literature, but Shakespeare just doesn't do anything for me. Other people seem to think he was something special, but for the life of me I can't figure why. I much prefer Dickens, Gaskell, Austin, Richardson, Trollepe, Elliot, etc.

Anyway, that's my shpeel.

You know, sometimes other people's history is interesting, and sometimes it's just .... bewildering. Especially when every major character in a certain historical play is named some variant of Henry, and you've never heard of any of them anyway .... I had a hard time following Henry the IV, as you can tell!

I think a lot of a reader's enjoyment and connection to a given literature lies in feeling a sense of familiarity and shared history and culture, where the written word triggers more emotions and layers of meaning than its literal meaning conveys. That's one reason why no matter how good the writing or how skillfully an author turns a phrase, Brit Lit is always a little remote and alien to me. There's no value judgment in that; that's just the way it is. It often lacks the visceral impact that American authors have on me (obviously, as an American). When I read Harper Lee's To Kill A Mockingbird, for example, it makes me think far beyond the actual story itself, because I understand all of the cultural implications and complex interrelationships in it, and immediately relate them to people I've known, or situations I've seen that have nothing to do with the actual characters and plot. It immediately resonates. It's probably a richer experience for me than it would be for a British reader. As their literature is probably a richer, more powerful experience for them than it is for me.

Your opinions are valid, but whether you like the works of Shakespeare or not, whether you understand the plots or not, whether the plots all follow similar themes (which they don't really) or not, whether you can understand the Shakespearean English or not, whether the very name of Shakespeare bores you to instant slumber or not......the lad from Arden, the Bard of Avon, whether in love or out of love, is, in my opinion, the world's (yes, the entire world's) most well known, most prolific playwright and one of the greatest exponents of our beautiful Language, whether in tragedies or comedies or simply in sonnets galore. The name of William Shakespeare, even now almost 400 years on since he snuffed it on his birthday (what a waste of a cake and 52 candles) is known in every corner of the globe and his plays have been performed in every land, or at least read and studied.

I am just making a point here - but I think it's true to say that if an international poll (not just a UK poll - right across the Globe) was taken to name the world's most famous playwright in the whole of literary history, old Will would easily come out as numero uno. Even the lovely Globe Theatre on London's South Bank (on the site of the original Wooden-O of the Bard's day of the same name) has a distinctly "special feel" about it, an atmosphere which no other theatre quite possesses, as if the guy's spirit still struts around the circular stage.

I think it's perfectly logical that people either favour, or really understand and relate to, the literary works of their own compatriots for a variety of reasons, not least of all because the themes and storylines generally involve the history, lifestyle and cultural background of their own countries and with which they are more familar, as pointed out by Uriel. I enjoyed reading Hemingway's "For Whom the Bell Tolls" - I suppose mainly because of it's European setting against the background a precursor to WW2 - the Spanish Civil War and all its tragedies. An amazing read.

A Scot coming to the aid of an Englishman. Are you sure you're Scottish.

<<A Scot coming to the aid of an Englishman. Are you sure you're Scottish.>>

You seemed to have missed his point!

Damian: point taken and well made too. I guess you're right. I mean if I had to name the most famous author I could think of, I would probably say Shakespeare, regardless of whether I or anyone else liked him or not.