Is Drizzt destined to become a Classic?

[WayneLigon]

Will Drizzt books be next to their's on S&S must-read lists in 10-20 years time.

He might be; the books are certainly popular enough with non-gaming audiences. I can't find a site with actual sales figures (as oppossed to the weightings given to the numbers by the NYTreview), but they are in the millions. There are not 'millions' of gamers; there are, maybe, about a million or so totalled (from what I remember about the WOTC estimates; if it's wrong, show me the numbers. I cannot remember off the top of my head). So it's not just gamers reading these books and making them appear on the bestseller lists.

I remember seeing something that in a hundred years time, everyone who's won a nobel or pulitzer for literature will be forgotten but Stephen King and Barbara Taylor Bradford will probably still be read all over the world.

I would not call it a classic yet, but in twenty or thirty years time, maybe. A classic author or work endures.

 

[JRRNeiklot]

Salvatore's books will still be popular in 30 years, if he is still alive. He'll keep cranking the books out because, frankly, they sell. His market is the masses, who eat stuff like that up. The average reader has no conception of symbolism or style. They may not make you think about greater issues, but they ARE entertaining.

He doesn't compare to Tolkien or any number of other authors, but his books will continue to be read, until 10 years or so after his death. Then they'll quietly disappear. The same can be said with a LOT of the current authors of the Genre, though.

 

[Dark Jezter]

Salvatore's books will still be popular in 30 years, if he is still alive. He'll keep cranking the books out because, frankly, they sell. His market is the masses, who eat stuff like that up. The average reader has no conception of symbolism or style. They may not make you think about greater issues, but they ARE entertaining.

Ah, the masses. Those ignorant fools. When are they going to realize that we, the self-appointed literary elite, are the true judges of quality in fiction?

 

[Bendris Noulg]

Ah, the masses. Those ignorant fools. When are they going to realize that we, the self-appointed literary elite, are the true judges of quality in fiction?

Well, considering that many "leading societies" excel at producing generations of ignorant masses, and the root word of ignorance is "ignore", why would I waste my time waiting for the masses to learn or realize anything when it's their nature not to? The typical human is happy being educated slightly higher than a cabbage. Now be a good poster and remember, "you are a Beta and real literature is bad."

(Yes, as a matter of fact, Mr. Huxley is rolling over in his grave, thank you very much.)

 

[LGodamus]

RA Salvatore vs. Jack Kerouac.
RA Salvatore vs. F. Scott Fitzgerald.
RA Salvatore vs. Ernest Hemingway.
RA Salvatore vs. James Conrad.
RA Salvatore vs. Haruki Murakami.
RA Salvatore vs. David Eggers.
RA Salvatore vs. Emily Bronte.
RA Salvatore vs. William S. Burroughs.

I could go on. There is a great difference between writing and writing. The Drizzt novels will never be classics. I don't believe that you could tell me, with a straight face, that Drizzt is as complex, or well-written, a hero as, say, Jay Gatsby. Or that any of his villians are a Heathcliff.

He doesn't even stand up compared to contemporary authors, such as Murakami. RAS novels will never be taught in schools, they have no literary merit.

Fantasy Genre Trash are the twinkies of the writing world.

Call me stupid if you will, I'd rather you didn't, but I judge literature by the enjoyment I derive from it. And, I enjoy the Drizz't novels a whole magnitude more than many works from the authors above...that doesn't mean I am an under-read twit......it means in my mind the entire purpose of fiction is .........wait for it.......................entertainment. So if something fulfills its' purpose and does it well then by all rights it should be judged as good.....not because some old man at a university says so.

 

[Darrin Drader]

Oh heck, I said I was done with this thread, but I said something in another related thread that I think applies here. So, accuse me of hubris for quoting myself, but here goes:

Just remember that there is nothing wrong with enjoying pulp. I have a degree in English lit, but what do I find myself reading most of the time (other than RPG books)? Pulp! And why not? I think academics who are snotty about which genres are valid or not overlook the fact that reading can also be for enjoyment.

Also as mentioned in that thread, remember that pulp and lowbrow humor are often thrown into that unacceptable category. I guess by that standard no one should waste their time with William Shakespeare since he was known for his bathroom humor.

The bottom line, I guess, is that it is extremely doubtful that anyone will be teaching classes on Drizzt at any point in the foreseeable future, but there's no shame in being entertained by the books.

 

[ConnorSB]

If my english teacher doesn't consider Dune a "classic of literature", (she doesn't) then the Drizzt books certainly arn't either.

 

[The Mirrorball Man]

Call me stupid if you will, I'd rather you didn't, but I judge literature by the enjoyment I derive from it.

And that's your right, of course. But the purpose of this thread, as I understand it, is not to answer the question "Is Drizzt enjoyable?" or "Is Drizzt entertaining?". The fact that many people enjoy these novels has very little to do with their potential status as literary classics.

in my mind the entire purpose of fiction is .........wait for it.......................entertainment. So if something fulfills its' purpose and does it well then by all rights it should be judged as good.....not because some old man at a university says so.

Entertainment is not the entire purpose of fiction. It just isn't. Good fiction needs to be entertaining of course, but pretending that entertainment is the alpha and omega of fictional literature is, in my opinion, extremely limiting. After all, if the entertainment factor were the only way to gauge the quality of a piece of writing, we wouldn't study literature: entertainment is entirely subjective, and there wouldn't be much to say beyond "I like it" or "I don't like it". I don't think there will ever be a general agreement on what the real purpose of fiction is, but I guess we might all agree that literature always is, at its deepest core, a quest for truth (authenticity, versimilitude, honesty, coherence, etc...) and beauty (entertainment, originality, emotional impact, formal perfection, etc...).

Often enough, genre fiction sacrifices some of these aspects to focus on entertainment exclusively. It's a perfectly viable approach of course, and it's satisfying in its own right, but it's so far from fulfilling the full potential of literature that it almost belongs to a different category. It's like sex without love: it's fun, but there's so much more to human relationships that ultimately, why bother?

 

[buzzard]

Oh heck, I said I was done with this thread, but I said something in another related thread that I think applies here. So, accuse me of hubris for quoting myself, but here goes:



Also as mentioned in that thread, remember that pulp and lowbrow humor are often thrown into that unacceptable category. I guess by that standard no one should waste their time with William Shakespeare since he was known for his bathroom humor.

Heck if lowbrow humor disqualifies something from being literature, Chaucer will certainly get the boot. The Canterbury Tales are extremely baudy in parts.

buzzard

 

[Henry]

I don't think there will ever be a general agreement on what the real purpose of fiction is, but I guess we might all agree that literature always is, at its deepest core, a quest for truth (authenticity, versimilitude, honesty, coherence, etc...) and beauty (entertainment, originality, emotional impact, formal perfection, etc...).

I've driven more than one English major to irritation by claiming that the Drizzt Do'Urden "Homeland" series has these same elements, and that said elements make it a quite deep work. Most of us have never had to go to the lengths Drizzt did just to find someone who wouldn't stab him in the back, much less to find his place in the world; His desire to find a faith, and a home, that he belonged to made him travel literally a thousand miles to find it, encountering prejudice from all but a handful of individuals, but it was that handful that convinced him to go on when he had almost nothing left. He had one friend for years who accepted him unconditionally, and it wasn't even human.

The Drizzt books are by no means original - but they are in character deeper than people give them credit for, and strike a chord with many of its readers who empathasize with trying to "find home" emotionally.