Great Writing Equals Popularity... Right...?

          Well we talked about novels that are either popular, classical, not popular, or a combination of these types. Personally I am surprised that so many people considered Arthur Conan Doyle’s Sherlock Holmes to be classical and popular because in the past I haven’t met many readers of the genre. Same goes for stuff like LOTR or Chronicles of Narnia: I always thought people had heard of the books—or at least seen one of the movies—but never actually taken the time to read the text; which I’ll admit I haven’t exactly read LOTR because the Hobbit is dense and it’s only a children’s book. Nevertheless, perhaps when I’ve got several hours open for a month or two I’ll commit to reading the first novel. As for work like Narnia or Sherlock Holmes, I am always surprised to learn that people are avid readers of both books, but have never heard of an author like oh, I don’t know, Robert Louis Stevenson (the Scottish author of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, or perhaps the better known Treasure Island). It is interesting because while the average person, in my experience, has little to no knowledge of such works, they happen to know Doyle’s craftsmanship; who believe it or not, conveniently is influenced by Stevenson. Now why is that? Why are two perfectly good authors not represented equally throughout literature and other media like the film industry?

Perhaps it has something to do with race.

Just as a quick disclaimer: I honestly haven’t done any serious researcher into the subject, but I do have a vague idea of why Doyle became famous and Stevenson didn’t. First off, Doyle lucked out and happened to have an agent that enabled him to make money off stories like Sherlock Holmes. In contrast, Stevenson had no such support, and in addition to that, he was of a minority group in the United Kingdom: he was Scottish. The real irony though is that while Doyle copies a lot of Stevenson’s suspenseful writing style, Stevenson’s stories like Arabian Nights fails to garner the same kind of widespread popularity even though recently critics suggest that Stevenson is the better writer of the two! The reason I point this out is simple: work that becomes popular—unfortunately—seems to rely more on the social appetite and appreciation of the author whose stories are being praised. And for me this poses a significant issue because popular writing shouldn’t be a reflection of an audience with bad taste, but should instead reflect a critical portrait of the values that the society holds dearest. That’s what I believe makes a book stand the test of time: if it can evoke emotions like anger, disgust, fear, sadness, surprise, or happiness, then it will forever be labeled a classic because it elicits the emotions we experience every day. I can only pray this seemingly decadent and stagnant stage of writing is quickly washed away by inspiring work…

Picture Source: http://farm9.static.flickr.com/8044/8106166307_9cee36cc94.jpg