3 ms·
I think you have a limited view of what counts as literary. Well-developed characters are not a rigid requirement. Many classics of literature don't feature t
by o_nate 11y ago
I think you have a limited view of what counts as literary. Well-developed characters are not a rigid requirement. Many classics of literature don't feature them. Have you ever read Kafka or Borges?
- lmm 11y agoI've read a little of both. Regardless of what we label it as, would you agree that some recent winners (specifically I'll say Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell, The Yiddish Policemen's Union, The City & the City, Ancillary Justice, and The Three-Body Problem) are in some sense alike, that they form a different cluster from the list of older winners in my previous comment? That these newer winners are more similar to e.g. older Booker Prize winners (so that we don't get caught up trying to objectively define literary) than the older Hugo winners were? That there are qualities that the older Hugo winners have that the newer ones lack?