Talk:Great American Novel

Gravity's Rainbow and Slaughterhouse 5

If someone could clear this up for me I'd be very grateful. The idea that a Great American Novel embodies "the spirit of life in the United States at the time of its writing" seems at odds with some of the examples. Gravity's Rainbow, for example, or Slaughterhouse 5, don't focus on life in the US, or life at the time of writing, both being set predominantly in Europe during WWII. Over here in Britain, we might describe some works that attempt to deal with contemporary national identity as being 'State of the Nation' novels; Dickens provides many classic examples, Martin Amis, London Fields or Zadie Smith's White Teeth would be more modern examples. Would the phrase Great American Novel be used in a similar way, something I could see in Huck Finn or Gatsby, or is it used more extensively to refer to any novel that happens to be 'great' and by an 'American', regardless of subject matter? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.3.170.105 (talk) 16:17, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

I agree that Gravity's Rainbow and Slaughterhouse 5 are poor examples & that this represents a confusion between "THE GREAT AMERICAN NOVEL" and "really, really great American novels" (in some people's minds). It would seem to me that, at a minimum, The Great American Novel must deal with life in America. Over time, this could be corrected in the article by insisting that editors give references for these examples... Did acknowledged critics really tout Gravity's Rainbow and Slaughterhouse 5 as The Great American Novel? 140.139.35.250 (talk) 17:36, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Gravity's Rainbow is called The Great American Novel here. It is also referenced as The Great American Novel on page 1 of A Gravity's Rainbow Companion, here Wolfehhgg (talk) 21:09, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Forgive me for adding to this discussion without proper citations, but it could be easily argued that Slaughterhouse Five is more about the American wartime experience with a specific focus on how Americans are seen as particularly violent, war-like people, as when Billy Pilgrim tries to warn the Tralfamadorians about the human ability to destroy the universe based at least somewhat on the American work on the atomic bomb. ~~ChristianH~~ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.183.30.137 (talk) 22:41, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Slaughterhouse Five belongs (as do pretty much everything Vonnegut did) in the SciFi category. Besides that, it really doesn't fit the criteria of being an epic (which is often something seen as requisite for bestowing the mantle of The Great American Novel, hence the adjective 'great'). This whole article is a bit nebulous to be quite frank. Outside of some critical analysis (by which I mean scholarly works, not book reviews which are mostly paid opinions) there isn't a whole lot of readily available information to give a concrete definition to what is or isn't The Great American Novel. And critical analysis isn't the sort of work Wikipedia is meant to do. But I will concur that Gravity's Rainbow and Slaughterhouse-Five, while great books (and by great I mean works of genius), and American books, aren't quite what I think of when I think of The Great American Novel. They aren't definitive period pieces -- hell, Gravity's Rainbow almost thirty years after the war ended. If The Great American Novel has anything to do with zeitgeist, on that ground alone Pynchon's two greatest works (the other being Mason & Dixon don't really fit the bill. Ryecatcher773 (talk) 04:56, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

I removed Gravity's Rainbow from the list of novels considered to be The Great American Novel because the citation offered does not refer to it as such. "piu' importante romanzo americano del secondo dopoguerra, Gravity's Rainbow di Thomas Pynchon (romanzo mai pubblicato in Italia, con grande vergogna dell'editoria nazionale)." English translation "most important American novel of post-WWII era, Gravity's Rainbow by Thomas Pynchon (a novel never published in Italy, why great shame of the national publishing industry)". -Guido Almansi, L'estetica dell'osceno (1994), p.226. The most important American novel is not the same as The Great American Novel. Please don't add this title back to the list without a citation that refers to it as The Great American Novel. -ErinHowarth (talk) 17:35, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

I restored Gravity's Rainbow to the list and added Wolfehhgg's citations to the article because they really do refer to the novel as The Great American Novel. -ErinHowarth (talk) 18:31, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Sarcastic Usage

This is far from my field of expertise, so can someone add something about the sarcastic usage of the term "great American novel" and associated cultural references? This term, in my view, is used more often to ridicule someone than to give praise to anything. Like some blowhard with no career and no grip on reality, someone asks, "What's he doing now, anyway?" Someone replies, "I don't know, I think he's writing the great American novel..."--208.127.100.147 (talk) 09:17, 14 March 2010 (UTC)--208.127.100.19 (talk) 08:23, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

McCarthy

While there is no telling if either of them agree with the Great American Novel criteria listed in this article, but both Roger Ebert and Harold Bloom have, perhaps unfortunately, called Blood Meridian, or the Evening Redness in the West by that name, as Google searching seems to support, though I have been unable to find a direct citation after a mere 15 minutes of browsing those results. --KGF0 ( T | C ) 23:44, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

The Wire

Admittedly not a novel, however the HBO TV series The Wire can in some ways be seen to fulfill that role of the Great American Novel ... often cited as a televised 21st century War and Peace —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.12.122.147 (talk) 00:07, 17 May 2010 (UTC) This is the first time I've ever heard that. I've watched all the episodes of it, and read many Great American Novels in my time. I just don't understand what this comment serves, as it's not eligible for this page and cannot better the page. I'm sorry if I'm coming across as harsh; just found your comment more than slightly bizzare. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.198.0.201 (talk) 16:24, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Here's a Solution -- start an article on other forms of media and how the Great American Novel concept informs the idea of TV today. Otherwise, this article is for books. Whether on paper or a Kindle, it's still about books and only books (and for that matter, only novels meeting a certain criteria).Ryecatcher773 (talk) 21:51, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Completely disagree. I think The Wire fits perfectly into this category. The great American novel concept needs to be revised to incorporate all of the new forms of media currently present. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.40.117.139 (talk) 01:40, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

If we have reliable sources calling it the "great American novel" it fits here. If we don't, it doesn't. - SummerPhD (talk) 03:18, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Huck Finn Image

Don't get me wrong, I think Huck Finn is great and very worthy of the title, but having a photo of its cover near the top of the article might lead some to believe its status as the 'Great American Novel' to be a foregone conclusion. An article void of anything absolute would be the most worthwhile one —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.14.131.20 (talk) 22:24, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Well... to be fair --- and I say this having heard it countless times over the past 30 years from various teachers, professors and lit buffs, (and having read it a few times -- both as an assignment and on my own) --- Huck Finn is widely considered to be the original (or if you prefer definitive) work of the genre known as the G.A.N. Ryecatcher773 (talk) 18:25, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Interesting argument you made (and then deleted for whatever reason). But consider this: 'widely held beliefs' and 'opinions' are in fact what define things as being great. In a Platonic sense, there is not an undisputed model of a 'great' anything somewhere that we can compare and contrast to. What is defined as being 'great' is entirely up to posterity. There is no source that will undeniably trump every other in an uncontested argument on what the Great American Novel is... (and FYI, before I forget, a G.A.N. is not a single genre unto itself). No one is contesting The Great Gatsby either... but chronologically, Huck Finn does precede it by nearly 40 years. A better argument would be for comparing opinions on Twain's magnum opus with Moby Dick. Although only part of that book even takes place in America, it holds up without much argument given the centralized theme Ishmael is narrating (in attempting to transcend borders and connect the whole world together through whaling).

Twain gets the nod from many scholars for his move away from romanticism, which is what defined older generations of lit that aren't American in origin. Melville and Hawthorne both being truly great writers, were a little high-brow and old-world leaning in their pursuits (i.e. not the zeitgeist of American culture by the end of the 19th century). Twain is at the beginning of a new tradition that is completely American in its premise. Either way, 'truths' bend a knee to opinions in cases such as the one we are debating. Ryecatcher773 (talk) 22:05, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

I can't remember exactly why I deleted my response, but I think it had something to do with my sudden desire to avoid online debates in which I presented poorly-informed arguments written feverishly in the dead of night, something along those lines. Anyway, you had me sold with the romanticism bit. Mark Twain created truly American fiction I suppose. Great job. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.14.131.20 (talk) 20:51, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

A Thought on the Criteria of the Great American Novel

There are times in U.S. history when its citizens were forced to go abroad: Namely, wars. I propose that any novel dealing with Americans in:

• The Spanish-American War (especially the Philippene Islands theater) and its aftermath
• The Second Indo-China (U.S./Vietnam) War and its aftermath
  
• WWI and its aftermath
• WWII and its aftermath
• The Korean War and its aftermath
  

be considered as happening in the U.S. for the purpose of this list.
I'm sure that I'm missing others, but these are all that I can think of off of the top of my head.<br. />—NBahn (talk) 01:11, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Bear in mind that it's not a malleable subject that we can mold to fit. True, while wars (particularly the Civil War and WWII) have had a huge effect on the zeitgeist of eras in American history (and by default becoming either directly or indirectly a factor in a story's setting) war novels (meaning book s that take place in a theater of operation) in and of themselves -- no matter how great -- are not typically considered The Great American Novel.

Here's the thing to remember as a rule for grading The Great American Novel criteria: just because a novel is great, and written about an Americans, by an American, does not necessarily qualify it as The Great American Novel. It's a novel that captures the essence of the general experience of what a period in American history was like for the average person. It may include some remarkable feats (hence distinguishing it as worthy of a story in the first place), but it's not meant to be exclusionary to those who didn't, say for example, fight in a war. Hemingway's For Whom The Bell Tolls and Mailer's The Naked and the Dead are both epic pieces of war-related writing, and are considered among the 20th century's great works, but they aren't The Great American Novel.

Remember, this is a narrow category, and it isn't up to us as WP editors to have a panel discussion on what makes the list and what doesn't. Large bodies of literary criticism over a period of time (and guidance from groups like The National Book Foundation and American Library Association ) are what determines what is and what isn't a Great American Novel. Ryecatcher773 (talk) 15:09, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

What is the source for all this? john k (talk) 17:09, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

A Slight Digression

I was wondering: Does anyone know if any reliable sources ever discussed Longfellow's The Song of Hiawatha in the context of The Great American Novel? I know that it's a large work, but its poetry, not prose. Can poetry fit the criteria of The Great American Novel?<br. />—NBahn (talk) 03:12, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Novels (even those by James Joyce) are prose. Poems (even epic ones) are not novels... Ryecatcher773 (talk) 07:24, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

What about The Ring and the Book or Eugene Onegin? We have a whole article about novels written in verse. I agree that Longfellow's work is not a novel, though. john k (talk)

Atlas Shrugged

An I.P. address removed Ayn Rand without justification (see here). Normally, when something like this happens, I'll revert it; however, I never read the book, so I'm asking here if anyone knows of any reliable sources that discuss it as a contender.<br. />—NBahn (talk) 01:01, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Ayn Rand was a philosopher who wrote novels to give a narrative to her philosophical theory, Objectivism. While The Fountainhead ranks in my top 5 favorites of all time (Atlas Shrugged was good, but not as good as Howard Roark's tale), I wouldn't qualify anything she wrote as symbolic of the zeitgeist of any era she lived in (arguably the biggest prerequisite of any Great American Novel). In short, whoever removed it; I can say it wasn't an act of injustice being that it doesn't fit the criteria. Ryecatcher773 (talk) 06:57, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Consideration should be given toward the movie adaptations and the reviews and commentaries if they refer to the original book as a Great American Novel. MMetro (talk) 04:09, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

Foer's Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close

Child-like, mournful, with wonderment and without attention span. Also beautifully written. To my mind, this is the best zeitgeist-catcher of the immediate aftermath of 9/11, and I'd like to see it on that list at the bottom. (talk • contribs) 18:36, 19 July 2010 (UTC) Lemikam (talk) 18:38, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Feminism controversy?

Based on the recent brouhaha over Franzen's Freedom, it might be worth mentioning that 99% of these novels are by men. Also, shouldn't Richard Wright's Native Son be on here??Nocoleah (talk) 15:44, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

I'm very happy to report that someone found a couple of references for To Kill A Mockingbird as The Great American Novel. It is currently the only novel on the list written by a woman, but I don't know if theat fact is worth adding to the article. The Great American novel is a highly subjective honor. -ErinHowarth (talk) 22:11, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Scarlet Letter

I removed The Scarlet Letter from the list of novels considered to be The Great American Novel because the source cited is inadequate. The source cited is an unsigned list at American Literature.com entitled Great American Novels. There has been considerable discussion here regarding the difference between a great American novel and The Great American Novel. It seems to me that to be included in this list the title must be referred to as The Great American Novel by a respected critique of American literature. I don't know exactly what qualifies someone to be a respected critic, but since the author of this list didn't even sign it, I'm sure that this source is inadequate. -ErinHowarth (talk) 21:06, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Therein lies the problem with most of these titles -- there is no defined 'canon', which is why citing any of these is a dubious task. I will say this though: The Scarlet Letter is one of the original Great American Novels that arguably any librarian or English teacher/professor will name to a list. The rest of those you've eliminated I'll leave alone, but I'm putting this one back. Ryecatcher773 (talk) 03:26, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

The citation you included is and excellent review from a highly repudable source. I'm glad you posted it. I'm glad I read it. I'm now interested in reading the novel for the first time ever. But your citattion does not refer to the The Scarlet Letter as The Great American Novel. It mostly discusses the greatness of the heroine. If "The Scarlet letter is one of the original Great American Novels that... any librarian or English teacher... will add to a list", then you ought to be able to find gads of references to it as such, so far, no noe has provided one. -ErinHowarth (talk) 15:50, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

I have another thought regarding The Scarlet Letter. I don't know if it is relevant or not, but the novel is not set in the time in which it was written. The author was using and earlier American society to comment on his contemporary society. Does this affect its status a contender for the title of The Great American Novel? Does it affect its ability to capture the spirit of the age? -ErinHowarth (talk) 15:50, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

That criteria would disqualify Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, written roughly 45 years after the time period in which it is set. This is no small difference, given that those 35 years contain the Civil War and resulting end of slavery. 208.118.18.229 (talk) 06:23, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Removed titles without citations

I removed the following titles which had no citation at all. Another contributor merely tagged them about six weeks ago, but I think that is far too generous. We shouldn't be adding our favorite novels to this list as if nominating them for the title of The Great American Novel. The Great American Novel is often referred to as not yet having been written, so the list of novels that might qualify should be very, very short. Please find sources to cite before adding these titles (or any other titles) to the list. -ErinHowarth (talk) 21:19, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

• 1935: James T. Farrell's Studs Lonigan Trilogy
• 1940: Richard Wright's Native Son
• 1946: Robert Penn Warren's All the King's Men
• 1952: Ralph Ellison's Invisible Man
• 1955: William Gaddis's The Recognitions
• 1962: Ken Kesey's One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest
• 1965: Norman Mailer's An American Dream
• 1985: Don DeLillo's White Noise
• 1985: Cormac McCarthy's Blood Meridian, or the Evening Redness in the West
• 1987: Toni Morrison's Beloved
• 1993: E. Annie Proulx's The Shipping News
• 1996: David Foster Wallace's Infinite Jest
• 1997: Philip Roth's American Pastoral
• 2000: Michael Chabon's The Amazing Adventures of Kavalier & Clay
• 2002: Jeffrey Eugenides' Middlesex

Henry James

I removed three titles by Henry James as novels considered to be The Great American Novel because the citation was quite inadequate. The citation lead to something like a library reference card which did not include a critique of the novel let alone one that referred to it as The Great American Novel. Please do not restore these titles unless you can find a source that refers to them as The Great American Novel. -ErinHowarth (talk) 21:38, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

• 1902: Henry James's The Wings of the Dove
• 1903: Henry James's The Ambassadors
• 1904: Henry James's The Golden Bowl

Light in August

I removed William Faulkner's Light in August (1932) from the list of books considered to be The Great American Novel because the citation was woefully inadequate. The citation leads to a bookseller rather than a scholarly critique of the book. It includes this phrase: "Publisher Comments: One of Faulkner's most admired and accessible novels, Light in August reveals the great American author at the height of his powers." Faulkner might be generally considered to be The Great American Author, but not because his publisher says so. Please don't restore this title to the list unless you can find a source that refers to the work as The Great American Novel. -ErinHowarth (talk) 21:47, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

The Road

I removed The Road from the list of novels referred to as The Great American Novel because the citation does not actually refer to it as such. "He suggested Cormac McCarthy’s The Road as a recent possibility of a pretty Great American Book. If you haven’t read it yet, go get it. The Road really could be the most recent Great American Novel." The author only says that it might be The Great American Novel. Pleas don't add this novel back to the list unless you can find a critic who is more certain of his assessment. -ErinHowarth (talk) 16:52, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Underworld

I removed Underworld from the list of novels referred to as The Great American Novel because the citation does not actually refer to it as such. But DeLillo more than makes it work: Underworld is his best novel and perhaps that most elusive of creatures, a great American novel. The author only says that it might be The Great American Novel. Pleas don't add this novel back to the list unless you can find a critic who is more certain of his assessment. -ErinHowarth (talk) 17:15, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

A Confederacy of Dunces

I removed A Confederacy of Dunces from the list of novels known as The Great American Novel because the citation did not refer to it as The Great American Novel. Early this year, the Book Review's editor, Sam Tanenhaus, sent out a short letter to a couple of hundred prominent writers, critics, editors and other literary sages, asking them to please identify "the single best work of American fiction published in the last 25 years." The best American novel is not the same as The Great American Novel. Please don't add this title back to the list without a reference referring to it as The Great American Novel. -ErinHowarth (talk) 17:25, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Catch 22

I removed Joseph Heller's Catch-22 (1961) from the list of novels referred to as The Great American Novel because the citation offered does not refer to it as such. The citation leads to a list of Top Novels chosen by experts. Top Novels are not the same as The Great American Novel. Please do not restore this title to the list without a reference that actually refers to it as The Great American Novel. -ErinHowarth (talk) 19:03, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

To Kill A Mockingbird

I removed Harper Lee's To Kill a Mockingbird (1960) from the list of novels referred to as The Great American Novel because the citation does not refer to it as such. This is one of my favorite books, so I looked around a bit on the Internet, and I found a lot of bloggers voting for it as The Great American novel, but the best scholarly thing I found on it only said that it might be The Great American Novel - very disappointing. I hope somebody can restore this title to the list with a decent reference that refers to it as The Great American Novel. -ErinHowarth (talk) 19:40, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Hurray! It's been restored - with some very nice citations, too. -ErinHowarth (talk) 22:12, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

On the Road

I removed Jack Kerouac's On the Road (1957) from the list of novels referred to as The Great American Novel because the citation does not refer to is as such. "If On the Road wasn't the Great American Novel, then Kerouac can make a fair claim to the Great American Fantasy Baseball League. Please do not restore this title to the list without a reference that refers to it as The Great American Novel. -ErinHowarth (talk) 19:52, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

I put it back because you just need to Google it for 5 minutes and you can find numerous places that mention it as a great American novel. i dont know how to add citations so i didn't. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.254.160.244 (talk) 08:26, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Moby Dick

I removed Moby Dick from the list of novels referred to as The Great American Novel because the citation does not refer to is as such. I'm CERTAIN that someone somewhere has referred to Moby Dick as The Great American Novel. Please find one before you restore this title to the list. -ErinHowarth (talk) 21:56, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

The Sound and the Fury

I removed William Faulkner's The Sound and the Fury (1929) because there was no citation. Please do not restore it to the list without a citation of someone somewhere referring to it as The Great American Novel.

Jonathan Franzen

I removed both Franzen books from the list because the content doesn't match the source -- notably, that there is a difference between calling something a great American novel, and dubbing it The Great American Novel. Not to mention the "source" was a scrolling graphic of upcoming books that might be great reads. It really begs the question of how long after publication a book can reasonably be considered The Great American Novel. It's easy for an overzealous literary critic to throw the term around. But in the case of Franzen's "Freedom," the bad reviews were as scathing as the good reviews were positive. The same is probably true for McCarthy's "The Road," but I haven't had time to look into it yet. Jeditor17 (talk) 09:04, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

I think the above comment about length of time after publication is extremely to the point. The citation for Franzen's book is from an Esquire book review from the year it came out? Seriously? How on earth can one legitimately call something that has had a shelf life of less than a year "The Great American Novel"- to use a sports analogy, its kind of like saying someone should win the Heisman after the first week of College Football. It makes no sense because TIME is an essential ingredient in the determination of what works can honestly be even be included in the conversation. I know Wikipedia has really lose criteria for what to include, but I'm sure there are dozens and dozens of books that have at some point been cited as "The Great American Novel" and if that's the case, hypothetically the list could be much much longer... So what makes Franzen's book deserved and NOTHING from someone like Hemingway or Henry James... or a dozen other greats that have endured the test of time. I'm perplexed. Tominrochester (talk) 03:37, 6 October 2012 (UTC)TominrochesterTominrochester (talk) 03:37, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

OK, so I´m prejudiced in this regard.....

There have recently been a number of anon. I.P. edits — most of them being deletions — that are without any explanations. I am taking the liberty of reverting some (albeit, not all) of them. I am not saying that the edits are ipso facto unjustifiable, just that an explanation is in order — especially when editing with an anon. I.P. address.<br. />—NBahn (talk) 05:36, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

From Weltanschauung to Zeitgeist

As a novelist in his late Sixties, may I provide some historical perspective? You've redefined what we meant by "the Great American Novel" when we originally used it (and that's fine. We quit using it.) Google nGram tells me the phrase shot up from nothing to great popularity between 1900 and 1920, fluctuated, and faded badly after 2000. I thought the notion had become quaint, but I find you've reinvigorated it. You speak of a book which captures the Zeitgeist, the Hegelian "spirit of the age"-- though I notice that lately your "ages" only seem to last two or three years, like your "generations." We originally meant the opposite: a book which triumphed over the Zeitgeist. It would capture the American Weltanschauung, the essential American World Outlook which endured despite all changes in the Zeitgeist. It would be something like our national epic, as someone commented above. Books I heard mentioned as contenders were HUCK FINN AND MOBY DICK, but also, very often, STUDS LONIGAN, THE GRAPES OF WRATH, USA. However, we gave up on the idea, and you have revived it in a useful form. http://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=great+American+novel&year_start=1800&year_end=2000&corpus=0&smoothing=3 Profhum (talk) 06:39, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Delete Everything After "History"

This is absurd. If the base criterion for being included in an encyclopedic list of books considered at one time or another to be "The Great American Novel" is that some reviewer in a fit of hyperbole has in one independent publication referred to the book as "the Great American Novel," or as a book that "may well be" the Great American Novel, or as a book that "could earn the title" of Great American Novel; or that Frederic Jameson ironically referred to it as the Great American Novel; or that it is "such a book," which would seem to diminish the singularity of the status; or that someone writing about an actor who starred in a film version of the book would refer to the book that way; or that it "came close"; or that it is "still frequently nominated"; or any of the other highly questionable and mostly entirely ephemeral instances found here, then I suggest that such a list, far from being authoritative, is useless. My own book was described as "a contender for Great American Novel status" in a large-circulation UK print magazine; flattering though that is, I would never dream of including it on a list of great novels, American or otherwise. 69.119.59.55 (talk) 02:26, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

I couldn't agree more with the above. Its hard to take the criterion for a book's inclusion on this page seriously. Tominrochester (talk) 16:29, 10 January 2013 (UTC)TominrochesterTominrochester (talk) 16:29, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Freedom

Is there synthesis being applied towards the citation for Freedom, the most recent novel? The Esquire review talks about the Great American Novel as a concept that may have gone away, but hopes that Freedom is evidence that it has not, while never explicitly naming Freedom as a Great American Novel. In fact, the Wikipedia article cites that several reviews were negative, and there was no mention of it being a Great American Novel. But even if Freedom is not an example of the Great American Novel, the citation does help to define what the concept is. MMetro (talk) 04:07, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

Classification as Great American Novel?

It seems relevant that the statements classifying some of the more examples as a Great American Novel are from non-Americans. I put that in the text, but this was reverted. How important does this fact seem to others? Pete unseth (talk) 23:32, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

Seems like a random observation. Feminists labeled by men, cults labeled by Catholics, socialists labeled by fascists, whatever. Either they are reliable sources or they aren't. - SummerPhD (talk) 01:46, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

Book of Mormon?

https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&es_th=1&ie=UTF-8#q=great%20american%20novel%20mormon%20smith&es_th=1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.43.114.233 (talk) 03:53, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Great American Novel/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Having read both the article and talk pages, I cannot help but agree that the article not only needs editing for citations, but that it needs more information as well; but both need to be done by an English major and I'm not an English major. --NBahn (talk) 01:51, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Last edited at 01:51, 10 May 2008 (UTC). Substituted at 16:38, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Great American Novel. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100915171907/http://www.themodernword.com/pynchon/pynchon_grintro.html to http://www.themodernword.com/pynchon/pynchon_grintro.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:13, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Great American Novel. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101016090658/http://www.poynter.org/column.asp?id=57&aid=60488 to http://www.poynter.org/column.asp?id=57&aid=60488
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111129221749/http://www.atlantic-books.co.uk/our_books/browse_catalogue.asp?css=1&genre=8400&pg=23&order=date&pre=true&edition=1275 to http://www.atlantic-books.co.uk/our_books/browse_catalogue.asp?css=1&genre=8400&pg=23&order=date&pre=true&edition=1275
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141102084742/http://blogs.publishersweekly.com/blogs/PWxyz/2013/03/28/what-did-we-learn-from-our-great-american-novel-poll/ to http://blogs.publishersweekly.com/blogs/PWxyz/2013/03/28/what-did-we-learn-from-our-great-american-novel-poll/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120318230019/http://www.rbooks.co.uk/product.aspx?id=0099771918 to http://www.rbooks.co.uk/product.aspx?id=0099771918

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:51, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

Uncited

I put the "Section Uncited" template on the lede because there are no sources for the statements there either in the lede or in the article.

Maybe should be "Article Uncited" but there are cites for individual novels in the list.

The "citations needed" for individual paragraphs have been there since 2013.ch (talk) 22:25, 1 June 2018 (UTC) ch (talk) 22:25, 1 June 2018 (UTC)

Inclusion criteria

@Fireflyfanboy: Anybody can voice their claim that XYZ is "The Great American Novel", but that is not sufficient. The source you use for Slaughterhouse-Five and Catch-22 is Manuel Garcia, Jr., an ex-physicist writing on a political site. It has to be someone with literary credentials. Clarityfiend (talk) 05:52, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

I can't help but notice that you and only you have unilaterally decided what is and is not sufficient for inclusion. (Let's not forget when you deleted the vast majority of the list a few days ago without saying anything on the talk page for little more than you just didn't like it.) Where are your literary credentials, if I may ask?Fireflyfanboy (talk) 16:57, 22 October 2018 (UTC)