100 years from now what books will be considered the literary

i don't fucking care man

>>8419292
afdsadfsdsafadfsafds;fa;afdsaldfladfsasldkjfhaslkdjfhaslkdjfhlaksjdhfaslfhasd

my diary desu

>>8419292
>100 years from now
>books

You must not pay much attention to the real world.

>inb4 the fault in our stars

probaby something by stephen king

>>8419292
Koran


that is all

>>8419355
>our time
>Koran
Hello time traveler

>>8419292
What do you mean by "our time"?

Anyway, I think you all already know. They're books that are already pretty critically acclaimed and also, of course, derided by others for pretentiousness and not doing what literature is supposed to do.

The titan is going to be Thomas Pynchon, whether you like it or not. As many critics have said, he's like Joyce for the latter part of the 20th century. His Ulysses will be Gravity's Rainbow, his worse stuff will be about as remembered now as Pomes Penyeach or Exiles and only be read by serious fans or scholars of him. Authors like Nabokov and Gaddis will get very worthy mentions, I expect that Gaddis will blow up in criticism and appreciation like Melville eventually, authors still love him more than professors and critics and scholars, either that or the end of The Recognitions will become a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Cormac McCarthy is going to be remembered for BM and Suttree, his best works and practically already classics. The great acclamation for The Road seems to be a typical brainfart on the part of critics.

Philip Roth will be an obscure footnote, probably Portnoy's Complaint will be remembered and the rest will be seen as dated pretty quickly and pulpy, although I won't deny I've enjoyed all the books of his I've read so far.

Even if you don't like his style and think his books are trite, Philip K. Dick's definitely going to be remembered.

David Foster Wallace (sorry, fans) was too much of a gimmicky and demagogic hack to be an artist that'll survive long. He really has no discernible talent.

Don DeLillo is nauseating to me, he writes like he has some mixture of autism and OCD, some modern critics jack off over him but eventually I think the varnish will fall off from his books and they'll be recognized for the unoriginal creations they are, cribbed from Gaddis and Pynchon and with no characterizations whatsoever.

Updike is probably the greatest English language prose stylist of all time and yet Joyce also said John Henry Newman was the greatest English prose stylist and no one remembers him, now, either.

I'll end this by saying I definitely have an American bias when it comes to modern literature, I don't know why, I just do. These are also completely subjective, of course.

Hit me with your best shot, c/lit/orises and critics.

>>8419431
Wow you should stop coming here. Looks like the memes got to you.

>>8419431
>What do you mean by "our time"?
wrong question harold

the operative question is 'by who?'

>>8419556
Are you referring to Bloom? I clearly don't match point for point with him, he idolizes Roth and DeLillo.

>>8419556
>whom

>>8419573
>harold whoom

>>8419431
Agreed but im not expert

Hopefully also my diary desu