Originally posted by AgentL Yeah, Dickens was definitely Victorian, pre-modernist. I could never get into him, his style is just not that enjoyable to me. It's not a reading comprehension level, I'm currently reading Plutarch (though in English). Hahah. But for Victorian authors A. Conan Doyle is my favorite by far, the Sherlock Holmes books are perennial favorites, and many of his other novels, like The White Company and The Exploits of Brigadier Gerard, not to mention his The Lost World books, are fantastic. The Victorian era was the high point of adventure fiction for sure.
Modernist authors were part of a general movement into what I would call a perfecting of mechanics, they were very self-aware when it came to the way they wrote, they were often disillusioned with some of the happenings of the world and shedding "old ways" and scrutinizing Humanism in a more rational way. Some find it tiresome or bleak, and sometimes a bit self-obsessed. I can find it that way some of the time, and can't read modernist literature nonstop without a break for something more agreeable. Hemingway needs to be appreciated almost like poetry, his "simple" style is a study in turning brevity into its own art form.
This is really eloquently put, and i agree with this 98%.
let me clarify, though, like you, and most, i did enjoy Sherlock Holmes series, one thing that irritated me, is the same issue i have with most short stories: I want character development. A short story (like short movies) leaves so much potential for character development, that by the time the story is done, we dont feel much for the main characters, other than the adventure they had.
For example, with Holmes, it was written from Watson's perspective. When describing the mannerisms of Sherlock Holmes, more often than not, he was described as doing x, y, z, in a very peculiar fashion.
paraphrasing, but example:
"here is Mr. Holmes, drinking tea, in a peculiar fashion" end story a few sentences later.
"here is Mr. Holmes smelling the rug on the ground, very peculiar this fellow is" end of story a few sentences later.
"ahh, yes, Mr. Holmes is reading a book upside down on a chair, as usual to his peculiar self" end story a few sentences later.
yes, we can see Mr. Holmes is a peculiar individual. What of it? Why is he like that? What more can you tell us about his peculiarities besides him being weird and ending the story. Or why does Mr. Watson find all these things peculiar? Maybe that is perfectly normal, and he is the peculiar one for judging?
I wanted to dig deeper into the character, rather than the crimes he was solving. But then again, I am of the rare minorities that cared more of the characters. Though the and stories were fascinating, and the excruciating details that were described were beautiful, the mind behind those discoveries is what I was after.