My favorite decade would have to be the 1930's which saw the publications of The Good Earth, Their Eyes Were Watching God and The Grapes of Wrath. With books like these, could there possibly be a better decade? The 50's and 60's deserve a mention for the writings of Flannery O'Connor and To Kill a Mockingbird was published in 1960 or '61.

What a great thread, though, and can't wait to hear others' choices. (and hurry, please, as I am headed to the library today...)

1920s -- The Great Gatsby (I know, I know ....)

1930s -- The Grapes of Wrath

1940s -- Sorry but I can't think of a book for this decade!

1950s -- Catcher in the Rye

1960s -- The Green Berets -- Robin Moore (Yes, it's not a novel but I think it epitomized the hope that the beginning of the 60s had and the oncoming freight train that was the late 60s)

1970s -- Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas (this book kind of straddles the 60s and the 70s)

1980s -- Bonfire of the Vanities

1990s -- Microserfs (Douglas Coupland)

Ok, so my choices are for books that I quite enjoyed (well, most of them anyway) AND which epitomized the era.

I was going to say for the 1920's "The Great Gatsby", but then I remembered "Main Street" by Sinclair Lewis, which epitomizes so much that America was all about in that decade, especially in the Midwest.

I think Edith Wharton and Willa Cather ought to go in here somewhere (1900-1920?)

I cannot agree that modern novels are bad. With writers like David Mitchell, Julian Barnes, Kazuo Ishiguro, Margaret Atwood and Philip Roth (just off the top of my head) I can't see that there's anything wrong with modern writing.

Don't forget the only books that have survived from the first half of the century are going to be the good ones. There was plenty of rubbish published too - it's just that we don't remember it.

I'll get back to you with my decade book-list.

I agree with Martin re modern writers.

Does anyone have a website that lists books according to their decade, or when they were published? I'd like to contribute to this thread but don't have the time to do the research and I just can't recall what decade they were from. (I thought The Great Gatsby was the thirties, for example.)

bookmom, you beat me to it: I think the 1930s produced the most readable books of the twentieth century. Besides the ones you mentioned, there are my favorites: D. du Maurier's Rebecca, Eric Ambler's A Coffin for Dimitrios, Caroline Miller's Lamb in His Bosom, and that monster of memorableness Gone With the Wind.

But the 1940s comes in a close second, I think, with A Tree Grows in Brooklyn by Betty Smith, Winsor's Forever Amber, DduM's The King's General, B. MacDonald's The Egg and I and The Plague and I (not novels, I know), and Dodie Smith's I Capture the Castle. No, wait, the 1940s may beat out the 1930s, in number if not quality.

dynomutt, interesting list! I have never had the nerve to read Microserfs, figuring I probably couldn't relate to it because I'm not Generation X. Do you think it would be accessible enough to an outsider?

Mary, I wasn't sure which decades Cather and Wharton belong in; so, though I think they are some of the best writers of their era, since I really can't pinpoint them, I don't associate them with a particular decade.
1920-1929 Since Gatsby has already been mentioned, I'll go with Gentlemen Prefer Blondes by Anita Loos. Did you know, Mary, that Edith Wharton called GPB "The All-American Novel"?! I wouldn't call it great literature by any stretch of the imagination, and I bet that a lot of folks have never read the book itself but a lot of people are familiar with the iconography of Ms Loos' witty novel: Lorelei Lee and the material-girl wannabes.Why were 1920s' writers and readers so hung up on wealth and beautiful people, anyway?

friedag --

Microserfs was an interesting read since I was in that industry (computer/information tech) and I was roughly in Gen X. The angst and soul-deadening effect of working for a large corporation (while wondering about life in general) should be accessible to everyone.

I think it should be ok -- I mean, I didn't live through the Depression but I can see where the people were coming from after reading Grapes of Wrath. (To be honest, I'd rather be a Gen X'er than a Depression era Okie. The Gen X'ers in Microserfs suffered from what one could call an overabundance of material stuff -- they just couldn't figure out what it all meant or where they were headed. The characters in Steinbeck's book had more immediate (and basic) concerns -- food, water, shelter......)

As for the 1920s being hung up on wealth and beautiful people ..... well, weren't the 1980s similar? Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose, as they say. ;-)

Ah, the decade when, in the words of President Coolidge, "The Business of America is business.' I always had the opinion that the 20s were the decade when, for the first time, every working class stiff, including writers, saw a real opportunity to get rich. Shoe shine boys apocryphally were investing in stocks. So we all wanted to know how we should live when our ship came in.

Whenever I hear people bemoaning 'modern authors' I immediatly remember the Pulitzer Prize list that I read. About half of those books are totally unknown. They were prize winning books, but for some reason have not stood the test of time. I suspect books like Da Vinci Code will go the same way, but books like Cloud Atlas and Birds Without Wings will be read for a long time.

And I need to go to those lists as well. I'll have my own list shortly.

I find I'm less enchanted by books than when I and all the world and love were young. My first encounter of an idea is exciting. The 12th variation, even if more skillfully depicted, fails to charm. One notable exception - the last book I read that thoroughly galvanized me was To Kill a Mockingbird which I had somehow avoided until I was in my 40s. Oh, and The Old Man and the Sea also read late in life.

1960s - Green Eggs and Ham
1950s - Alfred Bester's The Stars My Destination

Chris, I just finished The Stars and loved it. One of these days I am going to read more of the golden age of sci fi, when it really was all so new. And I love that you selected Green Eggs and Ham. Its one I can recite, and now and then do so to bug my beloved.

Just started going through this link, and wow there are a ton of 'best sellers' I've never heard of.

Here is a link that might be useful: Bestsellers by decade

Sorry, that link was wrong. Try this one

Here is a link that might be useful: bestsellers by decade and year

The Stars My Destination was one of the most amazing, intriguing books I've ever read. I should re-read it, since it's been over 30 years.

Cindy, thanks for the link -- I see lots of familiar titles there. I have Clive Bloom's Bestsellers: Popular Fiction Since 1900 that I've been using for reference. Here's the blurb from Amazon about it:"What fiction have British people been reading in the last hundred years? Who are the most popular authors, the most popular books and the most important genres? Such straightforward questions raise intriguing literary, cultural, social and intellectual responses which often require much detective work in the annals of lost literature. This essential guide and reference work is the only available study of all of the bestselling books, authors and genres since the beginning of the twentieth-century, providing an unique insight into over one hundred years of publishing and reading as well as taking us on a journey into the heart of the British imagination."I found it interesting that Americans and Britons have shared a lot of favorite bestsellers, but some of theirs were never or not so popular in the U.S. -- and vice versa, I'm sure. I can't give any good examples until I've read through the American bestseller lists first.1930-1939 I'm choosing James Hilton's Lost Horizon. Instead of the vastly popular historical novels published during that decade (Gone with the Wind was set in the 1860s and 1870s, after all), I think Hilton's fantasy is better representative of what readers were trying to escape into during the awful times of the Depression -- Shangri-La indeed. Realistic treatment of the decade itself didn't happen immediately, perhaps not until Steinbeck's Grapes of Wrath was published in 1939, thus making the latter book more of a 1940s phenomenon. Lost Horizon is one of the few fantasies that I actually like, but I could never love it with the same passion that readers of the 1930s had for it.

Chris, I think this
I find I'm less enchanted by books than when I and all the world and love were young. My first encounter of an idea is exciting. The 12th variation, even if more skillfully depicted, fails to charm.is the best explanation I've heard or read. Thank you!

Chris - I find I'm less enchanted by books than when I and all the world and love were young - beautifully put, but I don't agree with you. Like music, like food and drink, film, theatre - oh, everything ! - my taste in books has developed since I was young. Now, I read and enjoy books which I would not have read when I was younger, or would not have appreciated if I had read them. Now, I read a hard book, and I'm much more capable of making sense of it and understanding its depth. (I'm still an amateur compared to many, however).

When I was young, everything (books, music, films, whatever) was split into three camps - it was either rubbish, OK or brilliant. Now, I see much more clearly; a lot of what I thought was brilliant now seems very superficial.

I probably read less than I did, but I read far better. And I still occasionally come across books which I put firmly in the "brilliant!" camp. And what a pleasure it is when that happens.

Frieda, I have been mulling over the question you posed at the top of this thread and am finding it very difficult to come up with specific novels that represent an era, probably because I have never been much of a novel reader, so I am going to cheat a bit and generalise.

I notice that most people have given American books .. .naturally as 99.9% of you are from the US.
For me books that stand for the 'values' and the 'style' of the times in Great Britain might run along the lines of

1900's: anything by Kipling, Conan Doyle, Saki, the children's books by E Nesbit The Railway Children esp. maybe Hodgson Burnett's The Secret Garden . .. this must have been the first decade when 'proper' books for children came into their own.

1910's: John Buchan Thirty Nine Steps, Greenmantle The works of Dornford Yates (all squared-jawed, honourable men)

1920's: Wm Somerset Maugham from his 'Ashenden' series to his books set among the rubber-planters of Malaya slowly going mad while still 'dressing for dinner'.
The works of P G Wodehouse for me so typify the post-WWI's desire to party/misbehave, with scatty young men, domineering Aunts and mad aristocrats.
The very popular school-girl stories of Angela Brazil . . . all "Jolly Hockey Sticks" and "Didn't Monica do well in the deep-field?"

I'm thinking about the rest . . .this computer isn't liking the Garden Web site and keeps cutting out.
I'll be back!

dynomutt, your reply re Microserfs is very encouraging. I did read Coupland's Generation X and I got a glimmer of the reasons for ennui afflicting the cohort at that time. To be stuck in 1974, though...I don't know. Yeah, yeah, I realize that it's irony. :-)

Martin, you said:
And I still occasionally come across books which I put firmly in the "brilliant!" camp.Do you find more books to be brilliant than you used to, or about the same number, or fewer?And what a pleasure it is when that happens. Gosh, yes, it's the same for me. See, I think what Vee and I (well I, anyway) are lamenting is the loss of frequency in finding books that we find brilliant and memorable. I suspect that I'm terribly jaded -- the same thing Chris expressed but in much lovelier phrasing. My taste has changed over the years, too. For instance, Emma was my favorite Jane Austen book when I was a teenager, but now I can hardly stand to reread it. I didn't like Persuasion much at all back then, but it became my favorite in my thirties and remains so.

I don't doubt that are writers today who are adept, even marvelous, but my problem is finding them now that I no longer have the patience and time to wade through as much muck. I'm disappointed much more often nowadays than when I was young. Perhaps I just have greater affinity for old-fashioned storytelling, and it's also probably a matter of not being able to see the modern forest for the trees. As you say, most of the inferior stuff from decades ago has been weeded out.

Vee, I won't hold you, or anyone, to novels only. I only chose them because most readers in forums like this one are predominantly novel readers. I don't mind generalizations, either -- I am a generalist, myself, most times.

I'm looking more closely at the differences between American and British bestsellers of the 20th century. The closer to the present, the more alike we've become. Is that surprising or not surprising to you?

I do not base my reading preferences upon "best seller" lists, etc.

Frieda, I am reminded of a discussion we had here years ago on the writings of the late W.G. Sebald, a post-modern writer whom I would label "brilliant." (e.g. his "Rings of Saturn" and "Austerlitz", among others.) I think his work will be eventually discovered by more folk and will stand the test of time. I was utterly blown away by his novel (to me) approach to his writing style, espec. use of b & w photos as subtext....

Frieda - I can only actually think of one book - just one - which I read when I was still at school which actually stopped me in my tracks and made me realize that literature was not just about reading books. That book was Animal Farm by George Orwell, and was probably the first book I ever read which actually deserved the description "brilliant", as opposed to the careless appellation which I used for everything I liked.

Throughout my life, truly exceptional books for me have been few and far between. The "brilliant!" feeling probably happens more now than it did when I was younger - and certainly more since I've been on RP - as my reading is better, and as I tend to be more selective in what I read.

Some books, of course, only become excellent on re-reading multiple times - rather like music. I've read Madame Bovary just once, and though I enjoyed it, I can't yet see what all the fuss is about. But I know now that there is more to that book than a single read will give me - and one day, I intend to read it and re-read it; and perhaps, I, too, will be able to state categorically that it's one of my favourite books.

An affinity for old-fashioned storytelling is what it takes for me, too, Frieda. I find the older books do this better; the new ones seem bleak or much of a muchness; and, as we have discussed on RP before, I can't stand "dysfunctional."

I copied the following titles from Cindy's site:

To Have and To Hold, Mary Johnston
Mrs. Wiggs of the Cabbage Patch, Alice Caldwell Hegan
The Little Shepherd of Kingdom Come, John Fox Jr.
The Trail of the Lonesome Pine, John Fox Jr.
Main Street, Sinclair Lewis
Lamb in His Bosom, Caroline Miller
Good-Bye, Mr. Chips, James Hilton
Gone with the Wind, Margaret Mitchell
Rebecca, Daphne du Maurier
The Grapes of Wrath, John Steinbeck
Kitty Foyle, Christopher Morley
Mrs. Miniver, Jan Struther
The Robe, Lloyd C. Douglas
Green Dolphin Street, Elizabeth Goudge
Dinner at Antoine's, Frances Parkinson Keyes
From Here to Eternity, James Jones
Désirée, Annemarie Selinko
Andersonville, MacKinlay Kantor
Hawaii, James Michener
Advise and Consent, Allen Drury
To Kill a Mockingbird, Harper Lee
The Reivers, William Faulkner
The Source, James A. Michener
The Double Image, Helen MacInnes
The Chosen, Chaim Potok
A Small Town in Germany, John Le Carré
The Crystal Cave, Mary Stewart
The Winds of War, Herman Wouk
Centennial, James A. Michener
Watership Down, Richard Adams
War and Remembrance, Herman Wouk
Eye of the Needle, Ken Follett
". . . And the Ladies of the Club," Helen Hooven Santmyer
The Prince of Tides, Pat Conroy
The Pillars of the Earth, Ken Follet
September, Rosamunde Pilcher

They may not be the best literature in the world, but they were like running into old friends. Mostly, I can remember just where I was when I read them. The 90s did me in--so many Clancy books, Grisham, Cornwell, Steele, etc. I've read a number of them, and they do tell me a story; but they all seem to be alike. It's a good thing there are so many books to choose from to satisfy our diversity of needs.

I, too, agree that there are contemporary writers who are quite good, or who have produced at least one book which is quite good and will make someone else's list a century from now. The Time Traveler's Wife, Lonesome Dove, Cold Mountain, The Handmaid's Tale and The Kite-runner all come to mind as books which will endure.

Martin, I guess our mileage varies. I agree that my understanding is better now. I know I originally thought Erica Jong's Fear of Flying was rubbish. I reread it 20 years later and appreciated it. I suspect I didn't feel as strongly about it, however, as those women who made it a best seller originally. They were the ones at the right age to get the most from it. I'm not saying it belongs on any great lit list. I'm just saying my response to it was age and experience related. I was at an "oh, yeah" stage rather than a "Wow" stage when I finally understood it.

I should probably point out to those not familiar with it, especially after Martin's and Frieda's kind words, that "all the world and love were young" is lifted from the Maiden's reply to The Passionate Shepherd. If all the world and love were young and truth in every shepherd's tongue then these pleasures might me move ....Had joys no date, nor age no need.... just seemed to suit my thoughts.

>I do not base my reading preferences upon "best seller" lists, etc.

Neither do I, but if we are talking about books that stood the test of time, and whether or not there were better novels earlier in our lifetimes, then looking at those old lists sure gives you an idea.

I think I found more books to be 'brillant' when I was younger; not because they were, but because my definition of the word was different. Several that I thought were brilliant (eesp of the sci fi fantasy category) earns an 'eh' response now. So the books I think are brillant are fewer, but I have a few each year and they are treasures. Many other books are good, some will be remembered others forgotten. But they all gave me pleasure in reading. So brillant doesn't always matter much

Mary, every time I say I hate postmodern novels I have to qualify with except W.G. Sebald's. The difference between his books and, say, that "Staggering Genius" fellow's is the self-indulgent claptrap of the latter -- and too many other postmodernists, in my opinion. So, would you say Sebald defines part of the 1990s or the 2000s for you? I'm hazy about all his publication dates, but I think Austerlitz was after 2000 and maybe after Sebald's death. Such a loss...

Well, maybe we don't get as many "brilliants" as we would like -- they seem to be in short supply -- but I suppose if they were common we wouldn't appreciate them as much.
But they all gave me pleasure in reading. So brillant doesn't always matter much.That's a very good point, Cindy, that I need to remember. I've enjoyed beaucoup books while I was reading them; some I've enjoyed even more after I finished them and let 'em lie fallow for a while. So what if I don't remember them after a few weeks!

Carolyn, I know I've said this before to you, but I swear we could've been using the same library because you and I have read so many of the same books. Just looking at your list, I'd say that your book interests encompass all the decades but that you especially favor the ones published in the 1960s and 1970s. Or is that just a quantity thing and they are not necessarily your favorites?
I do not base my reading preferences upon "best seller" lists, etc.Neither do I, but I find bestseller lists fascinating as cultural markers -- what the zeitgeist was and all that hoo-ha.

Vee, according to Mr Bloom's study some of the writers popular in the UK but not in the US during the 20th century were:

1900-1918
Florence I. Barclay, Hall Caine, Charles Garvice, Elinor Glyn, Nat Gould, Effie A. Rowlands, Berta Ruck
1919-1934
Warwick Deeping, Ethel M. Dell and Ruby M. Ayres (a team, apparently)
1935-1956
Peter Cheyney, Stephen Francis, Nicholas Monsarrat
1957-1974
J.T. Edson, Michael Moorcock, Andrea Newman, John Wyndham
1975-1999
Ted Allbeury, Shirley Conran, Catherine Cookson, Colin Forbes, Alexander Fullerton, Sarah Harrison, Sheila Holland, Penny Jordan, Leo Kessler, Dudley Pope, Claire Rayner, Sarah Shears, Craig Thomas

What are we missing from these particular writers, if you know, Vee?

I'm having a devil of a time trying to narrow down my 1940s selection.

IÂm just a bit out of period, but a good Italian book about Italy and his history, certainly is The
Betrothed by Alessandro Manzoni
A.M. wrote the first draft in 1832 and the last in 1842. Also this one is a compulsory reading matter
in high school, because it is considered the first "popular" novel and a masterpiece of Italian writing,
so, all the Italian students have to read it.

Based in northern Italy in the early 17th century, during the terrible, oppressive years under
Spanish rule, it is really a veiled attack on Austria, who controlled the region at the time of writing
(the definitive version was published in 1842). It is also noted for the extraordinary description of the
plague that struck Milan in 1630.

To find a few other Italian writers worth reading , youÂve got to go back in time , first name which
come up to my mind is : Carlo Cassola, by all mean, my favourite author when I was a teen
(past-fifteen), and like, all but the boys at that age, I kept wondering about the barren life waiting for me
and the meaning of it, and...blah blah blah. But I checked up on amazon and I didnÂt find any of his
novels translated in English, there are essays about him, but not translated book

Another one is Elio Vittorini " Red Carnation" ; about adolescence while fascits were
seizing power in Italy, two boys close friends fall in love with the same girl, later, one joins the fascist
party the other one no.
The Dark and the Light, about our civil war, because as a matter of fact, that was.
Period 1943-45

Nowadays Italian writers pay too much attention to show to each others and to the critics how good
their writing is , so usually they donÂt give a damn about readers
ThereÂs a theory about this fact. Since Vatican wanted to keep people illiterate, in that way people
couldnÂt read the Bible on their own and only priest were able to explained it, so when the first
printed books came out, Italian writers had no public to write for. So they used to write only for
nobles and other writers, the only ones able to read. They developped a great ability in the writing,
but no ability in comprehension.

Just to come back on the period of this topic, I think the whole Saul BellowÂs work epitomize
Â900, and I think it is not incidental that he was gradueted in anthropology

grelobe

Here is a link that might be useful: The Betrothed

I don't think I've read enough books from earlier decades (e.g., the first half of the 20th century) to be able to make a judgment. Many of the books I've read and enjoyed (e.g., almost anything by Sabatini) aren't regarded as literary works.

Has anyone visited Arthur's Classic Novels? I point it out, because they have the etext for many of the bestsellers from 1900-1919 there.

Here is a link that might be useful: Etext at Arthurs Classic Novels

georgia, I have heard of almost none of those writers . . .

"Would you like to sin with Elinor Glyn
On a tiger skin?
Or would you prefer to err
With her, on some other fur?"

She along with Ethel M Dell, Ruby Ayres and Warwick Deeping would have been popular 'in the kitchen' as the purists of those days would have said. But they sold thousands of books and were an easy read.
Nicholas Monsarrat used to be very popular. His Cruel Sea set in the Royal Navy during WWII was made into a film.
John Wyndham ditto The Day of the Triffids The Midwich Cuckoos all good egs of 1950's novels.
I would add any of the books by Ian Fleming to the '50's list.
Catherine Cookson is very popular but wrote about poor working girls in the North East (Newcastle) at the turn of the last century, as does Josephine Cox (but Liverpool?)

For the late '50's - '60's in the UK I would have to add the 'kitchen sink' Northern, gritty, bleak, Stan Barstow's A Kind of Loving Room at the Top John Braine and similar. I don't know if working-class Northern gritty people enjoyed them but left-wing intellectuals in the south probably did.

This means I haven't 'done' anything for the 40's. Well there was Evelyn Waugh's Brideshead Revisited not that it's much of a reflection of the '40's . . . or the books by Patrick Hamilton, largely forgotten today. I have just found a copy of a re-written work Craven House. He wrote Gas Light do you remember the scary film?

I think I might run out of ideas from the '70's onwards. As you ask for books that give the 'feel' of the period I think by then we had become very much closer to the US and what went for you went for us! And I am presuming you are not looking for high literary works?

Elinor Glyn, from the first decade of Frieda's list, was considered a very naughty writer here in the states. My mom had them on a shelf in her closet. So of course I read them when I was 12 or 13. They were my guide to the peerage in England. I liked them but didn't really get the naughty part. Of course this was the 60s so naughty had changed.

I honestly don't think I've read enough to offer a best of the decade novel. I've opinions, of course, but I'm too aware of what I haven't read.

Frieda, as to Naipaul, you've read his best novels. I also like his non-fiction. My introduction to him was Among the Believers published in the 70s, about Islam. I read everything I could find of his after that and he made a great impact. Funny thing is that I can remember vingettes, characters, and the apparently easy writing, but not the specific books. I need to revisit him. I do remember being disappointed in A Turn in the South. I was excited to read his take on my beloved region, not realizing that the experiences of an Indian from Trinidad would be much closer to that of the African American than of what I knew of the South. Truth has many facets.

As you know, Frieda, I share your love of Gothic romances, so the 60s and 70s were my kind of reading in that genre as well as the others I listed, which were from the website. I think you are much more widely read than I.

Now, I mostly read mysteries for fun and dearly love Margaret Maron, Sharyn McCrumb's ballad novels, Ian Rankin, Elizabeth George (even though she's getting flaky), Martha Grimes at her best, etc., etc., etc.

I agree that the books I enjoy most won't be on anyone's list several decades from now, but I don't have enough time in my life to read the "good for me" stuff. I hate to tell you all this, but I can't stand Atwood. Beautiful writing isn't enough for me; I want a good story--pleasant, even.

Berta Ruck is the author of Love-Hater, a beloved book from my early teen years that got lost. I couldn't remember the author, and some wonderful RPer (maybe Vee) suggested her. I ordered it and found I do still like it. It is the only one of her books I've ever read.

Sorry, my last paragraph above was meant for the "unamerican" books thread. I'm so confused.

"It mystifies me, though, that I can remember so well novels that I first read decades ago and how much I still enjoy the characters who inhabit the stories."

The problem with age is that we have so many experiences. The older I get the harder it is to remember what I had for dinner last night, or the name of the last book I read. And I have no idea what year it was when we went to Budapest. (I'm just 60, not senile yet, but there's too much up there.)

But I can remember the names of authors and characters of books I read in my youth and it bears NO relation to when the novels were published! I read lots of old stuff as a kid. I can remember stuff about the Five Little Peppers not because it was good but because I loved it! It had to do with how little was rattling around in my memory.

I think is every bit as good as some seminal novels of my youth. But It will never have the same feeling for me as Black Boy or Red Badge of Courage because I learned things about the world that I didn't know or feel when I first read those books as an adolescent. Great books I read today are not showing me new things about the human condition, I know it too well. But good writing can still express it well for us.

>Great books I read today are not showing me new things about the human condition, I know it too well. But good writing can still express it well for us.
That was really well put granjan, quite perfect, really.

Grelobe, your recommendations of Italian period-piece novels is much appreciated. I'm putting them on my to-find list.
I Promessi Sposi (in English, The Betrothed) is an Italian historical novel by Alessandro Manzoni. It is the most famous and widely read novel of the Italian language. The Betrothed was inspired by Walter Scott's Ivanhoe and was the first Italian historical novel.I didn't know that! It sounds fascinating because I love Ivanhoe.

Georgia, that's a great link! Thank you. I'm not terribly fond of reading full-length novels off a computer screen, but those are hard to find as actual hold-in-the-hand books. I'm curious about several that I've heard of but have never read.

'S awright, Chris. I get confused all the time about which thread I'm in. You're better than me, though, 'cause I often forget to reply at all. Thank you for the Naipaul info. I've been interested in reading more of his stuff since I read about his and Theroux's fall out; so the nonfiction would probably suit my purpose better.

I thought Elinor Glyn sounded familiar; then I noticed that her books appear on several of the American bestseller lists. Evidently she was well-enough known to Americans at one time, but her novels seem to be largely forgotten in the States nowadays. So, is she still well-remembered in the UK? Was she a character herself or was it just her writing?

Vee, I'm about ready to give up on the 1940s. Though there were lots of books published during that decade, most of them aren't about the decade itself. It is the most bifurcated decade of the twentieth century, understandably, since half of it was wartime. After the war ended, there was a great rush of publishing; and I think some of the most entertaining books I've ever read came out then, but most of them are about other times -- e.g., The Egg and I, 1920s; I Capture the Castle, 1930s; The King's General, the 17th century. I don't really want to choose a war-setting to represent the whole decade -- I kicked around Mailer's The Naked and the Dead for a while. I'm willing, though, to consider a novel written years or decades later that's about the 1940s and authentically represents the times or at least one that gives the right "feel." Got any ideas, anyone?

When I first thought of this exercise, it was because I was remembering all the great "old-timey" novels I had read and how they transported me in a way that modern novels don't seem to. Some historical novels nowadays, though researched to the nth degree, don't always manage to feel right. I know that novels written in former times are often replete with mistakes, but in spite of the inaccuracies, they somehow instill the scene and time better. Ach! I can't seem to express what I mean, but maybe someone will recognize what I am floundering to describe. :-)

Vee, in my teens, I was awfully fond of Patrick Hamilton's Hangover Square and the novelized version of Angel Street. Of course I remember...

Wow, yes, 'I Promessi' is a wonderful book! An absolutely excellent read. In fact, it would make a great discussion, IMHO.

Just a thought on present day novels - two books that have been very well received in several reading groups that I have been a part of are 'Peace Like A River' by Leif Enger and 'The Secret Life of Bees' by Sue Monk Kidd. I rarely read books more than once ( the "too many books, not enough time" philosophy!)but I have read 'Peace' 4 times. Neither one of these books is particularly happy, but they are well written, beautiful, truthful and have plenty of comic moments to balance out the difficulties. The also have hopeful endings, I think.

I thought Peace like A River was a wonderful book that deserves a wide audience. And it does have rather modern sensibilities without being too wierd. Every character was special. I liked Kidd's book but don't think it was that special.

Frieda, I think few books of note with the feel of the decade were published in the UK during the '40's probably because of the practical problem of almost no availability of paper and because it was such a terrible time. People didn't want to read about grey bombed-out buildings, queues for everything, just enough to eat but NO luxuries such as eggs, butter or fruit. Only rationing kept the population from starving. And, of course it was worse after WWII, when aid had to go from a bankrupt UK to help the Germans, and the vast sad army of 'displaced persons'.
Many of the well-known/popular writers would have been in 'uniform' with other things to keep them busy.
You probably know that Dodie Smith was able to keep on writing and planning her books because she had done what was considered very unpatriotic by many people and run away to California for the duration . . . along with several other high-profile writers.
Was it during the '40's that the popular crime/lawyer books came out such as Ellery Queen and 'Perry Mason'; easy reads that took folk's minds off the difficult times?

For 1950-1959, I'm picking Peyton Place by Grace Metalious. On first consideration PP appears to be a particularly sudsy soap opera, but it struck a chord with readers for a good reason: every town in America (probably every town in the world!) has its dirty little secrets. The title became a catchphrase for all those places and situations of that sort.

Vee, who said acidly, "Who won the war anyway?" in regard to the post-war situation in Britain? Ellery Queen and Erle Stanley Gardner got started in the 1920s writing for the pulp magazines. But I think you're right that the 1940s saw increased demand for dependably entertaining books of the type written by the Queen duo and Gardner.

Thinking about the 1940s decade more, I most associate it with the noir style -- particularly in films but many of the films were based on books. Vera Caspary's Laura comes to mind, as well as Steve Fisher's I Wake Up Screaming. (I was going to say Brighton Rock but that actually was published in 1938, though the film adaptation is from the 1940s.)

Peace Like a River certainly seems to have impressed a lot of readers. Wow, thyrkas, you've read it four times! Which do you figure makes it so appealing: the setting, time, characters, plot, symbolism, or what? I read it a year or so ago but I can't say that it overwhelmingly pleased or displeased me.

Vee, I have some muddled thoughts about the British angry-young-man novels of the 1950s but I'll save those for later.

On to the 1960s, that most troublesome of decades!

At last I have thought of a couple of '40's books that say something about the times

The World My Wilderness by Rose Macaulay. Set in post-war London with a background of bombed and derelict streets and gangs of feral children running wild.
RM 's house had been bombed and she had lost everything including books, manuscripts etc.

She wrote

"The world my wilderness, its caves my home
Its weedy wastes the garden where I roam
Its chasm'd cliffs my castle and my tomb."

Little Boy Lost by Marghanita Laski. Written in 1949 and one of the most poignant and moving stories about the fall-out from 'occupied' France at the end of WWII.
A father searches for his small son who went missing after his mother died.
The sort of book I'd like to tell everyone to read. I think it was reissued in paperback not long ago.

A film was made of it in the '50's with Bing Crosby (Bing Crosby? Does he burst into song?) I found a 'still' from the movie and there is a shot of Rosemary Clooney dressed as a dancing girl! They must have got their script from a different edition.

For Rumer Godden fans An Episode of Sparrows is set in Post War London.

Another fan of Leif Enger's "Peace Like a River." I liked it so much I gave several copies as Xmas gifts the year I discovered it. Intriguing character, in the little girl, whom some compared to Scout, in Harper Lee's novel, a compelling story, and beautiful writing!

"Which do you figure makes it so appealing: the setting, time, characters, plot, symbolism, or what?"

I think the characters grabbed my attention first of all, but the plot, and the subplots, roll and build so quickly that is it hard to know where to stop reading once I've started, so plot is definitely part of the attraction. Additionally, I find myself trying to help Reuben breathe, and Swede to write and Jeremiah to find Davey. Maybe this happens because the story is written in the first person from a child's perspective. Also, I think Enger is very skillful at blending the miraculous with the mundane, just as a child would, and he makes that idea a part of the plot. Therefore, I am always on the look out for the next amazing development, and wondering if Enger slipped some foreshadowing into the text that I may have missed. Plus, the humor in the book is delightful!
To me, the theme of the book is familial love, and although this love is portrayed with plenty of faults in PLAR, it is also shown to be miraculous. Perhaps it's the sense of the power of love that brings me back to the book so often.

Are people suggesting Peace Like a River is a good eg of a book that depicts/says something about the USA during the last few years?
I was wondering about it last night and then we all heard the terrible news of the shootings at Virginia Tech and I thought 'Yes' there is a slight similarity between PLAR and modern America.
This is not the place to discuss the wrongs (are there are rights?) about the US and gun ownership, but I don't see 'Peace . . .' as a beautiful book when the basic premise of the plot is one of violence.
The almost casual way people get beaten-up/killed. The older brother who has to escape leading to the long family search for him; and at the end no retribution for the boy.
I understand from US friends that things are really like that in the mid West (or should that be just West?) people do still take the law into their own hands and act in that way. I notice here, and on the thread about the book a couple of years ago no-one remarked on this destructive quality, disrespect for life.
Are things still as they were in the days of the 'Wild West' in parts of the US?

veer - As far as PLAR goes, I think we see right from the start that the Land family is at ease with guns - the first thing we read about is the goose hunting trip the family has together. Hunting is for the family's enjoyment, yes, but also for their dinner. Hunting as a family activity is very common in the U.S., certainly in the states that serve as the backdrop for this story.
We also see from the beginning that Jeremiah is not a violent man, nor does he condone violence in any way. Here in lies the conflict - a tension that is played out in the Land family, and in the broader human arena as well. Jeremiah's peaceful ways, his mild and passive behavior, his ability to turn the other cheek, bring his family as much sorrow and trouble as it does good.(eg losing his job at the school; I also think his passive behavior is the reason his wife left him.) Davey's choice to deal violently with a bad person brings nothing but pain to everybody - there is nothing good about his choice. This is made plain in the book, I think. (Although Reuben and Swede, as children, think that loyalty to Davey trumps everything, Jeremiah does not think loyalty equals aiding and abetting their brother's escape from jail) Davey's choice to use violence is also part of Jeremiah's anguish with the situation, I think. How can the beloved son of a peaceful man choose to solve problems with violence?
Now we have a setting for an almost unresolvable conflict within Jeremiah, and anyone who has a family member who has committed a heinous crime; how do we continue to love them, and in the Land family's case, how do they do it without breaking the law themselves? I don't think Jeremiah is searching for Davey in order to get his son off the hook, I think he is trying to bring him to justice. I think Jeremiah believes Davey has a better chance at redeeming some portion of his life by facing the consequences of his actions in the courts, rather than running from the law for the rest of his life. Does he still love his son? Of course. Does he think Davey has done the right thing by committing murder - absolutely not.

What about James Caine's "Mildred Pierce" or "The Postman Always Rings Twice" for the 1940's?? Both were written and filmed during the 40's. Or how about "The Best Years of Their Lives" - it was a novel before it was a film. Or Ernie Pyle's "Brave Men"? "Hiroshima" by Hershey? Maybe "Inn of the Sixth Happiness" by Gladys Alward - was not that written in the 30's or 40's? Or "Oil for the Lamps of China" - the 20's I believe?

My mother kept every book she ever received and so I got to read some of the best sellers for the 20's, 30's and 40's: "Girl of the Limberlost"? Gad, I LOVE books!

I'm also a sucker for the great British mysteries of the 20's and 30's: Dorothy L Sayers' Lord Peter Wimsey novels, and Dame Agatha Christie's Jane Marple and Hercule Pirot.

So many books, so little time!

Do you think Wolfe's Bonfire of Vanities works for the 1980s?

Chris, I haven't considered the '80s yet. I'm still stuck in the sixties. I really set myself up for this one, not realizing it was going to be so difficult.

I've read various critics' opinions that Bonfire of the Vanities represents New York City of the 1980s better than any novel about any other decade in the metropolis. I read it when it first came out and recognized it was quite a flapping-good story, but not having ever had much experience with New York City it didn't bowl me over. I don't even recall trying to transfer the happenings in my mind to a place I was more familiar with -- I've never held the opinion of "as New York goes, so goes the rest of the country."

Dynomutt, above, listed Bonfire as his choice for the 1980s. Perhaps he will tell us why. So, what do you think, Chris?

Maybe I'll choose Valley of the Dolls for the 1960s. It's got the sex and drugs...

Why Bonfire of the Vanities for the 80s? Simple -- to me the story's about greed, superficiality, materialism, ambition .... all those lovely things that seemed to epitomize a lot of the 1980s. If I was to choose a companion movie, I'd probably select "Wall Street" with Michael Douglas.

To me, the 1980s was about appearances and trying to get away with as much as possible (or to get as MOST as possible) in as short a time as possible. And that was what the book was about.

Oops. I really do read the entire thread before posting, just not every time I post. Sorry, Dyno.

I saw the novel as more about the power of politics over reason. About society endorsing the meta-narrative rather than truth. The materialism of the characters was more the entertaining setting than the point. Except to point up that even the wealthy ultimately have no power over the political.