I think what constitutes a good novel may be entirely subjective. I don't think people should have to struggle though a classic if they are not enjoying it just to appear cultured.

The main thing is to write and keep writing, and don't throw away stuff that you have written because you think it isn't any good. — Bitter Crank

I have a lot of self doubt. I am also quite critical of other peoples writing.

Completely honest criticism is what any aspiring writer should want before anything else. — Baden

Honest criticism for an actually aspiring writer is one thing. What you did was nip it in the bud.

I agree with the excellent author, Flannery O'Connor, about criticism:

“There's many a bestseller that could have been prevented by a good teacher.”

Actually, Baden and @Andrew, Flannery O'Connor is worth a look, both for one's pleasure and instruction. I don't especially care for her full length novels (she didn't write many) but her short stories contain some of the best, tightest, most highly polished writing in the language. "A Good Man Is Hard to Find (A Hard Man Is Good to Find is by somebody else.) and The Life You Save May Be Your Own available at the same site.

I have a lot of self doubt. I am also quite critical of other peoples writing. — Andrew4Handel

Of course you have a lot of self doubt -- you and few billion other people. As for being so critical of your own and others writing, it's a dead end. But... when you sit down at the table, keyboard or pen in had, remember: nothing is a stake. You are free to write whatever you please. And you are free to find it pleasing, as well. The thing is, get it written.

Will you be successful? I don't know. Statistically the odds are against every writer that wants to write really good poetry, fiction, drama, screen plays, etc. including me, Baden, and everybody else. Nonfiction is much easier to write. Writing that ends up being classified as "printed matter" is the easiest of all. Terabytes of trash are turned out by truckloads of talentless twats.

My writing tends to degenerate into absurd perversion, slowly reducing its appeal until I'm the only one interested, at which point I know I've won.

How cruel the universe would throw you talentless twats onto the trash pile of history, that even this choose your own adventure novel, The Philosophy Forum (A Thousand and One F8rking Threads), will eventually be buried in the cold inhuman servers of Palantir.

Your writings tend to generate just more writing and other benign tautologies, never really having any appeal except for all the stolen uncited content. You crap authors will only ever relatively win by the consensually mediated love for your peers.

Mwahahahah (laughs maniacally)

Nothing is at stake. Whether by moderator, critic, the tears of a loved one, or the end of time, you will be effaced.

Yes. That sort of thing.
But I will have to reject it on the principles established.
Damn you, remorseless donkey.

Honest criticism for an actually aspiring writer is one thing. What you did was nip it in the bud. — Bitter Crank

Alright. Maybe it was a bit full-on considering the context. I will say I've seen writers go on for years at the same not-very-good level while receiving all the while warm well-intended praise/encouragement that only serves to prevent them improving, but, yes, criticism can be misplaced too.



:grin:

It's really not though.
And classics have stood the test of time because they are well-written and contain important thoughts about the human condition and other philosophical issues.

It's one thing to dislike a classic novel--that's just taste. It's another to to fail to realize why the novel is a classic, your own preferences aside. That failure shows that you really don't understand the novel at all, likely through a lack of literary ability and knowledge.

I love "The Never Ending Story" and also "Sophies World".

Sophie's World: A Novel About the History of Philosophy (FSG ...
https://www.amazon.com/Sophies-World-History-Philosophy-Classics/.../0374530718
A page-turning novel that is also an exploration of the great philosophical ... with a mysterious philosopher, while receiving letters addressed to another girl.
21 Books Written by and About Women That Men Would Benefit From ... — Amazon

What I like about "Sophie's World" is learning about classical philosophy with the added mystery of who was writing those notes? I could identify with the young girl and I enjoyed the hiding places as they reminded me of when I was young and exploring and hiding, so I would say the ability to identify with a character is important too.

Googling philosophy novels resulted in finding many links.

Alright. Maybe it was a bit full-on considering the context. I will say I've seen writers go on for years at the same not-very-good level while receiving all the while warm well-intended praise/encouragement that only serves to prevent them improving, but, yes, criticism can be misplaced too. — Baden

I will agree constructive criticism is a benefit. And so is just looking for information about how to write, how to publish, and whatever information the book may need. The internet is great for getting information, and there are really good books to help an aspiring writer. Reading is important to writing. We read to learn style and technological points such as how to construct a sentence, or how to develop a character. Writing a factual book is different from writing a novel, and in our technological society, I have seen a greater focus on validating facts, than in the past, if one is writing non-fiction. It is a little intimidating. Serious authors often have the money to travel around the world and dine with influential people. That is not a benefit I have.

No matter why we write, the effort benefits our thinking and that can make it worth the effort even if we don't publish.

It's really not though.
And classics have stood the test of time because they are well-written and contain important thoughts about the human condition and other philosophical issues.

It's one thing to dislike a classic novel--that's just taste. It's another to to fail to realize why the novel is a classic, your own preferences aside. That failure shows that you really don't understand the novel at all, likely through a lack of literary ability and knowledge. — NKBJ

I think the point of writing a novel is to entertain people in some way.If you wanted to inform someone you could write something factual or write a philosophy article.

I want to know if a book made a coherent powerful philosophical point then what was it?

Your positions seems a bit elitist.

think the point of writing a novel is to entertain people in some way.If you wanted to inform someone you could write something factual or write a philosophy article.

I want to know if a book made a coherent powerful philosophical point then what was it? — Andrew4Handel

Well, which is it now? Are you trying to make a powerful point or merely entertain? You can do both, but your first paragraph implies you think novels oughtn't do that.

I'll embrace elitism if it means I'm not just reading surface level books that are at best vague, and at worst, contradictory.

A regular novel may just want to entertain. I want to read something enlightening at least, at best, transformative. That's what great literature does.

I think the point of writing a novel is to entertain people in some way. — Andrew4Handel

Ideally, the point of writing a novel (worth anything) is to give a reader something they couldn't have got without reading it, whether that be a type of unique experience or knowledge or whatever form of edification. If it's to be worth anything of lasting value, it wouldn't be simply another entertainment, of which there is no shortage and that can be got at a moment's notice just about anywhere. It's not elitist to recognize that or to try to understand the value that's placed on classics.

[Edit: Cross posted with above]

An impediment to getting a message a cross is if the reader is bored. I don't think you can blame people if they are bored or uninterested in a novel or its theme. I think you could engage the masses with philosophy more if you made it easier to access in an entertaining format. I don't think philosophy is better if it is long winded and uses fancy prose.

I think that some messages in books have already impacted society and so even if you have not read the book you will be influenced by the ideas such as With Dickens criticisms of society.

There's no accounting for taste, as they say. But you can educate and refine your tastes.

Most people interested in a philosophical novel are going to be bored with a novel that is too simple in style and/or content.

A problem I have had with fiction is that it seems like lying. You are making people feel things based on events that did not happen. Even Autobiography and biography can be fictional being an interpretation of an event.

A problem I have had with fiction is that it seems like lying — Andrew4Handel

If the reader knows it's fiction, it's not a form of deceit, so whatever form of lying remains is fairly harmless.

My idea of a philosophical novel is one that makes a clear proposition or arguments and defends it. I think any novel can feel philosophical or inspire philosophical thought.

I feel like you are playing lip service to the "classics" because of their status. But many people are made to read classic novels in school as part of literature class and are bored by them.

I would like someone say to me something like "You should read this novel it offers a great refutation of solipsism"

Most people are bored by any philosophical discourse. Or math. Or science. Or history. I don't think the value of most things should be based on what teens feel about them.

The classics, for the most part (and I'll admit to some exceptions) are classics for good reason.

A good refutation of solipsism can be found in Robinson Crusoe, btw.

A good refutation of solipsism can be found in Robinson Crusoe, btw — NKBJ

How does it offer to refute solipsism and do you have to read the entire novel to find this out?

Do you think that most people who read the novel are aware that it offers a refutation for solipsism?

I have a problem with the style of language old novels are written in because we don't talk like that anymore. If these authors were alive to day would they write in that style?

I liked the film The Matrix for offering a simple exposition of the idea that reality could be an illusion. I think if a film just incorporated one idea like that it would make it more enjoyable.

How does it offer to refute solipsism and do you have to read the entire novel to find this out? — Andrew4Handel

I literally loled at this. Yes. Yes, you have to read a whole book.

You're starting to sound like some of my students who tell me that they love to write, and they're great writers, but they hate to read... It really really does not work that way.

Why would it take a whole book to make an argument against a straightforward premise?

You sound like you teach English but most people don't and don't have time to read all the classics.

I read a lot as a child and young adult and I have read quite a few classics like Anna Karenina, Great expectations, Wuthering Heights and so on, a couple of decades ago. If you teach literature then you certainly have an advantage.

But I just wanted to know a specific explicit argument like the one contained in The Matrix derived from one of these novels. If you want to encourage people to read these works it is worth giving an interesting summary of what to expect.

I grew up in a house without a television so I only read books as a source of entertainment until my late teens/early twenties. I got top marks in my English Language and English Literature classes.

I remember when our class went to see "Much ado About Nothing" at Stratford on Avon and one of the English Teachers was falling a sleep and the consensus was that it was a boring production I believe. The summary of "Much ado about Nothing" we were given was better than the play. I enjoyed reading Macbeth however and I really enjoyed Euripides Medea.

You can't do a great idea or theory justice in some short quip. Life is complex. Philosophy and art should mirror that.

If you just want to write a pop-culture book, then go ahead, but don't pretend it's any deeper than that.

What do you think of philosophical novels and what do you think counts a philosophical novel? — Andrew4Handel

While comments about morality, ethics, and politics are fairly common, other topics are more rare. It is possible to do quite a bit about philosophy of mind in SF with robots. Existentialist states are describable in diary form.

I onl;y know one good metaphysical novel: Hunger, by Knut Hamsun.

My idea of a philosophical novel is one that makes a clear proposition or arguments and defends it. I think any novel can feel philosophical or inspire philosophical thought. — Andrew4Handel

I think any novel or novelist writing about the human condition will inevitably contain aspects of philosophy. It is perhaps a matter of degree how any personal views of the author are incorporated into a story.Some are practically autobiographical in nature and are inspired by important life experiences, observations or themes.

I think it rare that any philosophical novel would make a 'clear proposition or arguments and defends it'
Where would be the fun in that? Goodness, hardly any Real Philosophy Book or Philosopher makes things clear. Hence the whole forum discussion scenario...

But I just wanted to know a specific explicit argument like the one contained in The Matrix derived from one of these novels. If you want to encourage people to read these works it is worth giving an interesting summary of what to expect. — Andrew4Handel

Where in The Matrix do you find the 'clear proposition' with a 'specific explicit argument' ?
Just curious. I haven't read the book, but have watched the film.

I can read about philosophical influences in wiki:

Philosophical influences

It has been suggested by philosopher William Irwin that the idea of the "Matrix" – a generated reality invented by malicious machines – is an allusion to Descartes' "First Meditation", and his idea of an evil demon. The Meditation hypothesizes that the perceived world might be a comprehensive illusion created to deceive us.[7] The same premise can be found in Hilary Putnam's brain in a vat scenario proposed in the 1980s.[7] A connection between the premise of The Matrix and Plato's Allegory of the Cave has also been suggested. The allegory is related to Plato's theory of Forms, which holds that the true essence of an object is not what we perceive with our senses, but rather its quality, and that most people perceive only the shadow of the object and are thus limited to false perception.[32]

----------
We can talk about any novel having philosophical influences but it need not necessarily contain an explicit argument for a specific, explicit argument.

If you want to write a philosophical novel, then I think it would be a good idea to start with yourself.
Know Thyself. And that is why some fiction might be required. You wouldn't necessarily want to bear all and expose other real life characters to the glare of publicity. Or would you ?

A problem I have had with fiction is that it seems like lying
— Andrew4Handel

If the reader knows it's fiction, it's not a form of deceit, so whatever form of lying remains is fairly harmless. — Baden

I don't even know why this would be a problem. It's a story. We are living our own narratives and yes, we sometimes don't see or know the whole truth. We only have our own perspective - unless we get to read about others...or share tales, tall or otherwise.

I think the point of writing a novel is to entertain people in some way.
— Andrew4Handel

Ideally, the point of writing a novel (worth anything) is to give a reader something they couldn't have got without reading it, whether that be a type of unique experience or knowledge or whatever form of edification. If it's to be worth anything of lasting value, it wouldn't be simply another entertainment, of which there is no shortage and that can be got at a moment's notice just about anywhere. It's not elitist to recognize that or to try to understand the value that's placed on classics. — Baden

Exactly. This.

If the reader knows it's fiction, it's not a form of deceit, so whatever form of lying remains is fairly harmless. — Baden

I think even though we know something is fiction it can still effect our beliefs and emotions. This happened to me as a child.

I think in order for fiction to make sense it has to use realistic elements and these are the things that could deceive us.

I could compare it to my dreams as well which I often find psychologically disturbing and remember even though I accept that what happened was imaginary.

So I think fiction has some responsibility not be be too manipulative or propaganda. If a novel wanted to campaign against an injustice it should not distort facts or be too reliant on emotion over reason.

Sounds like a great idea! I also have thought for many years about writing a fantasy or sci-fi novel that could have on readers the kind of impact that The Matrix film had. So I say, go for it!
Here is my piece of advice:

1. Start thinking about a plot that would illustrate your philosophical ideas: these ideas should be showed in the actual plot, not just expressed by the characters in the dialogue (although a few good hints in the dialogue can obviously help). The Matrix is a perfect example of this: it has terrible dialogue, but a spectacular and mind-blowing plot. That's where its power resides.
Thinking out this plot is the most difficult and crucial part of creating your novel. But it can also be the most fascinating and rewarding.

2. Once you have a good plot that fleshes out your philosophical ideas (or your philosophical questions, which would be even better), you need good characters. Characters that your readers will care about. The most amazing plot will fall flat if your characters aren't up to the task. Remember that you are writing a novel, not a movie script. You can't rely on the carisma of some famous actor like Keanu Reeves (an absolute star, imho). There are many books that teach you how to "flesh out" your characters, but in the end I feel it all comes down to having a deep understanding of human psychology, and that can only start with understanding yourself. Deeply.

3. And this takes me to the discussion about the classics of literature: Cervantes, Tolstoy, Dostoevsky... These are classics because of the depth of their characters. (Other classics like Hemingway or James Joyce are more so because of the quality of their narrative voice, but I won't go there now.) And they are never boring. I just read Dostoevsky's The Idiot and boy, was that a page-turner! More addictive than any stupid best-seller I ever read (I also read some of those, yes). There have been famous books like Thomas Mann's The Magic Mountain that consist almost exclusively of interminable philosophical dialogues (or sometimes monologues), but that's not what you want: those kind of books are the definition of "boring" for an average reader. So again, I recommend you express your philosophy through the action and the interactions between the characters, not the dialogue.

4. Some writers that have tried this kind of thing (expressing philosophical ideas through popular fantasy or sci-fi novels): George Orwell, Aldous Huxley, Colin Wilson, Ursula K. Le Guin, Frank Herbert, Philip K. Dick... the list is endless. Actually, most great sci-fi writers ground their works on deep philosophical questions. Outside sci-fi you have writers like Hermann Hesse... There must be others, but they don't come to my mind right now. I think most philosophically minded novelists have always tended towards science-fiction or fantasy. An early example is Jonathan Swift's Gulliver's Travels.

Anyway, I hope this helps! Even if you never get to publish or even finish your novel you will have great fun and learn a lot, I guarantee. I just finished my "masterpiece", which is exactly like that, a "The Matrix"-like work of fiction, and I'm feeling pretty happy and proud of my achievement. :)