Talk:The Recognitions

Novels High‑importance

	Novels portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Novels, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to novels, novellas, novelettes and short stories on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.NovelsWikipedia:WikiProject NovelsTemplate:WikiProject Novelsnovel articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Plot summary...

...really needs some work.141.161.119.79 18:30, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Expanded. Ekem (talk) 01:47, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

At least on par?

I think it should definitely be noted that many people consider The Recognitions to be his best novel, his masterpiece, and even more the only book of his that's worth the effort (people like Harold Bloom, for instance). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.204.249.84 (talk) 12:49, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Corrected. Ekem (talk) 01:45, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

High Importance

Thank you Wikipedia Novels Project for changing the Quality Rating from Low to High. For people coming to this page who didn't read my original request, I am reproducing it here to show why this novel is clearly of high importance.

The Recognitions is listed on Time magazine's list of the 100 best novels, on the Modern Library's list of the 100 best novels, AND in Harold Bloom's Western Canon.

William Gaddis is one of the very few modern writers whom novelists whose own work regularly appears on Ten Best lists talk of in the same sentence as Proust, Joyce and Woolf. He is one of the best novelists of the 20th century, and also one of he most influential. When Pynchon's first novels were published, people thought they had been written by Gaddis using a pseudonym. The New York Times recently ran a poll to select the best novel of the past 25 years. The accompanying article listed Gaddis as one of the 5 or 6 authors who might have won had his second novel, JR, not been written a few years too soon to qualify. To read an article on Gaddis by Jonathan Franzen, please click here.

In a long book review of a later Gaddis work, novelist Cynthia Ozick wrote: "The Recognitions is always spoken of as the most overlooked important work of the last several literary generations. Tony Tanner: The critical neglect of this book is really extraordinary. David Madden: An underground reputation has kept it on the brink of oblivion. "Promking (talk) 22:08, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

References have been incorporated.Ekem (talk) 01:47, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I want to read through this novel again just to expand this page to look at the very least more like that for Gravity's Rainbow. This book was one of the most important in shaping my thoughts as they are today. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TarkovskyFanX957 (talk • contribs) 05:43, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Gadden

Gadden was the editor of Rediscoveries (1971), and I suspect that is the original source for the Gadden quotation. Choor monster (talk) 17:11, 9 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on The Recognitions. 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:

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) 23:53, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]