On the Road question

I love On the Road, Kerouac, the Beats, Bukowski, and Henry Miller precisely because they are iconoclastic and alienated by American cultures. Miller lived outside the U.S. for many years, and he came back only because he couldn't get out of the way of the war, not because he wanted to come back (and he promptly toured America and wrote a book, calling it "The Air-Conditioned Nightmare"). When I live outside the U.S. I no longer see the U.S. as Americans are taught to see it--a dramatic reversal happens. Yet I don't have to leave the U.S. to gain that sense of disenfranchisement. The Beats were gay (Ginsberg & Burroughss among others) or drug users (Burroughs) or criminally alienated (Burroughs and Neal Cassady) or just hyper-cerebral (Burroughs & Kerouac) and could never fit in. Bukowski is an outrageously delightful cynic, like an atheist at the Church picnic (and the guy I'd be hanging out with). Being an American requires a deep belief in a vast nostalgic mythological system (most of which isn't true), and if you live outside the U.S. as Miller did; or if you are on one of America's many hate lists (gay; drug user; eggheads; "2d-class" races); or if you just can't subscribe to the things that make everybody else stand up to sing the National Anthem, then you don't feel enfranchised. You don't feel American. You don't believe in America. And dues-paying membership in that secular materialistic religion is necessary to write the Great AMERICAN Novel. And that in a nutshell is why On the Road isn't a Great American Novel: it's disenfranchised.

I thought it was awful, arrogant young man sapping money from some Aunty he never really thanks, treating women like objects and playing at poverty. Comfy middle-class 'rebellion', I don't understand how people see disenfranchised youth in it. Hard Rain Falling is a far better exploration of what happens when young people are expelled from a culture.

It isn't considered a great American novel? I'd put it on that shelf. In fact, I'm pretty sure my copy of it physically is on the shelf with my American novelists at this moment.... (Really, that shelf is for my favorite American novels, not so much just the "great" ones, but still.)

If I had a "great American novel" goodreads shelf, I'd tag it so. Maybe that's something I should do.

Apparently, this book has caused some confusion on wikipedia's article for "Great American Novel" in this exchange:

I removed Jack Kerouac's On the Road (1957) from the list of novels referred to as The Great American Novel because the citation does not refer to is as such. "If On the Road wasn't the Great American Novel, then Kerouac can make a fair claim to the Great American Fantasy Baseball League. Please do not restore this title to the list without a reference that refers to it as The Great American Novel. -ErinHowarth (talk) 19:52, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

I put it back because you just need to Google it for 5 minutes and you can find numerous places that mention it as a great American novel....

It's not currently listed on the article itself, so I guess somebody took it back off. A bit of debate there, it seems.... I hadn't realized. Putting it on that list seems like an obvious choice to me.

I'd say it belongs. It speaks to the zeitgeist of the 1950s. The beats aren't everyone's cup of tea, but that hardly matters. I'd say it qualifies.

It is one of the great American novels. Alienation, the search for identity and a sense of belonging in post war America. The previous generation had a war to fight whilst this generation reaped the rewards of a newly industrialised economy that provided movies and hamburgers and cars for recreational purposes. It is also a brilliantly written story.
And to throw another book into the mix what about 'Shane'

Samodh wrote: "I'm considerably familiar with books tagged as Great American Novel and most of them make sense to me to befit the categorisation. The Great Gastby, Beloved, Invisible Man, Moby Dick, Gravity's Rai..."

Who says it isn't a great American novel? And even if someone doesn't, who cares? If it means something to you, then it's a great novel. :)

'The Sun Also Rises' doesn't take place in America, that's why its not on most lists.

I myself wouldn't include 'Beloved' or 'Invisible Man'. As fine as they are, those are dedicated specifically to the black experience in America.

I've never heard that 'On the Road' was ever denied any props or laurels it was ever entitled to. Still, it seems the kind of book where the author probably wouldn't have wanted any such 'Great American Novel' designation.

Meanwhile, 'Moby Dick', 'Huckleberry Finn', and 'The Great Gatsby' are usually recommended as "greats" because they all say something about more than just one generation of Americans, and about more than just one type of American.

It always seems to appear on the 100 books you should read lists. Personally, I found it absolute drivel (as did the others in my book club, many of whom didn't bother to finish it.) Maybe it was interesting when it was first published, but it just bored me. Perhaps if I had read it when I was immature (19 or 20) I would have liked it somewhat. Seems like if you read reviews, people usually either loved it or hated it.

I thought it a Godawful grind and wouldn't call it a great novel, American or otherwise.

i didnt care for it. i thought the road by jack london was better

Couldn't connect with or, in honesty, really care about the characters. Great first half, but then I was bored. I love his "stream of thought" writing, almost poetic, but it wasn't enough for me. Tried reading BIG SUR and felt the same way.

Now I'm no expert at what makes a novel The Great American Novel; but whatever those elements are, 'On the Road' doesn't have them. It's the story of a man having what would be described today as a quarter-life crisis. He's bored with life and begins to travel in the hope he will find meaning. Kerouac wasn't trying to say anything grander than that with the book.

Personally, I wouldn't even consider it a novel since Kerouac lifted so much of it from real life. However, I do agree that it is an important entry in American Literature -- as an iconoclast, though -- not The Great American Novel.

I don't know if it should be considered a "great American novel" or not, but I just recall having totally different reactions to it based on my age at the time I read it. At 20 I LOVED it! At uhhh, a uhhhh, LATER age, I couldn't even finish it. Just found the characters shallow and self-absorbed and boring. But I sure didn't think of it that way the first time I read it. I don't recall having such a vastly different opinion of any other book I've read based on how old I was when I read it.