Talk:Jonathan Franzen

Oprah's Book Club
Oh, get over it, Johnny. Oprah praising your book is one of the best things that could happen. Sweep the leg. You got a problem with that!?! -Martin Kove — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.113.104.47 (talk) 13:13, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

If you've read The Corrections, it should be rather clear why he might object to Oprah's seal. And I think he's certainly aware that it helped him sell lots of books.

But he ain't crazy about what that little seal means. Once, while reading the book in public, a stranger took note of it in a very skeptical tone--"Oprah's book club?!" Underneath that question, lay another unspoken one: "you're not a middle-aged, white, suburban woman, so why are you reading that sappy crap?" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.112.104.193 (talk) 01:56, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

--

Although I didn't read the Oregonian article, I remember a Fresh Air (public radio) interview in which Franzen expressed reservations about the Oprah endorsement. - John Markos O'Neill — Preceding undated comment added 16:30, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

--

[Most best-selling works of literary fiction of the 2000's?]
"The Corrections, which became one of the most best-selling works of literary fiction of the 2000's."

How can this be assumed, the decade isn't yet finished! --Hugh 08:22, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Film Deal
"A film adaptation of the novel has been in the works since 2002, with Robert Zemeckis attached as director." " He expressed his dissatisfaction with the Oprah insignia being printed on his book by saying, "I see this as my book, my creation, and I didn't want that logo of corporate ownership on it." Really? He didn't want corporate ownership without an official check (even though I know he liked all the sales her endorsement provided. Ask James Frey, Oparah can sell books. I wonder what the "logo of corporate ownership" (film deal) paid?Master Redyva 20:38, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
 * And what's wrong with that? Surely an author can decide what he wants to do with his own book.85.157.155.247 (talk) 17:29, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Picture
Can we get an actual picture of Mr. Franzen in this page and not a cartoon of him with 3 other cartoon authors? It isn't even clear from the caption which one is Franzen. The only one I know by sight is Gore Vidal and I consider myself something of an avid reader. How is the average person seeking information on Franzen supposed to know which of the figures represents Franzen? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.237.208.174 (talk • contribs)
 * (L to R: Chabon, Franzen, Wolfe, Vidal) ShelfSkewed  [Talk] 19:47, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject class rating
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 07:09, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Photograph
Is there no public domain photograph of The 'Franz better than this? He looks here to have just suffered an Immodium-filled night. Please? If anyone's got one, let us in on it. Chicopac (talk) 14:22, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

freedom
I would point out that the link for the title freedom only indicates that that will be the title when released in Italy. PDBailey (talk) 01:07, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
 * That's not exactly what the cited source says, if read closely, and you look at the newspaper-column photo. It will be titled Libertà in Italy. But it might be more accurate to say that Freedom is still the tentative or working title, per this site: Jonathan Franzen profile at The American Academy in Berlin website.-- Shelf Skewed  Talk  04:21, 22 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Cute, but if we are going to lawyer this thing, I think the secondary source is pretty easy to read. In fact, I think the text, "in Italy, it will be called 'Freedom'" obviates any close reading requirement. Now, had the cite been to the Italian article, then yes, that would be what the citation said. PDBailey (talk) 01:14, 23 June 2009 (UTC)


 * A completer version of the quotation: "...his new book, his first novel after The Corrections came out in 2001, will come out in the fall of 2010 in the US and right before Xmas 2010 in Italy, it will be called 'Freedom'". It mentions both the U.S. and Italy, and gives the title in English. I don't see any implication that Freedom is the title only in Italy. Anyway, it's just a blogger's ungrammatical paraphrase of the Italian article, so we don't know exactly what the article said. So I'm not really arguing with you--I agree the title needs a better source. But the best one I found was the one I cited above, which says only that the novel is "tentatively titled Freedom".-- Shelf Skewed  Talk  04:28, 23 June 2009 (UTC)


 * And we're unlikely to find a better source soon. Another page on the same site, dated May 6, offers more: "And as to the title, Freedom, Franzen, indeed an adept political mind, erred on the side of coyness: 'The American Academy needed a name.'" Whether that's the real title may not be verifiable for several months.-- Shelf Skewed  Talk  04:45, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Speaks fluent German?
Has anyone actually heard him speak fluent German? Why the reluctance to do so publicly? Where did this claim originate? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.179.91.85 (talk) 20:11, 10 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Hi, yes, he does speak fluent german. He lived in Berlin for a long time and in 2010 he gave lectures in Germany in german so this claim is basically BS —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.222.59.82 (talk) 16:23, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

TIME cover appearance was controversial
When some notable people pushed the hype surrounding Freedom (e.g., Time editors) and some notable people objected to the hype (as documented with two reliable citations, more available), the word for that in English is "controversy". Choor monster (talk) 16:24, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Hysterical realism
Franzen is not a hysterical realist author. Per the wikipedia article, "strong contrast between elaborately absurd prose, plotting, or characterization and careful, detailed investigations of real specific social phenomena". Both The Corrections and Freedom are works of social realism. Neither have elaborate absurd prose, plotting or characterization. They do deal with social phenomena; however, hysterical realism juxtaposes these two features.

I would suggest changing Franzen's genre to social realism. Eesome (talk) 23:09, 14 June 2013 (UTC)eesome


 * Hysterical Realism is James Wood's phrase, and in the reference that was cited,, Wood was explicitly not calling Franzen an hysterical realist. He did call The Corrections a "big social novel", and the "realism" is certainly implicit.


 * For the record, Social realism refers to mostly visual art concerned with the poor making do. The term is also very commonly used as a less-than-accurate translation of the official Soviet term Socialist realism.  Neither applies to Franzen.


 * I've commented out the movement entry, leaving the Wood reference inside the comment. Choor monster (talk) 15:07, 16 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Social realism generally refers to work that deals with class issues. In American literature, it has evolved from social realists focusing on class struggles like Steinbeck, La Sueur, et al into dealing primarily with social issues. Franzen's work has been called 'social realism' extensively:   . In his Paris Review interview, Franzen himself repeatedly refers to his 'social novels' and during his interview in BOMB, he says, "Yes, in that I continue to be interested in the dramatic intersection of personal, domestic stories with larger social stories." I would argue very much social realism applies to Franzen. Eesome (talk) 22:16, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
 * OK, I put in the change per your suggestion, with just the Time citation. (It's the briefest, and comes with the least amount of hedging, no "Franzen's version of ..." for example.)  I suppose the Social Realism page ought to be updated. Choor monster (talk) 11:43, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I was looking at that page the other day. Someone else mentioned that there is nothing about social realism in literature, which is surprising. There are numerous writers - Maxim Gorky, George Eliot, George Brandis, Henrik Ibsen, Dickens, Tolstoy, Turgenev, Abraham Cahan, Upton Sinclair, John Steinbeck, Meridel La Sueur, Erskine Caldwell, Agnes Smedley, Grace Lumpkin, Betty Smith, Richard Wright, Ralph Ellison (to name a few), and then, of course, Jonathan Franzen attempting to revive it, which is laudatory. It would be great to add this to the main entry; however, it seems daunting.Eesome (talk) 18:11, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
 * In my (admittedly outsider) experience, no one used the phrase "social realism" to describe literature. The phrase meant something about the visual arts, or it was referring to the Soviet usage.  This is either a new thing (is there a new generation of critics that never learned either of the old meanings but like the phrase?) or it's a virtually unknown minority usage that is breaking out.  Or it could be a coincidental re-invention, in reaction to "magic realism".  Presumably the best arrangement would be a new page, not a section.  As you said, daunting. Choor monster (talk) 11:16, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I can't recall when I first heard 'social realism' used to describe literature, but I know it was back in college. From what I've learned, it has been used to describe a subset of 'realism' for quite some time (although there is controversy over who was the first author to use it - as there is with 'realism'). I was always taught it ran concurrently with the visual arts movement and it too differs from 'Socialist realism' . There have been many courses on it as a literary movement - &, and several scholarly books, "Tensions in Social Realism", "Social realism in the fiction of Dickens", etc. Franzen has asserted his intent to revive it and Tom Wolfe wrote a famous essay, "Stalking the Billion-Footed Beast. A literary manifesto for the new social novel", The Atlantic writes, "The question is worth asking, since Wolfe has previously championed social realism" . In short, I believe social realism has been around for quite some time as a literary movement, but the movement may have fallen out of favor (thus, Franzen and Wolfe's attempts to 'revive' it) and thus, the term possibly. To be honest, I was surprised that the 'social realism' entry did not include the literary movement as well.Eesome (talk) 19:06, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Interviews
There are a few points where the article references another piece of media, but doesn't actually include the relevant pieces of information. It seems like whoever wrote it is confusing what is important. It's not important that Franzen is interviewed. What is important is what he says in the interviews. - "In the lecture he said of the third question in particular "This one always raises my blood pressure" and quoted Nabokov in response." Shouldn't the Nabokov quote either be included or the entire Nabokov reference be left out? - "He discussed the implications of the Time coverage, and the reasoning behind the title of Freedom in an interview in Manchester, England, in October 2010." Shouldn't we include what he said, not that he did an interview? - "Franzen also discussed his friendship with David Foster Wallace and the impact of Wallace's suicide on his writing process." What was the impact of his friendship with Wallace and Wallace's suicide? 71.245.182.119 (talk) 14:49, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

That section is also missing it's link. Elemming (talk) 08:37, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

Somerville, Massachusetts
The Somerville Scout seems to think at some point he lived in Somerville, Massachusetts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Beland (talk • contribs) 20:10, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

He did, not Boston, I updated Willakers81 (talk) 15:00, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

Fawning
The article on Franzen and his first breakthrough book includes only positive opinions. Meanwhile, on the Graham Greene page, readers are subjected to Franzen’s negative assessment of Greene, as if that was crucial to know. Seems pretty biased. I don’t think Franzen’s opinions matter as to whether I would read another Greene novel. Meanwhile Franzen’s own boring, overlong work functions as its own dissuasion to reading his. 211.250.58.37 (talk) 00:47, 9 January 2022 (UTC)