Mamet on O'Brian

I came across this short, sharp and lovely little bit by David Mamet, on genre writers in general and Patrick O'Brian in particular.

The Humble Genre Novel, Sometimes Full of Genius

His Aubrey-Maturin series, 20 novels of the Royal Navy in the Napoleonic Wars, is a masterpiece. It will outlive most of today's putative literary gems as Sherlock Holmes has outlived Bulwer-Lytton, as Mark Twain has outlived Charles Reade. God bless the straightforward writer, and God bless those with the ability to amuse, provoke, surprise, shock, appall.

The purpose of literature is to Delight. To create or endorse the Scholastic is a craven desire. It may yield a low-level self-satisfaction, but how can this compare with our joy at great, generous writing? With our joy of discovery of worth in the simple and straightforward? Is this Jingoism? The use of the term's a wish to side with the powerful, the Curator, the Editor. The schoolmaster's bad enough in the schoolroom; I prefer to keep him out of my bookshelf.

I could quote more; hell, I could quote the whole thing. But go and read it yourself. Because even if you're not an O'Brian fan, if you're a book lover there's some author you cherish about whom the following sentiments could be said to apply:

Shel Silverstein said that there were some authors whose books one wanted literally to hug to oneself: with thanks, and in unavailing protest that, at some point, the works had an end