Gifts of Scholarship

Abstract

The vexed issue that remains, however, is precisely that of evaluation. If ‘literature’ is taken, in part, as a marker of critical value, then what constitutes ‘good’ contemporary literature? The ‘immediacy’ of a text, its transient status as a marker of a particular, similarly short-lived zeitgeist? The connection between Ellroy and Peace is interesting in this respect, as it is refreshing to realise that the former’s The Big Nowhere (1988) is nearly twenty-five years old. The demarcation of the contemporary becomes apparent here. Ellroy has recent published Blood’ sAR over(2009), and is planning a further phase of his career focusing on political novels. One could argue that Ellroy can no longer be classified as a ‘contemporary’ writer as his work stretches back over a quarter of a century. The counter-argument would then be to focus on his most recent work, despite the existence of a clear line of strategic continuity connecting this material to his earlier publications. As an area of academic study, contemporary literature is a fluid space, but it is this element of ambivalence that productively foregrounds aspects of the associated critical discourses that require attention. In David Peace: Texts and Contexts, Katy Shaw has produced a necessary study of an important writer; but she has also succeeded in approaching some of the wider issues linked to contemporary literary studies. When considering this field, criticism must do more than select the next man or woman of the year. What we see in Shaw’s text is the use of this point as a springboard to inaugurate a continuing assessment.