I dont know why you would say the above. What is elitist about Saramago? Novels are much more accessible and affordable than going to see a play (usually). So you must not mean that. I would never be for dumbing down literature, but Saramago is not styllistically difficult, like Joyce or somebody like that. About the only difficult thing is when his characters enter into dialogue. So, you must not mean that. So, I would like to know why the one is "proleterian" and the other is not.
Saramago comes from a working class background, so you must not mean that.
Also, why do writers/artists need to be seperated into "proleteriat" and "non-proleteriat" camps? Proust is not a "proleterian" writer (I guess) because the french nobility figures into his work (even though he thought most nobility and bourgeois were worthless and held in high esteem many workmen). Does that diminish his worth as an artist?
Really, can we not get beyond crude soc-realism?
Oh, I wrote another email. Having awakened finally I remembered that Saramago had indeed already won the Nobel. Thomas
__________________________________ Yahoo! Music Unlimited Access over 1 million songs. Try it free. http://music.yahoo.com/unlimited/