@fish: "a pioneer of what eventually sort of became Romanticism"

this claim sounds very far-fetched to me.

not so confident that he will win, but for the next day, definitely balzac. for anyone unfamiliar with "the french dickens" you can quickly read this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honor%C3%A9_de_Balzac

just realised this list hasn't got flaubert! or zola! or numerous other great french authors. oh well!

actually, i am pretty confident balzac will win this. since i can't get online in the next 24 hours at least: +1 balzac.

@soc: well, i put beckett and ionesco on the list. why didn't you? ;)

i know kasimax, i let the side down, just i did my nominations second and was spoilt for choice - i had assumed someone would put beckett, ionesco, flaubert and zola on for me :P

So, Laozi vs. Balzac...

And I haven't read either, so I'll decline to vote this time around...heard of both, though, obviously...

But kasimax's vote starts us off, so--

Balzac: 1
Laozi: 0

2-0!

No way Balzac should beat Laozi. Laozi was absolutely revolutionary, completely unique - no one else could have done what he did. Balzac wrote realism, and was damn good at it, but nowhere near as influential as Laozi, who singlehandedly determined hundreds of years of East Asian and world history with his teachings.

influence etc. does not make for a better author necessarily, or more to one's personal taste. "the french dickens" surpasses the english in my opinion.

Writing up a moral, beautiful, and successful religion far surpasses realism about life in France after the Napoleonic Wars. That's not to say Laozi is a better writer (considering his work has been translated ten billion times, you might even argue it's not his writing), but a better *author*, that goes to Laozi.

This tournament is relating to fiction, however, and therefore we are looking at factors relating to that - itis for this reason some of the best, most talented writers weren't nominated at all. You will see the great political philosophers/philosophers (be they marx, plato, locke, berkeley, nietzsche) are missing. Focusing on fiction, balzac wins, definitively.

If we're focusing on fiction, then take Laozi off the board and put Ray Bradbury or Agatha Christie on instead. We're debating two authors, and we're obviously not focusing on fiction, or we wouldn't be discussing a fictional realist versus a philosopher.

Laozi

I second bo_sox. Including all types of authors would make most of the debate meaningless. Mostly fiction writers against society-changing philosophy?

I don't think that was his point.

I vote Balzac, in honor of Francois Truffaut.

bo, in the original topic thread obi explicitly, i believe, discounted uisng people that didn't write fiction - they could write other things, but writing some fiction was meant to be the basis of it.

Then have Obi retract that statement or rewrite the ballot exclusively with fiction writers. Till then, I am voting by the authors and their merit, and I am not taking a line Obi used some time ago as the basis for my vote.

Yeah, I did say initially that this should be an all-fiction contest...I think the only other "iffy" one in here is Thoreau, and he gets in based on the fact that he did write poetry, even if people arguably remember the essays more. I figured one or two iffy cases like that wouldn't be a big deal, didn't want to just be like "You must change your vote" right at the beginning of this, lol.

So, yeah...

It's 3-2 Balzac right now anyway...we can keep going with this match-up as long as Laozi wrote some poetry, at all? Just since we already got started, unless everyone else feels strongly otherwise.

Lmao I vote Laozi

As the one that put both Thoreau and Laozi in here fuck y'all for saying they don't belong. They were both poets.

This shouldn't all be about storytelling it should also be about wordplay, content, and writing style

Have any of you ever read anything by Laozi???

I mean goddamn y'all this man was a veritable fount of linguistic tricks and strokes of genius, even in English:

"The truth is not always beautiful, nor beautiful words the truth."

"Knowing others is intelligence;
knowing yourself is true wisdom.
Mastering others is strength;
mastering yourself is true power.
If you realize that you have enough,
you are truly rich."

Nope, haven't read either contestant today--hence my not voting today. ;)

Well, it's 3-3 now...

What a snoozefest.

Obi, this isn't best fictional writer. If it is, take Thoreau and Laozi off (and since Thoreau and Laozi are two of the best here, work around that option).

@bo-sox, they agreed that it's fiction writers, playwrights, and poets. Anyone you could call an artist and not just a philosopher or journalist.

Laozi and Thoreau both fit the bill. No need to revise anything

How about we leave the list as-is, and let people vote based on whatever criteria they choose.

Also I don't know if y'all are aware but in terms of influence, an absolute shit ton of sayings that have become folk wisdom in at least America were said by Laozi.

The journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step. The flame that burns twice as bright burns half as long, and more.

For an ancient Chinese writer to have that kind of influence on modern western culture is itself a monumental achievement. In the west at least he is the single most influential Chinese writer. Others: Confucius, sun Tzu, or Zhuangzi, Li Po (much as love those last two) - none even come close