According to V S Naipaul, "Publishing has gone down in quality so much in recent years and the problem is that there is no literary life any more because there are quite simply no more great writers."
Does anyone follow the logic of that statement? It's possible that there are no more great writers but Naipaul's definition of a great writer might mean something different than, say, Barry Hannah's. And assuming that there are no more great writers, is that really the reason "publishing has gone down"? Or has publishing itself been to blame? As for literary life, I'm not even sure what he means by that phrase nor do I see how it is directly related to the lack of great writers?
Maybe I'm just too dense, or maybe we're just hearing the words of a grumpy old Nobel laureate, and a bitter one at that:
His comments follow an authorised biography by Patrick French, which says Naipaul tormented his first wife for four decades, visited prostitutes and kept a mistress for 24 years before he suddenly abandoned her to marry another woman.