What are the difference between traditional literature and modern literature compare and contrast? I expecting answer in bullet points

akannan's
comments are good, so I'll start with some of those as my first bulleted point and add another
point of my own:

• Traditional literature tends to be elitist
  (written by the very few for the very few). Modern literature tends to be a little more
  inclusive and more representative of the diversity of human experiences


• Traditional literature tends to follow set conventions (even when it sometimes
  parodies those conventions), such as the epic or sonnet or letter. Modern literature sometimes
  mixes up the conventions in very unexpected ways, striving not for harmony and unity but for
  dissonance and disunity.

You might want to review the
introductions to the different chapters on the Perspectives on Americanwebsite (see the link
below). It's fair, I think, to see the first two chapters, at least, largely as representative
of traditional literature and the final two chapters largely as representative of modern
literature.

In using the terms "traditional" and
"modern," it's worth noting that the two are not mutually exclusively or tied simply
to publication dates. In literature from centuries back we're always able to come across things
that seem amazingly "modern," and most of our recently published literature is still
much more "traditional" (at least in terms of structure and subject matter) than it is
"modern."