The Great Divide Between Lit Fic and SFF
Sep. 21st, 2008 06:50 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
pameladlloydI'm posting this here, rather than in the comments to ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
sartorias' recent post, Literary vs. Mainstream, in genre and out, because I didn't feel it was right to rant in her journal.
RANT--> The great divide between literary fiction and science fiction seems to me to be the tail end (I hope it's the tail end, anyway) between the distinction many people make (and here I'm referring not just to those who think of themselves as literary, but readers, high school English teachers, and others who influence the reading habits of young people) of an insistence that science fiction is somehow lacking in all the things that define good writing. Yet, many of the people who make such claims, at least in my experience, have either never read a work of science fiction or fantasy, or have read only a few of the lowest-common-denominator works. The argument that sff has poor characterization, an overabundance of adjectives, and is entirely plot-based, seems to me to be a repetition of claims hurled against it on the basis of writers from the "Golden Age of Science Fiction," and doesn't take into account anything that's been published since 1950. Or, maybe, since 1930.
Even within Anders' rant, and in her comments, she made statements that science fiction could benefit from being better written. By whose standards? Which books does she mean? (She can't mean all of them.) None of the comments to her post seemed to consider that maybe 90% of everything written and published is dreck? Is science fiction being held to a higher standard than other genres, including the genre of literary fiction?
I get really annoyed by attempts to dismiss a genre, any genre, as somehow beneath one's notice. Genres are defined, by and large, as much by their subject material as by their style. So, why is it that if a writer chooses to set their story on another planet, or in the future, or to posit a world in which magic is possible, that suddenly everything they write lacks the qualities that define good fiction? And when a book with the exact same subject material is acknowledged as "good," suddenly it's not science fiction any more? Even though it is?
And I think it matters. It matters to people who read science fiction and other genre works, because when you're put down for your reading tastes, it can cut you to the bone when what you most love reading is part of who you are. It matters to writers, because if what you write is marginalized, then you're not going to be paid as much as you might otherwise be, but also you won't reach every reader who might otherwise have loved your work. It matters to publishers and bookstores, because if an entire subset of what they sell is disparaged, it affects the bottom line, so maybe you don't want to publish those books. Which brings us full circle back to readers and writers.
There are plenty of good writers writing science fiction and fantasy today. I'll take a book by Lois McMaster Bujold over just about anything written in the "literary" scene, or elsewhere, for that matter. Which is not to say that there aren't good works of literary fiction out there, just that I suspect that nine times out of ten I'm going to think that LMB's book was better. Not just a fun read, but also one that makes me think and feel, and which has many, many layers of complexity that someone who's snobbish about science fiction will never even see. She doesn't need to be recursive or obscure about the story, or people's motivations, or anything. Yet, every time I read one of her books, I discover there was a little bit more under the surface than I saw the last time.
But, really, I think this comment by a young friend of mine who attended New School in NYC,chupacabrito, condemns the whole issue of literary snobbery far better than anything I can say: .
sartorias' recent post, Literary vs. Mainstream, in genre and out, because I didn't feel it was right to rant in her journal.RANT--> The great divide between literary fiction and science fiction seems to me to be the tail end (I hope it's the tail end, anyway) between the distinction many people make (and here I'm referring not just to those who think of themselves as literary, but readers, high school English teachers, and others who influence the reading habits of young people) of an insistence that science fiction is somehow lacking in all the things that define good writing. Yet, many of the people who make such claims, at least in my experience, have either never read a work of science fiction or fantasy, or have read only a few of the lowest-common-denominator works. The argument that sff has poor characterization, an overabundance of adjectives, and is entirely plot-based, seems to me to be a repetition of claims hurled against it on the basis of writers from the "Golden Age of Science Fiction," and doesn't take into account anything that's been published since 1950. Or, maybe, since 1930.
Even within Anders' rant, and in her comments, she made statements that science fiction could benefit from being better written. By whose standards? Which books does she mean? (She can't mean all of them.) None of the comments to her post seemed to consider that maybe 90% of everything written and published is dreck? Is science fiction being held to a higher standard than other genres, including the genre of literary fiction?
I get really annoyed by attempts to dismiss a genre, any genre, as somehow beneath one's notice. Genres are defined, by and large, as much by their subject material as by their style. So, why is it that if a writer chooses to set their story on another planet, or in the future, or to posit a world in which magic is possible, that suddenly everything they write lacks the qualities that define good fiction? And when a book with the exact same subject material is acknowledged as "good," suddenly it's not science fiction any more? Even though it is?
And I think it matters. It matters to people who read science fiction and other genre works, because when you're put down for your reading tastes, it can cut you to the bone when what you most love reading is part of who you are. It matters to writers, because if what you write is marginalized, then you're not going to be paid as much as you might otherwise be, but also you won't reach every reader who might otherwise have loved your work. It matters to publishers and bookstores, because if an entire subset of what they sell is disparaged, it affects the bottom line, so maybe you don't want to publish those books. Which brings us full circle back to readers and writers.
There are plenty of good writers writing science fiction and fantasy today. I'll take a book by Lois McMaster Bujold over just about anything written in the "literary" scene, or elsewhere, for that matter. Which is not to say that there aren't good works of literary fiction out there, just that I suspect that nine times out of ten I'm going to think that LMB's book was better. Not just a fun read, but also one that makes me think and feel, and which has many, many layers of complexity that someone who's snobbish about science fiction will never even see. She doesn't need to be recursive or obscure about the story, or people's motivations, or anything. Yet, every time I read one of her books, I discover there was a little bit more under the surface than I saw the last time.
But, really, I think this comment by a young friend of mine who attended New School in NYC,
chupacabrito, condemns the whole issue of literary snobbery far better than anything I can say: .
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2008-09-22 02:27 pm (UTC)Your friend's comment really hit the nail on the head. Lit fic is a genre, though it does like to think of itself as being above that.
Of course this is particularly pertinent right now as I'm about to embark on a creative writing course, which will have a Lit Fic slant, though as far as I know, genre is not pilloried and ridiculed.
When I was tutoring the introductory course, I always tried to be genre friendly, even to genres that I don't normally read myself, such as romance or historical. I tried to make sure the quality of the writing was what mattered, not the genre.
(no subject)
Date: 2008-09-22 05:29 pm (UTC)Of course this is particularly pertinent right now as I'm about to embark on a creative writing course, which will have a Lit Fic slant, though as far as I know, genre is not pilloried and ridiculed.
Is this one you're teaching, or taking? I'm assuming the first, since you say you don't know the attitude toward genre. Good luck with your class and may it be everything you want and need.
When I was tutoring the introductory course, I always tried to be genre friendly, even to genres that I don't normally read myself, such as romance or historical. I tried to make sure the quality of the writing was what mattered, not the genre.
You have very lucky students. Back when I was living in El Paso, Texas, I was fortunate enough to have writing instructors who were genre writers, themselves. The assumption there was that the students wanted writing careers, rather than academic careers, and one of my instructors flat out said that if you wanted to make a living writing, genre was the way to go.
The MFA program, here in Tucson, Arizona, is not genre friendly. I did manage one writing class taught by adjunct faculty, with the help of a sympathetic adviser who let me know he was sympathetic to genre, but even then, I discovered that he was confused by my fantasy stories. I enjoyed the class and the wide range of abilities and interests of the student, and I wasn't the only student with genre interests that had been directed toward the class. Yet, it frustrated me that when I turned in a story with goblins, the instructor really wanted the goblins to be metaphors, or hallucinations. Anything, but goblins. And I can't deny that there was a metaphoric aspect to the goblins. But, dang it, they were also real in the context of the story and the POV character who saw them was sane.
(no subject)
Date: 2008-09-23 06:53 pm (UTC)So I'm back being a student again and hope that the writing tasks required by the course will get me back into a regular writing habit.
(no subject)
Date: 2008-09-23 11:47 pm (UTC)It can be hard to stay confident in ourselves and our writing when we receive rejections, but I doubt this is really a matter of you not knowing what will sell, so much as your novel simply not finding the right publisher. I hope you are continuing to look for a home for it. Do you work with an agent, or have you been submitting it directly?
Good luck with all your writing projects.
(no subject)
Date: 2008-09-22 04:33 pm (UTC)Damm straight! Thank you! Now I don't have to go off on my own rant over this subject.
Well said, indeed.
:D
(no subject)
Date: 2008-09-22 05:34 pm (UTC)I feel a little silly sometimes, having this rant every so often. Especially since I imagine I'm talking to the choir here. But, it frustrates me so when otherwise intelligent people dismiss genre and claim that the writing is bad, simply because the subject matter differs from what they see as the norm. I find this especially objectionable when the people doing this are educators whose prejudices are being handed down to generation after generation of students.
(no subject)
Date: 2008-09-22 06:31 pm (UTC)And I found most of those "wanting," as far as quality went. Part of that was stylistic, and on some I've since revised my opinions, being wider-read nowadays. On some, however, the original opinions stand. It always boggled me how the Literary crowd looked down on my favourites - and that it was obvious that they had never even tried reading my favourites, as I had theirs.
I think we just need more cross-genre READING, so everybody gets a taste of what is outside their norms.
(no subject)
Date: 2008-09-22 06:41 pm (UTC)Travel, including travel across imaginary boundaries--and isn't it always?--is broadening to the mind.
(no subject)
Date: 2008-09-23 03:04 am (UTC)"Never apologize for your reading tastes." Betty Rosenberg (librarian author of Genreflecting, a classic of library literature).
(no subject)
Date: 2008-09-23 03:31 am (UTC)You're very welcome. BTW, as a romance reader, perhaps you can help me. I had a conversation about genre and reading tastes with a lab tech who was drawing my blood a while back. He commented that he reads everything, except romance, and I mentioned that while I don't read widely in that area, I've come across some really excellent examples in the genre. So, he's challenged me to come up with some titles that would appeal to guys. Any suggestions?
"Never apologize for your reading tastes." Betty Rosenberg (librarian author of Genreflecting, a classic of library literature).
I'm more likely to respond indignantly, than to apologize, although I do try to keep things civil. *g* That book sounds interesting. I wonder if our local library has a copy. At the very least, I'm curious about a few definitions (which seem to have shifted when I wasn't looking), and I'd like to check out the essays mentioned in the Amazon review (http://www.amazon.com/gp/redirect.html?ie=UTF8&location=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.amazon.com%2FGenreflecting-Popular-Reading-Interests-Advisory%2Fdp%2F1591582865&tag=stracast-20&linkCode=ur2&camp=1789&creative=9325)
(no subject)
Date: 2008-09-23 04:26 am (UTC)I've run up against that question before, and have never been able to address it successfully. Unless you want to pull some Bujold on him -- Komarr and A Civil Campaign (and to a much lesser extent, IMHO, Shards of Honor), especially, are romances of the first water. Then again, he'll probably pull a "but this is science fiction, it doesn't count" on you.
There appears to be some truth to the rumor of "romance cooties." Because the men I've tried to get to read it just don't seem to "get" romance.
Sorry not to be more help.
If your local library doesn't have a copy of Genreflecting, I'd be surprised. It'll most likely be in reference, though. Or, if your library has a reader's advisory collection, check there.
(no subject)
Date: 2008-09-23 06:35 am (UTC)I'll try to remember to check for Genreflecting on my next library trip.
(no subject)
Date: 2008-09-23 05:03 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2008-09-23 06:07 pm (UTC)