|
I'm also of the "I know it when I see it" camp, with regards to the definition of literary fiction. To me, the foremost thing is that I can lose myself in the beauty of the language. I do prefer my fiction (literary and otherwise) to have great characters and a great plot. So I do have a quandary on my hands when literary fiction offers me the first two and not the last. (some examples: The Story of Edgar Sawtelle, which I adored right up until the ending, and Tana French's In the Woods, which is that even more difficult to define genre "the literary mystery." Does a "literary mystery" have an obligation to resolve all plots? I don't want to give away anything about the book--and what does and does not get resolved--but let's just say that it was beautifully written AND incredibly frustrating).
As far as Cutting for Stone: I believe it has it all: great writing (which is fully subjective), great characters, international settings, great plot. It is about a young man and his twin brother, of Indian descent, who are orphaned and grow up in the hospital where they were born, in Ethiopia. The first part has 100 pages of harrowing hospital procedures (my friend nearly had to stop reading it because of this), and after that it's pretty sweeping in both time frame and place.
eP
|