The Emptiness of 'Literary Fiction' and the Stereotyping of Genre Literature

[taosaur]

I just find that in a conversation involving multiple people, it helps not to direct your statements to the lefthand ceiling-corner of the room.




DIAPDEALER!


I've been coming to the conviction over the past couple months that it's just best practice, when responding to specific statements in a thread on any forum, to quote those statements, or at least some representative sample. Otherwise I end up creating miscommunications or finding intervening posts (or mod actions) have changed the context of my statements, or going on longer than necessary trying to be clear just to get around the necessity of quoting.

Also, now I'm curious what kind of spam runs two pages

[odiakkoh]

Originally Posted by taosaur

Also, now I'm curious what kind of spam runs two pages

Some noir magazine guy. Tl;dr lol. He posted in like ten different threads too.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by Taosaur

Also, now I'm curious what kind of spam runs two pages

Happy now?

It was posted in many different threads. I'm sure it was appropriate for a shameless self-promotion thread, so perhaps they allowed it to exist there. But it was basically an SEO-grubbing post for a start-up crime/noir ezine looking for submissions and traffic.

[Ea]

Originally Posted by Ransom

You know, it's really pointless to converse with such a thoughtless human. The purpose of all literature is the same as non-fiction obviously—to convey information, and therefore to learn, whether it be about the uses of the various parts of the sperm whale in Moby Dick, or to gain insight into the motives of a murderous mindset as in Father Brown. It is not to sit and look at all the pretty words, which seems to be your only motive for picking up a book. If you aren't picking up a book to learn, then don't bother reading at all. You're just wasting your time just as you've wasting my time throughout this thread.

No, it's not Who told you that?

If you are only picking up books in such a utilitarian frame of mind, you are certainly sure never to be entertained or enlightened - which is other primary purposes of fiction.

I see much alike between literary fiction and modern art. Both are/can be difficult to understand and require you to approach it with an open mind and making an effort. Some background knowledge of the topic typically helps too. That's why I don't read much literary fiction - im lazy But when I do invest the time and attention, I usually find it a more rewarding, enlightening and enriching experience than just plain, "low", entertaining fiction.

[covingtoncat73]

Originally Posted by Ea

No, it's not Who told you that?

If you are only picking up books in such a utilitarian frame of mind, you are certainly sure never to be entertained or enlightened - which is other primary purposes of fiction.

I see much alike between literary fiction and modern art. Both are/can be difficult to understand and require you to approach it with an open mind and making an effort. Some background knowledge of the topic typically helps too. That's why I don't read much literary fiction - im lazy But when I do invest the time and attention, I usually find it a more rewarding, enlightening and enriching experience than just plain, "low", entertaining fiction.

Excellent point. I have to say that I like some historically-set fiction that could be said to be literary like The Thousand Autumns of Jacob de Zoet, which I raved about, or would that just be historical fiction? I don't like the "historical fiction" that is actually romance, though.

[Ea]

Originally Posted by covingtoncat73

Excellent point. I have to say that I like some historically-set fiction that could be said to be literary like The Thousand Autumns of Jacob de Zoet, which I raved about, or would that just be historical fiction? I don't like the "historical fiction" that is actually romance, though.

I think it's too limiting to think we can only apply one label to each book. I don't know the book you mentioned, but I can't see any reason why it couldn't possibly be literary as well as historical fiction. "Anathem" is IMHO both sci-fi and literary - as an example. For me it comes down to the quality of the book and its purpose (to entertain, to enlighten, to be an artistic expression), not what genre it is.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by Ea

I think it's too limiting to think we can only apply one label to each book. I don't know the book you mentioned, but I can't see any reason why it's possibly literary as well as historical fiction. "Anathem" is IMHO both sci-fi and literary - as an example. For me it comes down to the quality of the book and its purpose (to entertain, to enlighten, to be an artistic expression), not what genre it is.

If you're not careful, you guys are going to come full circle to the one and only point I was ever trying to make: the term "literary fiction" is not very helpful in describing a book.

You've just finished a book that you thought was fantastic, insightful, innovative and artistic. When someone inevitably asks you what kind of book it is, how many of you can truthfully say that the very first words out of your mouth will be; "Well, it's literary fiction!" ?

[Ea]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

If you're not careful, you guys are going to come full circle to the one and only point I was ever trying to make: the term "literary fiction" is not very helpful in describing a book.

I wouldn't go that far. Generally for me "literary" means intellectually challenging, with high quality prose and story-telling. I don't think you can describe those qualities through other genres.

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

You've just finished a book that you thought was fantastic, insightful, innovative and artistic. When someone inevitably asks you what kind of book it is, how many of you can truthfully say that the first very first words out of your mouth will be; "Well, it's literary fiction!" ?

Would your first words be, for example; "Well, it's historical fiction!" (or sci-fi or crime or thriller etc.)
If it is a book that can best be described by "literary", then yes, of course I'd describe it that way.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by Ea

Would your first words be, for example; "Well, it's historical fiction!" (or sci-fi or crime or thriller etc.)

Absolutely. "It was historical fiction.... with literary elements/qualities... I think you'd probably like it."

Originally Posted by Ea

If it is a book that can best be described by "literary", then yes, of course I'd describe it that way.

And would the person who asked the question be satisfied with that answer, in all likelihood? Or would you probably have to elaborate further?

[Ea]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

Absolutely. "It was historical fiction with literary elements/qualities... I think you'd like it."

I thought you literally meant to say: "Well, it's historical fiction!" ... In any case, yes, I'd say it's literary (a Danish equivalent thereof, of course), if it's a person who reads literary book themselves. If it's someone of whom I know they don't read anything but the most trivial literature, I might talk about what the story is about instead.

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

And would the person who asked the question be satisfied with that answer? Or would you probably have to elaborate further?

That would depend entirely of the person. In most cases I am asked to explain what I read - in the rare case that anyone asks at all, that is - because I often read books that no-one else around here reads, by authors no-one has heard of because they haven't been translated into Danish. Usually people are just too baffled by the ebook reader that they forget to ask about the actual book...

[DiapDealer]

Fair enough.

[Ea]

Indeed.

[Prestidigitweeze]

[Insert single word and grinning emoticon.]

[Ea]

Originally Posted by Prestidigitweeze

[Insert single word and grinning emoticon.]

No no no. I was already down to one word. You have to go lower, like this:

.

[Prestidigitweeze]

Yes, but your word was still two syllables.

I meant to say single-syllable word, but was annoyed that that would take six syllables. Yes seemed too agreeable and no too arbitrary.