Comments on: Another Perspective On Genre & Respect

By: Constance Ash

Constance Ash — Fri, 13 Oct 2006 14:27:47 +0000

I just call it landscape.

That is the weave of story: interesting interaction among interesting people in an interesting landscape.

Thus, John Ford, for one instance.

Love, C.

By: Mark Tiedemann

Mark Tiedemann — Fri, 13 Oct 2006 13:30:53 +0000

You know, I’ve been giving talks about this “lit’rary vs genre” thing for a few years now, and I’ve come to the conclusion that what is being missed–often on both sides–is how Premise is overlooked as a character unto itself. The best genre novels, that “rate” alongside literary mainstream, treat the wolrd-slash-problem of the story as if it were one of the cast, so to speak. The lesser works (on whose scale, though, really?) treat all that strictly as background that needs explication, which the literary critics find turgid, boring, and not to the point. But in genre, the “world” is absolutely essential for the purposes of the story. In SF it’s even more blatant, because the metaphors we use to depict our worlds–our premises–are foregrounded, whereas in more mainstream genres–mystery, romance, western, etc–the metaphors work in the background.

Mainstream critics who don’t “get” SF never read the universe of the story as character. If they did, they might start to have a clue. If, perhaps, more genre writers took the trouble to portray their worlds rather than just describe them–treating them as characters–it might elevate the prose to a less dismissable position. I think it would improve the work.

Because, after all, The World is a manifestation of character interaction, and becomes a living thing in consequence.

By: Constance Ash

Constance Ash — Fri, 13 Oct 2006 02:00:02 +0000

OTOTHERHAND, the sf/f world has been less than welcoming to some who are writing in the field, with true names rather than pseudos, like Doris Lessing, Margaret Atwood, Jonathan Lethem — MOTHERLESS IN BROOKLYN, FORTRESS OF SOLITUDE, GUN, WITH ACCOMPANYING MUSIC, etc. — McArthur Grant and all (though, since he’s a guy, and — just check his website — mebbee some of our segments are happy to Well Kom the Kewel Guy into the fold?)

It’s such tricky stuff.

Which is business, right, not craft?

Love, C.

By: glenda larke

glenda larke — Fri, 13 Oct 2006 01:31:14 +0000

Really, Katherine? Ye gods, that’s horrible. Now I’m convinced we sff writers have it good compared to romance writers.

By: Katharine Kerr

Katharine Kerr — Thu, 12 Oct 2006 19:58:21 +0000

In the Romance genre, publishers insist upon owning the pseudonyms of their writers. That way, if a writer gets uppity and wants bigger advances, she can be dismissed and another writer plugged into the brand. I suspect that this is the sort of thing Lois is referring to.

By: Katharine Kerr

Katharine Kerr — Thu, 12 Oct 2006 19:56:24 +0000

Ansible repeated an amusing remark by crime writer Ian Rankin some months ago. He’d been complaining that crime writers don’t get no respect, then admitted that they had it good compared to SF writers.

By: glenda larke

glenda larke — Wed, 11 Oct 2006 02:51:52 +0000

Ah well, Lois, If I ever write that great Australian mainstream novel, I shall do it under a pseudonym too. To preserve the brand, you understand.

By: Lois Tilton

Lois Tilton — Tue, 10 Oct 2006 14:28:21 +0000

Note that these are all done pseudonymously, to preserve the brand.

By: glenda larke

glenda larke — Tue, 10 Oct 2006 02:06:27 +0000

What???!! As a genre writer, I would say if we don’t measure up to the “toffs” we ought to get off our butts and write better books, not complain about fine writers winning “our” awards!

Yes, life is hard for most writers. And yes, often there is little justice - how often do great writers have to sit back and watch not-so-good craftsmen/women become bestsellers? But the solution is not to complain about great writers writing in genre fiction!