A few days ago, you posted about applying literary
technique to genre fiction. What did you mean by that?
Why?
Because the story had substance beyond the mere plot. The characters resonated with readers because of WHO they were, not WHAT they were. The themes spoke to fears and ambitions common to most of the readers. The stories made statements, but not at the expense of a great yarn.
In short, they did the same thing Hemingway and Faulkner and O'Hara were doing, but they did it in a "lesser" genre known as science fiction. They didn't get caught up in the genre vs. literary hang up publishers and writers have today. They borrowed and mish-mashed stuff together right and left and made both the worlds of both genre and literary writing better because of it. I want to do the same with whatever genre or format or setting in which I write, from comics (a format, not a genre) to pulp and horror (genres) or super heroes and steampunk (settings). I just want to continue to tell good stories that hopefully have meaning beyond just the surface action.
I disagree that pulp is a genre, Sean. It's a style through which genres are filtered, yes, and it was definitely a specific medium at one time.
ReplyDeleteBut a genre? No more so than comic books.
I'm just being argumentative, cap'n, but I'm also right for once. (;
I agree with you actually, Erik, but the marketing magnates who determine such things and set the rules have defeated us soundly in the court of public opinion.
ReplyDeleteThis weekend I'm going to see SF author Gene Wolfe honored by the Chicago Literary Hall of Fame (http://chicagoliteraryhof.wordpress.com/).
ReplyDelete"Genre" is just a technical term for marketers. A good story is just a good story.
"He's the finest living male American writer of SF and fantasy – possibly the finest living American writer." ~ Neil Gaiman
"Gene Wolfe is the greatest writer in the English language alive today. Let me repeat that: Gene Wolfe is the greatest writer in the English language alive today! I mean it. Shakespeare was a better stylist, Melville was more important to American letters, and Charles Dickens had a defter hand at creating characters. But among living writers, there is nobody who can even approach Gene Wolfe for brilliance of prose, clarity of thought, and depth in meaning." ~ Michael Swanwick
"Gene Wolfe is as good a writer as there is today....I feel a little bit like a musical contemporary attempting to tell people what's good about Mozart." --Chicago Sun-Times Review of Books
"A good story is just a good story." <--- That's gospel, baby. That'll preach. *grins*
ReplyDelete