Reverse Snobbery
- Thread starter CaroGirl
- Start date
- Status
To me, that's as ridiculous as Margaret Atwood having a bloody conniption every time someone calls Oryx and Crake "science fiction."
Well, and look at the hullaballoo when Stephen King won the National Book Award -- the decision was savaged from both sides (and King added to it with his acceptance speech).
I think, in many cases, it comes from a sense of inadequacy on both sides. Literary fiction is seen -- for good or ill -- as more "respectable" (largely overlooking the fact that the canon is filled with the genre writing and popular novels of their day), so a segment of genre writers feel that they're not up to snuff in some way, which creates defensiveness and lashing out.
At the same time, though, I think a lot of those "respectable" literary writers feel inadequate looking at the sales and recognition of the genre writers. Don Delillo, for example, would be unrecognizable to 95% of the reading public in a police line-up, whereas King and Grisham have trouble going out on the street without drawing a crowd. And that inadequacy causes its own defensiveness, lashing out, charges of pandering, that sort of thing.
Note the caveats -- "a segment of", "lots of". A lot writers, I know, don't give a shit -- they just want to be read.
And some of us ignore genre issues and expectations altogether.
If you guys and gals want to see a variety of very different writers, visit the Literary SYW forum. C'mon, we're not all trying to flourish our way out of a paper bag. Like someone else said upstream, our business is writing. Let the critics figure out what's good ("critics" read: sarcasm).
I'm not going to make a big deal out of it, because (a) there's some little validity to it and (b) that's a whole nother thread, but the blanket lambasting of "critics" is really starting to piss me off.
- Joined
- Jun 25, 2008
- Messages
- 777
- Reaction score
- 151
It's understood that some people here are defensive because they feel that we live in a culture that looks down on genre writers. That might be true of a certain segment of the population, but don't get in your head the idea that literary writers aren't subject to abuse too. We all feel the prejudices that are aimed at us more than we feel those aimed at others. Just because it seems that way from where we stand doesn't mean it is that way.
When I wrote my first story it was about a young woman who kills herself, and when I was discussing it elsewhere on the internet (not here) somebody said something like "Oooh, a story about a girl who kills herself. Deep. You're really deep."
Gee, thanks.
I hear that kind of crap about literary writers all the time; they get made fun of because their their books are "boring" and "trying too hard to be deep and philosophical." It's offensive. It's every bit as offensive as being told your book is stupid just because it's genre fiction.
I think Toothpaste is right. We should remember that both literary and genre books have their strengths and weaknesses, both have something to offer. I didn't hear anybody on this thread putting down genre writers, and attacking literary writers because of an imaginary slight is just looking for trouble.
When I wrote my first story it was about a young woman who kills herself, and when I was discussing it elsewhere on the internet (not here) somebody said something like "Oooh, a story about a girl who kills herself. Deep. You're really deep."
Gee, thanks.
I hear that kind of crap about literary writers all the time; they get made fun of because their their books are "boring" and "trying too hard to be deep and philosophical." It's offensive. It's every bit as offensive as being told your book is stupid just because it's genre fiction.
I think Toothpaste is right. We should remember that both literary and genre books have their strengths and weaknesses, both have something to offer. I didn't hear anybody on this thread putting down genre writers, and attacking literary writers because of an imaginary slight is just looking for trouble.
I look forward to reading critic reviews of books. I don't write them and it STILL pisses me off when people belittle critics carte blanche.
Well, KTC, critics have said some pretty fucking inflammatory things. For example, try this review of Oryx and Crake by Birkerts. First paragraph follows:
And if you'd like more real-world examples, I can oblige.
I AM going to stick my neck out and just say it: science fiction will never be Literature with a capital ''L,'' and this is because it inevitably proceeds from premise rather than character. It sacrifices moral and psychological nuance in favor of more conceptual matters, and elevates scenario over sensibility. Some will ask, of course, whether there still is such a thing as ''Literature with a capital 'L.' '' I proceed on the faith that there is. Are there exceptions to my categorical pronouncement? Probably, but I don't think enough of them to overturn it.
There is no way to read this except as a broad denouncement of science fiction as a genre. He even goes so far as to dismiss any possible exceptions to his denouncement. No writer would respond well to this sort of treatment from the establishment, because contrary to some claims I've read, most writers really do long for acceptance. We're social creatures.And if you'd like more real-world examples, I can oblige.
Last edited:
Did you miss the "carte blanche" in KTC's post, and the "blanket" in mine?
Nobody's arguing that there aren't some critics who are twats. But I like to think there are some good ones, who approach each work on its own terms and evaluates each on its own merits.
What do I know, though.
Your argument seems to be that this issue isn't systemic and is instead supposedly the result of a few bad apples. I don't agree.
No, my argument is that you're making sweeping generalizations and tarring ALL critics with the same brush.
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2009
- Messages
- 2,877
- Reaction score
- 404
- Location
- United States
- Website
- www.matthewgraybosch.com
I read it as, "This guy, Birkirts, has the trunk of a fully-grown California redwood jammed up his ass".
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2009
- Messages
- 1,307
- Reaction score
- 124
That was a terrible review--I don't mean that he didn't like the book, I mean it was terribly written. Two-thirds of it was summarizing (ruining) the plot, while he seems to have missed a huge point, which is that the narrator is wildly unreliable, sick, and drunk, and that on many important points, he appears to be outright wrong.
As far as moral and psychological nuance being at the service of conceptual matters, and scenario vs. sensibility, that's a problem that is found in "real life" tales as well.
You have clearly confused me for someone else. I never used the word all. I merely posit the existence of a culture of discrimination, which as we have seen elsewhere doesn't require the complicity of every person in a population.
The quality of the review (or lack thereof) is, IMO, beside the point. The man is a critic, and he wrote what I posted. That's all.
Last edited:
I understand the desire to have it both ways, but your inveigling against "critics" (not "some" critics. Not some "misinformed or prejudiced" critics, just critics in general), isn't much different from Birkerts' "categorical pronouncement"s about the genre -- "Are there exceptions to my categorical pronouncement? Probably, but I don't think enough of them to overturn it."
If you're comfortable arguing against a mindset by adopting that mindset yourself, okay. That's fine by me.
Okay, jesus, the actual point of my most recent post was totally glossed over, which pisses ME off. I was trying to promote the fine literary writers at AW, and how there is such a wide variety of styles (language/subjects/etc.). It's representative of how writers in any genre vary, so stereotyping them is basically ridiculous and a waste of writing time/energy.
My little snidery about critics referred to those critics which end up making us discuss this literary/genre bullshit over and over and over and over and over and over and over.
Who gives a shit about the distinction of genre, seriously? Why don't we, I don't know, write? There's snobbery all over the writing community, clearly. So let's just move on. I don't hate all critics, or genre writers. I don't even know any besides you people. I just think this distinction between which is better--which is, I take it back, a reader's job--is plain stupid.
If some people read literary, and some read genre, hooray! We all still have jobs.
My little snidery about critics referred to those critics which end up making us discuss this literary/genre bullshit over and over and over and over and over and over and over.
Who gives a shit about the distinction of genre, seriously? Why don't we, I don't know, write? There's snobbery all over the writing community, clearly. So let's just move on. I don't hate all critics, or genre writers. I don't even know any besides you people. I just think this distinction between which is better--which is, I take it back, a reader's job--is plain stupid.
If some people read literary, and some read genre, hooray! We all still have jobs.
Last edited:
And many people here read both, and multiple genres of genre novels, to boot.
caw
And I don't even care if it is genre or literary or whatever. Good story = me happy. Bad story = me unhappy.
- Joined
- May 14, 2005
- Messages
- 12,862
- Reaction score
- 2,846
- Location
- A Small Town in Germany
- Website
- www.sharonmaas.co.uk
I get rejected by some agents/publishers for not being commercial enough, by others for not being literary enough. For the same book. What's a girl to do?
Well, SPMiller, you can't lump every critic into the same group. A broad sweeping brushstroke is always a dumb thing. It makes for shitty art. Like I said, I enjoy reading the critics takes on new releases. But you do your thing, man...however narrow-minded that thing is.
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2009
- Messages
- 4,776
- Reaction score
- 417
I'd love to have a job as a film/theatre/literary critic. Critic hate is natural- us writers are delicate creatures If you pour your heart into something and then someone belittles it, of course you're going to be angry.The easiest attack of a critic is that they are a bitter failed writer, which may be true. But think of X Factor- does Simon Cowell sing? No. Does he know what he's talking about? Most definitely. Critics can see the flaws in your work where you can't.
As for the sci-fi review, I understand what he's saying- that by definition sci-fi is more concerned with technology/other worlds/premise than with character or political/moral/whatever insight- but that is by definition. Criticising a genre is fine but criticising every work that might be put in that genre- unfair seeing as even if your novel contains just a little bit of sci-fi, off it goes into the sci-fi section for fans to pour over and everyone else to avoid.
- Joined
- Mar 21, 2009
- Messages
- 530
- Reaction score
- 59
- Status