Escaping the genre mentality

The key is to look at 'literary' as a genre. It is a genre where a story needs to have an artistic goal. This may be a philosopical point, an experimental form, a beautiful mode of expression or a heart rending confessional. The literary writer must think like and artist and use any setting or characters to serve their particular artistic goal. As such it can be in the wild west or about a romance and still be literary. Entertainment value may be a secondary goal, or not a goal at all.

A lot of lit fic is about relationships -- all kinds of relationships. It doesn't have to have a happy ending (and most often, it doesn't). It's also about the use of language, metaphors, symbolisms, themes. Lit fic can be heavy on themes and philosophies, rather than about "plot."

Lit fic

Solatium said:

Here's my problem: whenever I set out to write something, my first question is always, "What's the genre?" It's as though I can't start writing without knowing that a lot of the story will be determined by its milieu.

I have neither the expertise nor the relish to write exclusively genre fiction, and I'd like to write literary stories -- but without the parameters and expectations of genre, I can't think of anything to write. Most guidelines for literary magazines say only, "No genre stories" -- which is no help to me; the only interpretation I can think of (and it's probably not quite right) is that I must avoid the genre tropes on which I tend to rely so heavily: that I cannot set a story in the Old West, or use speculative technology, or have a love story with a happy ending, or focus on the investigation of a crime -- or use any of the other elements that "mark" genres. If I have to cut all those out (and, as little affection as I have for any of them, they at least provide subject matter), then what is there to write about?

Click to expand...

What's to write about? Generally speaking, literary stories are about average real life people with average real life problems. The stories are about the people, whatever tropes are inserted. Do this well, and you're in.

Guidelines are fine, but how many literary short stories are you reading? Like any other area of writing, if you want to succeed, you need to read hundreds of stories in the area you're writing in.

Trying to understand magazines from guidelines is like trying to understand a movie from the poster outside the theater. You might learn a bit, but the only way to really understand the movie is to buy a ticket and watch the movie.

From all this reading you should be able to see what there is to write about.

What to write?

Literary and Mainstream stories can spring from what you see around you every day. Try writing about the things in your life and the people's round you that make you wonder. Why did he make that choice? Why did they marry? That poor kid! What if she did this and not that? Think about choices and relationships.

As Mr Ritchie said, read as many as possible. Have you looked at www.carvezine.com ? There are some great literary stories published there.

Personally, I hate "genre." After all, it's just a label. We as people like to categorize, and genre is a way to ensure people can peruse around bookstores more easily.

When I think of "no genre," I think of a story that has every genre in it, yet doesn't give the focus to just one.

Genre

katiemac said:

Personally, I hate "genre." After all, it's just a label. We as people like to categorize, and genre is a way to ensure people can peruse around bookstores more easily.

When I think of "no genre," I think of a story that has every genre in it, yet doesn't give the focus to just one.

Click to expand...

Yes, but it's one of the most useful labels out there. Someting that gives focus to no particular genre can be good writing, but it's still going to fall into some genre, or it's probably going to be unpublishable.

The genre label is used because it works extremely well in allowing the vast majority of readers to find whatever it is they most like to read.

And whether or not you count "literary" as a genre, it has its own demands, and you can't ignore them and expect to be successful.

Mixing genres is fine, but unless some aspect comes to the fore, you've probably written something no one will want.

People do like to categorize, and because of this publishers also categorize. It's a good thing. More important, it's how the world works.

Amd genre or no genre, if you want to sell fiction you have to read extensively, and then give the editor what he wants.

All very true, James.

I believe my current grudge to genre is the "don't worry about genre, let the editor decide," argument, when you have to have a genre before submitting to agents and publishers anyway. I like books with everything. I like movies with everything. I like stories with everything. And sometimes, genre becomes more important than the story.

Dogma 95 had it right. But of course, they were a genre all of their own, weren't they?

Genre? What genre?

Maybe no one wants more talk on this. I just registered so that's my excuse.

I think the important thing to realise is that the idea of genre is essentially bunk. There are two ways to know about great fiction: study it, attempt it. Never, ever, let someone else's idea of great fiction pervert your craft. Strive and don't give up. Write creatively. The harder it is to place the "genre" of a work, the more likely it is to be remembered as "literature" in fifty years time. A perfect example is Brave New World by Aldous Huxley. Though it was a "Sci Fi", the depth of its meaning transcended any notion of "genre". Catcher in the Rye, though it was really "fouth mouthed kid who doesn't like school", was actually in my opinion one of the most brilliant and persuasive books of all time. Robert E. Howard's Savage Tales of Solomon Kane, though "action", if read carefully has all the subtle depth and meaning of Heart of Darkness by Josef Conrad, and they tackle similar issues.

Write, and write for love of the ART. Forget the craft, forget the money. Forget everything except for love of the art. Let the fools who believe in "genre" label your story thus. You are an artist, not a critic. You know better.

I don't know then. My previous post was just the words of encouragement I tell myself when I worry about genre. What I was trying to say is, write to a genre if you want, but don't be afraid or annoyed with yourself if your story starts to transcend genre. It may be slightly risky in terms of finding markets, but it may also benefit your story in terms of offering readers something unique.
If you find it helps to think in terms of genre, just do it. It won't harm anything. However, if you write better without it, then write without it. Personally (and I must stress that this is purely an opinion) I think the most interesting stories don't fit into any precise genre. I also think the most interesting writers get confused about genre. That's just my two cents.

I'll reiterate: if genre is a useful tool to you, use it. Every good craftsman carries a slightly different set of tools. If, however, you find that as your work takes on a life of its own, it breaks out of the genre mentality for you, don't stifle it, run with it.

I'm not the most experienced writer in the world, but I know what works for me. I hope that helps.

An analogy here might be an American city that has a Chinatown, a Latino barrio, a black ghetto, etc.
From the standpoint of the average American...a fish in the ocean, so to speak...the barrios have distinctive look, accent, feel, mythology (another word for stereotype).
Back on main street, or in the mall, those local items are of less value. If you described a visit to one of the ghettos, you would go on and on about differences and distinctions and new things. To describe a trip to the mall in similar detail and length, you'd couldn't rely on that, you'd have to have some story going. Some people involved. Literary or mainstream fiction is not just another ghetto...it's the "non-ghetto". You have to come up with your own stories and meaning.

Then again, if you lived in one of the "ghettos" and had all your life, and you took your first trip to the mall, when you got home you'd be describing a trip to another ghetto to all your friends. It's a matter of perspective, I think. As other people have said, all fiction is genre fiction whether or not the author or editor or reader necessarily realizes it. People who read and write in one particular genre get so used to the tropes that it can be quite difficult to learn another set to understand a newly discovered genre (or it can be exciting--I remember in high school when I suddenly discovered mysteries after a solid diet of fantasy for years).

I'm not sure where I'm going with this. I just thought I'd throw it on out.

Most guidelines for literary magazines say only, "No genre stories"

Click to expand...

Have you thought of submitting to the more literary "genre" mags? Or do you feel the genre mags aren't "literary"? I guess I'm not clear on the issue here, except for the "which genre is this" part, which I consider comparable to my own damnable "which market does this fit" habit when beginning a story.

genre-lit-fit

Solatium:

My crackpot theory here is that you're going about this the wrong way, getting hung up on a trivial what-genre-is-this? question, when what you should be doing is this:

Write what interests you. Write what entertains you. Write what moves you emotionally. When done, compare it to all the things you've been reading lately and send it to those markets.

We usually read what we like, so when we write stories we're usually not far off the mark when it comes to the markets in which we read.

Exceptions abound.

In terms of "what is literary?" and "what is genre?" there are lots of writers who are considered "literary" writers and who are nonetheless clearly genre writers. The difference is that they do certain things better, and the more of those certain things that they do better, the more likely they are to be considered good literary writers and not crappy genre ones.

Here's what's for sale:

1. theme
2. plot
3. style
4. characterization

Hit all those nails on the head with your golden hammer and everything you do will be praised and most likely called "literary." It will also sell.

---------------------------------------------------------
skipping a beat / a.k.a. changing gears / shrinking the head
---------------------------------------------------------

You wrote, "I have neither the expertise nor the relish to write exclusively genre fiction, and I'd like to write literary stories ... I must avoid the genre tropes upon which I tend to rely so heavily ... as little affection as I have for any of them [genre elements] they at least provide subject matter."

Dude, sounds like you must be very familiar with the elements of genre, yet you've been infected with the "genre is crap" germ. Lookit this:

Slaughterhouse Five, by Kurt Vonnegut
Cosmicomics, by Italo Calvino
Gravity's Rainbow, by Thomas Pynchon

All of the above are considered literary works, and every one of them contains genre tropes. Vonnegut is clearly a science fiction writer, though for years he denied it because, well, dontcha know sci-fi is crap, yet Slaughterhouse Five, with its time travel and other worlds slipping in and out of World War II Germany, is considered a great and lasting work of art.

Calvino's work is praised by critics and held up in wonder and awe as being highly imaginative and enduring, yet Cosmicomics (Le cosmicomiche, if you prefer the original Italian) is science fiction (or science fantasy, depending upon which end of the soft-sf/hard-sf you acribe to), sporting characters made out of mathematical fomulae and simple cellular structures.

Gravity's Rainbow, another World War II novel, incorporates elements of such genres as mystery, horror, science fiction, erotica, spy thrillers, and lotsa other things besides. The bigger the literary egghead, the more praise you'll get out of it concerning Pynchon's book.

Like I said, exceptions abound.

So if you're deeply familiar with the tricks and gimmicks and tools of genre, but fear what others will think of you because you write what others call genre fiction (as opposed to good, high-quality literary fiction) simply skip the worry and write what's in you to write. Even if it's bad. Everyone needs to write a lot of awful stuff before they get to the better, whether they're a literary writer or a genre one. No exceptions.

That's partly why writing is hard.

And if you want to write literary stuff and not genre, then go ahead and write what you relish. If you lack the confidence to do so without those icky genre tropes, then, read read read that literary stuff, and write write write (a.k.a practice practice practice).

-- end of bombastic pontification, enjoy or disregard

(advice may not apply to all states or nations or situations; void where prohibited by law; your mileage may vary; if I've left anything out, please fill in the missing information that most makes me look like a genius)

Then again, if you lived in one of the "ghettos" and had all your life, and you took your first trip to the mall, when you got home you'd be describing a trip to another ghetto to all your friends.

Click to expand...

No, not really, because the people who live in barrios and chinatowns all know what main street looks like. You can't real sell travel pieces about Walmart to ghetto publications.

SciFi fans know what "literature" is...they just prefer scifi. Or westerns, or whatever. Just like C&W fans prefer it...it's really an "accent" in writing, more than anything.

And like a comedian who works from a dialect, it can be a good niche. "King of Saturday Night" (I believe the Billy Crystall movie was called) showed that really well, the young borscht comedian striking out in a mainstream talent show.