Showing posts with label literary fiction. Show all posts
Showing posts with label literary fiction. Show all posts

Sunday, 22 September 2013

Are you a book snob?

In January I posted a blog piece entitled Literary Fiction V Genre Fiction which stimulated lively discussion in various book groups online, so I suspect it is a topic of interest to many writers and readers. 
There's also an interesting post on literary versus genre fiction over at Jane Friedman: http://janefriedman.com/2013/07/11/writing-on-the-ether-98/

So when I came across this post by Matt Haig at the Booktrust, I wanted to share it. Called 30 things to tell a book snob, this is a contentious subject, judging by all the comments on his blog post. What do you think?


Along the same lines, I have just read the blurb for the University of Kent’s Creative Writing Centre and it made me growl!  For example:

“You won’t write mass-market thrillers or children’s fiction on our programmes.”  
Why not?  What’s wrong with children’s fiction?   Or thrillers?  Are they not worthy of study or creation?   

And,  “We don’t want our students to write inside genre and formula but outside, where real art is found.”  Really?  And a definition of real art? 

Click below to get annoyed. http://www.kent.ac.uk/english/research/centres/creative-writing.html

Rant over........for now......

Related posts: 

Saturday, 20 April 2013

Slow burners and literary fiction

I'm naturally an impatient person.  I struggle to read or write long novels.  I'm a slow reader so generally prefer a fast-paced read with plenty of dialogue and not too many long descriptions.  A story that pulls me in from the start and compels me to find out how it all ends.  If I get bored I tend to skim and flip to the end of the book to see if it is worth the effort.  I do that with films and TV programmes too.

However, recently, I've been savouring the delights of some slow burners.  The first was The Little Stranger by Sarah Waters.  

I was nearly halfway through the book before it grabbed me.  The pace was interminably slow, with endless, apparently unnecessary descriptions and little happening in the story.  Or so it seems.  I nearly gave up.  But how glad I am that I persevered!  The story uses the device of the unreliable narrator superbly and this has to be one of the cleverest constructions I've read in a very long time.  Like a dark, disturbing jigsaw puzzle, a mystery littered with clues that you simply can't spot the first time round.  As soon as I had finished I immediately went back to the beginning, hunting them out.  If you want to find out more I wrote a review for Goodreads  http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/483099747   and it really got me thinking about the way I have limited myself in so many ways as a writer, how lacking in confidence I am of attempting such a feat.  If you write, then I urge you to read The Little Stranger to learn about the craft. 

I'm currently reading a totally different genre but another slow burner called Super Sad True Love Story by Gary Shteyngart (I referred to this in a previous post http://janeayres.blogspot.co.uk/2012/01/more-on-journeys.html as far back as January 2012, which shows how long it has taken me to read it!).  It's a dark, funny satire set in a future chillingly similar to the present, where technology rules. (see my post http://janeayres.blogspot.co.uk/2013/03/slaves-to-machines.html).  I have really struggled with the first half of the book, again because it takes its time and little (apparently) is happening but now I am halfway through, it has me hooked and I can't put it down.  I need to know where the journey ends. 


Encouraged by this experience I have been thinking about the idea of the slow burner and questioning my own reading preferences - and wondering if I would ever have the confidence to take on this kind of writing project.

Can you recommend any slow burning novels that were worth the wait?  And what did they teach you as a writer?

Related post: http://janeayres.blogspot.co.uk/2011/12/on-books-digital-landscape-and-bigger.html
http://janeayres.blogspot.co.uk/2013/05/reading-bigger-books.html
http://janeayres.blogspot.co.uk/2013/05/readers-does-size-matter.html

Book links: 

Sunday, 27 January 2013

Literary V Genre Fiction: A postscript

Further to my post last week about Literary Fiction versus Genre Fiction I came across an excellent post over at Jennie Coughlin, in which she suggests the term "serious fiction" is useful and comments:

Literary often involves playing with language in ways that are artistically pleasing, but perhaps veer too far into experimental for most people. And genre has taken on a connotation that is the opposite of serious fiction. More and more there are books out there that don’t fall into either category. If more people adopt the “serious fiction” category, maybe we can start to build a new genre.

I'd urge you to read the full post - very interesting stuff.

http://jenniecoughlin.wordpress.com/2013/01/19/serious-fiction-and-legitlit-creating-a-hybrid-home/

Related post:
http://janeayres.blogspot.co.uk/2013/01/literary-fiction-versus-genre-fiction.html

Tuesday, 15 January 2013

Literary Fiction versus Genre Fiction?

In a previous blog post (http://www.janeayres.blogspot.co.uk/2013/01/how-do-you-deal-with-rejection.html ) I referred to work I recently had rejected and promised to develop this in a future post.  Today I am picking up the thread again, and will try very hard not to end up having a rant, because the topic I will write on has niggled me for a long time.

Literary (or serious) fiction versus genre writing (or commercial fiction).

When I started out as a writer in my teens, I won a few short story competitions at school and decided I wanted to be a journalist.  In fact, when I contacted some well-known writers, this was the career path they recommended to me if I wanted to see my work in print.  Interesting.  I wrote about what I was passionate about, which at the time was horses and riding, and, a bit later, I developed a fascination with the supernatural, often combining the two. I also enjoyed reading horror stories.  (Does anyone remember the Pan Book of Horror Series of short stories?  I used to read these avidly). In fact the first short story I had published in a national horse magazine was about a psychotic pony that goes unaccountably crazy at a horse show and kills another horse! 

After this, I wrote a large body of traditional pony stories and serials, which were all published in pony magazines and annuals, so I kind of pigeon holed myself in a way.  But I was doing what I loved and I felt like a proper writer.

In my twenties and thirties, I sent out a range of other short stories to a mixture of magazines, which included the women’s mags, and some of the small press (and bigger press) literary magazines.  I had limited success with both, faring better with small press.  

When your pony stories are usually accepted by the specialist publications but your non-horsey stuff is more frequently rejected, you tend to veer towards what experience shows you works, but I did persevere with my “other” writing for many years, winning a few more writing competitions and getting a fair bit of poetry (and lots of non-fiction articles) published.  On the whole, “literary” success eluded me, and I soon discovered that in the world of academia, there was far more respect for a writer who had achieved recognition in this field than one who had sold over 162,000 copies (translated into 7 languages) of their latest pony novel for teenage girls.  (This was Transitions, my best seller ever and which took me into the US market). I began to develop a bit of a chip on my shoulder and wondered if I would only be a proper writer if I won the Booker prize (or similar), because whenever I applied for an arts council bursary or RLF Fellowship Scheme, I never got a look in.  

So, back to the point, which was my recent rejection from a literary magazine.  I don’t often enter contests or send speculative work off these days but last year, I sent off 6 of my poems (all previously published) and a short story that I felt proud of, (which had won a literary short story award a few years back) to this magazine.  My work eventually came back to me in the familiar A4 white SAE (I used to spend a fortune on postage before emails were invented!).  It had been read “with interest and careful attention” but “the editors finally decided not to take (them) for publication.” 

Why did this sting so much?  Was it because it reminded me of those days in the past when this was a regular occurrence?  I am always telling other writers to develop a thick skin; rejections are a fact of life for a writer. Just keep going, there’s an element of subjectivity, someone’s opinion, wrong place, wrong time, etc.  But clearly this got to me or I wouldn’t be writing this long and rambling post.  I believed I wrote as well as many of those already published in the magazine.  Deep down, did I think my work simply wasn’t “literary” enough?  I suspected they did.  And does it really matter? 

As regards Treading Water, the short story in question, you can judge for yourself, because I put it on my blog a while back, before I (correction, it) got rejected. 

My question is, am I being paranoid?  Do I still have a chip on my shoulder?  Does a kind of snobbery  exist in some circles about genre and commercial fiction, as opposed to literary?  And what the hell is the difference?  And does it matter?  Phew.  Ranting again.  Can anyone give a definitive definition of what makes something literary?  Who decides?

Footnote:
There’s an excellent (non-ranty!) post about over at Jane Friedman called “Commodity publishing, self-publishing and the future of fiction”, which explores the role of literary and commercial fiction in the world of indie publishing, and it has some great insights into what can be a controversial topic.