I have been thinking
about so-called ‘genre fiction’, and why I try not to write it. I think the
concept is rather vague, and also a little strange. Initially I suspect the
concept arose because people like to categorise things: it is this compulsion
that human beings have to bring order out of chaos. To achieve that, we like to
build boundaries around things; to put things in boxes. It is an understandable
process and probably has its uses, even as regards literature.
Nowadays, people
always ask a writer what genre there book is, whether they be literary agents,
publishers or friends. I hate the question, for several reasons. First, it
seems to me that I cannot slot my books into any of the conventional genres.
This is not because my books are particularly special. Like many, if not most
books, they do not fit into any single category. It is easier to say what my
books are not, than what they are. So, in the end, I feel obliged to describe
my books as ‘literary fiction’, which, I am coming more and more to understand,
simply means: They do not fit a particular genre. ‘Literary fiction’ is simply
the box into which to place all ‘other’ types of fictional writing which have
not yet been adequately categorised, and means very little. But I don’t like
saying my books are ‘literary fiction’ either, because that sounds pompous and
pretentious. They are not necessarily any more literary than any other fiction;
or, rather, genre literature is also, presumably, literary. Or are we simply
using the term ‘literary’ to mean ‘well-written’, which much literary fiction
probably isn’t?
It is also odd to
think that a book has to fit within any single literary genre. Cannot a fantasy
or science fiction novel also be a romance? Can’t a mystery novel also be
science fiction? Of course, this begins to generate all kinds of sub-genres. Latter
Day Saints Science Fiction Mystery Romance. Or we come up with a new genre
called ‘cross-genre literature’. Eventually each of our books falls into its
own genre, the exemplars of which number precisely one: The Philip Newey Angel’s Harp Genre.
If a book is labelled
as a particular genre, it is expected to follow certain rules, which are mostly
unwritten. Despite the vagueness of these rules, they are what make a novel a
romance or a mystery. They give rise to certain expectations: When I read a
romance I expect certain elements to be present, or I may feel let down. I
suspect this owes a lot to the marketing mentality. Publishers like to be able
to promote their projects to a specific readership. There seems to be the
belief, among publishers and, to some extent, writers, that if I like a certain
book, I will like another which is very similar to it. I probably won’t. Books
are not vacuum cleaners. They don’t have a very specific function to perform
which, should they fail to do so, causes them to cease to be books, even good
books.
While the concept of
genre begins with a descriptive purpose, it soon becomes prescriptive. It
begins to say not only what a book is, but what it ought to be. Writing and
writers begin to be channelled by those who pretend to understand ‘what people
want’. It is not impossible for a genre book to also be a great piece of
literature, certainly in the sense of being well-written. There is also a
certain skill required when writing within particular guidelines and for a
specific readership. However, any book which truly fits within a particular
genre is likely to be somewhat formulaic. This may make some readers and some
writers comfortable, or even happy. Not this reader and writer. The best genre literature
will always be that which breaks the rules, dares to cross the boundaries
between genres. Some will try to define this as another genre, so there will
always be new boundaries to cross and new rules to break.
What a great post! I believe that the author's worldview and artistic vision have far more to do with whether a reader likes a book than the genre does.
ReplyDelete