Switching to genre fiction from literary fiction

[dneuschulz]

I have given up writing in the literary fiction genre because I feel, that as an upper middle-class ("bougie") white, cisgender, heterosexual male, I have nothing to add to the canon. Yes, I could write in the mode of -- I won't disparage other, current wm authors, there are plenty -- but nothing in my oh so precious life, or my insights on life and the "human condition," addresses anything that hasn't been addressed, indeed, over-addressed, before. This nagging sense of redundancy and irrelevance, of ethical transgression, was sapping my writing energy. So, I am turning away. (Someone with good intentions said to me, "Just write from the POV of an LGBTQ protagonist." No, no, no! Talk about ethical transgressions!)

But I love writing. So I will turn my attention to genre fiction. It sits mainly within the dominant culture zone, and it can subtly address the same issues lit tackles head-on. And it is completely free of expectations of deep intellectualism. I don't agree with a lot of things said in Stephen King's On Writing, but I think in my old age and wisdom, I no longer deride it. Genre fiction can be vapid, but it can also fill a support role for lit. IMHO, of course.

 

[BAYLOR]

You'll never be successful doing something you don't like so, write the kind of books and stories that you want to write . Do what makes you happy.

 

[Astro Pen]

Seconded. Write it, then label it.

 

[Valtharius]

I despise the term genre fiction. All fiction has at least one genre. Realism is a genre. And all fiction is literary. All writing is literature. Literature is not an honorific term. I don't know who invented those terms, but they were a doofus and a snob.
Write whatever the hell you want.

 

[Mon0Zer0]

I don't know who invented those terms, but they were a doofus and a snob.

The Marketing Department.(TM)

Write whatever the hell you want.

This.

an upper middle-class ("bougie") white, cisgender, heterosexual male, I have nothing to add to the canon.

Why pigeon hole yourself? You are more than a group of nebulous and reductive characteristics.

As for having anything to "add to the canon" - I mean, it's good to aim high, but how about just writing without second guessing (someone else's opinion of)the merit or otherwise of what you're writing? Write what's important to you, from your expertise or experience and eventually a perspective or view will arise unique to you that may contribute to "canon".

but nothing in my oh so precious life, or my insights on life and the "human condition," addresses anything that hasn't been addressed, indeed, over-addressed, before.

The answer is to seek out new experiences or perspectives. Additionally, the context within which the "universal human condition" arises changes in relation to the environment and technology, which means there will always be something to contribute, regardless of your social class, sexual orientation, melanin levels or any other surface facet of your being.

 

[Abernovo]

Are you trying to be ironic, or are you just trolling? You're going to try your hand at writing genre, because you don't think it's as intellectual as literary fiction? The literary fiction which you feel excluded(?) from because you're a middle class, white, cis-het guy of a certain age?

Please tell me I'm misunderstanding you.

And, I second this.

All writing is literature.

There should be no snobbery about literature here.

 

[dneuschulz]

Are you trying to be ironic, or are you just trolling? You're going to try your hand at writing genre, because you don't think it's as intellectual as literary fiction? The literary fiction which you feel excluded(?) from because you're a middle class, white, cis-het guy of a certain age?

Please tell me I'm misunderstanding you.

And, I second this.

There should be no snobbery about literature here.

Not ironic in the least. I feel horrible anybody would think I am trolling!

I can't speak for others. I was motivated to write "high literature" because I wanted to be pretentious. Too much ego. Maybe there is no such thing as a purely altruistic act, but now I would like to produce something that would be of the most value to the most people. I can achieve the same result for myself as a writing A Heartbreaking Work of Staggering Genius* just by buying a T-shirt that says, "I am astonishingly smart. No, really." (Now that last sentences was sarcastic.)

I am happy writing what I am writing now. Although, it presents different challenges. For instance, I currently have to run my pages through "reading difficulty calculators" to teach myself how to write to the 7th-9th grade level, because that's what reaches the most readers. Otherwise, my default writing uses too complex a grammar, too large and obscure of a vocabulary, horrifically obscure literary allusions -- it's profoundly pretentious. Deliberately so. It's a reflex, a reflex that I decided to consciously break.

* Apologies to Mr. Eggers, I have no idea why he wrote it or what he got out of writing it. And I haven't read it. Mostly because of the title.

 

[dneuschulz]

I think I may have fallen into the trap of accidentally insulting people by deprecating myself. Not taking into consideration that if somebody identifies with the things I am saying I don't like about myself, then I am (not deliberately) insulting them. If this is the case, I apologize.

 

[Steve Harrison]

I've always referred to literary fiction as unpopular fiction, but after writing a couple of SF novels and a thriller, my latest book falls into that 'category' simply because I can't think of a genre that fits.

The literary v genre debate is all complete nonsense, of course, but amusing nonsense.

 

[BAYLOR]

Not ironic in the least. I feel horrible anybody would think I am trolling!

I can't speak for others. I was motivated to write "high literature" because I wanted to be pretentious. Too much ego. Maybe there is no such thing as a purely altruistic act, but now I would like to produce something that would be of the most value to the most people. I can achieve the same result for myself as a writing A Heartbreaking Work of Staggering Genius* just by buying a T-shirt that says, "I am astonishingly smart. No, really." (Now that last sentences was sarcastic.)

I am happy writing what I am writing now. Although, it presents different challenges. For instance, I currently have to run my pages through "reading difficulty calculators" to teach myself how to write to the 7th-9th grade level, because that's what reaches the most readers. Otherwise, my default writing uses too complex a grammar, too large and obscure of a vocabulary, horrifically obscure literary allusions -- it's profoundly pretentious. Deliberately so. It's a reflex, a reflex that I decided to consciously break.

* Apologies to Mr. Eggers, I have no idea why he wrote it or what he got out of writing it. And I haven't read it. Mostly because of the title.

It sounds like you would love Clark Ashton Smith and James Branch Cabell

May make suggestions? To make yourself more relatable , Try reading some the books the 7th though 9th Graders read
Also try reading pulp stories for example Robert E Howard ( Conan the Barbarian King Kull, Bran Mak Morn , Solomon Kane ). Howard was a good storyteller and knew how keep things simple and to keep things moving .

 

[Vladd67]

If you want to keep it simple and moving along, there is always Lester Dent's, the creator of Doc Savage, Short story master formula.

Lester Dent's Short Story Master Formula

A step-by-step guide detailing how to write a 6,000 word short story.

blog.karenwoodward.org

 

[dneuschulz]

It sounds like you would love Clark Ashton Smith and James Branch Cabell

I just looked them up. Yes! I've read the entire ouvre of Lovecraft, so -- yes. Thanks for this!

May make suggestions? To make yourself more relatable , Try reading some the books the 7th though 9th Graders read

(reading Brian Sanderson and Patrick Rothfuss now)

Also try reading pulp stories for example Robert E Howard ( Conan the Barbarian King Kull, Bran Mak Morn , Solomon Kane ). Howard was a good storyteller and knew how keep things simple and to keep things moving .

You're instincts are laser-like. I rad them in my youth -- and again about a year ago when I embarked on teaching myself to write in a new way.

 

[hitmouse]

But I love writing. So I will turn my attention to genre fiction. …it is completely free of expectations of deep intellectualism. I don't agree with a lot of things said in Stephen King's On Writing, but I think in my old age and wisdom, I no longer deride it. Genre fiction can be vapid, but it can also fill a support role for lit. IMHO, of course.

Um, what everyone else has said in response.
Just to add, I think your assertion about genre fiction is significantly innaccurate, as evidenced by a body of discussion on this board, and by a widely published critical literature.

Best not to move ignorantly into a “genre” of which you seem to have a low opinion and poor knowledge. Best not to underestimate your intended audience.

 

[Abernovo]

Otherwise, my default writing uses too complex a grammar, too large and obscure of a vocabulary, horrifically obscure literary allusions -- it's profoundly pretentious

That sounds like a case of purple prose syndrome. A lot of us have been there.

My apologies, @dneuschulz - I mistook your intent, and it may be one of my more spiky days. I hope you will forgive me.

I would say that, whilst there's a good reason to be straightforward in your storytelling, I don't think you should dumb it down. There's always been some highbrow sff, and there's quite a bit of it being produced right now.

Finally, please don't dislike yourself for what you are. None of us can help our backgrounds. We all come from different places here, with different experiences, but we're all equals.

 

[dneuschulz]

I've always referred to literary fiction as unpopular fiction, but after writing a couple of SF novels and a thriller, my latest book falls into that 'category' simply because I can't think of a genre that fits.

The literary v genre debate is all complete nonsense, of course, but amusing nonsense.

There are always cross-overs. And nothing is absolutely one thing or the other, no book, no genre. But, that said, here are a couple of examples:

Ursula K. Le Guin is considered to be in both genres. In the opinion of teachers, publishers, and professors, she crosses over into "literary" from the SF/Fantasy. And sorry if folks bridle at the assertion that the genre "literary fiction" exists or that it should not exist -- because who cares what teachers, publishers, and professors think -- but that's a reality, for good or ill.

In the opposite direction, Thomas Pynchon's Gravity's Rainbow is sometimes categorized as SF, even though it is primarily "literary."

Heck, there are elements of Victorian realism in Tolkien's Lord of the Rings ("The Scouring of the Shire" vis a vis Dickens's Hard TImes).

 

[Jo Zebedee]

Are you Irish? We are the masters at literary fiction angst.

Anyhow write what you enjoy. Writing genre won’t necessarily make you any less literary - there are lit sci fi writers out there. If you hope to switch styles by switching genre, it might not happen.

 

[Venusian Broon]

In the opposite direction, Thomas Pynchon's Gravity's Rainbow is sometimes categorized as SF, even though it is primarily "literary."

Yes, I struggle to see this book as SF, even although, first, it's one of my favourite books of all time, and secondly, as an avid SF reader and writer I'd love to have it 'in the canon'....but I feel it's an overreach to claim it as such.

 

[Steve Harrison]

And sorry if folks bridle at the assertion that the genre "literary fiction" exists or that it should not exist -- because who cares what teachers, publishers, and professors think -- but that's a reality, for good or ill.

Literary fiction exists, but only if you believe it does. A bit like money, democracy or a preferred deity.

 

[BAYLOR]

There are always cross-overs. And nothing is absolutely one thing or the other, no book, no genre. But, that said, here are a couple of examples:

Ursula K. Le Guin is considered to be in both genres. In the opinion of teachers, publishers, and professors, she crosses over into "literary" from the SF/Fantasy. And sorry if folks bridle at the assertion that the genre "literary fiction" exists or that it should not exist -- because who cares what teachers, publishers, and professors think -- but that's a reality, for good or ill.

In the opposite direction, Thomas Pynchon's Gravity's Rainbow is sometimes categorized as SF, even though it is primarily "literary."

Heck, there are elements of Victorian realism in Tolkien's Lord of the Rings ("The Scouring of the Shire" vis a vis Dickens's Hard TImes).

I read Thomas Pythons novel V and like it . Gravity Rainbow , I know its a great book but I cannot get into it , Ive tried 3 times, I may give it 4th try

On other novel that ive never been able to crack is Dahlgren by Samuel Delany. This book is impossible. From what I understand , this has defeated many a reader.

 

[Dan Jones]

Hi @dneuschulz - welcome to the Boards! It did take me a couple of reads of your OP to figure out your angle, but it's clear from subsequent posts that you're being very self-deprecating (though even your self-deprecating post was written in quite a literary, florid style - if intentional.... that's some deep meta work there!).

Seriously though, I appreciate the sentiment of the post; it seems very pertinent to me right now as I'm going through a similar thought process. I tend to write semi-literary genre fiction (one member here who shall remain anonymous calls it "semi-literate" - arf arf) and with only very limited success. So I'm going through the same sort of re-evaluation of why I'm writing the sorts of things I do. At present my thinking is not angled towards a switch of genre/ style, but remembering why I wrote it in the beginning, which was for pleasure, not for fame or sales. In short, for me, before anyone else. Somewhere along the line I've become mired in the strictures of writing to acquire an agent and/or publisher, and it brings with it a tendency to remove oneself from the writing process.

It's not exactly the same thing but your post did chime with me. I'm trying to get back to simply writing, reconnecting with the Challenges here (Which I'd neglected for years whilst writing "serious" stuff) and writing some short stuff and blogs just to remember the joy of the craft. I hope you find some fertile ground in the SFFH (never forget the H, isn't that right @Phyrebrat ) as it certainly can be used to convey some pretty hefty themes when done properly.

On the other hand, if you want to kick back with sexy space pilots, barbarians with big swords, wizened warlocks, and buxom wenches carrying pots of mead, it's good for that too.