literature

On Monday, I think we were talking about the categorization of "genre fiction" and "literature". I share the general sentiment that separating genre fiction from literature on grounds of quality, professionalism and "worth" is a fallacy, a value judgement that should not permeate scholarship, since intellectualism should lead to neutrality. Unfortunately, at least in my experience, it is scholarship itself that insists on a stark separation between the good, valuable, timeless "literature" and pop, cheap, dime-a-dozen, formulaic "genre". I don't exactly buy that argument at all, but I do want to acknowledge that literary exclusion/elitism seems to be the norm.

[Actually, before I go on, I should acknowledge that exceptions to the rule do exist. "The Hobbit", for example, is becoming required reading in some schools, and even our Lit class focuses on narrative from a very nontraditional, open-minded perspective. Having said that...]  read more »

The other day in class we had a discussion about genre. Most of the discussion focused it seemed on books. There was much debate about what makes literature fiction and genre fiction. I’m guessing that literature is simply what the wise academics in there ivory towers decide is literature; while genre fiction (westerns, romance, horror) appear to be less “distinguished” and follow a specific pattern. While I don’t necessarily prescribe to this thinking or parameters, for arguments sake, lets just assume that this crude interpretation is correct.  read more »

No, I'm not talking about the A&E Channel. If you habitually watch A&E, I'm sorry.

In class today, we discussed interactive literature, hypertext media, and tried to understand why it never really "took off." It's hard to read a book that wants you to do more than read. I know that sounds silly, but a historical look can only confirm this.

The novel has not changed very much since the times of Jane Austen, Dickens, or Poe. Popular literature is very straightforward, there are a few twists, the characters are round, and the main character undergoes some sort of change by way of overcoming a conflict. The rules are not that hard to follow.

There is literature that attempts to do things otherwise, such as the short stories of Donald Barthelme, Italo Calvino--books that really change the way a person reads. But they are not popular in the least, and frankly, they do not sell. Why do you think there is an ever-shrinking "Fiction - Literature" section at Barnes & Noble? Genre fiction is what sells.  read more »

I discussed in my last post how Doom forces me into a close relationship with it. I feel as if I'm going to Hell, with a chainsaw.

In all my workshop writing classes, we discuss immersion as well, but in a different form. In literature, there are levels of interaction. Think about it: you have first-person narration, sometimes second-person narration (read Lorrie Moore's "Self-Help"), and almost always third-person narration. As first-person, you are the character. Second-person, you are a character interacting with others. (Also, it's important to note the level of immersion with second-person writing. You will not find a novel in second-person. It is too demanding on the reader.)  read more »