Today I have written, quickly, the last two sections of the story that I am working on. They are far from finished, but they give me a good idea of the direction I need to move in with the story, and a cursory idea of the structural direction of the last two sections. I think that more fleshing out is necessary, so I think my next step is to print up a copy of the story to read, and see what I feel is lacking from the conclusion, what I need to do to punch it up, and what I need to do to fit the story more strongly into the narrative pattern of the story so far.
Also, yesterday I talked with Anne extensively about the ending of the last story, and the changes I need to make to that one's ending to give it a more fitting conclusion. I basically have to rewrite that section, expanding it, and changing the main character's response to his situation to make the ending less heavy handed than it could be. the basic idea is that, in stead of a shocking realization that isn't that shocking, I need to go for a sense of creeping unease, which will be more effective at making the point of the story, and will also work better to maintain the reader's sympathy. I think. I don't know if I want to make those changes now, or in the future. I think I should finish the present story before going back to make revisions, just so I'm not flitting around too much, but I should doo the revisions before moving on to the next story.
Monday, September 10, 2007
Friday, September 7, 2007
Literary vs. Genre
One of the things I spend a lot of my time thinking about/wanting to read about is the topic of genre fiction vs. literary fiction, what the terms means, their artistic worth, and so on. Most of this relates to the perception of the artistic merits of fiction, and whether fiction needs to have pretty words to count as great art or not. This eventually turns into a debate about what qualifies as literary fiction and what qualifies as genre fiction, and it lierary fiction is just another genre or not.
The way I see it, the difference between genre fiction and literary fiction is this. Genre fiction—it's various genres, sci-fi, fantasy, western, mystery, crime, thriller, horror, romance, etc.—is interested in the tropes of it's particular genre, and literary fiction is more interested in the use of literary devices—foreshadowing, symbolism, character, imagery, structure, etc. Its basically two different approaches to relating themes, which is what all fiction is ultimately about.
Hence the difference in the readers interest. Readers of literary fiction want to read something that is, let's say, well-written. Readers of science fiction want something that involves science fiction. This does not mean that a science fiction book can't be well-written, or literary fiction piece involve genre element. Both occur. It's a question of emphasis.
For example, lots of Thomas Pynchon novels include genre tropes, like robotic men, ninjas, walking dead people. But the emphasis is more on the prose style and postmodern plotting and structure techniques. Hence, literary fiction. Also, most of those tropes are pretty derivative. Then there is someone like Philip K. Dick, who apparently, writes like crap, but has visionary, genius science fiction concepts. Hence, he's considered a major science fiction writer. In fact, it's often the case that some genre writers who are not really good "writers" are still considered very good writers because of the content of their ideas. Most of the pulp writers whose names we still know, like Lovecraft and Howard are known because of their ideas, the Cthulu mythos and the Hyperborian Age, respectively. Meanwhile, literary writers usually become well known for their innovation of technique, like Faulkner or Hemingway or Joyce. (Although I often feel like Joyce is his own form in an of itself, as he seems to be more a writer of ideas than form, and thus became the master of form as he was the master of ideas. Or something.)
In brief, genre fiction is about ideas, literary fiction is about technique. And both forms have both ideas and technique.
The way I see it, the difference between genre fiction and literary fiction is this. Genre fiction—it's various genres, sci-fi, fantasy, western, mystery, crime, thriller, horror, romance, etc.—is interested in the tropes of it's particular genre, and literary fiction is more interested in the use of literary devices—foreshadowing, symbolism, character, imagery, structure, etc. Its basically two different approaches to relating themes, which is what all fiction is ultimately about.
Hence the difference in the readers interest. Readers of literary fiction want to read something that is, let's say, well-written. Readers of science fiction want something that involves science fiction. This does not mean that a science fiction book can't be well-written, or literary fiction piece involve genre element. Both occur. It's a question of emphasis.
For example, lots of Thomas Pynchon novels include genre tropes, like robotic men, ninjas, walking dead people. But the emphasis is more on the prose style and postmodern plotting and structure techniques. Hence, literary fiction. Also, most of those tropes are pretty derivative. Then there is someone like Philip K. Dick, who apparently, writes like crap, but has visionary, genius science fiction concepts. Hence, he's considered a major science fiction writer. In fact, it's often the case that some genre writers who are not really good "writers" are still considered very good writers because of the content of their ideas. Most of the pulp writers whose names we still know, like Lovecraft and Howard are known because of their ideas, the Cthulu mythos and the Hyperborian Age, respectively. Meanwhile, literary writers usually become well known for their innovation of technique, like Faulkner or Hemingway or Joyce. (Although I often feel like Joyce is his own form in an of itself, as he seems to be more a writer of ideas than form, and thus became the master of form as he was the master of ideas. Or something.)
In brief, genre fiction is about ideas, literary fiction is about technique. And both forms have both ideas and technique.
Madeleine L'Engle, 1918-2007
Via the Onion A.V. club, I see that Madeleine L'Engle had died. Guess I feel I should point that out, since I wrote this post about her work not too long ago. Now I feel bad about not finishing A Swiftly Tilting Planet. So it goes.
Here's the Wikipedia entry on her.
Here's the Wikipedia entry on her.
Got nothing done yesterday.
I spent most of my night finishing my A Familiar Dragon book. It collects the first three books in a series of five, so I ordered the last two online from Amazon. it's sad that the books are out of print. I hope the author, Daniel Hood, is doing all right.
The books should be here by September 10th. It will be nice to get something in the mail. Something to make this place feel a little more like home.
And hey, it's the weekend. Hopefully the writing juices will kick back in. I feel like of thrown off my game by that long weekend. Think I need to just bite the bullet and start pouring over my notes again, get back in the mindset. Any time now.
The books should be here by September 10th. It will be nice to get something in the mail. Something to make this place feel a little more like home.
And hey, it's the weekend. Hopefully the writing juices will kick back in. I feel like of thrown off my game by that long weekend. Think I need to just bite the bullet and start pouring over my notes again, get back in the mindset. Any time now.
Thursday, September 6, 2007
Well, that didn't go as planned.
Got nothing done this past week or so. Last Friday got a call from mom: basement flooded. Had to drive there and help move stuff to garage, throw stuff out. This went on through Saturday, Sunday, and Monday. Spent Tuesday recuperating and drove back around noon on Wednesday. This seems to have become the standard process of my weekend visits.
In between boxes I managed to read some of my A Familiar Dragon omnibus, and watch the first season of Heroes with mom, which was very good. For a show with that title, there is a surprising amount of moral ambiguity on display. Most of the characters are neither wholly good or wholly bad, except for maybe Peter and Hiro, who both still have their flaws (Peter's unconditional caring for his family often leads him to trust the wrong people, and Hiro's idealistic notions of heroism are vaguely self-centered). The characters are often depicted as people stuck in situations with no easy solutions, and having to struggle through, or making wrong but basically understandable decisions that there is no way to get out of within the system. Even the villainous mastermind, Linderman, a vaguely justifiable reasons for his actions, if you're a far out Utilitarian, and serial killer Sylar is given nuance and sympathy (a choice which actually makes him even scarier).
I had some minor squabbles: the evil masterplan is stolen wholecloth from Watchmen, and I think some of the character development is a little quick for a five week period, especially that involving the Nikki/Jessica plotline, but other than that, the show is pretty awesome. There are people with super powers in it, after all. Can't wait for the next season to start.
Unfortunately, this means I now have to get a dvd player and tv, so I can watch all the commentaries and special features. Hurm.
Hopefully, I will get back to writing my story tonight. I hope to finish it by the the end of the week. Which is what I planned last week, but, hey, flooded basement, right.
In between boxes I managed to read some of my A Familiar Dragon omnibus, and watch the first season of Heroes with mom, which was very good. For a show with that title, there is a surprising amount of moral ambiguity on display. Most of the characters are neither wholly good or wholly bad, except for maybe Peter and Hiro, who both still have their flaws (Peter's unconditional caring for his family often leads him to trust the wrong people, and Hiro's idealistic notions of heroism are vaguely self-centered). The characters are often depicted as people stuck in situations with no easy solutions, and having to struggle through, or making wrong but basically understandable decisions that there is no way to get out of within the system. Even the villainous mastermind, Linderman, a vaguely justifiable reasons for his actions, if you're a far out Utilitarian, and serial killer Sylar is given nuance and sympathy (a choice which actually makes him even scarier).
I had some minor squabbles: the evil masterplan is stolen wholecloth from Watchmen, and I think some of the character development is a little quick for a five week period, especially that involving the Nikki/Jessica plotline, but other than that, the show is pretty awesome. There are people with super powers in it, after all. Can't wait for the next season to start.
Unfortunately, this means I now have to get a dvd player and tv, so I can watch all the commentaries and special features. Hurm.
Hopefully, I will get back to writing my story tonight. I hope to finish it by the the end of the week. Which is what I planned last week, but, hey, flooded basement, right.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)