Literary or Nah?



The distinction between writing in genre versus writing that is literary but contains elements of genre is a discussion that has surprisingly come up in several classes I’ve taken. For me, personally, I have never thought of it as an important distinction to make. While I do believe that there is sufficient evidence to show that one can be made, I just never thought of it as a big deal. I think the book I read for this week, 1984, is a good jumping off point for a discussion about this question. If a distinction absolutely had to be made, then I think 1984 would be an example of a work using science-fiction (specifically futuristic dystopian) elements to better get across the themes of the book. However, it is definitely possible to tell the themes of the story in another way; the dangers of totalitarianism, the use of language as mind control, and the overall idea of independence and identity have all been told in different ways. But with the setting and characters Orwell has given us, the story has a much stronger, lasting impact.

Neil Gaiman in one of his talks described genre works in a very interesting way: if the plot is a vehicle to get to what the genre is about, then its a genre work. I think that’s a very strong definition for a genre work. However, I don’t think whether a work is literary in nature or not should necessarily detract from the writing. Everyone comes into books with different experiences and comes away with different lessons from each book, genre or otherwise. I think that is what’s truly important for a book. As long as the book sets out what it achieves to do, then I don’t see the importance of the making the distinction.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Hobbit and The Hero's Journey

Interview With The Vampire: Immortality Kinda Sucks (Part 2)

A Wild Sheep Chase - Not Your Typical Creepy Story