And it seems that pooka has raised an interesting question. Asked broadly, it is this: "What's the relationship between what a writer writes and what a writer reads?"

Asked another way: "Should a writer who wants to write X-kind of fiction read primarily X-kind of fiction?"

Or, another question: "Should an unpublished writer even care about these kinds of things?"

I used to be of the opinion that an unpublished writer should say, "I want to write X, and therefore I need to read as much X stories and novels as I can."

But after writing for a couple of years, I think the best answer for the UNPUBLISHED is this: "I like to read and I like to write and therefore I'm going to read what I want and write what I want and not worry about specializing until I start to break in."

This way we are free to experiment with various kinds of genres, which helps us mature as writers.

It also gives us more opportunity to write: I may not have a horror story in mind, but I have this semi-autobiographical tale that I'd like to try.

And, finally, I think something Lawrence Block said is very true: Just because you like a genre doesn't mean you can write it. It requires a certain way of thinking, a certain kind of storytelling intelligence. I doubted this for some time until I read in Uncle Orson's Writing Class that Card himself, though he loves mysteries, can't write mysteries.

In other words, it seems that the unpublished writer should focus on broadening himself rather than limiting, and it is only when a career is knocking at your door should you start to specialize. That's when it's time to put away all other forms of fiction, at least for a while, and read only the kind of fiction that may give you a career. I know Peter Straub did this; only after he'd published his first two supernatural novels did he go back and immerse himself in the tradition.