Hatrack River Writers Workshop   
my profile login | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Hatrack River Writers Workshop » Forums » Open Discussions About Writing » How do you feel about so-called "Literary Fiction?"

   
Author Topic: How do you feel about so-called "Literary Fiction?"
Fox
Member
Member # 3871

 - posted      Profile for Fox   Email Fox         Edit/Delete Post 
I guess this'll serve as my introductory topic, since I need to explain who/where I am to initiate this debate. Hi. Name's Fox. Yes, really.

Anyway, I've gone through about five different writing classes at University--mostly a blend of fiction and nonfiction CW stuff--and most of my instructors, be they grad students or tenured faculty with experience in the field, have tried to introduce (read: indoctrinate) us in something they call, "Literary Fiction."

What is literary fiction? My initial reaction was, of course, a question: isn't ALL fiction literary? Well, I suppose propaganda could be an exception... but, still.

I've since learned what was meant by, "literary." Apparently, it means "contemporary American fiction"--American meaning, of course, written by a U.S. citizen. Most of what I've been exposed to has been horridly pretentious (Deborah Eisenberg leaps to mind immediately), trite, and often inconsequential fiction. Writing where the emphasis is more on how the thing is written, than who or what is being written (of). A distinct emphasis on the mundanity of daily life--which, often, means tales of very bored blue-bloods. Or a son/daughter or immigrant parents struggling to find an identity. All very hum-drum and predictable (in my experience).

Every time my current fiction instructor mentions, "literary fiction" (which is very, very frequently) I cringe. I suppose, in her mind, Herman Hesse, Eiji Yoshikawa, Asimov, Herbert, Clarke, Morrow, Yeates, Vonnegut, Card, Milton, Bester, Heller, Verne and oh-so-many more didn't write "literary" fiction. As is undoubtedly evident, that angers me.

So what do you guys think of this, "literary fiction," stuff? Do you like reading it? Hand-in-hand: do you like writing it? Do you think it commands an undue amount of emphasis in writing education (whatever that is)? Do you think it warrants an entire genre unto itself, while at the same time claiming to be "above" genres?

Or, more to the point, am I the only one sickened by the pretense of it all?


Posts: 41 | Registered: Sep 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TaleSpinner
Member
Member # 5638

 - posted      Profile for TaleSpinner   Email TaleSpinner         Edit/Delete Post 
Hi Fox, and welcome to Hatrack.

You aren't alone (actually, you're never alone at Hatrack!) and we're ahead of you:

http://www.hatrack.com/forums/writers/forum/Forum1/HTML/005250.html
http://www.hatrack.com/forums/writers/forum/Forum1/HTML/005214.html
http://www.hatrack.com/forums/writers/forum/Forum1/HTML/004580.html http://www.hatrack.com/forums/writers/forum/Forum1/HTML/004761.html http://www.hatrack.com/forums/writers/forum/Forum1/HTML/004756.html

Cheers,
Pat


Posts: 1796 | Registered: Jun 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
BenM
Member
Member # 8329

 - posted      Profile for BenM   Email BenM         Edit/Delete Post 
I must admit, only since renewing an interest in writing have I come across the term Literary Fiction.

quote:
Writing where the emphasis is more on how the thing is written, than who or what is being written (of).

This is what I understand it to mean as well.

For another perspective on this, you might be interested in this little exercise posted on Nathan Bransord's blog a while ago:
http://nathanbransford.blogspot.com/2008/11/you-tell-me-literary-acclaim-or-big.html

I put my thoughts on the matter on my blog.

Now, I should really go have a look at those links, right TaleSpinner? :)


Posts: 921 | Registered: Nov 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TheOnceandFutureMe
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post 
I may have jumped into the fray on those earlier links, but I've since grown in my opinions (that pretentious enough for you?).

I'm taking a class from Tom De Haven, who also chairs the VCU creative writing mfa program. In a class of 9 people, only me and one other person have written speculative fiction. The professor encourages this, as he's written a fantasy trilogy and his most recent book is about Superman. But he's also well respeceted in the "literary" community. His opinion is that speculative fiction and literary fiction should be blended.

For this class, I've read the New Yorker story every week all semester. A lot of the stories are horribly pretentious, focusing on boring people in a different culture. I've expressed this in class, and the prof has often agreed. But some of them are simply amazing.

I picked up Ray Bradbury's Dandelion Wine. I read twenty pages and hated it. Then I took a deep breath, and settled back into it, not looking to be excited, but rather to enjoy the language. And it's great. Now, I don't want to write like that. Even the li-fi style I've fooled around with focuses on character and event more than language. But I can learn how to improve my own prose by reading more "literary" work.

It's like reading J.K. Rowling or Stephanie Meyer, but reversed. These two authors can teach us a lot about story and character, but nothing about craft and prose. With the li-fi community, they can teach you a lot about craft and prose, but (with many exceptions) little about story.


IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TheOnceandFutureMe
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post 
But you're right, speculative fiction is often looked down upon in the literary community. But hold you head high. If someone publishes great li-fi, they might get a good teaching position. They'll never match the paychecks of great speculative fiction, or even mediocre speculative fiction.
IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Doc Brown
Member
Member # 1118

 - posted      Profile for Doc Brown   Email Doc Brown         Edit/Delete Post 
So you are sickened by the pretense, Fox? Good, go with that. Get into the psychology of your sickened feeling, find the meaning behind your loathing of pretense, write it using tragic characters inhabiting a world of symbolism and allegory. Soon you too will be writing literary fiction!

I believe literary fiction needs to be revolutionary, beautiful, and/or have enough layers of depth and meaning that it bears discussion and analysis. The writing style needs to use the words in ways that transcend simply telling the story.

Typical genre fiction doesn't have those qualities. You can read and enjoy it but you can't dig into it very deeply.

In speculative fiction, I would say Vonnegut and Card have produced literary fiction. But you also need to look at Roger Zelazny and Philip José Farmer. I consider some of their work to be quite literary.

Show your teacher a copy of the novella "Riders of the Purple Wage" and I expect she will agree.


Posts: 976 | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Fox
Member
Member # 3871

 - posted      Profile for Fox   Email Fox         Edit/Delete Post 
Maybe next time... I've only got one class left with her... one of those frazzled-hairs (if you know what I mean, you know what I mean).

As for that advice Doc... that is the kind of thing I do (mold stories around characters driven by my own psychosis)... only I play around with things. Setting, temporal locality--reality itself. The thing I chiefly dislike about LF is that the writers don't seem to be enjoying themselves... it's either dry or morose (and frequently morbid) but they rarely play around with the stuff they write.

There are exceptions, of course, but I'll naturally ignore those to sustain my poorly-constructed argument.

A lot of the things mentioned here (and in the other thread... too bad I missed those parties) is the whole "deep" aspect. The different layers of meaning, symbolism, allusion, etc. that are used to characterize "literary fiction." Those elements--those complexities--are things I attribute to, "good fiction." I really dislike the fact that a bunch of contemporary writers decide to toss "plot" out the window, proliferate their text with obscure literary references and trite observations on human nature--much of which reads forced--and are able to get away with calling their writing not only the "best" genre of literary fiction--but the ONLY one. That irritates the hell out of me.

A while back I remember reading something with the line, "America has no intellectual community." I think it must've been one of OSC's Peter books, though I don't remember which. I had no idea what America's "intellectual" community was, then, and now... I think the scientific community died with Sagan, and I'm pretty sure the literary community was never worth much to begin with.


Posts: 41 | Registered: Sep 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
J
Member
Member # 2197

 - posted      Profile for J   Email J         Edit/Delete Post 
Never worth much to begin with? Even as a pure opinion, that's outrageous. Poe, Melville, Emerson, Twain, Pound, Hemingway, Fitzgerald, Wolf (to name a few)--ring any bells? Not only literary authors, but all part of a vibrant literary community. Saying they were never worth much to begin with has all the credibility of a fast-food junkie criticizing porterhouse and scotch.
Posts: 683 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
LintonRobinson
Member
Member # 8325

 - posted      Profile for LintonRobinson           Edit/Delete Post 
Do they mention fiction novels?
Posts: 63 | Registered: Nov 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Fox
Member
Member # 3871

 - posted      Profile for Fox   Email Fox         Edit/Delete Post 
@J: Yes, I know those authors. I'm no moron. But for the most part, the kinds of stories they wrote wouldn't be classified as "literary fiction" if they were written today.

Well, maybe some of Hemingway's lesser short stories.

It's that whole, "plot" thing.


Posts: 41 | Registered: Sep 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
J
Member
Member # 2197

 - posted      Profile for J   Email J         Edit/Delete Post 
You don't think Moby Dick would be classified as "literary fiction" if written today? Huckleberry Finn? The Great Gatsby? The Scarlet Letter? For Whom the Bell Tolls? The Bonfire of the Vanities?

You are trying to defend an indefensible position. You like genre and pulp better than literary fiction--fine. But be reasonable in the scope of your criticism.


Posts: 683 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
dinoroxxx
Member
Member # 8344

 - posted      Profile for dinoroxxx           Edit/Delete Post 
Ah, the follies of youth.

Of course when I was younger I loved to gorge on sweet wine coolers due to the fact that my palette was different then. As one climbs in years tastes tend to evolve -- whiskey now. The most important thing about literature is that one has to be exposed to it EARLY before the palette is totally destroyed, same goes for literary fiction.

All reading is wonderful and the novel may indeed be a dying form of entertainment, but I thank Mrs Rowling for her contributions to the form. Book sales are not and never will be the proof of writing success. The test of time is the ultimate factor that decides this debate.

In the end, the art of long prose lurks fist within the words and secondly within the story. There's a reason there are no child prodigies in the literary world, NOT ONE!

Literary fiction has its place and always will. Its most certainly a legitemate form that ALL GOOD WRITERS READ. Also, don't be duped into thinking that its form is hallmark to one country.


Posts: 14 | Registered: Nov 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
LintonRobinson
Member
Member # 8325

 - posted      Profile for LintonRobinson           Edit/Delete Post 
No, as a matter of fact, I have a VERY hard time thinking people would class most of those books as "literary fiction".

Bonfire of the Vanities??????????????? You're kidding about that one, right?

Most of these are best-sellers from an era back before somebody dedided "literature" was something different from "what people read"


Posts: 63 | Registered: Nov 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
LintonRobinson
Member
Member # 8325

 - posted      Profile for LintonRobinson           Edit/Delete Post 
As a matter of fact there ARE child prodigies in literature.

Trouble is, they have to be French for some reason.


On the other hand:
NINE YEAR OLD SIGNS WITH HOUGHTON

[This message has been edited by LintonRobinson (edited December 02, 2008).]


Posts: 63 | Registered: Nov 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
satate
Member
Member # 8082

 - posted      Profile for satate   Email satate         Edit/Delete Post 
I don't like to read fiction that has no plot. I read for enjoyment and highminded people who knock that are pretentious, and annoying.

I also don't like knocking literature fiction. I think there's something to be learned from both and when people knock literary fiction they put themselves on the same level as the ones knocking genre.

Can't we all just get along? Joins hands with Stephenie Meyer, Rowling, Hemingway, Poe, Wolf, and a couple of stuffy old English lit professors. Okay, everybody start, Cumbaya my lord...

[This message has been edited by satate (edited December 02, 2008).]


Posts: 968 | Registered: Jul 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
philocinemas
Member
Member # 8108

 - posted      Profile for philocinemas   Email philocinemas         Edit/Delete Post 
I have been on vacation through most of the duration of this thread, and I have returned to see an old topic that never dies.

I find it interesting that within this literary world, which prides itself concerning its own intellectual merits, there is so little tolerance for diversity.

Hemingway was the turning point. Now all the "Greats" are out the door, fodder of a bygone era. I recently listened to The Nick Adams Collection by Hemingway and received revelatory incite into his approach. He said that those "others" used "tricks" that "he" the MC had decided never to use. His writing was going to be about people and real life and things that matter [paraphrased].

So everyone hears this and says, "Yeah, that's what writing's all about." And everyone jumps on the simple prose bandwagon because this is now considered "superior".

Simple prose worked for Hemingway because Hemingway was enormously talented. I would argue that complex and poetic prose worked for Dickens for the same reason. And I would suggest that OSC's writing has worked for him for this reason as well. Not that every writer has equal talent, but that each writer uses his or her talent to the best effect.

I would therefore suggest that style and genre are merely vessels of delivery. It is the talent that commands the vessels and determines whether they rule the seas of paper and ink or are sunk by icebergs.


Posts: 2003 | Registered: Jul 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
   

   Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Hatrack River Home Page

Copyright © 2008 Hatrack River Enterprises Inc. All rights reserved.
Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.


Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.2