Does your story have genre clichéitis?
Jul. 8th, 2009 01:01 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
Yes, I know I am meant to be writing or sleeping, but I had a little epiphany today about writing and reading and I wanted to share it, and it was either post here or continue working on the Giant Georgia-inspired Writing Post of Doom. (Which is currently at 6000 words with notes for another 15,000 at least, and I cannot open it or I will never finish my story.) So please bear with me.
My epiphany manifested swiftly, but had its birth over the last few days. To start with,
pushdragon and I were talking about Pericles, and she wondered if the choice to play the final act largely seriously after the often riotous comedy that had gone before may not have been a poor one. I confessed that I had not noticed, because I am too used to renaissance and mediaeval theatre, where that sort of thing happens all the time. (NB, this is why you should always ask Push, not me, about a play. Throw in a good concluding dance or a bit of Festival and I think it's a winner even if it's actually a bit dodgy.)
Yesterday, my young friend
tomatoe18 bemoaned that she just could not get into The Demon's Lexicon. This surprised me, because she is a really good reader, and it is a good book. But I thought about my reading of it and remembered that I had found the lead character astonishingly hard to connect with, to the point I quickly realised that it must *spoiler* be a plot twist (which it is, and a nicely constructed one). I thought about Amy and what she likes to read, and realised that she would be reading the whole book with her emotional brain on, which is the way that most Young Adult Fiction, homoerotic fiction and high-end fantasy novels are written these days. I suggested that she approach it like a mystery instead, which is how I ended up reading it, and she found she was able to finish it last night.
Hmmmm, I said to myself, nodding with annoying smugness, our pre-established audience responses can really send us in unhelpful directions, can't they? My own distaste for trashy horror nearly saw me snub the Sookie Stackhouse books, which I enjoyed ENORMOUSLY. And I was a good 100 pages in before I realised that they were in fact filled with genre jokes and political satire, because I had assumed they were Serious Fantasy/Horror Business.
I thought that was the extent of things, until I staggered half-deranged and mildly rain-splattered onto the train from North Sydney earlier this evening. I sat beside a man who looked just like an average opera singer I used to fancy and, in a bid to not peer at his face, I pulled out last week's New Yorker and tried to finish the excellent story on Nora Roberts.
I should confess at this point that before reading this article, I had only the vaguest idea who Nora Roberts was, which should cement any ideas you may have about my level of wankery and demolish any reputation for keen insights into the world of publishing I may have constructed. For those of you who are similarly ignorant, she is a massively famous and successful American romance writer.
The magazine article on her is long, comprehensive and fascinating. And on the second-last page, it contains this sentence:
'In a 1981 survey, the literature professor Janice A. Radway, found that the romance readers in her sample group considered the depiction or rape only slightly less objectionable than a sad ending.'
I put the magazine down. I looked at the man beside me to discover that he was almost certainly not David Hobson. I mentally listened to the Hallelujah Chorus and enjoyed the short firework display that my brain had scheduled to underscore the fact that it had reached a probably obvious but to me revelatory conclusion.
Those fanfic writers who look at me blankly when I say 'I just do not feel that people respond to sexual violence by immediately falling in love with their violator' were probably raised on old-school romance. More, those fantasy writers who I cannot convince to give their characters sane names have grown up with characters called Willow, Aragorn and Locke and do not know that the Middle Ages were full of Johns, Williams, Janes and Elizabeths (and Tiffanys, strange but true). Similarly, those action-based story aficionados who think it is perfectly logical to have highly trained military or spy-type folk rush off with a strategy that is full of logical holes have almost certainly formed their ways of thinking about campaigns during the Bush administration (is it too soon?).
In every case, the resultant story will be readily understood by a component of its audience, but can alienate or baffle the rest. Because it is written from a basis of genre conventions rather than being written as an organic story within itself. Similarly, as readers, we can cock up our relationship with a new book because we approach it from the basis of its genre, rather than reading it as a thing within itself, feeling our own way through its people and events.
When this occurred to me, I thought, oh but surely that's obvious and you've just forgotten you know it. But on longer reflection, it's not. Like may of us, I've been bamboozled by publishers into reading their books according to their rules, and those rules are rules of marketing, not of writing. I like to think that I make fewer of these errors as a writer, but if that is true, then it is only because my reading is so broad. Or perhaps because being bound by the conventions of political satire is not so limiting as working within some other genres ...
On an unrelated note, Lance Armstrong, you are a freak, well done. And Fabian Cancellara, congratulations. Australian commentators, please note, it is Tours de France, not Tour de Frances. I know that you are not taught this at school, but feel certain someone around you has probably corrected you at some point, you should listen to them. (Also Grands Prix, but that's a different commentary team.)
And I have the most awful crush on Kevin McCloud.
My epiphany manifested swiftly, but had its birth over the last few days. To start with,
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
Yesterday, my young friend
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
Hmmmm, I said to myself, nodding with annoying smugness, our pre-established audience responses can really send us in unhelpful directions, can't they? My own distaste for trashy horror nearly saw me snub the Sookie Stackhouse books, which I enjoyed ENORMOUSLY. And I was a good 100 pages in before I realised that they were in fact filled with genre jokes and political satire, because I had assumed they were Serious Fantasy/Horror Business.
I thought that was the extent of things, until I staggered half-deranged and mildly rain-splattered onto the train from North Sydney earlier this evening. I sat beside a man who looked just like an average opera singer I used to fancy and, in a bid to not peer at his face, I pulled out last week's New Yorker and tried to finish the excellent story on Nora Roberts.
I should confess at this point that before reading this article, I had only the vaguest idea who Nora Roberts was, which should cement any ideas you may have about my level of wankery and demolish any reputation for keen insights into the world of publishing I may have constructed. For those of you who are similarly ignorant, she is a massively famous and successful American romance writer.
The magazine article on her is long, comprehensive and fascinating. And on the second-last page, it contains this sentence:
'In a 1981 survey, the literature professor Janice A. Radway, found that the romance readers in her sample group considered the depiction or rape only slightly less objectionable than a sad ending.'
I put the magazine down. I looked at the man beside me to discover that he was almost certainly not David Hobson. I mentally listened to the Hallelujah Chorus and enjoyed the short firework display that my brain had scheduled to underscore the fact that it had reached a probably obvious but to me revelatory conclusion.
Those fanfic writers who look at me blankly when I say 'I just do not feel that people respond to sexual violence by immediately falling in love with their violator' were probably raised on old-school romance. More, those fantasy writers who I cannot convince to give their characters sane names have grown up with characters called Willow, Aragorn and Locke and do not know that the Middle Ages were full of Johns, Williams, Janes and Elizabeths (and Tiffanys, strange but true). Similarly, those action-based story aficionados who think it is perfectly logical to have highly trained military or spy-type folk rush off with a strategy that is full of logical holes have almost certainly formed their ways of thinking about campaigns during the Bush administration (is it too soon?).
In every case, the resultant story will be readily understood by a component of its audience, but can alienate or baffle the rest. Because it is written from a basis of genre conventions rather than being written as an organic story within itself. Similarly, as readers, we can cock up our relationship with a new book because we approach it from the basis of its genre, rather than reading it as a thing within itself, feeling our own way through its people and events.
When this occurred to me, I thought, oh but surely that's obvious and you've just forgotten you know it. But on longer reflection, it's not. Like may of us, I've been bamboozled by publishers into reading their books according to their rules, and those rules are rules of marketing, not of writing. I like to think that I make fewer of these errors as a writer, but if that is true, then it is only because my reading is so broad. Or perhaps because being bound by the conventions of political satire is not so limiting as working within some other genres ...
On an unrelated note, Lance Armstrong, you are a freak, well done. And Fabian Cancellara, congratulations. Australian commentators, please note, it is Tours de France, not Tour de Frances. I know that you are not taught this at school, but feel certain someone around you has probably corrected you at some point, you should listen to them. (Also Grands Prix, but that's a different commentary team.)
And I have the most awful crush on Kevin McCloud.
no subject
Date: 2009-07-07 06:39 pm (UTC)nevermind me...*goes back to watching MJ memorial*
no subject
Date: 2009-07-07 06:40 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-07-07 06:48 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-07-07 06:50 pm (UTC)Yeah, I liked it, too. It's entirely wacky, and you would think that he would restrict the whole family to travelling by land, but the ending was joyful and warm :-)
no subject
Date: 2009-07-07 06:54 pm (UTC)seriously. how many women in their 9th month of pregnancy go cruising? honestly. :P
also, i think i had a slight problem with the actor portraying pericles; although a gifted and thoroughly classically trained, he looked like he could pass for 12 on a good day. it was kind of creepy at some points.
no subject
Date: 2009-07-07 06:56 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-07-07 07:17 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-07-08 06:19 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-07-07 07:20 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-07-08 06:25 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-07-07 07:23 pm (UTC)But it is also true that sometimes, I'm just looking for a good old true-to-genre story that doesn't play any games. And sometimes I am annoyed when people take my favourite stories and analyse them at higher levels that ruin their inherent awesomeness (speak to me not of the Ender = Hitler people). Oh, bb, were that I was a sophisticated consumer of the literature but I fear I am not...
And Lance is a crazy monster. My pet peeve? Commentators that call it Toor DES Frants with the frakking emphasis on the des that isn't even a des!!! *grumbles*
no subject
Date: 2009-07-08 12:58 pm (UTC)But when it comes to writing, I think it is really important. Writing wholly from within genre conventions without considering readers who never read that genre is a recipe for losing readership. I am not saying that every story needs to be The French Lieutenant's Woman, but stories should exist strongly within themselves, rather than requiring an enormous amount of assumed knowledge. Even if the knowledge would then add another layer ...
And DES?? CRAZINESS!
no subject
Date: 2009-07-07 08:38 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-07-08 01:09 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-07-08 01:29 pm (UTC)As we were taught since we were babies, the round peg goes in the round hole. We all try to anticipate what is to come, and what to do, based on visual cues and past experiences.
Generalities are a fact of life - BUT, there are some of us that enjoy an artist or writer that attempts to jam a square peg in the round hole. But it is not easy, and many fall prey to the easy solution of pre-fab plots and characterizations. Its not easy being green, as Kermit the Frog said, as it is also not easy to be different.
no subject
Date: 2009-07-08 01:39 pm (UTC)A good writer can even convince me that someone can grow to love a person who violated them, but they need to convince me, not just assume I will believe it happens all the time.
no subject
Date: 2009-07-07 09:57 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-07-08 01:10 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-07-07 10:06 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-07-08 01:18 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-07-07 10:58 pm (UTC)I used to do a difficult job involving intense interpersonal r/ships, and at that stage I relaxed with "good" murder mysteries - presumably as an escape from the emotional intensity of work (or as I wanted to kill someone).
These days I'm in a less tense job but a more isolated one with less people-contact, and what do you know, I've discovered fanfiction focussing on fantasy, relationships and angst. I don't think it's a coincidence. I liked the Demon's Lexicon in the end, but struggled with the emotional aridity of the central character most of the way, too.
What with the fanfiction obsession, playing on sites like this and the companion animal (as in icon) I sometimes think I'm the poster-girl for virtual social connectedness trumping real day-to-day relationships. The way the sociologists worry we're all heading. Perhaps there's a link to the general rise of the romantic fantasy genre there.
But, hey, enough navel-gazing, I need to go write stories about Sirius and Remus and read more about SGA's John and Rodney. And lets not even get INTO the slash thing (penis envy? what penis envy)...
no subject
Date: 2009-07-08 01:31 pm (UTC)Interesting analogues between your work and reading. With me it's reading volume: when life is happy I read through tonnes of books, when stressed and over-worked, I might make it all the way through the New Yorker and New Scientist ...
But it's not penis-envy, it's post modernism, honest! And I think we will all be far better at balancing our online/real world lived the minute the Global Financial Crisis sods off ;-)
no subject
Date: 2009-07-07 11:30 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-07-08 01:43 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-07-08 03:59 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-07-08 12:37 am (UTC)I wish I know what were the genre conventions in the first place - there're nice points about being illiterate I suppose. *nods*
I totally judge a book by the cover! That's the only way I know to guess the book's target readers. Library books obviously present a problem because the cover is protected :D.
Usually, I avoid portrait type covers ... oil pointing style especially; the bigger the head, the less likely I'd pick it up; I prefer head diameter less than one-third of book cover's width. Also, too much grass and horses; and what else, mmmm, men or boys in suspenders and straw hats...and curly title fonts. Books with titles written in any font with radius of curvature greater than the font size at non loopy places; add extra negative points if shiny and in magenta...
*giggles and runs away*
PS. But oh oh oh, I've actually read Nora Roberts before!
no subject
Date: 2009-07-08 03:15 pm (UTC)And you know, I think that cover art has a 80-odd per cent chance of being right. I have rarely read a good book with really crap art. Curly fonts are indeed usually best avoided ;-)
Come back, I love you tooooooo!
(I feel I will probably end up reading NR one day, but not yet ...)
no subject
Date: 2009-07-09 12:34 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-07-08 01:07 am (UTC)http://www.usatoday.com/life/books/news/2009-07-06-romance-novels_N.htm
I think you have nailed why some fanfic stories are big hits and then why some folks don't understand why they are big hits (leaving grammar issues aside). I like mystery, adventure, science fiction, and/or politics so its harder for me to appreciate a character analysis story or one built upon romance. I admit there are a few I adore but my hp fanfic favorites list is mainly composed of long plotty stories.
I unfortunately left my copy of the Demon's Lexicon at the windshield replacement shop last week. :( I don't have the time to go pick it up before my vacation. I told the office assistant to enjoy it.
no subject
Date: 2009-07-08 03:20 pm (UTC)YES! I sometimes wonder if I am an alien, but then others are aliens, too, so that's all right.
Are they going to hold it for you? I hate losing books!
no subject
Date: 2009-07-08 03:57 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-07-08 04:27 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-07-08 03:16 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-07-08 06:12 am (UTC)Anyway, I've thought about my feelings on TDL once again and... I wondered if I'd subconsciously been influenced by the author's reputation as a 'wonderful fanfic writer loved by the fandom'. Earlier I'd claimed that I wasn't, but perhaps I'd been after all. *shrugs*
You're right, though. I should try to read each book, as you say, as a thing within itself, feeling my own way through its people and events. The next time I pick up a hyped-up book within a certain genre, I will certainly remember this.
no subject
Date: 2009-07-08 06:19 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-07-09 05:38 am (UTC)A Demon's Lexicon was a bit of mystery. That is an interesting point. But it had a fairly angsty, "sunken" protagonist view as well, so the cues to read it emotionally were there. I was sincerely disappointed by it, plot-wise, though I found characters compelling and will read the next one, so I suppose it's done its work.
*grins over the cover art litmus test and Tour de Frances* Poor Frances. I wonder if she sang them any of her little songs or served them bread and jam.
no subject
Date: 2009-07-09 12:36 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-07-10 05:43 am (UTC)And this post crystallises many of the problems I've had trying to read much current YA and fantasy fiction. I'm not a sink-into-the-story-and-wallow reader. ALl I want is characters who make sense within their environment, and sadly a lot of the time they don't. Now I have a hypothesis why. Thank you.
no subject
Date: 2009-07-10 07:00 am (UTC)I am trying to write a longer version of this for a giant post on the art and craft of writing that I am working on (somewhat thwarted by the run-down state of my brain at the moment, but I have editors who will help) and it does all revolve around 'would that happen? and would that happen next?'
The issue clarified for me recently when I was watching a television programme in which a character saw her beloved hugging another girl and wandered over to say 'Hello you two, are you all right?' I nearly cheered at the genius of the writer, because obviously a real person would assume that the huggee was either upset or celebrating great good news, in which case another person could help to console or congratulate, or, on the off chance there was philandering afoot, the character would be perfectly positioned for an immediate 'gotcha!'.