“In genre fiction, it’s not like that. People usually begin their
careers by having their writing rejected by their undergrad creative
writing professors. Then (since they don’t get paid by MFA programs),
they must write in silence and obscurity—choosing to write even when it
means taking time away from their jobs and their families—for years!
Since genre workshops tend to be self-organized, even if the
writer does go to a regular workshop, their validation usually only
comes from their peers (rather than from authority figures). Oftentimes
their first real validation is when they sell a story: something that
often comes after five or more years of constant rejection, with only
extremely infrequent pats on the back (as opposed to the creative
writing student who gets some praise at least three times a semester,
when they turn in their stories for workshop)."
From: http://blotter-paper.com/2014/01/22/why-you-should-hate-the-creative-writing-establishment-as-if-you-needed-any-more-reasons/
Showing posts with label Genre fiction. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Genre fiction. Show all posts
26/01/2014
29/11/2012
Literary vs. Genre
"Many critics, art aficionados and artists try to convince their audiences of the difference between the great works of literary import and the dismissible works of genre — to which they would be loathe to even call art. But for all their attempts to sever one from the other, I have never seen an adequate definition of literariness.
I can discern only a few qualities from the muck of their attempted definitions. First, that literary works of art should never fall into any genre, regardless of shape or form (it may be romantic, but never a romance). Second, that literary works should have the proper pretensions toward winning the Pulitzer (or Oscar, Tony, etc.).
As far as divisions of art go, this artificial definition seems horribly useless. It speaks less to the content of the art than to the ego of its creators and distributors. ...
Genre can be very, very low art indeed with a tendency to become too much of an in-joke. ...
Literary works can suffer the same ills, though. They too have their fanboys for pseudo-intellectual rambling."
More: http://www.dailyillini.com/opinion/columns/article_9084bbca-377b-11e2-9e85-001a4bcf6878.html
SpyWriter Jack King "A new King of Thrillers on the Horizon" www.SpyWriter.com
I can discern only a few qualities from the muck of their attempted definitions. First, that literary works of art should never fall into any genre, regardless of shape or form (it may be romantic, but never a romance). Second, that literary works should have the proper pretensions toward winning the Pulitzer (or Oscar, Tony, etc.).
As far as divisions of art go, this artificial definition seems horribly useless. It speaks less to the content of the art than to the ego of its creators and distributors. ...
Genre can be very, very low art indeed with a tendency to become too much of an in-joke. ...
Literary works can suffer the same ills, though. They too have their fanboys for pseudo-intellectual rambling."
More: http://www.dailyillini.com/opinion/columns/article_9084bbca-377b-11e2-9e85-001a4bcf6878.html
SpyWriter Jack King "A new King of Thrillers on the Horizon" www.SpyWriter.com
Labels:
Books,
Fiction,
Genre fiction,
Literature,
Reading,
spywriter,
Writers,
Writing
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)