Wednesday, January 25, 2012

Genre vs. Literary

To everyone who thumbs their nose at "genre" fiction, and insists that only "literary" fiction has true merit, I say...

What were these books considered when they first published?

Literary or Romantic Satire?



Literary or Fantasy?



Literary or Dystopian?






Literary or Mystery?






Literary or Science Fiction?




Literary or Young Adult?




Literary or just Weird and Pretty Much Tanked His Sinking Career?



Next time you judge a book by its genre, just remember: current perception is fleeting. Brilliant writing lasts forever.

8 comments:

  1. Good point and well displayed! I love it all is my short answer! Genre, literary...as long as the writing's good and the story interests me!

    ReplyDelete
  2. You're right! If these came out today, they'd all probably be considered genre fiction. In any event, it's the writing and story that matters most!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Some great points raised here Ellen, especially about the longtivity (fairly sure that's a made-up word) of Genre vs Literary. My opinion? Who cares! If it's awesome, I'll read it, regardless of overly snobby looks I get! :D

    ReplyDelete
  4. I would contest that Lord of the Rings is still Fantasy, whether it's literary or not. Next to join the ranks? Harry Potter. Just you wait and see.

    ReplyDelete
  5. @Allison -- yeah, that was sorta my point ;) they're all both...

    ReplyDelete
  6. My personal gripe is slotting The Hunger Games into YA. I think the distinction of 'literary' is in the eye of the beholder. Thoroughly nuts, huh.

    ReplyDelete
  7. @Huntress -- interesting, I haven't heard that one before! Why don't you think it belongs in YA? I kind of think it's the perfect example of why YA doesn't have to mean "light and fluffy"... :)

    ReplyDelete