But what boils my soup is when one set loudly and sneeringly denigrates the other for liking what it likes or reading what it reads. In my experience so far it seems that the Protes are the most likely to attack the other team for liking the traditional, the comfortable, the 70 years of established parameters.
I absolutely support and celebrate the idea of pushing the envelope, of resisting stagnation, of experimenting with the form and the tropes and the genres to see how else these stories can be told. After all, at some point in history everything is 'new' and 'experimental' before it's 'tried and true'. But that doesn't mean there is something inferior or stupid or lesser or unworthy about the writers who stay inside the lines that have already been drawn, or the readers who choose to purchase those writers' books over and above the stuff that's a little left or right of mainstream.
But that's the message so often sent out within the genre community. How often do we hear people complaining that such and such a new book failed to reinvent the genre? And then using that observation to dismiss the work, regardless of how well executed it might be? I don't see that this elitest attitude does anyone any favours.
I mean, we must be the only genre that does it. I don't hear the romance community, or the crime writing community, bitching and moaning about the new Nora Roberts or the new Michael Connelly. I mean, damn, there's her new book and you know what? The guy gets the girl, again!!!! How old is that? Or, gee, there was a crime and a detective investigated it, isn't that so so predictable????
Okay. Those two genres are far more easily defined, perhaps, than spec fic. But I believe the principle still holds. Why can't the folks who want to push the envelope push the envelope, with brilliance and audacity, without putting down the folks who like the envelope the shape it is?
Could it be because, so often, publishers will choose the familiar envelope to the new one? And could that be because in the mainstream, the bookbuying public prefers to read the familiar envelope? As a former spec fic bookseller I saw over and over and over again that the folks who regularly were reading spec fic (but not often getting involved in the spec fic community) weren't buying the cutting edge stuff. They chose the more traditional stories. The much maligned epic and big fat fantasy books. They enjoyed them. That style of storytelling fed their needs. Okay, so sometimes those books aren't always the most technically breathtaking, sometimes it might be fair to say that the writing is a little ordinary, but nevertheless -- they hit the reading public where they live. They give the readers what they want. And yet that is so often treated like a crime within the spec fic community.
I think we need to be far more supportive of *all* kinds of spec fic storytelling, we need to cheer each other on regardless of what kind of envelope we want to play with. There is nothing more disheartening than sitting with a group of spec fic writers and hear them viciously ripping apart someone who's achieved success, the kind of success they can only dream about, and in doing so insult not only that colleague, that peer, but also the reading public they want to spend money on them.
I believe it is possible for all spec fic to be celebrated. I believe it should be. I believe we should be self-critical, we should always be asking ourselves, can we do this better? But we shouldn't lose sight of the fact that, at the end of the day, it's the bookbuying public that determines the rise or fall of the genre we love. And we won't achieve much by disrespecting them or the people who seem to speak their language most effectively.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
momijizukamori
no subject
Date: 2006-08-20 07:24 am (UTC)But what boils my soup is when one set loudly and sneeringly denigrates the other for liking what it likes or reading what it reads. In my experience so far it seems that the Protes are the most likely to attack the other team for liking the traditional, the comfortable, the 70 years of established parameters.
I absolutely support and celebrate the idea of pushing the envelope, of resisting stagnation, of experimenting with the form and the tropes and the genres to see how else these stories can be told. After all, at some point in history everything is 'new' and 'experimental' before it's 'tried and true'. But that doesn't mean there is something inferior or stupid or lesser or unworthy about the writers who stay inside the lines that have already been drawn, or the readers who choose to purchase those writers' books over and above the stuff that's a little left or right of mainstream.
But that's the message so often sent out within the genre community. How often do we hear people complaining that such and such a new book failed to reinvent the genre? And then using that observation to dismiss the work, regardless of how well executed it might be? I don't see that this elitest attitude does anyone any favours.
I mean, we must be the only genre that does it. I don't hear the romance community, or the crime writing community, bitching and moaning about the new Nora Roberts or the new Michael Connelly. I mean, damn, there's her new book and you know what? The guy gets the girl, again!!!! How old is that? Or, gee, there was a crime and a detective investigated it, isn't that so so predictable????
Okay. Those two genres are far more easily defined, perhaps, than spec fic. But I believe the principle still holds. Why can't the folks who want to push the envelope push the envelope, with brilliance and audacity, without putting down the folks who like the envelope the shape it is?
Could it be because, so often, publishers will choose the familiar envelope to the new one? And could that be because in the mainstream, the bookbuying public prefers to read the familiar envelope? As a former spec fic bookseller I saw over and over and over again that the folks who regularly were reading spec fic (but not often getting involved in the spec fic community) weren't buying the cutting edge stuff. They chose the more traditional stories. The much maligned epic and big fat fantasy books. They enjoyed them. That style of storytelling fed their needs. Okay, so sometimes those books aren't always the most technically breathtaking, sometimes it might be fair to say that the writing is a little ordinary, but nevertheless -- they hit the reading public where they live. They give the readers what they want. And yet that is so often treated like a crime within the spec fic community.
I think we need to be far more supportive of *all* kinds of spec fic storytelling, we need to cheer each other on regardless of what kind of envelope we want to play with. There is nothing more disheartening than sitting with a group of spec fic writers and hear them viciously ripping apart someone who's achieved success, the kind of success they can only dream about, and in doing so insult not only that colleague, that peer, but also the reading public they want to spend money on them.
I believe it is possible for all spec fic to be celebrated. I believe it should be. I believe we should be self-critical, we should always be asking ourselves, can we do this better? But we shouldn't lose sight of the fact that, at the end of the day, it's the bookbuying public that determines the rise or fall of the genre we love. And we won't achieve much by disrespecting them or the people who seem to speak their language most effectively.