Genre labels are limiting, constricting writers (and film makers) into stylistic straitjackets. Slap such a label on a book, and automatically, the cliches, ahem, spring to mind. Fantasy: That’s wizards and elves, right? Mysteries: Where’s the wry detective with baggage? Science fiction: Cue the Star Trek theme and snide comments about large-breasted women wearing as little clothing as possible. Historical fiction: That’s just a bodice-ripper.
Not always.
How does something ‘transcend’ its genre?
The phrase is used mostly by reviewers who don’t normally read the genre in question, and liked the book anyway. Therefore, the book can’t possibly be a typical specimen of that genre. It was too thought-provoking; the characters are too fully realized. The book was just too darn good. It must be an exception.
How many exceptions must there be before we realize that the rule itself might be bogus?
Let’s take mysteries. These days nobody writes so well about class conflict as British writer Ruth Rendell. Her books frequently hinge on missed communications, misunderstandings, and savage class resentments (I recommend A Judgement in Stone). Yet her books are shelved as ‘mysteries’, not literature; she gets Edgars, not Bookers. After all, she’s just a genre writer.
The same is true of Walter Mosely, whose Easy Rawlins books are about the postwar, extra-Southern black experience. I knew nothing of this world before I read Mosely’s work, and I’m grateful to him for showing it to me. Yet Easy Rawlins is a detective, and people get murdered. Nothing serious here, just simple entertainment.
Ugh.
The same is true of Ursula LeGuin, (sci-fi) and Terry Pratchett, (fantasy). Their work is sociological and psychological; their invented worlds make us see things in our own we might have missed. (Pratchett also makes good use of satire to achieve this.) Yet they too, are seldom taken as seriously as they deserve. Le Guin has won a Pulitzer, but not for any of her brilliant science-fiction.
I think that everyone loses by this. Writers don’t get the credit they deserve. Readers who decide they ‘just don’t care for that genre’ cheat themselves of wonderful books and stunt their own imaginations.
In on-line discussion groups, the most interesting, insightful people read all across the spectrum and readers who limit themselves only to Serious Literature (stuff that wins National Book Awards) can be as dull witted as the worst sci-fi/fantasy-only fan boys-and-gurlz.
This is also true of writers; the best work comes from people who read everything. Science-fiction writer Dan Simmons taught high-school English for a number of years; he has a passion for Keats and Marcel Proust, which he weaves brilliantly into his books. I’ve read work by writers who read nothing but genre; it’s pallid and limp.
Wider interests-and respect for those interests-are to everyone’s benefit. The next time you feel like dissing ‘genre’ fiction, read some instead-you might find a whole new vista open up.
