| Author | Message | ||
     Gary Fry (Gary_fry) Username: Gary_fry Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 82.3.65.135 |
In the wake of King's National Book award speech, I think it's fair to ask what he and other worthy genre writers want. Does King (as a case study) want critical respect because he regards the opinion of literary critics more highly than that of his fans? He's been 'selected' as worthy by a mass audience, but is this enough for him? Why does he want to eliminate the elitism in the industry, and if that's what he does want, isn't he also saying that he wants to be considered 'elite' himself - a way of distancing the best of genre fiction from the steerage that constitutes its bulk? Therefore, how much is this to do with the contemporary obsession over status? King has made millions and has the ear of a huge spectrum of the public - why does he want more? I ask these questions in the spirit of debate. Not saying I agree with their slant. I was just reading a book called The New Elites, and the author made these enquiries about successful genre writers wanting critical respect. Just wondered what folk thought. | ||
| Niki Flynn (Niki) Username: Niki Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 78.32.69.29 |
It's human nature to want more and by that I don't necessarily mean fame, fortune and adultation. You don't stop living just because you've reached a certain pinnacle. You may never win a second Nobel Prize or Academy Award, but hopefully you'll never stop trying. As for critical respect (whatever that means), it's probably more to do with being taken seriously (whatever that means). There are plenty who still don't consider King a "real" writer because his roots are in horror and dark fantasy. He'll always be "just a genre writer" to them. | ||
| Gary Fry (Gary_fry) Username: Gary_fry Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 82.3.65.135 |
Such writers are taken seriously by millions of readers who invest their money and time in their work. Why do they need a few (to quote King) "self-appointed guardians of literature" to endorse them also? It's as if they're seeking sustenance from the very people they decry. I guess the question is that by breaking down elitism, doesn't one eliminate the right to be taken more seriously than anyone else? | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 213.219.8.243 |
I've just read King's speech online, and it seems to me tyhat he simply wants those "literary guardians" to accept that genre writing is (or can be) as important as any other. My guess is that he's pig-sick of being labelled "just a horror writer". | ||
| Gary Fry (Gary_fry) Username: Gary_fry Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 82.3.65.135 |
But being the one of the world's bestselling writers is a pretty good index of "importance", isn't it? He's speaking to millions. So why does he need the cognescenti to agree? Because he doesn't want to be associated with the steerage in popular culture? Is it therefore a status thing? | ||
| Gary Fry (Gary_fry) Username: Gary_fry Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 82.3.65.135 |
And is it insulting your vast fan-base to want more than their cash and attention, as if their preference, exemplified in currency and time, isn't enough? Still playing Devil's advocate, btw.  | ||
| Gary Fry (Gary_fry) Username: Gary_fry Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 82.3.65.135 |
Zed, if I let you read one of my stories, and you really liked it and said so, how you would feel if I then said, "Fair enough, but I'd better run it by a proper literary critic to make sure you're right." ? | ||
| Joel (Joel) Username: Joel Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 91.110.206.85 |
Those who don't invite you to join them are elitists. Those who do are discerning. It's natural for genre writers to resent ghettoisation and the contempt it implies. Harlan Ellison noted back in the 1980s that books by Judith Krantz and Harold Robbins are placed in the 'literature' section, while books by Ballard and Vonnegut are hidden in the 'Sci-Fi' section alongside Perry Rhodan. It's not unreasonable for King to hope that his novels might be considered popular literature rather than being stuck at the end of a shelf of Shaun Hutson novels. Do Jackie Collins and Katie Price (or her ghost-writer) possess some mysterious literary essence that Campbell and Ligotti lack? A recent issue of David Langford's ANSIBLE notes a newspaper in the USA commenting that the 'sci-fi' section of any bookshop is kept away from the rest of the shop, so that normal people don't have to suffer the BO of the sci-fi and fantasy fans. I'm not kidding. There's a difference, if not always a clear one, between the elitism that says skilful, intelligent, purposeful writing has more value than crass, stupid, exploitative writing and the elitism that says certain genres and themes are intrinsically inferior to true 'literature'. The former is essential, the latter is bullshit. | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 213.219.8.243 |
I'd just think you were a nob. ;-) Seriosuly, though, maybe King has an insecurity about this - possibly exacerbated by crap films being made from a lot of his work. "But being the one of the world's bestselling writers is a pretty good index of "importance", isn't it? " Nope. It just means you've sold a lot of books to people in supermarket checkout queues. :-) | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 213.219.8.243 |
Crossed posts... | ||
| Mick Curtis (Mick) Username: Mick Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 85.158.139.99 |
It all keeps the self important self important. If King were grouped in with the so-called "Elite", the only thing to differentiate him from them would be sales figues, and they wouldn't have a hope. | ||
| Craig (Craig) Username: Craig Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 75.5.13.235 |
... So - fessing up to my ignorance - is Jack Ketchum's Off Season as good as King says it is?... | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 213.219.8.243 |
No. Off Season is ok, but Ketchum has done much better - Red and The Girl Next Door, to name but two. | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 213.219.8.243 |
Ketchum's short work is excellent too. | ||
| Joel (Joel) Username: Joel Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 91.110.186.250 |
I'm so tempted to read that as 'Ketchum's [novel] Short Work is excellent too.' | ||
| Thomasb (Thomasb) Username: Thomasb Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 69.236.164.76 |
Being about the best selling author in the world says little about the quality of the work; it's how it's remembered in the years to come; go take a look at the best seller lists of fifty years ago and then consider how many of those novels are remembered now. Or even readable. No one would ever mistake Arthur Conan Doyle for James Joyce . . . but fer chrissakes millions *still* read him and that's what says a lot. |