From hard core High Fantasy to Extreme Horror, to Romance, genre drama is alive and well in the reading community.
While there are many who are happy readers of multiple genres, there is a loud group (sometimes rather loud) that not only rejects this, but openly mocks genres they deem 'less than' thus inciting genre drama. I once told a fellow book community member I liked fantasy with aspects of horror in it (ie dark fantasy or grimdark) and they scoffed and threw a fit. Why? Because they deemed horror to be gory low brow drivel that took no mental fortitude to write or enjoy. I've also witnessed this happen firsthand to many a romance reader. Because apparently enjoying an escapism book with a happy ending is trivial and frivolous *insert eye roll.
What I want to unpack is this issue that seems to be prevalent in pockets of the book community.
When looking at the individuals perpetuating some of these ideas and making these snark comments, one thing I noticed is the trend of 'I dislike this genre because it is low brow'. I find this an odd take. Consider many of the authors today's society hold up as the pinacol of sophistication and a well learned individual. In my opinion, Shakespear is the most notable of these, when he first published his plays high society of time scoffed at his works. He was seen as crude and his word usage too simple to be sophisticated. But today he's held up as an idol of highbrow society.
On the flip side of this, you have authors like Jane Austen who was mocking a society she despised. Ironically, that same society embraced her writings to the point of trying to keep her work from the 'teeming masses'. As if having an author's work be readily available to anyone, regardless of their social statues, was an insult.
Based on some of the interactions I have been a part of, or witnessed, I can't help but think this idea is still alive and well. If a genre, or a book, is widely available or popular among the 'teeming masses' it is seen as less than by self-proclaimed critics.
But why? Why does something being readily available to anyone, regardless of class, ethnicity, or gender, an issue?
The bitter part of me wants to say it's because these critics don't want to be seen enjoying things that people below them (lower class) enjoy.
The cynical part of me wonders if these critics are so desperate for any scrap of uniqueness in themselves, they automatically reject anything popular or common.
Now if you genuinely dislike a popular anything, this doesn't necessarily apply to you. I am speaking on the people who dislike something, then stick their noses up in the air about it and sneer at anyone who does like it. I'm talking about the people who use their dislike of something as a moral/social high ground.
Currently Romance and the sub-genre Fantasy Romance (Romantasy) is very popular. These books take a lot of flak, especially if they are in the YA age category. Some of the arguments are directed at the writing style being too simple. Some arguments are directed at the plots being frivolous. Others point out the open-door intimacy senses in these adult romance books. (if you read some of these books, they have 1 to 3 intimacy scenes, which hardly qualifies them as porn).
But I ask you this, what is the primary purpose of a novel?
Do you have your answer?
A how-to page for writing and publishing on Writers Digest, defines a novel as "A novel is a piece of long narrative in literary prose. Narrative prose is meant to entertain and tell a story. It is a description of a chain of events which includes a cast of characters, a setting, and an ending."
Marriam Webster defines it as "a long prose narrative that usually portrays imaginary characters and events."
Both of these definitions leave large spaces of wiggle room for the author to sculpt the type of novel they desire. All one has to do is peruse a bookshop to see the various interpretations of this firsthand. There are novels in various genres that are blatant social narratives that challenge the reader to look at themselves and their actions under a microscope. There are novels that are emotional, taking the readers on a journey of tears and heartbreak. Some novels are written for the sole purpose of entertainment and joy, allowing the readers a reprieve form the never-ending slog of everyday life. And novels that are adventures, layered with all of the above.
With this in mind, I ask you another question, why does it matter that a type of novel exists and that it is enjoyed by the masses?
Books at their root are a form of media. Not all media is educational or 'hard hitting'.
Is every movie you watch a biopic?
Is every show you put on a documentary?
Every tune you listen to on the radio classical music or political talk radio?
The answer is most likely 'no'.
So then why are books written and read for pure entertainment looked down upon?
Why is it a bad thing to find comfort and escapism in the form of books?
And why would it be a bad thing for the masses to read said books?
To be clear, different people will have different ideas of what escapism is. For some a bloody horror novel offers them a cathartic release. For others it will be warriors going to battle and winning against all odds, a detective collecting clues and ultimately finding the 'bad guy' moments before the clock runs out. Some readers care more about the world building and becoming full engrossed in a land of fantasy or a galaxy of fiction. And others still will find solace in two people falling in love. This is why we have so many book genres, there is no one size fits all. And I personally think that should be celebrated! Furthermore, books being readily available and the love of reading coming out in droves should be encouraged. Teachers and parents alike spend years trying to force young children to read, emphasizing the value of the written word. And yet, for years very few adults read outside of work requirements.
Have you ever wondered why so many kids stop reading? It's because they never found a book they loved. If an adult comes back to reading and is lucky enough to find a book genre that engrosses them, that is a win in my book. (pun intended) And this attitude of 'my genre is better that your genre' is trivial, selfish, and pushes people away from discovering the joy of reading.
In addition to genre drama, some readers will engage in author drama. What is author drama you may ask? Allow me to provide you with two examples:
First there is an online channel where the host records videos of them reading passages from current popular romantasy or fantasy books, then read a passage from a Tolkien book. The rest of the video is the host lamenting the new books and authors for how horrible they are and how they do not compare to the mastery of Tolkien.
Second, there was a fellow horror author I follow who had a length post ranting about any reader who said they did not enjoy a famous horror author. (This famous horror author in question is still alive and well and I don't want to name drop, but his name rhymes with 'sing'.) The author ranting went into great detail about how the famous author was pique genius, and anyone who didn't like his work was too small minded to understand it or they were trying to be 'edgy' to draw attention to themselves. The post was long and went on to say all fellow horror authors should strive to write exactly like the famous author. etc... and anything else was an unworthy pursuit.
While there is nothing wrong with having a favorite author, there is something fundamentally obnoxious about these types of comments. The idea that only one author is valid and if you don't like them you're too small minded. That's just rude.
There is no shortage of turmoil, prejudices, and nasty energy in the world. That is why so many people turn to books and various forms of media in their free time. To escape. To find some shred of happiness or hope. If we adopted and practiced a better attitude of 'read and let read' maybe we could make the book community a slightly better place for people regardless of what they do or don't like to read.
Comments