An essay that misses its own point and makes my head hurt.

[Haphazzard]

I my opinion nearly all fiction reads like this. Granted I only work through the sci-fi and fantasy section, but you read the back blurb and you feel like its a form document with blanks for filling in the few different details.

Our hero,_______, lived a humble life as a _______.  However, his entire life changes when ________ kills his family.  With the sword _______ that was passed down to him from his father just before he died, our hero fights his way through hoards of enemies with a few friends he meets along the way.  But will it be enough to stop _______?  Will they get there before _______ kills the king and takes over the whole kingdom?


Just once, I'd like to see a hero inherit a weapon that isn't a sword.  A spear would be fun.  Or a mace.  Yeah...a mace.

[LordVreeg]

I think that you just described why I liked the Elric books so much.  
Not the sword part, but just the atypical storyline.

[Jharviss]

I've taken several creative writing courses, and believe me what I say that several of my colleagues need to read this article.  Their work is bland, over-the-top, and has no literary merit.  It's an entertaining read, at first, but it quickly loses my (and everyone else's) interest.

And I feel that way about most fantasy stories on the market.  They tend to be boorishly written.  I love fantasy, I really do, but I pretty much only read literature now-a-days.  It's much better.  I actually can't remember the last fantasy story I read.  I got through about half of a Salvatore book a year and a half ago before putting it down for something else.  Then I picked up Dune and found it to be quite literary.  But it's also packed full of realism.  I have never read such a realistic approach to a science fiction set so far in the future.  It's out there, but it all seems quite plausible.

Right, what were we talking about?

[SilvercatMoonpaw]

What do you mean by "has no literary merit"?  How do you judge something that subjective?

[Polycarp]

Well, we are.  Somebody has to judge for quality.  What are you, a literary relativist? ;)

Edit: Oh, you edited on me.

[Polycarp]

To be more serious, I don't see how "literary merit" is neccessarily, 100% of subjective value - or, if it was, why subjective value prevents a value judgement.

If I presented you with an incoherent two-page story about a puppy written by a fourth grader and "The Kite Runner," I think you would be hard pressed to make the case that the puppy story had more literary merit (and not be a liar).  An extreme example, but it's the extreme examples that make the case.  If you can't judge subjective things you might as well stop giving opinions on everything, as purely objective judgements are either trite or nonexistent.  Reasonable people can disagree on exactly what "literary merit" means and exactly which books have more than other books, but that subjectivity does not automatically mean that the entire discussion is fruitless and should be jettisoned into the abyss of "problematic subjectivity."  There's nothing wrong with taking a stand on things that don't come with ironclad objective definitions.

[beejazz]

I think good fantasy comes in pairs. Elric and Conan exist in counterpoint. There's the Wizard of Oz and Alice in Wonderland. There's Lord of the Rings and the series beginning with The Horned King and the Black Cauldron (I can't remember the name of the series). Hell, I may as well include Arabian Nights and... I guess Canterbury tales? I suppose it's a bit of a stretch. And there is so much potential for heroic fantasy outside of the fictional setting obsession. Hell, it isn't exactly crazy with the magic in any of these, but there are the legends about Charlemagne's knights and King Arthur's court. There's Robin Hood and the Three Musketeers.

I think the problem is the ridiculous quantity of Lord of the Rings ripoffs. Honestly, where are our Alices, Ozzes, Peganas and Kadaths? Hell, where are our modern world fantasies as per Lovecraft's mythos or the King in Yellow. I'd settle for something better written on a similar premise to The White People... although, in all fairness, there is Pan's Labyrinth. And how about some more fantasy in a "real" historical/cultural (if not historically/culturally accurate) context? The French revolution plus sorcery equals awesome.

I'm just saying that good vs evil in x non-earth setting gets old, but that's (fortunately) not what all fantasy is about.

[SilvercatMoonpaw]

Edit: Oh, you edited on me.

I can't remember what I said in what you saw, but I was trying to say something without being mean.

In terms of whether or not anyone is qualified to judge "literary merit" I just don't want it to be used to justify ignoring a work that doesn't fit in to some subjective category.

As to what I think doesn't get done enough: fiction that doesn't restrict itself.  Space opera with magic powers (Star Wars doesn't go far enough).  Fantasy worlds that exist at a stage of technological development similar to our own.  Etc.

[beejazz]

As to what I think doesn't get done enough: fiction that doesn't restrict itself.  Space opera with magic powers (Star Wars doesn't go far enough).  Fantasy worlds that exist at a stage of technological development similar to our own.  Etc.

One of these days I need to make a modern day setting with all the tropes dumped in. Magic? Sure. Ninjas? Why not? Cthulhu? Why, certainly. Zombies/vampires/werewolves? Fan-friggin'-tastic. Scifi stuff? Hell yes. Giant robots? Oh, you know it.

It would make no sense. And it wouldn't need to.

[SDragon]

As to what I think doesn't get done enough: fiction that doesn't restrict itself.  Space opera with magic powers (Star Wars doesn't go far enough).  Fantasy worlds that exist at a stage of technological development similar to our own.  Etc.

One of these days I need to make a modern day setting with all the tropes dumped in. Magic? Sure. Ninjas? Why not? Cthulhu? Why, certainly. Zombies/vampires/werewolves? Fan-friggin'-tastic. Scifi stuff? Hell yes. Giant robots? Oh, you know it.

It would make no sense. And it wouldn't need to.

Do you plan on submitting it to SJ Games?

[Polycarp]

In terms of whether or not anyone is qualified to judge "literary merit" I just don't want it to be used to justify ignoring a work that doesn't fit in to some subjective category.

Why not?  What "objective categories" would you rather have people use?  I'm having trouble understanding what your objection is.

[Jharviss]

Well, let's quickly define literary merit, since it's something that seems thus far to need quotation marks (which means it isn't yet defined):

I have read fantasies, science fictions, and mysteries that had literary merit.  Being literature is not a genre.  Literature exists outside of genres.  The problem that most literary snobs have with most genre fiction (and I will include myself) is that so much of it falls into various trappings of the genre.  The genre of science fiction is space fights and giant robots and mars colonies and numerous aliens.  The genre of mystery is a sleuth character and an illegal occurrence and trying to find the perpetrator.  

There is science fiction literature.  I would site sources such as Frank Herbert's Dune, Isaac Asimov's Nightfall, works by Arthur C. Clarke, Margaret Atwood, and Ray Bradbury.  I would say that there is literary merit in the fantasy of Lord of the Rings, Alice in Wonderland, and several others that Beeblebrox mentioned.  Sherlock Homes or anything by Edgar Allen Poe.  These all have literary merit.

Works that lack literary merit are those that don't require a bit of work from the reader, that aren't very intellectual, that don't have inspiring writing.  I would argue (possibly against many literary snobs) that Harry Potter is literature.  And I say this because the writing is brilliant.  It's clean, it paints a perfect picture, and communicates exactly what it is meant to communicate.  It's not terribly intellectually stimulating (though people have had debates on the themes and morals from the series), but I would still say it's literature.

I love the Dragonlance series.  But how much of that is literary?  I think the reason that Raistlin is so many people's favorite character is because he is one of the few deep characters in the setting.  He's not all good vs. evil, heroics, and life vs. death.  He's something a little bit more.  He's literary.  Nothing else in Dragonlance is.  They're just fun stories.  That's not bad, but they aren't literary.

Does that really help Poul Anderson's argument?  Maybe a little.  I think that there should be more literary merit in the publishing world now-a-days.  Instead we get all of these dime novels that I cannot read.  They just bore me.  I haven't read a typical fantasy novel in years, but I'm still here as a huge advocate for the genre.  

Right, I'm done.

[SilvercatMoonpaw]

My objection to "literary merit" is that I've read books that (probably) counted as literature, not because I wanted to, but because it was required for school.  And every single one of them was dull and incomprehensible.  They were trying to say something without actually coming out and saying it, and they never tried to just be entertaining.  I have no doubt I was made to read these because someone thought they had "literary merit", but it was the stupidest thing I ever had to do.
(And just in case you want to say it was being forced that made me hate literature: I tried reading Dune.  Twice.  Of my own free will.  Same problem.)

My objection is that categories like "literary merit" creates a perception that there are certain areas of art that one is required to like in order to be a "good person".  I don't want to be judged simply because I rather read something without depth.

[Wensleydale]

Ugh. As to your last comment, Silver, personally I love Dune, but it's not exactly the easiest reading. Especially the first half. If you like more action books, skip straight to the last few chapters of the first half and work off assumptions (or alternatively read a summary of the first half). You really won't miss anything that you can't work out by things mentioned later on.

[beejazz]

My objection to "literary merit" is that I've read books that (probably) counted as literature, not because I wanted to, but because it was required for school.  And every single one of them was dull and incomprehensible.

They were trying to say something without actually coming out and saying it, and they never tried to just be entertaining.  I have no doubt I was made to read these because someone thought they had "literary merit", but it was the stupidest thing I ever had to do.
(And just in case you want to say it was being forced that made me hate literature: I tried reading Dune.  Twice.  Of my own free will.  Same problem.)[/quote]My objection is that categories like "literary merit" creates a perception that there are certain areas of art that one is required to like in order to be a "good person".  I don't want to be judged simply because I rather read something without depth.
[/quote]
Yeah... the whole literary snobbery thing is something I'd like to see die off. It isn't enough to say something without saying it, or pad your book with pages of descriptive text. The story itself needs to be interesting, well paced, and well written. Also, people need to stop writing novels when a short story would suffice. I know that novels are the only way to make money writing anymore (the pulps? gone) but it's annoying to get so little out of so much time spent reading.

I think genre fiction has a great deal of entertainment value that can greatly enhance a literary work. I loves me some Aldous Huxely, PKD, and Vonnegut, for example. I also think a whole lot of authors think genre tropes *make* something entertaining just by being there, which is in fact not true.