I think you need to expand on this a bit. Or maybe explain it in words that make sense to me .
:) I went over and pontificated about it in my own LJ (http://www.livejournal.com/users/robling_t/74080.html) just now and I'm not sure if I'm getting any clearer on it or just tying myself in knots...
There are without question fantasy novels that take the genre dead, dead seriously as a literary form in its own right (China Mieville comes instantly to mind and Won't Go Away
Yeah, and that "Won't Go Away" part is kind of what I was trying to get at by that; granted my reading in the past decade or so has been limited to whatever my local libraries consider worthy of enshrining in their collections (which I suppose is in itself some measure of where the market's at, in that they're trying to acquire the books that they feel will circulate the most), but I haven't been seeing much middle ground between the "one from column A, one from column B" stuff that leaves one wondering if we've actually checked this one out already, and the writers like Mieville who are an acquired taste in the extreme.
In this case, perhaps a different question is appropriate: What's the difference between an author who takes their work seriously and a work that takes itself seriously, given that a work is capable of that much intent?
I would say that a work that takes itself seriously is one that believes in its premise to the degree that the reader could begin to question whether things could be any other way. For example, consider how with some film productions the viewer can't quite get past the sense that the characters are actors in costumes, not real people living in their version of the "real world"; genrefic is prone to that same sort of "nudge nudge, wink wink, isn't this a fun game we're playing" lack of conviction about what it's doing in these funny clothes. I guess what I'm saying is that for me to successfully suspend disbelief, first I have to have a sense that the actors/characters aren't anything but that -- that this guy isn't going to take off that coat when the curtain goes down and return to his day-job bagging groceries at my Jewel.
Now, the author taking themself seriously is another matter altogether, and it's entirely possible to believe wholeheartedly in the legitimacy of your project as a literary endeavor and yet not manage to pull off having your world believe in itself. I've read works that scream, "I am Literature" to the point where I just want to smack the author and tell them to get on with telling the story, dammit.
Oo, okay, I've just thought of an example of what I'm trying to get at: have you read Jo Walton's Tooth and Claw? Of my recent reading that springs out as an illustration of taking a premise that could go wrong in so many ways and making it believe itself to the point where the reader says, "of course, it's like that". The post I reference above also mentions David Sosnowski's Vamped, which interestingly enough is over in the mainstream section, and it's another good example of the work taking itself seriously in a way that straightforward genrefic doesn't always; it starts from a position of this is the way the world is, statement, as opposed to Once upon a time, or, what if?, which can weaken that sense of looking in upon a world that's equally valid, just not where you happen to be. (Which is the primary strength of so-called mainstream fiction when it works, IE that it gets to say "this (fictional) world must be valid because it resembles the world that you know is a valid world, QED".)
-- Darn it, I've lost the thread again because "something" keeps darting out from under the fridge. :( I'll come back to this when I'm not distracted, if we haven't all forgotten what we were on about by then...
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
no subject
Date: 2004-08-17 02:45 am (UTC):) I went over and pontificated about it in my own LJ (http://www.livejournal.com/users/robling_t/74080.html) just now and I'm not sure if I'm getting any clearer on it or just tying myself in knots...
There are without question fantasy novels that take the genre dead, dead seriously as a literary form in its own right (China Mieville comes instantly to mind and Won't Go Away
Yeah, and that "Won't Go Away" part is kind of what I was trying to get at by that; granted my reading in the past decade or so has been limited to whatever my local libraries consider worthy of enshrining in their collections (which I suppose is in itself some measure of where the market's at, in that they're trying to acquire the books that they feel will circulate the most), but I haven't been seeing much middle ground between the "one from column A, one from column B" stuff that leaves one wondering if we've actually checked this one out already, and the writers like Mieville who are an acquired taste in the extreme.
In this case, perhaps a different question is appropriate: What's the difference between an author who takes their work seriously and a work that takes itself seriously, given that a work is capable of that much intent?
I would say that a work that takes itself seriously is one that believes in its premise to the degree that the reader could begin to question whether things could be any other way. For example, consider how with some film productions the viewer can't quite get past the sense that the characters are actors in costumes, not real people living in their version of the "real world"; genrefic is prone to that same sort of "nudge nudge, wink wink, isn't this a fun game we're playing" lack of conviction about what it's doing in these funny clothes. I guess what I'm saying is that for me to successfully suspend disbelief, first I have to have a sense that the actors/characters aren't anything but that -- that this guy isn't going to take off that coat when the curtain goes down and return to his day-job bagging groceries at my Jewel.
Now, the author taking themself seriously is another matter altogether, and it's entirely possible to believe wholeheartedly in the legitimacy of your project as a literary endeavor and yet not manage to pull off having your world believe in itself. I've read works that scream, "I am Literature" to the point where I just want to smack the author and tell them to get on with telling the story, dammit.
Oo, okay, I've just thought of an example of what I'm trying to get at: have you read Jo Walton's Tooth and Claw? Of my recent reading that springs out as an illustration of taking a premise that could go wrong in so many ways and making it believe itself to the point where the reader says, "of course, it's like that". The post I reference above also mentions David Sosnowski's Vamped, which interestingly enough is over in the mainstream section, and it's another good example of the work taking itself seriously in a way that straightforward genrefic doesn't always; it starts from a position of this is the way the world is, statement, as opposed to Once upon a time, or, what if?, which can weaken that sense of looking in upon a world that's equally valid, just not where you happen to be. (Which is the primary strength of so-called mainstream fiction when it works, IE that it gets to say "this (fictional) world must be valid because it resembles the world that you know is a valid world, QED".)
-- Darn it, I've lost the thread again because "something" keeps darting out from under the fridge. :( I'll come back to this when I'm not distracted, if we haven't all forgotten what we were on about by then...