Literary reviews

[msagara]

ann_leckie has a post here that I really agree with.

I wanted to say a couple of things about the topic in general, because I find some of the dislike of the literary novel almost pointless. There's nothing in her post I disagree with; None of the following points are addressed by her in her main post.

First: equating sales with quality means that McDonald's is a better restaurant than, say, Scaramouche or Canoe. It's not. Does this make me a snob? I don't think so. I know what I like; I know why I like it. I can go through every little thing about the two restaurants in comparison, and come up with an answer that works for me. This answer won't materially change the fact that McDonalds outsells either of the two restaurants I have just named. If someone wants to tell me that the mass appeal of McDonald's means that I should now equate McDonalds with 5 star restaurants… don't go there.

Does this mean that I think anything popular = the McDonald's of fiction? No. Anathem was #1 NYT in hardcover. It was therefore demonstrably popular, and it is an ambitious work which I adored. I'm merely saying that numbers or popularity do not instantly mean that L. K. Hamilton should be reviewed as if she were writing Franzen's novels. The people who are pushing her to the top of the NYT lists are, imho, not the audience at which the NYTRs are aimed.

Second: Literary novels are, to me, like any other sub-genre of book. Do I write them? No. Do I read them? Sometimes. Do I like them? Sometimes.

But I don't expect that the novels I write are going to be feted by reviewers of literary novels. I just don't. Those reviewers read and get literary novels in a way that many readers don't. There's nothing wrong with that. That's what they're paid to do. The fact that they can still be paid to do this means there is a market for their opinions of those books. Implying that they are stale-dated and not moving with the market seems, to me, to miss this point.

I don't expect that those reviewers are going to pick up one of my Cast novels or one of my West novels and find themselves riveted by the contents. I would vastly prefer that my novels never be sent to one of those reviewers because I can guarantee that they wouldn't like it or give it a review that would be germane to my audience. I'm not white, not male, and don't live in Brooklyn, but I also don't want my books to be reviewed by the stable of reviewers that comprise the NYT's book review section.

People who are looking at the NYTR aren't looking for Cast in Chaos. They're not looking for opinions on Cast in Chaos. They're probably looking for opinions on the latest Franzen novel -- which, not surprisingly, they'll find there. They might also be looking for opinions on the latest Margaret Atwood novel. They just won't be looking for mine.

Neither will I.

I want my books to be read by reviewers who actually enjoy reading the types of books I write. If someone from the NYTR hated my books, it wouldn't mean anything to me, because they're not my audience.

If the blogsphere of active fantasy readers and reviewers hated my books…it would.

But you know, I don't troll over to Pat's Fantasy Hotlist or Dear Author or Smart Bitches and ask why they're collectively so much of a snob that they don't review mysteries, westerns or baseball books. I don't really need that from them--or any other number--of sites. Would I like to see them reading my books? Yes. Would I like them to review them? Yes. Why? Because I consider their unanointed reviews to be germane to what I've done, and what I'm trying to achieve.

Those are my reviewers, those and the people like them spread across the blogsphere. Those are my critics, and the critics who will reach my readers.

I guess I don't understand why people hate the NYTR so much because in the end, it's not relevant to the books that they're writing and the readers they're trying to reach. They're irrelevant to me because I don't write in that genre. They're not my readers and in a purely crass way, they're not going to be giving me 80 cents per book at the bookstore or ebookstore.

For people who want to point out that the NYTR is an arbiter of prestige, I won't disagree -- but I will say up front that it's a pointless prestige for me because my readers are not those critics or those reviewers. As long as I can reach my readers, I'm happy to let other people drown in prestige games.


Edited because rant is not spelled with a terminating g.

Comments

[mtlawson.livejournal.com]

I want an escape when I read - literary fiction is often to close to real life, you know what I'm trying to escape.

From a personal perspective, I'm the same way. If I want real life or something depressing, I'll go watch the news; there's more than enough of that to go around as it is.

[romsfuulynn.livejournal.com]

There are a couple of points I've wanted to add.

First - the assumption that readers don't have to work at other types of fiction. For SF and fantasy there are protocols that are more work - but you have to be willing to engage with the work. Your books are excellent examples of exactly that.

In reading your books the reader has to be willing to move into the world you have created. Most readers of litfic aren't competent to do that. They are lazy about that stuff.

The second point I'm going to riff off of mtlawson - but I've seen this a lot of places. I read to go interesting places I can't go any other way. It isn't about getting away from here, it's about going someplace else interesting. It may even be depressing and upsetting, but I'm going to someplace not escaping.

[fyrna.livejournal.com]

On the point about moving into the world the author has created --

One of the books we were required to read in 9th grade was The Sword in the Stone. I remember that most of my class was having trouble with the idea of Arthur turning into a fish and all. My best friend and I realized we had a real advantage from being familiar with fantasy writing. (It was reflected in our grades, too.)