Strictly Formula
'In some types of genre writing, the same old same old is exactly what the readers want, with a different hero each time or just the same type.'
--D.G. Hudson
Genre fiction sometimes gets a bad rap. There is a cultural tendency to view fiction as either Literature-with-a-capital-L or as genre stories churned out according to formula, even if we're a fan of one or more types of 'genre' fiction ourselves. Honestly, every genre (yes, even capital-L-Literature!) has overused tropes and plotlines, because borrowing and recycling and repurposing is at the heart of human storytelling.
Some subgenres actively embrace this. Most famously, category romance has turned formula into art form, using strict word counts and content requirements to tell thousands of permutations on basic storylines. It works here because the authors are self aware. These stories are pure escapism, and the anticipation of the guaranteed happy ending, as well as anticipation of some of the other tropes, is part of the reader's experience and enjoyment. If your intent is to actively feed off the expected formula because its integral to the genre, by all means go for it. The fact that romance novels fly off the shelves, even in a recession, proves our collective desire for deliberate, scripted escapism.
Other genres, however, have become formulaic by stagnation rather than by design. My suspicion is that new authors feel like the existing tropes are pre-requisites for entry, rather than devices used by the people who've gone before. I've mentioned repeatedly that traditional publishing (certain genres especially) are not exactly carnivals of diversity, so some of the problem may simply be that people with similar perspectives are, by dint of those perspectives, producing similar stories. But a good part of me thinks that we consciously or subconsciously see certain tropes as essential to the genre even when they're not. In those cases, don't constrain your thinking based on what other people have done--let your story be itself.
--D.G. Hudson
Genre fiction sometimes gets a bad rap. There is a cultural tendency to view fiction as either Literature-with-a-capital-L or as genre stories churned out according to formula, even if we're a fan of one or more types of 'genre' fiction ourselves. Honestly, every genre (yes, even capital-L-Literature!) has overused tropes and plotlines, because borrowing and recycling and repurposing is at the heart of human storytelling.
Some subgenres actively embrace this. Most famously, category romance has turned formula into art form, using strict word counts and content requirements to tell thousands of permutations on basic storylines. It works here because the authors are self aware. These stories are pure escapism, and the anticipation of the guaranteed happy ending, as well as anticipation of some of the other tropes, is part of the reader's experience and enjoyment. If your intent is to actively feed off the expected formula because its integral to the genre, by all means go for it. The fact that romance novels fly off the shelves, even in a recession, proves our collective desire for deliberate, scripted escapism.
Other genres, however, have become formulaic by stagnation rather than by design. My suspicion is that new authors feel like the existing tropes are pre-requisites for entry, rather than devices used by the people who've gone before. I've mentioned repeatedly that traditional publishing (certain genres especially) are not exactly carnivals of diversity, so some of the problem may simply be that people with similar perspectives are, by dint of those perspectives, producing similar stories. But a good part of me thinks that we consciously or subconsciously see certain tropes as essential to the genre even when they're not. In those cases, don't constrain your thinking based on what other people have done--let your story be itself.
No comments have been added yet.
