ROBUST discussion

This topic is about
Virginia Woolf
Book Talk & Exchange of Views
>
What has Virginia Woolf to do with the self-styled "literary fiction" indies?
date
newest »


I think the most sensible comment on there (by neither you or me) was someone who said "you don't get to say you're writing literary fiction; other people get to say that about you". When you're dead.
I do like Woolf though.

Maybe if more Indie writers would 'call it like it is' and take on the e-pulp fiction moniker it wouldn't be so frustrating.
Death by drowning? Ghastly way to go!
Nah, I'm not riled, I'm laughing; very few people now alive have ever seen me stop smiling. I've been watching those people embarrass a decent profession for a while, waiting for someone to expose herself so I could make an example of her; that little cabal didn't just volunteer, they begged to be permitted to shoot themselves in the foot, the genitals and the face. Conveniently, all the material I required arrived in a single thread; that saves on the footnotes.
K.A. wrote: "Would you share the source of your amusement?
And I AM talking about a direct link."
The link you want is in the articles, bottom of the second article, clickable text reading "*All quotations in this set of four articles are taken from the Amazon thread Reader looking for literary fiction."
And I AM talking about a direct link."
The link you want is in the articles, bottom of the second article, clickable text reading "*All quotations in this set of four articles are taken from the Amazon thread Reader looking for literary fiction."
BTW, it isn't Woolf who is the problem here. Her daddy was a critic who taught her the art of self-criticism. The problem is the people who think Woolf's failures define an artform. Woolf at least failed elegantly. The copycats are beyond clumsy. Watkins' self-chosen example of the best of her work lumbers like a sloth with a dietary imbalance.
What they remind me of most is an Indian beggar claiming that his expertise in self-mutilation should give him entree to a conference of surgeons.
What they remind me of most is an Indian beggar claiming that his expertise in self-mutilation should give him entree to a conference of surgeons.

http://maryww.wordpress.com/2009/04/1...
My point is that her work is readable. Has the layers, but is very accessible. I'll buy her books before I borrow Woolf from the library.

Oh wait. There is a term. Non-genre fiction.
Never mind.
___
The real problem here is that there is Literary Fiction, and literary fiction.
"Literary Fiction" is fiction that holds up well years after its publication and has earned some degree of respect among those who are expected to know a thing or two about literature (including critics, professors, and at least two generations of readers).
But small l, small f, "literary fiction" is that stuff the prospective agent or publisher returns to you along with a note saying "literary fiction isn't selling at the moment, so I must reluctantly say no and wish you luck placing this wonderful manuscript elsewhere."
It's also any book the bookshop employee can't shelve because its title, blurb, and author give him no clue where it belongs.



James - good for you!

But I write fantasy. What do I know?

Better a paranormal romance that sells than a literary work that no one reads or understands.
Poor Tolkien. How will he ever live down having a *plot* and *events*, in short, a story to tell? He'll languish forever with Katie in the fantasy genre pigeonhole of history! Poor Katie, trying to make a career, held back with that great lumbering millstone of Tolkien's failure around her neck!
Sierra, if you believe those people will willingly give up the prestigious label literary fiction, you must have a bathroom shelf full of bottles of snake-oil that you bought off nice gentlemen on the high street. It's just one of their junior school debating trade tricks to shove the responsibility for finding another name off on everyone else. Me, I vote for Kat's "pretentious tripe" -- except, come to think of it, tripe, properly cleaned, might be used to feed the hungry. We can't call it "crap" either, because that is useful as manure for plantfood.
***
One of the intesting things in that thread is how everyone whose work has actually been called literary by a reputable source, or is ever likely to be, was touching the entire business with shy fingers, disdain absolutely dripping, writhing with impatience to be away before they too were stained by such manifest incompetence and braggadocio. One would think that people who aspire to the mantle of Woolf and her crowd would at the very least be hypersensitive -- because a cultivated and elevated sensitivity was the raison d'etre of the Bloomsburies. But Watkins and her hangers-on, and the cruder indies interested only in labeling themselves whatever will sell a copy or two, didn't even notice that they are held in contempt by the very people they're trying to join.
Another depressing foray into the quicksands of the Amazon fora.
Sierra, if you believe those people will willingly give up the prestigious label literary fiction, you must have a bathroom shelf full of bottles of snake-oil that you bought off nice gentlemen on the high street. It's just one of their junior school debating trade tricks to shove the responsibility for finding another name off on everyone else. Me, I vote for Kat's "pretentious tripe" -- except, come to think of it, tripe, properly cleaned, might be used to feed the hungry. We can't call it "crap" either, because that is useful as manure for plantfood.
***
One of the intesting things in that thread is how everyone whose work has actually been called literary by a reputable source, or is ever likely to be, was touching the entire business with shy fingers, disdain absolutely dripping, writhing with impatience to be away before they too were stained by such manifest incompetence and braggadocio. One would think that people who aspire to the mantle of Woolf and her crowd would at the very least be hypersensitive -- because a cultivated and elevated sensitivity was the raison d'etre of the Bloomsburies. But Watkins and her hangers-on, and the cruder indies interested only in labeling themselves whatever will sell a copy or two, didn't even notice that they are held in contempt by the very people they're trying to join.
Another depressing foray into the quicksands of the Amazon fora.

There was more darkness and steel in her writing than people like to acknowledge nowadays.

James wrote: "There was more darkness and steel in her writing than people like to acknowledge nowadays."
Takes steel to top yourself, and the darkness goes without saying.
Takes steel to top yourself, and the darkness goes without saying.
Patricia Sierra wrote: "Andre, I do not keep the snake oil in the bathroom. Needed a much larger space to store all of it."
The biggest snake oil swindle of all time is Listerine mouthwash. It was invented as a "cure" for syphilis. When it didn't cure the clap, the owners of the formula went looking for something else it could cure. After some further adventures, which would make an amusing novel, they settled on it curing bad breath. Medically, bad breath is several steps below syphilis, but of course in a marketing perspective so many more people need a cure for bad breath than for venereal disease, saleswise it is no contest.
The biggest snake oil swindle of all time is Listerine mouthwash. It was invented as a "cure" for syphilis. When it didn't cure the clap, the owners of the formula went looking for something else it could cure. After some further adventures, which would make an amusing novel, they settled on it curing bad breath. Medically, bad breath is several steps below syphilis, but of course in a marketing perspective so many more people need a cure for bad breath than for venereal disease, saleswise it is no contest.

Although I think describing writing in such hard/ soft terms is probably a bit vacuous and meaningless anyway.
James wrote: "Although I think describing writing in such hard/ soft terms is probably a bit vacuous and meaningless anyway."
I take the low-road attitude that any discussion, in any terms people want to use or can comprehend, is useful as at least a start. Though I'm not a fan of Virginia Woolf, I have absolutely no difficulty envisioning a lurker who drops in here and, seeing this discussion, thinks, "Let's take a look at her, see why they're talking about her." Perhaps the lurker likes Woolf, maybe not -- that outcome is irrevant: what matters is the exposure to quality writing as a counterweight to the tide of KDP Krap Amazon has loosed on the world together with the good stuff that the traditional publishers offered no outlet to.
I take the low-road attitude that any discussion, in any terms people want to use or can comprehend, is useful as at least a start. Though I'm not a fan of Virginia Woolf, I have absolutely no difficulty envisioning a lurker who drops in here and, seeing this discussion, thinks, "Let's take a look at her, see why they're talking about her." Perhaps the lurker likes Woolf, maybe not -- that outcome is irrevant: what matters is the exposure to quality writing as a counterweight to the tide of KDP Krap Amazon has loosed on the world together with the good stuff that the traditional publishers offered no outlet to.

I considered setting her straight, but then decided it would just set off another war.
Moi? Nah. I have so many people on the ignore button in that thread, it seems quite pleasant to me now. I saw Kathleen say something about pulp fiction -- probably a slip of the tongue -- but that lot is too self-absorbed either to know or to care, so I didn't take it up.
Seems to me that as an educational medium, the Amazon fora are finished (if they ever were any chop, perhaps before my time) or in need of a radical overhaul.
Seems to me that as an educational medium, the Amazon fora are finished (if they ever were any chop, perhaps before my time) or in need of a radical overhaul.

p.s. Andre yes I do know 'romance' had a different original meaning, but as you say Amazon is not always show off your knowledge of literature!
Another ROBUST, Kat Jordan, had some good articles about pulp fiction on her blog a couple of months ago.

I was appalled at the examples given by Ms. Watkins, but as she kept digging herself in ever deeper and finally suggested her work be used for study, I simply felt sad for her.
It was suggested by my (admittedly hired) editor and a couple of writing groups to list The Storyteller as 'literary fiction'. It is not genre, it is not mainstream, it's not even general. I don't have pretentions that it is particularly 'literary' with a capital L. But though I have struggled since the beginning about categorizing it 'literary fiction', it does tell a prospective reader what it is not. I am not going to get on a high horse and pretend I only wrote it to please myself. I did not. I believe it has a message and I wish it to be read. But I don't wish it to be read by folks who do not enjoy it because it was 'not what I expected' from the description.
So, Literary Fiction it will remain until such time as whoever determines these things provides me with a suitable category which will better define what it IS.


I spent a semester trapped in a room with a man who was supposedly teaching us how to write, and did it by making us read whiny, woe is me, I'm more sensitive than anyone else ever, I need to go slit my wrists now, short story after short story.
Then he made us write them.
It was a basic level one creative writing class. Yet we never talked about plot, dialog, climax, nor denouement. The oldest student in the class was 19 so we got to spend eons critiquing page after page of upper-middle class white kid angst. We spent hours crafting individual sentences for maximum emotional effect, without bothering to see if those sentence actually made any sense, or for that matter made a story.
Amazingly enough, I haven't been a fan of literary fiction, even good literary fiction, since.
A good test of a writing teacher is: How many of his students manage to *sell* a single piece of any length?
It's that simple for those teachers who help writers realize their talent. Unfortunately, in practice most of those clowns don't turn out writers, they turn out more uninspired and uninspiring teachers of creative writing.
It's that simple for those teachers who help writers realize their talent. Unfortunately, in practice most of those clowns don't turn out writers, they turn out more uninspired and uninspiring teachers of creative writing.

It's that simple for those teachers who help writers realize their talent. Unfortunatel..."
To the best of my knowledge the answer to that is one. Me. And I did my best to forget everything he ever taught me about writing as quickly as I could.
The cruel irony of this is one room down the hall, there actually was a decent teacher of writing, who not only has sold his own work, but does have students who were able to go on and get published, too. I just never was lucky enough to get into one of his classes.
Meanwhile the poser (and the two "poets" who made up the rest of the department) did a very good job of making sure I got my degree in Religious Studies instead of English.
When I decided to be a novelist, a state film corporation which owed me political favours hired an American writer to be my writing tutor (ostensibly he was on the payroll as a script editor). His behaviour, his instruction and his own writing samples ensured that I became a hardworking writer who threw out eight words of every ten I wrote and who always behaves like a businessman rather than an "artiste". He was such an arsehole, and so pretentious, and so slack, and so smugly pompous, that I was saved from becoming another provincial nobody whining for the rest of his life that nobody recognized my genius -- by doing everything the opposite of what he advised. (I of course had the salutary experience of prospering in the artistic forcing house of multinational advertising, where he wouldn't have lasted a morning; advertising and big city newspapers are superior schools for the spotting of talentless poseurs.)
Not such a different experience to yours. Still, the easier option would have been the competent teacher.
Not such a different experience to yours. Still, the easier option would have been the competent teacher.

Competent teacher would have been nice. As it was my writing didn't suffer, and like you, my bull shit detector was made a few degrees sharper.
The funny thing is, I can only name a few professional writers who also teach, but none of them teach English or writing. They're usually off teaching things like history, sciences, or psych. The stuff they write about.
1. Virginia Woolf: Suicide chic.
2. The enemies of society assault Literature. Virginia Woof spins in her grave.
3. Ersatz. Fake. Not Virginia Woolf. Not within a thousand miles.
4. Come back Virginia Woolf. All is forgiven.