What are you Reading Now?

[Mythopoet]

Well, obviously I am not an "expert" or an "academic" in the field. I am only a reader. But I don't think those are very good definitions. They are much too broad. They don't echo at all what seems to me the way that most readers think of Science Fiction. And, in my opinion, the only valid purpose of genre labels is to aid readers in finding stories they want to read. If Science Fiction is as broad as all that, then the label is almost entirely useless to most readers.

Science Fiction has an image in the popular imagination. Authors like to pretend the trappings don't matter but they do. To most readers they do.

 

[Steerpike]

Well, obviously I am not an "expert" or an "academic" in the field. I am only a reader. But I don't think those are very good definitions. They are much too broad. They don't echo at all what seems to me the way that most readers think of Science Fiction. And, in my opinion, the only valid purpose of genre labels is to aid readers in finding stories they want to read. If Science Fiction is as broad as all that, then the label is almost entirely useless to most readers.

Science Fiction has an image in the popular imagination. Authors like to pretend the trappings don't matter but they do. To most readers they do.

I think most readers' view of science fiction may even be broader, since it goes into fantasy. For example: Star Wars. That's pure fantasy in space. It doesn't make sense, in my mind, to say a social-sciences speculation like Handmaid's Tale isn't science fiction, and then to say that something with complete bollocks for science like Star Wars IS part of the genre.

Where do you put Handmaid's Tale? Fantasy? That seems a less granular fit than SF (which is arguably a subset of Fantasy).

In any event, there is a whole subgenre of science fiction called "social science fiction" that deals with speculation rooted in social sciences--human societies that are different from our own as a vehicle to explore our own society, and they don't have to have lasers and spaceships or take place on distant worlds. The Handmaid's Tale seems to me to fit pretty squarely into that definition.

Also, it is worth noting that Hulu, who makes the TV adaptation of the Handmaid's Tale, categorizes it under "science fiction," which seems to be a pretty good indicator of what the impression of the population at large might be about such a work, because they tag shows in a way that they think are going fit with how their viewers categorize shows. It is also tagged as "drama," which is accurate as well.

That's my opinion on it.

 

[pmmg]

Well, MS. Atwood's book shows up on just about every writers site I've ever been on, so she seems to have written herself a winner no matter what we call it. I don't know what her attitude is towards SciFi, and I probably don't need to know. She can just take herself to the bank and call it what she likes. For me, I am okay with just calling it fiction. If it needs to be in a narrower hole I am okay with any of the above. Maybe I'll just call it Speculative Fiction, or SF for short

 

[Russ]

Well, obviously I am not an "expert" or an "academic" in the field. I am only a reader. But I don't think those are very good definitions. They are much too broad. They don't echo at all what seems to me the way that most readers think of Science Fiction. And, in my opinion, the only valid purpose of genre labels is to aid readers in finding stories they want to read. If Science Fiction is as broad as all that, then the label is almost entirely useless to most readers.

Science Fiction has an image in the popular imagination. Authors like to pretend the trappings don't matter but they do. To most readers they do.

Genres have basically three functions. One is marketing, one is as a shorthand to simplify conversation, and one is for academic study to narrow focus or define issues.

I am not sure authors like to pretend labels don't matter. The many writers I know often have long discussions about what genre a book fits into for any of the above reasons.

For instance there is a significant discussion about where Heather Graham and John Land's recent book in all three spheres (the discussion also includes whether or not it is YA which is a whole different kettle of fish).

I am curious how you know or think you know what most readers think science fiction is? What alternative definition do you suggest on behalf of "readers".

 

[Russ]

Well, MS. Atwood's book shows up on just about every writers site I've ever been on, so she seems to have written herself a winner no matter what we call it. I don't know what her attitude is towards SciFi, and I probably don't need to know. She can just take herself to the bank and call it what she likes. For me, I am okay with just calling it fiction. If it needs to be in a narrower hole I am okay with any of the above. Maybe I'll just call it Speculative Fiction, or SF for short

I have no quarrel with the fact that it is a good book and commercially successful (to some degree driven by the desperation of English teachers in Canada at certain times looking for Canadian lit to promote, but again I digress).

But because she is a good writer, and a rich one doesn't mean it is appropriate for her to demean a large and respectable genre.

It also doesn't mean that the discussion on where (or if) her book fits in genre classification is not an interesting one.

And if almost every site you go to mentions her book...you need to go to more sites.

 

[Steerpike]

Just started God is an Englishman, by R.F. Delderfield. Straight up historical fiction.

Finishing a re-read of The Snow Queen, by Joan Vinge, which is a great book.

 

[pmmg]

I do agree the discussion is an interesting one. But, I've no reason to go pick on Ms. Atwood specifically. If she said snooty things about SciFi, then I suppose that is her perspective. I can just tune her out. I suppose I feel the world is full of enough reasons to hate on people, I do need to go finding more reasons to add to it.

I can see why there would be some difficulty in slotting her book into a category, it does not match up well to any of the ones I would site. SciFi though would seem to be a fitting place if I take a broad view of SciFi.

I did not know she was Canadian, and maybe that does play a role in why she remains popular, but I don't know how much. I think it is true that the those of us in the America's have had the baggage of not being as literary important as some European authors, but I suspect that is somewhat not true, and will change over time.

And if almost every site you go to mentions her book...you need to go to more sites.

I am not sure what to make of that...

Ms. Atwood's book is kind of exploring the horror world feminists most imagine, and given that there are many who have sympathies to such, it is not surprising to me that the book comes up for discussion a lot (maybe I should add on writers sites?)

On many sites, other books and authors come up somewhat frequently as well. Ayn Rand is another marginally frequent one. On fantasy sites, Tolkien, Martin, Goodkind, Brooks, Morecock, Howard...these all get a lot of mentions. Why would I expect anything different?

I suppose I am open to seeking out other avenues that would be beneficial, but I am not sure what I should be looking for in that regard.

 

[Russ]

I do agree the discussion is an interesting one. But, I've no reason to go pick on Ms. Atwood specifically. If she said snooty things about SciFi, then I suppose that is her perspective. I can just tune her out. I suppose I feel the world is full of enough reasons to hate on people, I do need to go finding more reasons to add to it.

I think the issue of genre definitions is a fascinating one. It can be discussed and enjoyed at length. But if one is going to look at a discussion with a long history, like whether or not HMT and O&C are sci fi, I think there is value in understanding the history and context of the discussion so one does not act like it is coming from a blank slate, but rather it has a context. For instance if you are talking about some of her later comments about what Sci Fi is or isn't, to be understood properly they have to be read in the context of her retreat and apologia for the firestorm of controversy she created when she mocked Sci Fi on a number of occasions. The comments of many others about the nature of her work is also best understood in that context as well.

You are perfectly entitled to hate on her or not, but to understand the discussion around the classification of her books you need to understand the context and its history.

I can see why there would be some difficulty in slotting her book into a category, it does not match up well to any of the ones I would site. SciFi though would seem to be a fitting place if I take a broad view of SciFi.

I happen to agree with you there.

I did not know she was Canadian, and maybe that does play a role in why she remains popular, but I don't know how much. I think it is true that the those of us in the America's have had the baggage of not being as literary important as some European authors, but I suspect that is somewhat not true, and will change over time.

Yeah, and Canadians feel the same way about the many great American literary authors. But for a long time there was a huge push in Canadian schools to promote and idolize certain Canadian political figures and art figures. This resulted in Atwood and a few others (notably Margaret Laurence) getting put on the curriculum on about every school in Canada, and in most universities, and for negative criticism of them to be really discouraged. People of my generation and around it a bit were all forced to read them ad nauseum, but it sure promoted a lot of book sales for them, and generated a lot of university papers on their work. I think Atwood is a strong writer, but she definitely has benefited from a culture boost from the Canadian inferiority complex.

I am not sure what to make of that...

Well it was meant about 70% in humour. But experientially I don't see her work discussed as often as you do. I would say I see it discussed occasionally but not on the majority of the sites I go to. And I got to at least three or four writers conferences a year, and I would say I might hear it mentioned at less than 10% of them. But that is just off the cuff.

But if you are going to writers sites were feminist dystopias are being discussed or they have a more feminist turn, I am not surprised to hear that you see it a lot. That makes perfect sense.

 

[Steerpike]

I think Atwood is a strong writer, but she definitely has benefited from a culture boost from the Canadian inferiority complex.

She's a strong writer generally, though I didn't care for HMT. When it comes to the intersection of genre and feminist fiction, Angela Carter could write circles around her (and most authors).

 

[Russ]

She's a strong writer generally, though I didn't care for HMT. When it comes to the intersection of genre and feminist fiction, Angela Carter could write circles around her (and most authors).

Carter is awesome, and if you want intersectionality you really can't beat Nalo Hopkinson.

 

[Svrtnsse]

Currently reading The Dream-Quest of Vellitt Boe by Kij Johnson. I had some doubts initially, but now that I'm into it, I'm enjoying the feel of the story.

Sure, it's a novella, so it should be a quick read, but I'm a slow reader and I don't devote as much time to reading as I ought to. Happy to get some done at all.

 

[Addison]

In anticipation of the coming movie adaptation I read, just today, "Murder On The Orient Express". I know adaptations often times scrap or exaggerate some things. Like Jaws and Jurassic Park. (If you haven't read the books, DO!) If the movie is half as good as the book, it will be great.

Yet according to the cast list it looks like they've already taken one liberty by changing a character from Swede to Spanish.

Oh well. After I finished Agatha Christie I started on the new release, "The Last Magician". I'm only through the first three chapters. If the tension continues to mount, which I know it will, then I've found a thrilling, Urban Fantasy treasure.

 

[Ireth]

Over the weekend I read "The Lastborn of Elvinwood" and "A Celtic Odyssey". The former is a story about a human guy who is embroiled in a quest to find a human girl to be a willing bride for one of the fairies, and the latter tells the story of the hero Maildun and his journey through lands unknown to mortals. Pretty cool stuff. ^^

 

[TheCrystallineEntity]

^Ooh, those sound very interesting. Who are the authors?

 

[TheCrystallineEntity]

I think Atwood is a strong writer, but she definitely has benefited from a culture boost from the Canadian inferiority complex.

So, all Canadians feel inferior to each other, or other cultures? Who knew! That's a fascinating thing to learn about the country I live in. Thank you.

 

[Ireth]

^Ooh, those sound very interesting. Who are the authors?

The Lastborn of Elvinwood is by Linda Haldeman, and A Celtic Odyssey is by Michael Scott.

 

[TheCrystallineEntity]

^Thanks! I'll check into those.

 

[Mythopoet]

I picked up some free/cheap volumes by Irish folktale writers. The King of Ireland's Son and The Boy Who Knew What the Birds Said by Padraic Colum. I'm halfway through The King of Ireland's Son and it's quite an interesting example of a tale within a tale within a tale. Also got Donegal Fairy Stories by Seumas MacManus whose other book Hibernian Nights I really love. He's got a really strong storyteller's voice which makes old fairy tales come to life.

And just picked up The Woodcutter by Kate Danley which I saw on sale on Amazon today. 20 % in and I'm really glad I did. It's not like anything else I've read recently, which is always so welcome. There's a strong fairy tale atmosphere with the Wood at its center and a mystery full of dark magic to uncover.

 

[T.Allen.Smith]

I don't strictly read fantasy...

I just finished Dr. Sleep, King's sequel to The Shining, & currently have 2 more books on the go:

The Forgotten Garden - Kate Morton

8 Million Ways to Die - Lawrence Block (No, I've never seen the movie.)

 

[Mythopoet]

Well, I ended up finishing The Woodcutter within 24 hours. Which is impressive when you remember that I have 5 kids and I got the book the day before the first day of school. In other words, I did not have a lot of reading time, but I just HAD to keep reading it. Literally could not think of anything else. It was SO GOOD. SO REFRESHING. I desperately wish there were more books written like this one.

Also finished The King of Ireland's Son. It ended up not being quite like other folktales I've read. At first there were tales within tales within tales and they didn't seem particularly related. But in the end everything had been woven together in a very satisfactory way. I really enjoyed it.

Started rereading some of my favorite Lord Dunsany stories and decided to see if I could find some of his other works I haven't read yet. Picked up Don Rodriguez and Tales of Three Hemispheres cheaply. The other ones still in print will have to wait a bit. Unfortunately, some of his works must be both OOP and not yet in the public domain because they can't be had on Amazon at least for any reasonable price.