Genre is as Genre Does

[MontiLee]

While I was perusing another forum today I saw an interesting question pop up.

"Does having to fit into a defined genre limit our creativity as writers?"

I call myself a horror writer, but a lot of what I write could be defined as psychological thriller (horror internalized), or even Magical Realism (which is just Fantasy without the dragons).

When I sit down to write, I don't think, "Okey, dokey, Albert (that's the name of my laptop), let's write some horror." I write what's in my head and I figure out how to classify it later. I also don't believe when you're writing for a specific genre - here I'm thinking of commission pieces, or maybe you want to break in to Romance or YA - you're limiting your creativity. I would think it would be a challenge to branch out into different areas and go where the story takes you.

But that's just me.


Interested in other opinions on the original point - Does crafting your writing for a specific genre limit how cretive you can be? Do you think ou'd feel stifled or cramped?

[micah]

I usually self-define (and we'll come back to that) as a horror writer because most of what I have written recently falls into this category. That being said, I have two sets of business cards, my GLAHW ones, and another set on which I call myself a "Writer of Dark Speculative Fiction."

So what does that mean? Well, long version: science fiction or any other fiction which answers the question "what if" in a dark fashion (where dark can mean tone, setting, plot, etc.). Short version: horror.

Does this mean I only write horror? Nope, straight sci-fi, mystery, Urban Fantasy (defined in the not paranormal romance way), boring ass non-genre stuff...

I doubt that many people sit down and think "I'm going to write a [fill in the genre].' The exceptions, of course, are those people who sit down and write something formulaic based on their previous successes (Dan Brown, Stephanie Meyer--I'm looking at you). I think most writers have an idea (or four) and some characters and most importantly, a story that they want to tell. Sure, odds are King and Keene are going to churn out something at least sort of horrific, but not necessarily so (think about Shawshank, The Body, and Green Mile).

In a lot of ways genres are plastered on writers by brick and mortar bookstores looking for a way to categorize books so it is easier to sell them. If your first book is horror, but your second one is romance, where do people look for you? As a former bookseller I can tell you, this is difficult. Management wants ALL of the John Grisham and Scott Turrow books in the Mystery section, even the non-fiction books that they have written.

[Aside: The Innocent Man and One L are both amazing non-fiction books by the previously mentioned authors, especially the former.]

What I am getting at here is that genre can definitely limit the reader. I think that there are many people who miss out on great fiction (or non-fiction as the case may be) because they are more comfortable with what they know. They would rather read bad genre than something new. Similarly, it is these readers that get upset when an author tries to branch off into a new direction. It's kind of like when your favorite rocker goes acoustic.

If genre fiction limits the creative process, I think that is probably a manifestation of the author's insecurities. This may be perfectly valid. If you have made a name for yourself writing a certain type of fiction then you might be loathe to try something new and maybe, if not fail, at least not succeed like you did with your previous works. Of course, if you never try, you'll never know what you might achieve.

Before you chuck something at me for pulling out something that sounds like a Hallmark card, I'm going to say Cherie Priest. She was moderately well known as the "Southern Gothic" author of the Eden Moore novels. Then she turned her back on her series character and went in a completely different direction. A couple of stories about a nun who chases werewolves and one featuring Daniel Boone later she comes out with Boneshaker. Now she's the go to person when someone needs a quote about Steampunk. The success of Boneshaker (which is nominated for a Nebula) has led to a number of contracts for Steampunk stories including one in the new VanderMeer anthology. From what I understand, she's now working on another horror story.

So, long story short (too late!), don't let your genre expectations limit you. If you are really worried about branching out, use a pseudonym.

A related topic which I have discussed a lot elsewhere is how authors self-identify, or in many cases, don't. Dean Koontz has written a lot of thrillers with little or no supernatural elements to them, but he is always right there next to Stephen King in the horror section. The Handmaid's Tale is Science Fiction, as are The Road and The Time Traveler's Wife. In these cases the literatti (and in some cases the authors themselves) vehemently deny that their books are genre fiction. Most time this is because the books are too high brow, too intellectual, too good to be genre.

This kind of thinking perpetuates the "red headed step-child" perception of genre fiction in general. Horror is even lower as most genre snobs see it as the illegitimate cousin of sff. This saddens me as there is a wealth of good fiction being written by 'genre authors' and a metric ass-load of crap being written by the literature types.

When the sun goes down and the bed side light comes on, I'm happy if I have a well written book to accompany me. If that book is shoved into a genre by some decision maker at Borders, how that author defines her or himself, and whether or not the book is like previous books of the author and/or genre is all a distant second. Well written books are what I'm trying to write myself. I'll let someone else decide what shelf to stick them on.

In my heart I'll probably always be a horror writer, even if I start churning out bodice rippers.

[Stout Roost]

I'm proud of being a horror writer. I've loved the genre since before I could read. That being said, I'm not sure if I've written horror yet. Or written it successfully yet. I do weird REALLY well, but scary I'm still working on. Maybe I'm firmly ensconced in creepy.

But there are subgenres within each genre and I've found actual success in tailoring my writing to one of those subgenres. Or rather, writing for the topic of a particular anthology. I had no cause to write "Mona" until I found out about the Harvest Hill antho. I actually thought of 4 or 5 ideas, wrote 2 of them (the other just got accepted in another Halloween antho). I found that themes help you get your foot in the door. So now I go trolling for anthos. I don't write for every one I see, but if I can think up something along the lines of what they want and it makes sense for me I write it. The stuff I've written all on my own has been a little more difficult to place.

But to the original question: no it doesn't limit me. It actually helps push me. There are a lot of zombie anthos out there and I finally broke down and wrote for one. I got that one accepted too.

[micah]

Mar 2, 2010 9:02:36 GMT -5 Stout Roost said:

I'm proud of being a horror writer.

Mar 2, 2010 9:02:36 GMT -5 Stout Roost said:

I'm firmly ensconced in creepy.

I need both of these on tee shirts.

[Stout Roost]

How about 'Zombies Always get Good Brain'?

[micah]

Everyone at work loves my "Great Minds Taste Alike" shirt with a red brain with a fork in it on the front.