Like many men of my generation, I enjoy what is typically referred to as genre fiction, that is science fiction and fantasy as it is presented both in print and on film. In fact, I think that I am probably a bigger fan most, with an extensive array of quotes and pop culture references at my disposal, often so obscure that even other nerds don’t get them right away. However, almost since the advent of literary and film criticism, these genres have been dismissed as irrelevant by the critics.
Now, to be honest, there is good reason for this. In most science fiction and fantasy, there is a great deal of action, slender women in revealing clothing carrying huge swords and/or lasers and a cadre of adjectives that even Roger and his thesaurus find daunting but very little in the way of plot and character development. Even in classics such as the Martian Tales books by Edgar Rice Burroughs, the story exists solely to serve the action and the whole comes off as though Burroughs was simply writing out his childhood fantasies. There is much better out there of course but the bulk of it really is junk fiction.
In recent years though, there has been a growing appreciation of the fact that there is also quality science fiction and fantasy out there. Literature has softened up a bit due in no small part to the crusading efforts of Stephen King who simply demands that quality be recognized no matter where it be found, and also the rise in popularity of things like Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter and comic books. Film in particular has come recognize quality genre fiction. Iron Man was well received, District 9 was graced with a Best Picture nomination and Return of the King is one of the most decorated films in history.
Why the sudden turn around? It is hard to say. Personally, I think it has a lot to do with amount of money such properties bring in. That said, it is also possible that there is a genuine recognition of what such stories have to offer. Which brings me to the issue at hand, does genre fiction have something unique to offer as opposed to what is generally referred to as literature? Or if it doesn’t offer anything unique, does it at least present what is offers in not just a unique, but valid way?
Perhaps the most obvious thing differentiating literature from genre fiction is the setting. Literature is generally set in the real world, typically, but not always contemporary with the time and place of the author. They also concern events that could plausibly happen. Even the world war scenarios of Tom Clancy’s novels could possibly occur given the right circumstances. There are of course exceptions such as the gods and goddesses actions in the work of Homer. Such works are included in the canon of respectable literature for the simple reason that they have stood the test of time.
The ways in which genre fiction differ here are obvious. Lightsabers, giants, far away worlds in habited by aliens who send out black monoliths and trigger impossible novas are clearly not part of our everyday experience. Even in more restrained science fiction such that of Jules Verne, one finds ideas and props that are typically slightly beyond the current time and place. They are also very often essential to the story, sometimes absolutely so as in the case of H.G. Well’s Time Machine or the Martians of his War of the Worlds.
This brings us to another difference, the nature of the central conflict, or rather, the way the conflict is portrayed. In literature, the action is very often (though not always) character driven, filled with lots of dialogue or introspective narrative. And the conflict often involves a relationship, whether it be natural tension between personalities or the subtle class/social status conflict of Jane Austen’s Sense and Sensibility and Pride and Prejudice. The English Patient is driven by a love triangle, as is the movie The Piano; whatever the case, the issue at hand usually revolves around a relationship.
Social issues are also a central feature such as in the book and movie How Green Was My Valley about how the Industrial Revolution gradually tore apart a family in a small mining town in Wales.
There is of course plenty of plot-driven literature out there as well such as Homer, John Grisham, Tom Clancy and Michael Crichton (for the record, I am not putting any of these other guys in the same league as Homer, just making a point).
With science fiction and fantasy, the action and conflict are generally plot driven. There is a sword to be found, and alien invasion/meteor/virus/dragon to be stopped. Relationships are often important, the greatest example being the friendship of Frodo and Sam in the Lord of the Rings. Others abound such as the father and son relationship in Star Wars and friendship of Jim, Bones and Spock in Star Trek. However, these relationships are not necessarily what the story is about, or the mover of the action, regardless of how essential they may be to resolution of the action.
Superficially then, genre fiction is often about an invasion, the restoration of a kingdom, or some other outlandish set up. But such settings usually mask what the story is truly about. The aforementioned District 9, superficially is about one man’s transformation into a member of an alien race that he used to oppressing. What it is really about is racism, apartheid and how it takes walking in another man’s shoes (or skin) before one understands him. The novel War of the Worlds is at least in part about the scarcity of resources, while the movie is also about man’s tendency to descend into irrational fear on one hand and the power of faith on the other. Remember, at the end, everyone is praying in Church when the germs get the aliens. The stories of Philip K. Dick generally explore the nature of free will and just what it is that makes us human, such as in Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? (better known as Blade Runner). A lesser known work is the Pre-Persons which takes place in a world in which children can be aborted up to twelve years of age, the age at which (it has been decided) a person is able to handle basic algebra. The main character, an adult male, challenges this foolish notion by saying that he can’t remember how to do algebra and therefore must not be fully human either.
In the realm of fantasy, there is none greater than Tolkien and his Lord of the Rings. In this work, we find issues of destiny, sacrifice, the power of grace over physical might, the value of friendship, etc. Even more impressive is the fact that is was done unconsciously. All these were simply elements of the story he was trying to tell.
The point of all of this is to illustrate that not only do the highly imaginative settings and props of genre fiction not impede the exploration of serious ideas, they often aid it by throwing the ideas into sharper relief. In fact, it could be argued that in some ways genre fictions is better than mainstream literature at doing this. The settings allow for thought experiments that take many ideas of today out their logical, or at least logically possible conclusions (just think of how Huxley and Heinlein used trends in entertainment and manufacturing in Brave New World and Fahrenheit 451) which in turn provide excellent opportunities for exploring the human condition in ways that rarely seen in any other medium except formal philosophy. Mainstream literature is capable of this as well but it’s focus on present-day realism and the subjective experiences of the characters makes it much more difficult. Again, there are exceptions, such as the aforementioned Jane Austen and those works of fantasy and science fiction that have been around long enough to be accepted by the critics (Frankenstein, the works of Verne and Wells).
In terms of sheer literary achievement, a good genre fiction story also has much to boast about, considering that they can take characters in utterly fantastic situations and make them engaging believable. That takes a fair amount of talent as well as a thorough understanding of human nature. More conventional mainstream literature has a different, though no less difficult challenge; take characters living ordinary lives and make them interesting enough that you want to take a few hours out of your life to read about theirs. This ability is what made authors like Mark Twain, Shakespeare, and Austen famous. Both tasks are daunting and worthy of admiration, even if one prefers on brand over the other.
So, does genre fiction offer something substantial that mainstream literature does not? That is debatable. What I do hope to have show though is that genre fiction can do as good a job as mainstream literature at examining the highs and lows of human nature and even of exploring various issues of import. Happy readying.
