Science Fiction and Its Future — To the Literary Den

Reading Time

It’s been a few days since I posted my rant on the genre/literary divide.  One of the things that occurred to me after thinking about what I had written is that there does seem to be a rise in popularity for “literary” science fiction, and that there might be something to all this discussion of literary SF.  I still have huge issues with the way critics approach the form, but the popularity of certain SF titles which aren’t categorized as SF makes one wonder if something is going on.

If I had to hazard a guess, which is how future history always operates, I would say that the increased popularity of SF outside of the publishing category, particularly in its “literary” strain, may be signalling the fracturing of SF.  Titles that are marketed as “literary” or some other non-SF category sell well enough and get plenty of attention, while category SF is declining only insofar as its non-tie-in industry is concerned.  Star Wars novels will probably sell well so long as Star Wars is on our TV screens, in our video games, and so on.  You could take the Star Wars section off the SF shelf and give it a whole new space and it would still sell quite well.  I get the feeling that people come to Star Wars books not for the SF tales, but for, well, Star Wars.
And, if we’re being fair, SF as a genre can’t survive on the backs of its “literary” takes, except where classic authors are still contributing to the field.  What will save SF from obscurity is adventure and suspense, which other genres are, sadly, doing quite well without needing the SF label (though many of them are SF stories).  It occurs to me that SF’s possible fracture will see the “serious” forms move out into general fiction (or “literary” fiction, if you will), while SF will become a haven for the adventurous and suspenseful, encompassing the tie-in wonders like Star Wars and Warhammer 40K and bringing back a lot of what we used to call the “sense of wonder.”  As for “literary” SF:  because it sells well enough outside of SF (or appears to sell well enough), I think we’ll see it move away from category fiction in general, because “literary” writers within the SF category might see the intelligence in moving out into non-SF shelves.
But this is all conjecture.  I don’t know if any of this is happening; it probably isn’t.  All of the above is based on what I’ve observed in my tiny little world.  Which is why I’m bringing the question to you:
Do you think “serious” or “literary” science fiction will abandon category fiction for the general fiction pile?
Email
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Digg
Reddit
LinkedIn

5 Responses

  1. I think this is exactly the future history of SF. It's at once sad and hopeful, because if there is one thing sorely lacking from SF right now, it's adventure.

  2. All I know is, I've never been a big fan of "srs" SF. I remember reading Kim Stanley Robinson's "Red Mars," and there was this scene where they were making bricks, and I was like… dubya-tee-eff. I mean, making bricks is pretty useful, but… but I just don't read books for the bricks, is all. Anyway, this scene was greatly made up for in the finale when they started shooting some kind of weapon from either Phobos or Deimos, which brought with it much destruction and attendant "DOOM" flashbacks.

    My point, I guess, is that science fiction in the highly speculative sense can be really great and impressive – I certainly don't disrespect people who take the time to stop and think about this stuff, and then make cool stories from it – but, personally, I just like deathrays and alien babes. Perhaps I am a cynical half-wit; or perhaps I am a highly discerning consumer. Either way, I think the "S" is best when it stands for "Spaaaaaaace!"

  3. as long as bloggers and fans love to have their little subculture-fetish which sets them apart, and as along as a writer you make more money on one shelf than on the other,and as long as people like to divide complex things in small digestible parts there will be divisions between so called "literary" fiction and "genre" fiction.
    maybe the labels change, but i think people just like create boundaries, however random they are.
    so i dont think one thing is moving to another thing in all, but there will always be shifts. how that is good for readers or writers, that is a different question…

  4. Ben: And you've every right to love that stuff. I love it too, as much as I love "serious" SF. There's nothing wrong with an action-packed scifi romp. Hell, sometimes such stories can also be "serious" works of literature. You're a segment of the SF community who prefers the action-packed romps, and I think SF proper has fallen short of pushing such things into the public eye. We get attention for our "serious" SF, which is great too, but we don't push what brings people to the genre (and what has always brought people there): good old fashioned sensawunda.

    Yona: What do you mean by a subculture-fetish? People who love SF are drawn to it because, well, that's what they like. They don't much care for works that don't fit into that category. Sometimes, anyway. (I don't mind a mixture, but I certainly find books about "real life" dull and uninspiring). The divisions, though, are created not by genre readers so much as by publishers and non-genre critics. The division between "literary" and "genre" were always ideological selections by the literary elite, and then publishing categories which made it easier for people to find what they were looking for. The categories are problematic, but they serve a purpose which has been very useful in the past.

    But you do raise a question: if there is a shift, as you say, is this a good thing for readers or writers?

Leave a Reply

Follow Me

Newsletter

Support Me

Recent Posts

A Reading List of Dystopian Fiction and Relevant Texts (Apropos of Nothing in Particular)

Why would someone make a list of important and interesting works of dystopian fiction? Or a suggested reading list of works that are relevant to those dystopian works? There is absolutely no reason other than raw interest. There’s nothing going on to compel this. There is nothing in particular one making such a list would hope you’d learn. The lists below are not an exhaustive list. There are bound to be texts I have forgotten or texts you think folks should read that are not listed. Feel free to make your own list and tell me about it OR leave a comment. I’ll add things I’ve missed! Anywhoodles. Here goes:

Read More »

Duke’s Best EDM Tracks of 2024

And so it came to pass that I finished up my annual Best of EDM [Insert Year Here] lists. I used to do these on Spotify before switching to Tidal, and I continued doing them on Tidal because I listen to an absurd amount of EDM and like keeping track of the tunes I love the most. Below, you will find a Tidal playlist that should be public. You can listen to the first 50 tracks right here, but the full playlist is available on Tidal proper (which has a free version just like Spotify does). For whatever reason, the embedded playlist breaks the page, and so I’ve opted to link to it here and at the bottom of this post. Embeds are weird. Or you can pull songs into your preferred listening app. It’s up to you. Some caveats before we begin:

Read More »

2025: The Year of Something

We’re nine days into 2025, and it’s already full of exhausting levels of controversy before we’ve even had a turnover in power in my home country of the United States. We’ve seen resignations of world leaders, wars continuing and getting worse and worse (you know where), the owner of Twitter continuing his tirade of lunacy and demonstrating why the billionaire class is not to be revered, California ablaze with a horrendous and large wildfire, right wing thinktanks developing plans to out and attack Wikipedia editors as any fascist-friendly organization would do, Meta rolling out and rolling back GenAI profiles on its platforms, and, just yesterday, the same Meta announcing sweeping changes to its moderation policies that, in a charitable reading, encourage hate-based harassment and abuse of vulnerable populations, promotion and support for disinformation, and other problems, all of which are so profound that people are talking about a mass exodus from the platform to…somewhere. It’s that last thing that brings me back to the blog today. Since the takeover at Twitter, social networks have been in a state of chaos. Platforms have risen and fallen — or only risen so much — and nothing I would call stability has formed. Years ago, I (and many others far more popular than me) remarked that we’ve ceded the territory of self-owned or small-scale third party spaces for massive third party platforms where we have minimal to no control or say and which can be stripped away in a tech-scale heartbeat. By putting all our ducks into a bin of unstable chaos, we’re also expending our time and energy on something that won’t last, requiring us to expend more time and energy finding alternatives, rebuilding communities, and then repeating the process again. In the present environment, that’s impossible to ignore.1 This is all rather reductive, but this post is not the place to talk about all the ways that social networks have impacted control over our own spaces and narratives. Another time, perhaps. I similarly don’t have space to talk about the fact that some of the platforms we currently have, however functional they may be, have placed many of us in a moral quagmire, as in the case of Meta’s recent moderation changes. Another time… ↩

Read More »