By Slanted Light

Thinking aloud... Me too!! LJ and Dreamwidth are similar in that respect and quite different from all the other social networks. If you want long conversations they're really the only options!

I don't suppose there's a definitive definition of literature - but I do think there is a sort of coterie of critics and their favourite writers who think they can dictate to the rest of us. And I really don't see why they should. We are just as capable of appreciating good writing, good theatre, good art, etc. even if we don't always have all the jargon to hand to explain our likes and dislikes. I do think pure genre fic - very run-of-the-mill crime, romance, etc. is unlikely to be literature by anyone's standards. Usually it is characterised by two-dimensional characters and forgettable plots.

I wasn't equating Maurice with Hollinghurst's books exactly - though there are some similarities. To begin with, both could be in danger of being dismissed as m/m genre and might have been if the authors weren't already well-known, Forster for his other work and Hollinghurst for his journalism and critical expertise. Then, both Maurice and most of Hollinghurst's stuff look at the central romance or tragedy in terms of the surrounding social mores of the period rather than just in terms of the characters' reactions to each other. Incidentally, whilst I admire Hollinghurst as a writer I prefer Forster!

Publishable writing - there is a frightening amount of published material that does not show any kind of technical expertise... And there are admired litfic authors e.g. Anita Brookner who give us almost no peripheral material at all. As to crime fiction - I think there is a sense that readers want a gripping plot that races towards a satisfying conclusion and many crime writers don't have perhaps the nerve, or the time (given by the publisher) to let themselves stray from the main plot. But then I think of things like The Quincunx and yes, you're right, it isn't harder to make crime into literature, it just isn't as profitable... In the same way that Mills and Boon romances could be literature but probably usually aren't. As for fanfiction - it does depend what you're most interested in. If it's just more about your favourite characters then yes, it probably falls short of literature. But when some writers place those characters in different settings and see how they cope (e.g. Birdwatchers Guide), or write semi-metaphysical stuff like yours where they're waiting to see what will happen in heaven, then I think literature is a possibility hovering in the wings. I must also say I find more 'literature' in some fandoms than others and to a great extent the best is in fandoms that are of books (or the films/shows of books) that are literature in the first place e.g. Austen, or LotR or Shakespeare. And before you say 'yes but...' (because I would!) there is plenty of dross in those, and plenty of literature elsewhere and in fact some of the very best writing I have come across has been in bandom and other rpf...

Vernon God Little had plot but was, I thought, unnecessarily offensive. I would need to have a look at my books, which are in boxes, or my Amazon history to find a good example of plotless fic. I do remember reading the second book (title forgotten) by the writer whose Brick Lane was shortlisted for the Brookner and wondering why she had bothered as there was no story. (And yes, I agree that character development can be story.)

Maybe I should do this more often - take time to set down thinky thoughts instead of making instant comments! *g*