What's in Genre

The easy answer to the title of this post is: many things. But I suppose that's a bit vague. Of course, those of you who are writers of literature, and not genre, will immediately know that genre is Classically defined as the traditional major types of writing: Satire, Epic, Tragedy, Comedy, and Lyric. After a few centuries of debate, short fiction and novels were added to the definition of genre.

For those of you who are genre fans today, you might be thinking genre is: Science Fiction, Mystery, Romance, Horror, Westerns, and countless other variations. Well, that's true as well. Basically, genre has been and is still defined as "types" of writing. This means the modern fans of genre can delight in knowing that classic literature was genre. And even the Great Bard Shakespeare wrote genre.

This might lead you to ask: Then what is "literary fiction"? The fast answer is: genre. However, most literary fiction today borrows from the forms of the above mentioned genres. And if you're a writer or reader of literary fiction, you've probably, and most dutifully, read all of the essential philosophical texts of aesthetics starting from Plato and at least going to Eagleton. If not, then it would make enjoying and understanding literature a bit of a gamble.

Now to be more specific about modern genre, it is really a subclass of "Romance" (one of the major literary types of writing). For example, SF was dubbed "Science Romance," and contemporary Horror is pretty much Gothic Romance. Mind you, the word Romance here means "imagination." It comes from the great Romantic literary movement where writers believed imagination transcended life. The popular novel Frankenstein, by Mary Shelley was one of these works.

And today's "literary" writing is basically a mode of fiction that attempts to avoid form and structure, such as the forms found in Westerns, Horror, SF, etc. This means a skilled work of "literature" uses the elements of genre - supernatural, murders, madness - but does its best not to look like a "novel" (see above, it is one of the types of genre). But I'll not venture farther in that direction for there be monsters there.

Back to the topic: What's in Genre. Again, a simple answer is "many things." A more confusing answer is "theme." Many readers and writers will argue that most genre books have no theme. I suppose this isn't far off the mark. However, as the forms of genre we have today are structured and usually tightly defined, it is very difficult for a work of SF not to come with a ready-made theme. If you think about it, the common two are "Science will save humanity" and "Science will destroy humanity." Whether or not the author plans it, writing a story about a "fail" in science or a "win" in science, one of those themes is most likely embedded. And then the reader brings his or her own themes, plus culture adds a few to the mix as do contemporary world events.

Yes, this means that even "Zombie" novels have themes. Naturally, I'm using that example because of my recent novel. Since it's release, I've had a number of generous letters/emails asking about the themes readers found in the novel. And without revealing too much, the novel is really SF/Horror - so I could say it comes packed with a few "auto-themes." For most readers of Horror fiction, the mixture of SF is often a surprise (see Pamela K. Kinney's review at Innsmouth Press). And for fans of SF, many things were telegraphed to them as they expected the SF "form" to follow a given path. In my case, I did intend various themes, and many others came from the aforementioned areas.

Obviously, I can't list every theme of every genre - they do vary and can be altered by the writer. The reader also reshapes them as well based on personal experiences. But if you stop to think about it, I'd bet you can come up with a consistent number of themes from your favorite genres (including Classical literary genres). Quite often, it is the theme of a genre that attracts a reader to return to it - be the themes hidden or not. And after all of this, if you're wondering what function a theme has, then I'd offer up: Themes repeat in a work of fiction in order to transmit a message to the reader; these messages are often insightful, meaningful, and emotional. While a theme should be under the surface of a text, it is often the factor can make a book bring about new perspectives, and on occasion, with some novels, themes have changed cultural views. They are very powerful aspects of fiction, be they reader or writer created.

Battlestar, Caprica, SF and Gender

First, to all of those college students who are in a mad quest to write a paper about "The Cask of Amontillado," the ending Italian phrase means "Rest in Peace." Do note that it is not something the protagonist with a vendetta would normally say. It is, however, something a priest is likely to say. Hmm, there's a poser.

And on to the topic the post is really about. I've had a chance to catch-up with the latest episodes of the SyFy Channel's new series Caprica. For those who don't know, the show takes place prior to the events of Battlestar Galactica (BSG), and does include some sequel information (after some pushing from those involved with the money).

If you're a fan of BSG, then you've already been through the "Starbuck is a girl" issues. No offense to the original Starbuck, but I thought the change was quite clever. Also, if you're a fan of BSG, you already know that many of the strongest and powerful characters in the series were female. Villains and Goodgals alike.

This might not seem unusual to new fans of the SF genre, but for those who date back to the stone tablet days, having strong female characters is a bit unusual. In the old days, they were mostly restricted to falling in love with Captain Kirk, screaming, falling, and wearing short skirts. Often, all of these occurred in a single Star Trek episode. It seemed females just couldn't be a part of SF.

Then Ripley appeared, and things changed (Aliens). Okay, even today the short skirts remain. But most everything else has changed.

I won't go into gender and SF. Many words have been written on the topic, and if you've not read them (this includes those students looking for something to cut and paste in your essay due at the end of this week), take the time to read the books and articles about the new role of females in SF.

Instead of venturing there, and listing articles and books, I'll jump to Caprica. At first glance, like BSG, the show seems hard and manly, full of murder and swearing ("frak"). But after an episode or two, the male anger fades into the background, replaced by teenage, female angst. The real focus of the show is on teenage girls, one of which who is a robot, and another who has no body, and a third who seems to be torn about how to interact with her robot/cyberghost friend. A quick glance at the promo photos and cast photos in this post highlights the real demographic of the series: young females. Yes, it is still aimed at males as the "Apple" photo reveals, but it is also focused at the female viewership.

For an SF series, this is unusual - at least it is historically, the last five years have seen many changes. For fans of SF, this is great news as it means there are new fans of the genre, and what appears to be a growing number of fans. And really, it is a direction the genre should be heading.

All of the above is nothing new nor surprising. As I said, it has been happening consistently over the last few years. What is interesting is how many males have not noticed. Why? I suspect because the genre is reflecting society, and is at last catching up from the Dark Ages of the genre. With any luck, as in the past, real life will imitate art and the gender barrier will continue to decline culturally based upon the acceptances of new females roles in the genre.

Surrogate - Film

Yes, I'm behind in my film watching. In fact, last night was the first chance I had to watch Zombieland and Surrogate. It seems that Zombieland has had plenty of commentaries - not surprisingly. I certainly enjoyed the film, but I didn't think it was as clever as Shaun of the Dead. And luckily for me, there are some common themes in Zombieland, Shaun of the Dead and Surrogate. Lucky because it gives me an easy segue from zombie films to "almost" zombie films.

Let me explain that last remark. Or maybe the entire paragraph. Quite often, zombie fiction/films deal with the alienation of humanity. Shaun, in Shaun of the Dead was so alienated that he didn't notice the difference between a living and undead world - until it was close enough to bite him. Similarly, Zombieland followed the "journey" plot, taking the narrator from the living world (isolated from humanity) to the zombie world, where he finally completes his journey of growth, and finds the family for which he's been searching (no longer alienated). In Surrogate, most of humanity use avatars (robots) to live their daily lives. They go to work in them, entertain in them, vacation in them, and pretty much do everything else you can imagine in them. Hidden in those "control beds" where humans dwell while operating their surrogates is something of a "zombie." But mostly, they are alienated from each other - just as in the two zombie films mentioned above.

Those of you who are familiar with Marxist literary analysis have already picked up on the keyword "alienated." Those who are just familiar with Marx are probably thinking: Is this guy a Communist? I'm a writer, therefore, I'm a Capitalist - is it possible to be anything else in the current world? What I'm saying is I'm not speaking about Communism. I'm speaking about alienation - the removal ourselves from the daily human existence. Yes, Karl Marx feared Capitalism caused this, and well it does. As a result, the theme appears in our fiction (intentionally or not). For example, to be alienated from labor is to work for a corporation, but being nothing more than a cog in a greater mechanism. To borrow from Marx's example: If I make shoes for a company, the company name goes on the shoe. That is very different from being the owner of a shoe shop, where people know me for making shoes. When I own the shop and make the shoes, I'm not alienated from what I do for a living.

So back to the film Surrogate. It is set in a world where most everyone uses robots to travel about the world, and to work. They view and sense through the robots, but their real bodies are in "VR" beds. Needless to say, the robots are physically attractive, creating a world of supermodels. Meanwhile, the humans look shabby and sickly - they don't get out much. Or, in other terms, they exist in near complete alienation.

This was something I didn't expect from the film. And I'm not sure it was the intention of the film. Isolation and vanity are clearly themes it deals with, but as a side effect alienation comes into play as it produces an artificial superstructure - a false world in which humans have their surrogate machines do the living for them. The end result is that there is no "real " living going on in the film. Husbands and wives remain locked behind doors, while their surrogates interact with each other. This makes for a clever analogy for the Internet, texting, VR, and most trends in our modern world where personal interaction can be "phoned in" from a device.

With all of that said, this is not a new idea. It has been told in many different tales many times. However, without revealing the end of the film, I will say it was strikingly similar to a short story by John Shirley titled, "Techotriptych." In fact, it was so similar in concept and execution that I briefly wondered if John wrote the screenplay for Surrogate (he is a screenplay writer). It turns out not to be wasn't the case. And if you're wondering, John Shirley's tale deals with similar themes. He'd have to comment about the alienation aspect. Although, intended or not, it is embedded in his story as it is in Surrogate and Shaun of the Dead and Zombieland because alienation is a part of Western Culture. And I think, for me, that is part of the appeal of these films and short story. They touch upon a common theme, an aspect of the viewer's (and reader's) life.

Hopefully, I've not revealed too much about the film to spoil anything, but offered enough incentive to watch Surrogate. And if you haven't seen the other films mentioned, give them a shot. The same goes for John Shirley's tale. It is powerful and makes no apologies, but that is what rattles the reader into reconsidering the world in which he or she lives.

The Anthology of Dark Wisdom and Stoker

After receiving the always welcome email from Eric Christ, the Horror Writers Association (HWA) Stoker Awards verifier, it appears that The Anthology of Dark Wisdom: The Best of Dark Fiction has been recommended for a Bram Stoker Award.

Do note that there is quite a bit of difference between a "recommendation" and "nomination." The "nomination" part comes after enough recommendations have been made. Typically, there are only five final nominations. Nonetheless, the anthology is on the path to a potential nomination. Sadly, I cannot remember my HWA account, so I'm unable to read the Stoker list (that is being corrected presently).

In either case, it is worth mentioning all of the authors and thanking them for their work - which I can do again if the anthology reaches the nomination stage. My guess is this will particularly please Christian Klaver (as he has a tale in the anthology connected to Bram Stoker).

Authors:

Peter Straub, Alan Dean Foster, Tom Piccirilli, John Pelan, Richard A. Lupoff, John Shirley, Shane Jiraiya Cummings, Wendy Leeds, Lee Clark Zumpe, Gerard Houarner, Christopher Welch, Sam W. Anderson, C.J. Henderson, Paul Melnickzek, Richard Wright, Deanna Hoak, Christopher T. Leland, Bruce Boston, Lee Ballentine, Sherry Decker, Gene O’Neill, James Argendeli, Patricial Lee Macomber, David Niall Wilson, Christian Klaver, Tim Curran, Neddal Ayad, and Rachel Gray.