• Welcome to BookAndReader!

    We LOVE books and hope you'll join us in sharing your favorites and experiences along with your love of reading with our community. Registering for our site is free and easy, just CLICK HERE!

    Already a member and forgot your password? Click here.

Are Book Genres Meaningless?

abecedarian

Well-Known Member
"[Neil] Gaiman resists pigeonholing of his work, pointing out that his 2001 novel, American Gods, won awards for best science fiction, horror and fantasy.
"It's just a matter of shelving. It doesn't mean anything. Genre tags are just telling people in a Barnes & Noble where to go and put books," he says."
Your thoughts?
 
I think shelving books under genre has disadvantages. I don't read anything outside the "Fiction" area because I don't particularly care for genre fic. However, there are probably some very talented authors I would enjoy out there. There is a sortof similar conversation here that you might be interested in.
 
Yes, I agree that pigeon-holing works into specific genres will limit it's potential audience - people who would otherwise enjoy the book if it weren't found under 'scifi'. However, I think there's a lot to be said about filtering out stuff that I know I will enjoy versus something more akin to lottery. If there weren't any genres, I won't know if the subject matter of the book is something that I'd enjoy.

ds
 
Well that's what we have TBF for ;) Talking to people and based on what people say deciding whether or not we might like a certain book. I read all genres, so when I choose books I *am* participating in the lottery. And admittedly I do at times read books I'm disappointed with, but that has nothing to do with that.

Last time I was disappointed by a book it was one in my favoured genre, fantasy, that had been recommended to me very warmly. The reason it disappointed was that it had been recommended too warmly. I had been lead to believe that this was *the* book of all fantasy books. And it wasn't. It was good, but it was not fantabulous. Hence my disappointment.

I can't remember when I've been disappointed by a book I chose at random, mainly because when I do that I don't have a lot of expectations. Heck, when my grandmother gave me Umberto Eco's Foucault's Pendulum for Christmas some years back I hadn't ever read Eco before. And neither she nor my mum had read that book.

Perhaps I'm just very tolerant, but I think there could be found a better way fo sorting books.

For instance sorting them after target audience, so fantasy geeks like myself who like books with advanced plots, don't run into books for kids aged 13-17 all the time. Those can still be good and entertaining, but sometimes it'd be nice to know which is which. But since it's all fantasy no one bothers to tell us.

I like to read mysteries - should a crime novel that just so happens to be set in a fantasy setting be put under mysteries? or under fantasy? I'm inclined to think the former, because it tells me something about the plot, while the latter tells me something about the setting.

I'd like to see how a division of books akin to the current division of computer games would work. We'd have:

Action: Under which much fantasy and sci-fi would fit, Much action, fast moving story.
Adventure: More plot and character focused than the previous
Mystery/Crime: Detective stories in whichever setting applies.
Historical: we need this genre because I don't like to find Edward Rutherfurd's books under fantasy - they're not.
Love-stories/Romance: This should be self-explanatory.

This is by no means a complete list and I'm sure others can add useful categories to it, but I hope I've managed to demonstrate what I'd like to learn from the categories/genres we define books by. I don't need to know about the setting - the setting really isn't important to me, whereas I may one day feel like reading a love-story - where would I find that? In any of the genres we currently split books up in, so they really don't help me a lot.
 
I agree that the current set-up in bookstores leaves much to be desired. I personally don't enjoy crime/mysteries overly much, and so therefore I don't stray into that section very often. I know that I am probably missing out on some great reads by doing so, but it's just habit to stay away from that area of the bookstore. I'[d say that grouping books into certain catergories is most definatey limiting their audience, but I don't suppose that there is a radically different, better idea at this stage.

I like the idea, Jemima. I understand perfectly what you mean, and totally agree.
 
Can't wait to read his works so that I Can pigeonhole him.:cool: Yes, I'm certain that his work falls within a certain criteria-I'd bet the farm on it.:cool:
 
Jemima Aslana said:
Last time I was disappointed by a book it was one in my favoured genre, fantasy, that had been recommended to me very warmly. The reason it disappointed was that it had been recommended too warmly. I had been lead to believe that this was *the* book of all fantasy books. And it wasn't. It was good, but it was not fantabulous. Hence my disappointment.

Well now I'm curious what that book could be, Jemima...

ds
 
direstraits said:
Well now I'm curious what that book could be, Jemima...

ds
If you check one of the Feist related topics you'll see what my gripe was about Magician. It was a good book, and I suffered from this sort of artificial dissappointment, simply because the book was not perfect and as fantabulous as I had been 'promised'. I posted a longish comment on it in my booklog. Feel free to peruse.
 
abecedarian said:
"[Neil] Gaiman resists pigeonholing of his work, pointing out that his 2001 novel, American Gods, won awards for best science fiction, horror and fantasy.
"It's just a matter of shelving. It doesn't mean anything. Genre tags are just telling people in a Barnes & Noble where to go and put books," he says."

I would prefer that there wasn't such divisions in book shops, although, having attempted one Neil Gaiman novel, I'm quite happy for him to appear in a fantasy section, because I'll then be safe in the knowledge that I won't have to consider his other work as the fantasy section is a no-go area in my world.
 
Actually, I like the division of books in the book shops. It makes it a lot easier for me to know where to go when I want something specific, but I'm lazy, so there you go. :p

In my opinion all fiction can be placed into genres, whether they are categorised that way or not. There are heaps of romances in the 'fiction' section, but they're in the fiction section because the author is popular or some such nonsence. There is also historical fiction sittingin the fiction section and horror and all other genres. Just because they are in the fiction section rather than the genre section doesn't make them any better books. A category is a category and as we discussed in another thread, there is nothing really new or different.
 
Billy said:
There are heaps of romances in the 'fiction' section, but they're in the fiction section because the author is popular or some such nonsence. There is also historical fiction sittingin the fiction section and horror and all other genres. Just because they are in the fiction section rather than the genre section doesn't make them any better books. A category is a category and as we discussed in another thread, there is nothing really new or different.

I'm inclined to disagree with this and refer to something said by Shade in another post. The thing about the many works of genre fiction is that their theme is readily known before you even pick up the book; plot is their theme. How ultimately boring!

Within the decently browsable A to Z of authors found in bookshops there is less opacity to the novels; is it plot driven? is it an exercise in style? In my opinion the genre section is like looking before you leap, but, as an old friend once said to me, don't look before you leap: it spoils the surprise.
 
Jemima Aslana said:
If you check one of the Feist related topics you'll see what my gripe was about Magician.
Sorry to hear that. I know how that disappointment feels like.

Guy Gavriel Kay writes some of the most interesting fantasy loosely based on medieval societies that really existed: medieval spain, england, byzantine, france. And not all of his stuff is magic and mages. I'd be sad if they put him in historical fantasy.

And Jemima, I heartily recommend Kay if you hadn't had the pleasure of reading him yet.
 
Everybody keeps telling me I should read GG Kay, yes. He's on my TBP list, so I'll get there sooner or later. Just don't recommend it too heartily - I'd hate to be disappointed again just because my expectations were unnaturally high :p
 
Stewart said:
I'm inclined to disagree with this and refer to something said by Shade in another post. The thing about the many works of genre fiction is that their theme is readily known before you even pick up the book; plot is their theme. How ultimately boring!

You may disagree all you like, as that is your right. I'm sure I'm not telling you anything you don't already know when I say that plot and theme are two totally different things. Plot cannot be theme. One is the story line and one is the message the author is trying to convey. The theme is explored in the plot, so the two are not the same. I would never call a book that is plot driven ultimately boring just because it is placed in the genre section of a bookstore. A little predictable, maybe, but not boring. There is always enjoyment to be found in a good story.

Within the decently browsable A to Z of authors found in bookshops there is less opacity to the novels; is it plot driven? is it an exercise in style? In my opinion the genre section is like looking before you leap, but, as an old friend once said to me, don't look before you leap: it spoils the surprise.


Regardless of whether the book is an exercise in style or a plot driven romance, ultimately it will be placed into a category or genre. This was my point. Many books cross genres and these are the ones that are often not placed in the genre specific sections, but in the fiction sections, but even so when studied they are still placed into one genre or another. An example would be Margaret Attwoods, Oryx and Crake. One would not find this book in a genre specific section of a bookstore, it would be in the fiction section, however, when studied the book is clearly placed in the specualtive fiction category.
 
Billy said:
Plot cannot be theme.

Actually, it can. There are a huge number of throwaway novels out there (Dan Brown's, for example) and these are only interested in the plot. You can say, if you want, that The Da Vinci Code is about the Holy Grail, or whatever, but, when it comes down to it, the book's plot is its theme. It's all about the plot. Little, if anything, is given to exploring the characters, the setting, the implications, or the conflict of beliefs based on the content. It's all about the plot.
 
Stewart said:
It's all about the plot.

No wonder you didn't like it. A quick google search reveals that a lot of people aren't talking about the plot. They are talking about whether Dan Brown's so called "meticulously researched facts" are actually factual.

http://www.opusdei.org/art.php?w=32&p=7017

http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/persecution/pch0076.html

http://www.catholic.com/library/cracking_da_vinci_code.asp



Why should a Catholic be concerned about the novel?

Although a work of fiction, the book claims to be meticulously researched, and it goes to great lengths to convey the impression that it is based on fact. It even has a "fact" page at the front of the book underscoring the claim of factuality for particular ideas within the book. As a result, many readers-both Catholic and non-Catholic-are taking the book's ideas seriously.

The problem is that many of the ideas that the book promotes are anything but fact, and they go directly to the heart of the Catholic faith. For example, the book promotes these ideas:

Jesus is not God; he was only a man.
Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene.
She is to be worshiped as a goddess.
Jesus got her pregnant, and the two had a daughter.
That daughter gave rise to a prominent family line that is still present in Europe today.
The Bible was put together by a pagan Roman emperor.
Jesus was viewed as a man and not as God until the fourth century, when he was deified by the emperor Constantine.
The Gospels have been edited to support the claims of later Christians.
In the original Gospels, Mary Magdalene rather than Peter was directed to establish the Church.
There is a secret society known as the Priory of Sion that still worships Mary Magdalene as a goddess and is trying to keep the truth alive.
The Catholic Church is aware of all this and has been fighting for centuries to keep it suppressed. It often has committed murder to do so.
The Catholic Church is willing to and often has assassinated the descendents of Christ to keep his bloodline from growing.



My dictionary gives several defintions of theme, but one is "a distinct, recurring, and unifying quality or idea:"

Plot is defined as: "The pattern of events or main story in a narrative or drama"

"The humanity of Christ," is an distinct idea that reocurrs throughout the Da Vinci Code. It's not an event in the narrative. Sounds like a theme to me.

But to stay on topic. Everything about a book matters: genre, cover, sales, publicity, reputation of the writer etc. Different people react differently to all of those things. Which is one of the reason books are pretty cool, and discussing books is so interesting.
 
Doug Johnson said:
A quick google search reveals that a lot of people aren't talking about the plot.

http://www.opusdei.org/art.php?w=32&p=7017

http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/persecution/pch0076.html

http://www.catholic.com/library/cracking_da_vinci_code.asp

They are talking about whether Dan Brown's so called "meticulously researched facts" are actually factual.

What quick Google search did you do to get OpusDei, Catholic Education, and Catholic.com? Certainly not "the da vinci code"+"plot" or "the da vinci code"+"theme".

Anyhow, I don't see the relevance between discussing facts in relation to the plot.

Why should a Catholic be concerned about the novel?

No reason.

My dictionary gives several defintions of theme, but one is "a distinct, recurring, and unifying quality or idea:"

Plot is defined as: "The pattern of events or main story in a narrative or drama"

"The humanity of Christ," is an distinct idea that reocurrs throughout the Da Vinci Code. It's not an event in the narrative. Sounds like a theme to me.

Yes, the humanity of Christ is a part of the storyline but I don't view it as much more than a plotpoint. The author isn't exploring the divine nature of Christ, he's not exporing the sacred feminine mythos; he's creating nothing more than a treasure hunt of which these things form clues and content.
 
hm.. well genres do certainly organize a story/library well. i just stick to the fiction section. i dont really gravitate toward sci-fi since most of the time i dont like imagining a new world/appearance. yeh, i'm lazy like that. altho i have read some great sci-fi books before. shame i can't remember the names.
 
direstraits said:
I'd be sad if they put him in historical fantasy.
Yikes! I really meant "I'd be sad if they put him in historical fiction".

Ah, yes, there is a squadron of Kay lovers here in this forum. Tis good.

Even if you're disappointed, Jemima (though highly unlikely :D), I'd love to hear from your point of view. Impossible for everyone to love something universally, so points from a non-believer would be most welcome. That's the number one reason I recommend Kay anyway, to have Kay readers to talk to about his books, regardless of whether they like him or not.

ds
 
Back
Top