By Cindy Orr
James Fallows of The Atlantic says that he feels vaguely cheesy because he likes to read mysteries and thrillers, but he also says that “crime fiction is classy now, and has taken over part of the describing-modern-life job that high-toned novelists abdicated when they moved into the universities.”
His test for whether a book is one he can feel good about reading over one he should wean himself from? Can he remember anything about it a month, six months or a year after reading it. Some of his genre candidates for this list include Scott Smith’s A Simple Plan, Charles McCarry’s The Tears of Autumn, and Peter Robinson’s In a Dry Season.
The distinction between highbrow and lowbrow is a recent phenomenon according to Charles McGrath in the New York Times. Charles Dickens wrote ghost stories and mysteries. The good book, bad book argument began in earnest at the end of the 19th Century with the rise of the penny dreadful. What we look for in genre writing, according to John Updike, is “the predictableness of a formula successfully executed. We know exactly what we’re going to get, and that’s a seductive part of the appeal.”
But nevertheless, some genre authors have been promoted to the mainstream—Raymond Chandler and Dashiell Hammett, for instance. The question is, why not more? And the answer is likely that there is still a stigma attached to genre writing. Many critics were upset, for example, when the thriller Child 44 by Tom Rob Smith was nominated for the Man Booker Prize.
Ursula K. Le Guin has long spoken on the use of the label “genre” as an evaluative term (read unworthy). But here is Jeffery Deaver on how Raymond Chandler’s The Long Good-Bye transcends its genre.
Sarah Weinman, in her blog Confessions of an Idiosyncratic Mind, has a thoughtful take on the subject: does a book really transcend genre, or is it just a matter of writers with bigger or smaller imaginations, and greater and lesser talent?
On the other hand, why is it that Cormac McCarthy’s The Road was not ghettoized as science fiction even though it resembles many other postapocalyptic works relegated to those shelves? And will Michael Chabon be successful in pulling genre out of the muck and into the mainstream?
What do you think?









