# SOCIAL STATUS among Authors?



## Mikeyboy_esq (Sep 30, 2020)

Never seen this topic discussed before, but I'm curious to know if most people view all book authors as having the same "social status" or are authors viewed as having different social status based on the particular genre they write. In other words, are authors of CERTAIN GENRE typically viewed by the general public/reading community as having more value, respect, honor, and assumed competence than authors of other genre? 

If there is a social hierarchy, what do you think it is from highest to lowest status? (e.g., 1-fiction, 2-nonfiction, 3-poetry, 4-children's books, 5-cook books, etc.)  Similarly, do fiction authors have their own hierarchy of social status based on the particular type of fiction they write? 

What say you?


----------



## Olly Buckle (Sep 30, 2020)

The genre does not seem like an important factor to me. I would think the quality of the writing is the main thing, and that could be assessed in two ways, by the opinion of the literary professionals and intelligentsia, and by the number of books they sell, or the opinion of the general public in other words. Sometimes the two coincide, how far up the scale you are is a matter of opinion in one school, and of numbers in the other.


----------



## EternalGreen (Sep 30, 2020)

I don't think someone who writes a cookbook is very concerned what writers of fiction think about them.


----------



## Olly Buckle (Sep 30, 2020)

EternalGreen said:


> I don't think someone who writes a cookbook is very concerned what writers of fiction think about them.



True if it is your run of the mill, average, cook book and it is the opinion of any old run of the mill fiction writer; but what if it is someone trying to do something new and different in writing about cookery and develop a literary style and a well known literary figure and writer of fiction writes a review of it , bet your life they are concerned. See what I mean about it is not really the genre that counts? Its the writing. Another way of looking at it than the people who assess it is by the qualities they are assessing. Could be by the direct quality of writing, the way they put the words together, or it could be by the ideas behind what they are writing. That can be true for a fiction writer or a cookery writer, but there is no reason why one could not appreciate one of those qualities in another, and I reckon any author worth his salt will care about the appreciation of his readers, even if they do write about something completely different.


----------



## EternalGreen (Sep 30, 2020)

How could you possibly write a "literary" cookbook?


----------



## PiP (Sep 30, 2020)

Cookery book writers have their own social hierarchy depending which celebrity chef published it. BUT I'd rather have a Delia Smith or Mary Berry book than a Gordon Ramsey or Jamie Oliver's some of their recipes probably come close to fiction on prep and cooking times. 

As for fiction, yes, I believe there is a social hierachy both readers and authors and I have heard the phrase: genre shaming being banded about For example are all these authors equal? E. L. James (erotica). J.K Rowling (Fantasy) John Grisham (Legal Thrillers).

Out of the three I would place legal thrillers way ahead of fantasy and erotica/fanfic at the bottom.

Nonfiction I don't know.



> If there is a social hierarchy, what do you think it is from highest to  lowest status? (e.g., 1-fiction, 2-nonfiction, 3-poetry, 4-children's  books, 5-cook books, etc.)



It's like comparing apples to oranges. But if pressed I would say: nonfiction including cookbooks), fiction, poetry, children's books.


----------



## luckyscars (Sep 30, 2020)

EternalGreen said:


> How could you possibly write a "literary" cookbook?


----------



## luckyscars (Sep 30, 2020)

Mikeyboy_esq said:


> Similarly, do fiction authors have their own hierarchy of social status based on the particular type of fiction they write?



Honestly? I think it's really hard and rather unnecessarily foolish to 'go there' given egos. But, yeah, if you put a gun to my head, I think there is a kind of hierarchy (within fiction, not sure about the comparisons with cookbooks) which is NOT based on the actual quality or anything but rather just the kind of 'reputation' and representation certain genres receive through layman discourse and media:

- Literary fiction is clearly at the top. Should it be? Possibly not, but it is. This is our equivalent of 'Oscar' material. 

- Historical fiction & Memoir. I would put this a close runner up because a lot of it is considered pretty literary and it is often written by academics or other 'serious' people. There's a lot that falls under historical fiction, but I'm talking about the high-end, less genre-y stuff. Ken Follet, etc. This stuff can win the Oscars pretty often also.

- Science Fiction: Roughly at the same level as Historical: Tends to enjoy a pretty good reputation due to being another 'brainy' genre, rather like litfic, though undermined slightly by the sheer quantity of trash. Occasionally flirts with Oscars.

- Romance: This can be rather varying. Some romantic fiction is considered classic, others very much not so. 

- Mystery, Thrillers & Crime - Commercial: I would put this either at the bottom of the top-tier or top of the bottom tier depending on the writer and subject matter.

- Fantasy: With notable exceptions, Fantasy seems to struggle to be taken seriously. Possibly due to its traditional popularity among the kind of people who struggle to put on deodorant in the morning.

- Horror: As something of a horror-ish writer myself, it pains me a little bit to accept this, but this is a really rough one. Horror is popular. It's also deeply unpopular. The word is probably 'polarizing'. You either really like horror or you don't. Unfortunately, a lot of the people who really like horror don't seem to work for Simon & Schuster or the Booker Prize panel. There are some well-respected horror writers, sure, but not terribly many. The relative stigma is probably why many horror writers try to avoid using the label -- 'this is PSYCHOLOGICAL THRILLER SUSPENSE'. No mate, it's horror. Horror don't win Oscars, sorry.

- Western: People don't value this genre much anymore. Considered a vehicle for a lot of toxicity. Pity, really.

- YA/MG: It's down here only because a lot of people don't consider childrens writing 'real writing'.

- Graphic novels: Like YA/MG, unfortunately.

- The weird stuff lives at the bottom: Splatterpunk, steampunk, dieselpunk, anything 'punk', absurdism, erotica.


----------



## indianroads (Sep 30, 2020)

Olly Buckle said:


> True if it is your run of the mill, average, cook book and it is the opinion of any old run of the mill fiction writer; but what if it is someone trying to do something new and different in writing about cookery and develop a literary style and a well known literary figure and writer of fiction writes a review of it , bet your life they are concerned. See what I mean about it is not really the genre that counts? Its the writing. Another way of looking at it than the people who assess it is by the qualities they are assessing. Could be by the direct quality of writing, the way they put the words together, or it could be by the ideas behind what they are writing. That can be true for a fiction writer or a cookery writer, but there is no reason why one could not appreciate one of those qualities in another, and I reckon any author worth his salt will care about the appreciation of his readers, even if they do write about something completely different.



Off topic a bit - my apologies. 

My wife is Indonesian - and according to my mother in law, and some islands still have cannibals. The government denies this... but you know - that could just be propaganda... or not.

Anyway - I've been after her for years to make a funny cookbook named after one of our favorite Twilight Zone episodes - "How to Serve Man". Of course the recipes would be fictional - substituting steak or hamburger for human meat, and giving the dish a funny name. I'd love to see her do that one day, at the least, it would be something to pass down to our daughters.


----------



## indianroads (Sep 30, 2020)

Regarding the topic - 

Of course, among some groups if you're writing romance, or horror, or scifi, or fantasy - you're not a _real_ writer.  Real writers write historical epics filled with hundred dollar words, and the rest of us are hacks.

But really, who cares? Those folks have their heads shoved shoulders deep up their own ass, because just smelling their own farts isn't enough.


----------



## Cephus (Sep 30, 2020)

Who cares? Anyone who is trying to compare themselves to those around them has issues. The only thing that matters is how well you do the thing that you're trying to do. Be the best writer you can. Stop competing with others. You're not helping anyone if you do that.


----------



## Sir-KP (Sep 30, 2020)

- literary fiction/non-fiction with classic English words that barely used today
- poetry
- non-fiction
- fiction
- The _How to be Rich, How to Get Laid, etc._ motivational books

I guess...


----------



## bdcharles (Oct 1, 2020)

The way I see it is:

The Classics
Epic Poetry
Literary Fiction
Non-Fiction
Historical Fiction
Other Poetry
Contemporary Fiction
Crime / Thriller
Horror
Anything with the "~punk" suffix
Wattpad
Scrawled notes of any kind
Graffiti on bathroom walls
Discarded noodles, preferably on the street outside a takeaway.
Unmentionables in the sink
Inexplicable brown stains on bathroom walls
Dog poo
Slime
Base matter (loosely arranged)
Fantasy


----------



## Olly Buckle (Oct 1, 2020)

EternalGreen said:


> How could you possibly write a "literary" cookbook?



Try putting 'literary cookbooks' into Google. If you are trying to sell a set of instructions to produce a meal in competition with many others better writing would appear to be an obvious way to make it stand out. Better meals would be a good option, sure, but making it as good as you can all round seems sensible. I am not greatly into cooking, but I remember reading with interest a book of Chinese cookery which explained the various regional cooking methods according to the types of fuel available as well as ingredients, it was a good and interesting read. I made the egg fried rice once or twice


----------



## bdcharles (Oct 1, 2020)

Olly Buckle said:


> Try putting 'literary cookbooks' into Google. If you are trying to sell a set of instructions to produce a meal in competition with many others better writing would appear to be an obvious way to make it stand out. Better meals would be a good option, sure, but making it as good as you can all round seems sensible. I am not greatly into cooking, but I remember reading with interest a book of Chinese cookery which explained the various regional cooking methods according to the types of fuel available as well as ingredients, it was a good and interesting read. I made the egg fried rice once or twice



I personally think there's a market for literary cookbooks.



> "You are a man quite incorrigible!" yelled Bob, throwing the lonely level teaspoon's worth of crushed garlic (how Andy hated the stuff) onto the small dollop of olive oil that had been simmering there these three minutes past,  a greasy pool of unrequited something. "I shall deny you this Thai chicken curry that serves five!"
> 
> The cubes of breast on the chopping board - they were naught but 750g of wasted years. So what if he was to sauté them for fifteen minutes till browned? It barely mattered that he - Bob - might add an optional sprig of coriander to the tainted mess.


----------



## Olly Buckle (Oct 1, 2020)

The egg fried rice recipe stuck with me partly because it was written by her mathematician husband.

"Break three eggs into a bowl by knocking them one against the other. It is practical to adopt a numbering system that counts the egg that breaks as the next egg in the series."


----------



## TheManx (Oct 1, 2020)

I really want to be seen as literary writer. When I go out, I wear a cable sweater and tweed jacket with patches on the elbows. I carry a pipe, and when people talk to me, I put it in my mouth and look thoughtfully into the distance. If I'm drunk, well, that adds to the effect...


----------



## luckyscars (Oct 1, 2020)

bdcharles said:


> The way I see it is:
> 
> The Classics
> Epic Poetry
> ...



I know this list may not be particularly scientific  But do you think fantasy ranks below horror in terms of social acceptance?

I feel like even though fantasy isn't taken terribly seriously it nevertheless doesn't suffer from the same stigma as horror does. Fantasy may still often be considered a refuge for man-children and smelly basement-dwellers rather than Real Writers, but I feel like those of us who enjoy horror suffer from similar levels of social stigma with additional baggage. Fantasy, for all the dismissiveness with which it is often treated, and in spite of the grimmer modern iterations, seems usually considered morally harmless. I can imagine telling somebody I am a fantasy author and getting nothing more than a smirk and a bit of pretend interest.

Horror has baggage, though. Might depend on where you live, but around 'these parts' it's the kind of thing that often not only gets scorned as being cheap, childish trash but also morally dubious. The impression I always get from a lot of people (who claim to like reading) when I tell them I write horror stories is '...um, oh.' It's one of those genres where people seem to conflate the subject matter with the morality of the author a hell of a lot.


----------



## Phil Istine (Oct 1, 2020)

(1)  What I write.

(2) What others write.


----------



## Kyle R (Oct 1, 2020)

From what I've seen, Romance authors get a pretty bad rep.

They're often put pretty low on the "fiction hierarchy", because there's a perception that Romance is corny fluff, and not to be taken seriously.


----------



## bdcharles (Oct 1, 2020)

luckyscars said:


> But do you think fantasy ranks below horror in terms of social acceptance?



 I don't really know. In  the UK there isn't quite that section of society that objects morally to things. It's more about gaining broad middle class traction, irrespective of whichever dissolute artform. Most people here think you're not serious until you've been on morning telly or been endorsed by a local pet charity or something; once you have been, they can mention you in company again.


----------



## TheManx (Oct 1, 2020)

Kyle R said:


> From what I've seen, Romance authors get a pretty bad rep.
> 
> They're often put pretty low on the "fiction hierarchy", because there's a perception that Romance is corny fluff, and not to be taken seriously.



My mom was into literary fiction, and weighty non-fiction, but she'd read her "trash books" with the hunk and the bosomy lady embracing on the cover. She used to hide them under other books or magazines. My sister and I would read the sex scenes and laugh hysterically. "Throbbing member" became a catch phrase. One euphemism that really cracked us up was "grotto of passion." Ha ha ha.


----------



## luckyscars (Oct 1, 2020)

Kyle R said:


> From what I've seen, Romance authors get a pretty bad rep.
> 
> They're often put pretty low on the "fiction hierarchy", because there's a perception that Romance is corny fluff, and not to be taken seriously.



Yeah I think probably subgenres alter a lot of this. "Literary horror' is probably more on the higher end, Sarah Waters or even Stephen King -- literary first, than some Edward Lee type blood-and-gore-and-and-monsters stuff. Likewise, when I think 'romance' I tend to think of more old fashioned, literary type romance than the beach reads which are probably more common nowadays. We can probably say anything with scantily clad men on the cover is considered on the lower end; society is still kind of prudish. Maybe romance and horror have something in common in being perceived as morally questionable?

I still think romance novels enjoy a slightly better rep than horror novels primarily because they are much more commercially popular. 



bdcharles said:


> I don't really know. In  the UK there isn't quite that section of society that objects morally to things. It's more about gaining broad middle class traction, irrespective of whichever dissolute artform. Most people here think you're not serious until you've been on morning telly or been endorsed by a local pet charity or something; once you have been, they can mention you in company again.



I think by 'morally' I mean less about outrage and stuff (though that can be the case) and more just about people being a bit uncomfortable...

When I tell people I write, they always ask what kind of stuff, and I often find it difficult to say the H word because I feel like even if the reaction isn't completely negative it nonetheless puts me into a box. Basically, my _perception_ is the general public seems to often think horror authors are weirdos, possibly troubled, possibly even lacking somewhat of a moral compass -- _why do you write that stuff?_ Which is a bit unique, maybe?

Romance authors? Well they're obviously all perpetually horny. Sci fi and historical? They're obviously nerds. Fantasy? Harmless oddballs. Horror seems to have something 'else' about it. Crime and mystery too, but to a far lesser extent.


----------



## Olly Buckle (Oct 1, 2020)

I'm with your mum, Manx. I'll read serious non-fiction historical, social, and science; then I will pick up an easy read paperback, or the latest from Galbraith or Aaronovitch Variety is the spice of life.


----------



## Deleted member 64995 (Oct 2, 2020)

It's true, many people find certain genres ridiculous.
I told some people that my dream as a writer is Science Fiction.
I discovered at that moment that it is not a genre taken seriously.

Some people judge the writer first, and then his short stories.


----------



## indianroads (Oct 2, 2020)

LadySilence said:


> It's true, many people find certain genres ridiculous.
> I told some people that my dream as a writer is Science Fiction.
> I discovered at that moment that it is not a genre taken seriously.
> 
> Some people judge the writer first, and then his short stories.



I get that a lot. "Oh Sci-Fi... that's a good mindless, escapist read." 

Yet, the genre is a medium where we can address social/political/cultural issues on a tangent and thereby say more than we could in other genre's without it seeming to beat them up.


----------



## Olly Buckle (Oct 2, 2020)

I reckon that can be true of any genre if the opinion of the genre is based on particular writers, the rubbish ones who are not wf members. 

As I have said previously, the social status is much more likely to depend on the quality of the writing. I have seen Ray Bradbury get rave reviews from people who think of themselves as 'literary critics'. Could be that that is because he writes literature in the form of science fiction, he is definitely rated by people who are not typical sf fans.


----------



## indianroads (Oct 2, 2020)

Reading the first couple pages of Bradbury's Fahrenheit 451, or Well's War of the Worlds is enough to humble even the greatest authors ... in my opinion.

Gorgeous words.


----------



## luckyscars (Oct 2, 2020)

I mean, I think Ray Bradbury really is different. He is essentially a litfic author who happened to enjoy the subject matter typically associated with genre fiction and wrote about that sometimes (a lot of his books aren't SF). Something like Atwood. Something like Stephen King. These are really literary fiction authors who simply happen to be 'into stuff' and by incorporating their subject interests they can transcend.

To the limited extent this thread is worth discussing it can only be by sticking to generalizations based on 'typical' output. This isn't about quality of writing but broad public perceptions of the genres as a whole. 

Boilerplate science fiction isn't taken that seriously as a genre. Maybe because many people don't take science all that seriously.


----------



## Kyle R (Oct 2, 2020)

I imagine Erotica authors get a lot of snobbery thrown their way.


----------



## Pamelyn Casto (Oct 2, 2020)

I think, in general, a novel ranks the highest in many eyes. Then (I'd guess) comes nonfiction, then fiction, then poetry, then children's books, then cookbooks. I've even heard it said you're not a real author at all unless you've written a novel. I'm not a lover of novels myself-- I prefer shorter fiction, nonfiction, and poetry. I'm not easily pleased by most novels so mostly gave up reading them. (I have some unforgettable favorites, though.) I've read very few children's books (I mostly read adult work as a kid-- including a neighbor's serious collection of porno read when I was twelve and thirteen while babysitting for the neighbor's kids). I've only recently started exploring cookbooks-- out of a desire to get all junk food out of my life (yeah, I know, I'm no fun now.)


----------



## EternalGreen (Oct 2, 2020)

luckyscars said:


> I mean, I think Ray Bradbury really is different. He is essentially a litfic author who happened to enjoy the subject matter typically associated with genre fiction and wrote about that sometimes (a lot of his books aren't SF). Something like Atwood. Something like Stephen King. These are really literary fiction authors who simply happen to be 'into stuff' and by incorporating their subject interests they can transcend.
> 
> .



I can't help but think it's silly to use the word "literary" to mean "good."

A book about a clown demon that kills people is probably not literary fiction, no matter how "good" it is. It's speculative horror. "Literary" fiction is not always "better" than "nonliterary" fiction.


----------



## EternalGreen (Oct 2, 2020)

The Iliad, if published today, would be considered a genre war-story, not literary fiction, (The sequel would be an adventure - not literary - story.) and it's considered one of the best things ever written.

I try not to think too hard about genres.


----------



## Darren White (Oct 2, 2020)

I do think the Iliad would still be considered lyrical, metric, epic, poetry


----------



## luckyscars (Oct 3, 2020)

Kyle R said:


> I imagine Erotica authors get a lot of snobbery thrown their way.



I think it's a little more insidious than just snobbery. Erotica writers are treated as sex workers and subject to the same ostracization from 'decent people'.


----------



## luckyscars (Oct 3, 2020)

EternalGreen said:


> "Literary" fiction is not always "better" than "nonliterary" fiction.



Yeah, but I didn't say it was better. Terms like 'good' and 'better' don't mean anything. Personally I despise a lot of literary fiction while, at the same time, recognizing it is where the highest levels of writing (not _storytelling_, that's different) tend to exist.

Comparing most literary fiction to most genre fiction is like comparing a Michelin star French restaurant to a really good taco truck. Which is 'better' food? Well, that depends totally on what you want, right? The taco truck is probably more enjoyable to more people most of the time -- it's certainly what I'd go for most days of the week. But it's *just tacos*.

What I have found with writing genre fiction is that it's actually possible to be too complicated. By that I mean, if you try to sell a horror story that is overly complex or ambitious in terms of what it is trying to say, it stops feeling like horror and therefore gets into this sort of no man's land of being genre fiction that feels more like literary fiction. People like Bradbury, Atwood and King are able to bridge that gap somewhat, but for those of us who are less talented it can be a challenge to balance. I don't want to say that genre fiction requires a degree of dumbing down, because in other respects it doesn't, but there's no doubt that, in general terms at least, there's a huge difference between the two in technical and thematic complexity.


----------



## Deleted member 64995 (Oct 3, 2020)

There are many prejudices, unfortunately when it comes to reading.
I want to give an example.


During the LockDown caused by Coronavirus, to relax, I read a book from a TV series.
The Walking Dead Rise of the Governor (ok you can laugh LoL)
Excluding the story, from the narrative point of view,
 there are descriptions, and metaphors, fantastic.
I have read the translated book. I also want to read it in the original language.
I took a lot of notes from this book.
Ok it will never be a masterpiece, but it is well written.


But if I tell someone that the book is beautiful, and well written, I get very bad responses, from those who don't even read it.


Prejudice also kills literature.
My personal opinion.


----------



## EternalGreen (Oct 3, 2020)

luckyscars said:


> Comparing most literary fiction to most genre fiction is like comparing a Michelin star French restaurant to a really good taco truck.



I think that's a pretty silly comparison. Do you consider novels like Frankenstein and Dracula the equivalent of greasy fast food just because they are the epitome of genre-fiction?

I have already given examples of stuff that would be considered "genre" today that's revered as some of the best literature has to offer.

The Tell Tale Heart is often considered _one of_ the finest short stories ever written in English, despite being horror with no "real point" besides the horror and suspense.

In fact, Edgar Allen Poe is often considered the finest American short story author (probably the most "classic" - due to his innovation - short story author in the English language) and he wrote mostly horror, suspense, macabre, and detective fiction.

I wouldn't beat yourself up about writing psychological thrillers.


----------



## luckyscars (Oct 3, 2020)

EternalGreen said:


> I think that's a pretty silly comparison. Do you consider novels like Frankenstein and Dracula the equivalent of greasy fast food just because they are the epitome of genre-fiction?
> 
> I have already given examples of stuff that would be considered "genre" today that's revered as some of the best literature has to offer.
> 
> ...



I see we're doing the signature WF routine of "let me pick some extremely high profile exceptions and pretend they are representative of the whole".

If you think Frankenstein and Dracula and Edgar Allen Poe are typical of the status given to the vast majority of modern science and horror fiction on Amazon or a bookstore, that's your prerogative. It's misreading the point, though.

This isn't a question of 'what are the best books'. The thread title isn't 'what genre has the most good books and is therefore the best?' This is simply a question of perceptions and status. You really don't need to list off examples of genre fiction books that are better than literary fiction books. I know they exist. The problem is that doesn't address perceptions or status.

Literary fiction is _defined _by incorporating higher-grade language and deeper meaning. If you don't like the food example, we can use the movie example. Literary fiction is the stuff that gets reliably archived as 'culturally significant' and has scope for a college essay on its characters and themes. It's your high-concept, high-grade writing that carries weight beyond just telling a story. It's 'Schindler's List' versus 'The Blair Witch Project'. Neither is unquestionably better as a movie, but only one wins major awards.

 Whether or not it is deserved, doesn't matter. Whether or not some literary fiction happens to superficially overlap with genre fiction, also doesn't matter. What matters is that in broad terms this is its 'social status' and there's no point in arguing about it. Nobody is winning the Booker Prize with a YA vampire romance anytime soon, and if they do it will only be because they somehow managed to go beyond the scope of genre fiction.


----------



## Olly Buckle (Oct 3, 2020)

S you are saying the genre normally dictates the social status of the writer in the writing world, but if they are good enough at writing, or run away with Shelly or something, they can move up the scale despite the fact that they write in a genre that is normally despised, or at least looked down upon. No, sorry, ignore the bit about Shelly, I couldn't resist it, naughty Olly.

Do you think it is possible that , with some exceptions, the people who write in the genres esteemed lowest don't usually write as well as those who write in the more esteemed genres and that what people really admire and award status for is a good bit of writing, which would account for there being individuals awarded a status incompatible with that normally awarded to their genre?

Just a thought.

I wonder if there are writers in the higher status genres who are really despised? Maybe they never get published. complete lack of cred there


----------



## luckyscars (Oct 3, 2020)

Olly Buckle said:


> S you are saying the genre normally dictates the social status of the writer in the writing world, but if they are good enough at writing, or run away with Shelly or something, they can move up the scale despite the fact that they write in a genre that is normally despised, or at least looked down upon. No, sorry, ignore the bit about Shelly, I couldn't resist it, naughty Olly.



Yeah, I think a good enough writer can more or less ascend in status regardless of genre. I say more or less because I don't think that's _always _true. Like, erotica may have some genuinely brilliant writing but it's totally handicapped by the subject matter and the stigma attached. Less extreme: I think Louis L'Amour, who wrote pretty much only Westerns his entire life, was probably undermined by his apparent dislike of any other type of book, and that meant that despite huge sales he never really built the legacy _despite _being a brilliant writer, in my opinion. So, genre choice can definitely in some cases totally box you in status-wise.



> Do you think it is possible that , with some exceptions, the people who write in the genres esteemed lowest don't usually write as well as those who write in the more esteemed genres and that what people really admire and award status for is a good bit of writing, which would account for there being individuals awarded a status incompatible with that normally awarded to their genre?
> 
> Just a thought.
> 
> I wonder if there are writers in the higher status genres who are really despised? Maybe they never get published. complete lack of cred there



I don't know, it's a good question. 

I do think some genres are far more flexible when it comes to quality of writing. I don't think really any genres are totally accommodating of bad writing, but real genre fiction tends to seemingly tolerate, if not outright prefer, 'workmanlike' standards rather than 'high' standards.

For example, your typical beach read romance is supposed to attract mass market appeal. Most adults in America simply don't have the reading skills or attention span necessary to engage with complex, high level literature, so a writer who tends towards writing that way, may do as poorly within those kinds of genres as a 'bad writer'.


----------



## EternalGreen (Oct 3, 2020)

luckyscars said:


> Nobody is winning the Booker Prize with a YA vampire romance anytime soon, and if they do it will only be because they somehow managed to go beyond the scope of genre fiction.



Romeo and Juliet is essentially a YA romance. And the ending is paranormal/speculative (the afterlife).


----------



## luckyscars (Oct 3, 2020)

EternalGreen said:


> Romeo and Juliet is essentially a YA romance.



It really isn’t.


----------



## EternalGreen (Oct 3, 2020)

I was joking with you about the supernatural elements, but the characters Romeo and Juliet are both young adults.


----------



## ppsage (Oct 3, 2020)

I feel like the (poorly defined) dependent variable in this hypothesis has so many differing causes that the independent variable chosen for analysis is hopelessly mired in uncontrollable contingency. It seems like its effect would often (usually?) be out weighted by writing ability and commercial popularity. We're also confronted with problems of comparing local statusifications to some general standard and with accounting for differing cultural preferences among readerships. With so much uncontrolled variability, defending idle speculation is all that can be brought to the experiment. Entertaining, but not a serious occupation.


----------



## ArrowInTheBowOfTheLord (Oct 3, 2020)

One question: how is this thread useful at all? Mildly interesting perhaps, but as a writing discussion? How would this help anyone improve their writing?


----------



## Turnbull (Oct 3, 2020)

I don't know...isn't status defined more by success?  Besides from the "success from something not particularly great" phenomenon of things like Twilight and 40 Shades, if one is a successful author in any genre, writers of the other genres respect.  I think the people who care the most about status tend to be less successful.  The more successful writers are, the less interested they generally seem to be in lording it over other writers.  They still get a big head sometimes, but generally that has to do with their fans rather than other writers.  

I dunno, my general impression.  I think also that maybe things have changed with the advent of the internet and easier forms of publishing, because not only are there more writers to keep up with, it's harder to stand out among them.  Back in the day published writers might have seemed more like a social class because there were fewer of them.


----------



## luckyscars (Oct 3, 2020)

ArrowInTheBowOfTheLord said:


> One question: how is this thread useful at all? Mildly interesting perhaps, but as a writing discussion? How would this help anyone improve their writing?



I have misgivings on it also. That said, I think when choosing a genre it often helps to consider it in a larger context. It's the old cliche "know your reader".

 Not to say you shouldn't write whatever you want, but if you have a set goal it makes sense to look at the context in which your writing is likely to be received.

For instance, if your favorite kinds of books are on the higher end of literary-ness, and if that is your goal, you need to work at your chops accordingly. Your skills need to be compatible with expectations. You have to have exemplary use of language, and a particular type of language that touches something deeper. I've critiqued a lot of self-declared 'literary' stuff that just...wasn't. Likewise, if you're the kind of writer who really loves symbolism, deep character studies, etc. then you may have difficulty writing for most horror outlets because a lot of horror outlets just don't value those kinds of things much. 

There are always ways to adapt and forge a new path, but it doesn't hurt to sometimes analyze books as the consumer products they are.


----------



## Olly Buckle (Oct 4, 2020)

ppsage said:


> I feel like the (poorly defined) dependent variable in this hypothesis has so many differing causes that the independent variable chosen for analysis is hopelessly mired in uncontrollable contingency. It seems like its effect would often (usually?) be out weighted by writing ability and commercial popularity. We're also confronted with problems of comparing local statusifications to some general standard and with accounting for differing cultural preferences among readerships. With so much uncontrolled variability, defending idle speculation is all that can be brought to the experiment. Entertaining, but not a serious occupation.



Great. Poorly defined, many variables, differing causes, uncontrolled contingency, idle speculation and entertaining without serious occupation to cause vituperative disagreement; it is almost as good a subject for discussion as the weather, perfect, this thread could go on forever.  

How about the personality of the author themselves? That has to be a factor as well, someone like Twain who could return skint from Hawaii and book a concert hall and give a lecture, fill the hall and re-establish his financial status, or start his career selling books door to door. Dickens who could manage lectures and a menage a trois, hard drinking Hemingway, real characters. Would some shrinking violet, wimp the publishers didn't even fancy sending to a book signing have any status among authors?

And useful ArrowInTheBow ? Useful has nothing to do with status, do the authors who write do-it-yourself manuals receive any status for it? No.


----------



## apocalypsegal (Oct 4, 2020)

My opinion is that there is a certain preferred writing for many. First, literary fiction. Genre fiction writers are hacks and not worthy of respect. Second would come respected persons writing nonfiction. Anyone else, likely hacks.

In genre fiction, Romance and Erotica are generally not respected. Speculative fiction fares a bit better, but not much. Women SF writers are still giving girl cooties. Ew. Thriller, mystery and suspense seems to garner respect, except that they're still hacks to the literary crowd. Historical fiction seems to do okay, as long as it's not tied to Romance.

Traditionally published authors are better than self publishers, at least in some crowds. (Don't ask them about their bank accounts, that's a touchy subject. Any hack can make _money_, but where's the _validation_?)

It's sad to see it, but it's there. All writers are created equal, but some are more equal than others.


----------



## JJBuchholz (Oct 4, 2020)

Phil Istine said:


> (1)  What I write.
> 
> (2) What others write.



This should be the only way we look at it, as writers.


-JJB


----------



## Pallandozi (Oct 4, 2020)

Mikeyboy_esq said:


> are authors of CERTAIN GENRE typically viewed by the general public/reading community as having more value, respect, honor, and assumed competence than authors of other genre?



Yes.
And, interestingly, there are probably many writers who share the view, and suffer from imposter syndrome because of it.

On examining my personal assumptions, my hierarchy ends up looking something like:

*Authors who change the world.*   Examples of books: Newton's _Principia_, The Mahabharata, Clarke's _Profiles of the Future.
_
*Authors who change how the world is seen*.   Voltaire's _Candide_, Kesey's _One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest_, The Poems of Wilfred Owen

*Authors whose quotes, plots or characters form part of a cultural narrative*.  The Merchant of Venice, by William Shakespeare

*Authors whose books have practical use.*   Mrs Beeton's _Book of Household Management_

*Authors whose books inspire thought and learning.   *Churchill's_A History of the English-Speaking Peoples_

*Authors whose books are entertaining.* _Little World of Don Camillo_ by Giovannino Guareschi


Something could appear in more than one category, just as a writer can write in more than one genre.    Splitting things between romance, erotica, historical fiction, high fantasy etc. doesn't seem to help me order the social status I accord.    Even parody and fan fiction can be done amusingly.


----------



## Theglasshouse (Oct 4, 2020)

Excellent post pallandozi. I liked the examples you have and hierarchy. You might have inspired me to try something out with the category you have put down, " how the world is seen. "


----------



## Olly Buckle (Oct 4, 2020)

Pallandozi said:


> Yes.
> And, interestingly, there are probably many writers who share the view, and suffer from imposter syndrome because of it.
> 
> On examining my personal assumptions, my hierarchy ends up looking something like:
> ...



Fay Weldon in 'Letters to Alice' talks about writing and compares it to a town. There is a low class district, a high society district, a market, even a red light district, and towering over everything is castle Shakespeare. He is not just part of the cultural narrative, his words suffuse the entire language, you probably quote him daily without thinking about it. Do you wear your heart on your sleeve? Fight fire with fire? Is the game up? Does your hair stand on end? Do you believe what's done is done?  

It goes on and on, he coined so many phrases in everyday use it is difficult to imagine how people communicated before him


----------



## Olly Buckle (Oct 4, 2020)

Sorry, double post.


----------



## Pamelyn Casto (Oct 4, 2020)

How I wish I knew everyone's real name. I feel so weird when quoting. But Olly Buckle said: 

"Fay Weldon in 'Letters to Alice' talks about writing and compares it to a town. There is a low class district, a high society district, a market, even a red light district, and towering over everything is castle Shakespeare. He is not just part of the cultural narrative, his words suffuse the entire language, you probably quote him daily without thinking about it. Do you wear your heart on your sleeve? Fight fire with fire? Is the game up? Does your hair stand on end? Do you believe what's done is done?"

Just goes to show you how cliche-ridden Shakespeare's work is. (Joke.) Really, it IS hard to imagine what we talked about or what we said before he came along.


----------



## Olly Buckle (Oct 4, 2020)

Pamelyn Casto said:


> How I wish I knew everyone's real name. I feel so weird when quoting. But Olly Buckle said:
> 
> "Fay Weldon in 'Letters to Alice' talks about writing and compares it to a town. There is a low class district, a high society district, a market, even a red light district, and towering over everything is castle Shakespeare. He is not just part of the cultural narrative, his words suffuse the entire language, you probably quote him daily without thinking about it. Do you wear your heart on your sleeve? Fight fire with fire? Is the game up? Does your hair stand on end? Do you believe what's done is done?"
> 
> Just goes to show you how cliche-ridden Shakespeare's work is. (Joke.) Really, it IS hard to imagine what we talked about or what we said before he came along.



Someone once sent me a PM saying how cool my name was for an author and how did I come up with it, Oliver Buckle is my real name


----------



## Phil Istine (Oct 4, 2020)

Olly Buckle said:


> Someone once sent me a PM saying how cool my name was for an author and how did I come up with it, Oliver Buckle is my real name



I also assumed it was made up.  Excellent name for an author


----------



## Pamelyn Casto (Oct 4, 2020)

Well, then, Olly Buckle, I owe you an apology for my incorrect assumption! The name Olly Buckle sounds fun. Oliver Buckle sounds like an author. (for the longest time I kept reading your name as Oily Buckle-- but then one day squinted real hard and saw Olly.) Speaking of getting someone's name wrong. I have a poem coming out soon in the most prestigious publication I've ever been in. And online they've misspelled my name. (People keep wanting to put an "R" in my last name so that I'm a CastRo. It must be my beard or something.:-D) So sorry, Olly!


----------

