What Is Literary Fiction?

By Audrey Driscoll

This question came up at the most recent WSW chat session (which will be posted here in the near future). It looks like we will need yet another session to thrash it out further, but I thought I would muddle some ideas around before that.

Here are some irreverent descriptions of literary fiction:

  • Books you have to read in English Literature classes
  • Great literature (they say)
  • The Classics (whatever that means)
  • Long, boring books written by dead guys
  • Long, boring books written by snobs
  • Books that critics write about
  • Books that get awards like the Pulitzer, the Booker, or the Nobel
  • Books that are good for you but no fun to read
  • Books with symbolism and allusions to stuff in other books
  • Books that don’t really have a story, just words
  • Books where you can’t tell what’s going on
  • Books you put on your shelf.

I’m sure you can add to this list.

It’s a lot like the question of what is “classical” music, and where is the dividing line between (hoity-toity, highbrow, inaccessible) music and the (familiar, predictable, head-bobbing) sounds of popular music. A question with no easy answer, it turns out.

And not one I’m about to debate here.

Getting serious, here is a definition from the Wikipedia article on literary fiction: “…novels that are character-driven rather than plot-driven, examine the human condition, use language in an experimental or poetic fashion, or are simply considered serious art.”

The main characteristics of literary fiction are:

  • Character-driven
  • Realistic examination of the human condition
  • Uses language in an artistic way.

It can be argued that literary writing refers more to style than to actual genre. After all, a romance, a mystery, a fantasy, or a thriller can possess these characteristics along with the necessary genre tropes. In fact, such a story would probably be richer and more interesting than one focussed primarily on plot.

There is also the problematic implication that literary fiction is somehow superior to genre fiction, that its readers are more intellectual and sophisticated than those who read for entertainment and just want to find out who did the murder or how the couple will achieve happiness.

I think it isn’t really necessary to classify books by genre unless you are running a bookstore. These classifications are part of the book trade. Even online ebook stores use some form of genre labelling, with “Literature” being given its own slot. I wonder how useful this is, really. Book retailers must make their products searchable, but surely that can be done through tags and keywords?

Genre labels—assuming “literary fiction” is a genre—do tell potential readers what to expect, up to a point. The trouble with this term is it covers a vast territory, everything from serious, slow moving, socially-conscious novels to plotless experimental fiction. Moreover, there’s a lot of genre bending and genre lumping going on, even by “literary” writers.

You want to know what I think? It doesn’t matter. Now that books no longer have to pass the gatekeepers of traditional publishing, there is no need to adhere to the labels of that world. Any book, no matter its genre, can be “literary,” meaning it’s character-driven, presents the human condition in a realistic way, and is written with an awareness of the artful possibilities of language.

Not every book needs to have these qualities. It’s perfectly okay to write and publish books where plot is the main driver and the characters are recognizable genre types. As for language, all writers should use it competently, if not always artfully.

Readers are quick to recognize books they like. Some will keep reading even if the style or content is unfamiliar or uncomfortable, but many will not. That’s perfectly okay too; there’s no shortage of books. Every reader can find more than enough to suit them, and those who cannot are free to write and publish whatever they like.

Fellow writers, do you read or write literary fiction? Do you think it’s a separate genre, a style of writing, or something else altogether? And do you even care?

Photo by Ravi Kant on Pexels.com

Looking For Some Advice

I’m faced with a potential conundrum, one of my own making, and I’d be curious to know what the collective writer/reader wisdom around here might think.

A couple of years ago, I published a contemporary YA novel. It is a story that isn’t necessarily finished and I planned on writing another volume in the tale at some point. And maybe even a third. The story about these characters could go on for some time, if I wanted to let it.

But there are other stories and characters I want to spend my time with. There is, however, an open storyline from what I published a couple of years ago that I want to provide closure to. I’ve now started writing what comes next. Which leads to my question.

The published book consists of three parts that are each in the 25,000-30,000 word range. If I do what I am planning, I’ll be writing a fourth part of comparable length. (There is a slim chance that I’ll end up writing more as I get back into the story, but for sake of this question, assume that I’m just writing one more part equal in length to the first three parts.)

How do I go about publishing that? Do I tack it on to the end of the first book and publish the entire thing? (What does that mean for the people who have already purchased and read the first three parts? I’m assuming they won’t really want to pay for what is essentially 75% something they’ve already read before.) Do I publish the fourth part separately? (If I hit 30,000 words, it can be a stand alone ebook and a slim paperback. But then how do I market it to make clear that potential readers should buy the novel first.) Do I do both? Or maybe none of the above? Or … do I suck it up and write a full novel-length sequel to the thing?

AI As a Fiction Writing Tool

by Audrey Driscoll

As an experiment, I wrote a short story I called “The Green Flash” and then presented its basic elements to ChatGPT and asked it to produce a short story incorporating them. You can read the results in this post on my personal blog.

It took the AI a few seconds to produce its 755-word story. It took me the equivalent of 2.5 standard working days, spread over several weeks.

I did not refine the ChatGPT story in any way. But I reduced mine by a third to make it more comparable to the AI version.

I have to admit, the AI’s version of the story, which it titled “Run for Janey,” isn’t bad. It has an arc, it hangs together, it’s even mildly exciting and ends with an “aww” moment. Many would say it’s a perfectly good story.

A few observations:

  • My prompt didn’t say it was the couple’s 50th anniversary. ChatGPT added that detail independently.
  • I did not specify that either of the photographers took photos of anyone, but I guess ChatGPT knows about Chekhov’s gun.
  • ChatGPT seems to have a positive, sentimental outlook, as well as a sense of humour.
  • ChatGPT doesn’t always show rather than tell, and it doesn’t mind using adverbs or stock phrases (i.e., clichés).
  • The green flash is more dramatic in the AI version.

Based on this rather superficial test, I conclude that AI may be a useful tool for fiction writers, especially those under pressure to produce text quickly. It would probably be a good idea for those writers to work on creating effective prompts and refining their inputs.

Have I done that? No. Do I intend to? I’m not sure. I have admitted that crossing the gap from story idea to a first draft is my toughest writing challenge. It’s obvious that AI can do that easily, but I don’t know how much effort would be needed on my part to revise prompts and repeat the AI’s text generating routines before the results would match my intentions for a specific story. It could be I’d rather stick to using my aging brain.

Take the story in my “experiment.” I think “The Green Flash,” written 100% by me, is a better short story than “Run for Janey” by ChatGPT. If I had started by prompting the AI and working with the resulting text, I don’t know what sort of story I would have ended up writing, or how much time and effort would have been required to produce something I thought worthwhile.

Logically, the next experiment would be to prompt an AI with elements from one of the many story ideas in my notebook, and see if I could turn the results into a real story more efficiently than my current process.

The real question is which method of producing written fiction is more congenial and effective for any individual writer. Some may have no interest in engaging with AI; others may be motivated to try different AIs and learn how to use them effectively.

In the latter case, should the human writer credit whatever AI they use as a co-writer? Or is the AI analogous to all the mental inputs a writer has had over their lifetime, from everything they’ve ever experienced, read, and learned, all the movies they’ve watched, all the conversations overheard. Because really, our minds are repositories of all this stuff, and it’s from these wells we draw the ideas for stories and the words in which we embody them. It could be argued that AIs do the same, only more efficiently.

Writers, what do you think of artificial intelligence as a fiction writing tool? What sorts of writing projects have you used it for?

Feature image photo by Audrey Driscoll enhanced with Canva.

Lost Stories

I’m not the most organized person.

In the early years of my life as a writer, I was in a writing group. We would start each session with a short writing exercise. One such exercise went like this. Write for five minutes about a place. Then five minutes about a person in that place. And finally, five minutes about something that happens in that place.

I wrote about a church on a hill and an old priest who presided there. And finally, about a man who came to the church to find answers to his life’s struggles. When we read our efforts, others seemed to really like what I had done, and I did feel like I had caught something in those 15 minutes of writing.

I didn’t follow up on what I produced for a couple of years. Why? Because I lost it. At some point, I decided to return to that piece and carry it forward. I searched everywhere and couldn’t find it. I gave up.

Around six months later, I thought of it again and searched again. I couldn’t find it anywhere. At some point, I decided to try to recreate it, but what I produced lacked what I had captured in the earlier piece. I gave up again.

Around another six months later, I searched again and found it buried in a notebook. I then took that piece and wrote my second novel — what I think is my best work, but it was published for only a short period of time because it has some autobiographical details that caused too much hurt for others.

More recently, I was searching on my blog for something I wrote for Father’s Day a number of years ago. The search terms resulted in the first result being a story I wrote in response to a writing exercise on Toasted Cheese. The exercise was a more manageable version of NaNoWriMo. Instead of 50,000 words in a month, write 167 words a day for a 5,000 word short story.

I have absolutely no memory of the story I found. It’s not complete and now it’s been added to the ever-growing list of ideas, starts, and half-completed stories I hope to get to before my time on earth is done. Finding this story makes me wonder what else I’ve forgotten about, either in notebooks or in the bowels of my blogs.

So … how do you maintain your story files? Like me, are they everywhere and anywhere? I have notebooks from the early days of my writing life, scraps of paper, folders and piles from those days. These days, everything I write ends up on the computer, on my laptop’s hard drive, an external drive, and more recently in the OneDrive Cloud. But there may be other things on my blogs that aren’t in any of those locations.

Or, have you managed to maintain some semblance of organization and know that all of your stops and starts are in one location and you remember everything you’ve written?

Is the Grass Greener…

If you have ever wondered what you’re missing as an indie author vs a traditionally published author, now you can find out. All you have to do is listen to the Publishing Rodeo Podcast to hear traditionally published authors candidly talking about their experiences in getting their books published and then decide for yourself if the grass is really greener on the trad side.

I find myself looking forward to it each week, even though I have no interest in traditional publishing. I just find writing and publishing a very interesting subject. If you are interested, it is best to start at episode 1, as that episode lays out what most traditional authors won’t say for fear of getting on the wrong side of their publisher.

Going Straight To The Source

With all of noise about AI and whether creative folks, including writers, should be worried (yes, there was just a tweet asking this very question … again), I decided to go straight to the source.

I asked ChatGPT whether writer should be afraid of artificial intelligence. Here is the answer that I hope settles the debate. 😉

As an AI language model, I can understand why some writers may have concerns about the rise of artificial intelligence (AI) in the field of writing. However, I don’t believe writers should necessarily be afraid of AI. Here are a few points to consider:

  1. Augmentation, not replacement: AI technology can be seen as a tool to enhance and support the writing process, rather than a direct threat to human writers. AI can assist with tasks like grammar and spell checking, generating ideas, providing suggestions, or helping with research. Ultimately, the creative and critical thinking abilities of human writers are still invaluable and difficult to replicate.
  2. New opportunities: AI has the potential to create new opportunities for writers. For example, AI-generated content has been used for various purposes, such as generating news stories, product descriptions, or sports reports. While this may raise concerns about the authenticity of the content, it also opens up new avenues for writers to collaborate with AI systems or explore creative projects that incorporate AI elements.
  3. Uniquely human skills: Writing involves more than just assembling words; it requires emotional depth, unique perspectives, and the ability to connect with readers on a personal level. These are aspects that AI currently struggles to replicate convincingly. Writers can focus on developing these distinctively human skills, which are highly valued in creative and literary works.
  4. Ethical considerations: It is important to be aware of the ethical implications of AI in writing. Issues like plagiarism, copyright infringement, and the responsible use of AI-generated content need to be carefully considered and regulated. By upholding ethical standards, writers can ensure the integrity of their work and maintain trust with their readers.

In summary, rather than being afraid, writers can view AI as a powerful tool that can complement their skills and offer new possibilities. Embracing AI and understanding its limitations and potential ethical concerns can help writers navigate the evolving landscape of writing in the digital age.

It is #3 which is why AI just isn’t much of a risk, at least currently. I believe that AI will always struggle with that. It’s one thing to be able to vacuum up data and predict an answer. It’s a whole other thing to be able to inject human emotions into the output. We shall see.

WSW Chat – Progress Report and A.I. : Threat or Menace?

The latest WSW chat is up! We discuss progress on our latest projects, as well as our thoughts on what AI means for writers.

(Apologies for some technical issues. Edited most audio-related issues out, but the result is that Lucinda moves around the screen a bit.)

Offensive Content

Mark Paxson

Do you worry about whether your book has offensive content? I’m going to bring up a specific example, but I’m sure this could apply more broadly. (For instance, a friend from high school that I reconnected with a few years ago, read one of my stories and didn’t like it because of some foul language.)

No … my example today is the n word. Hopefully, I don’t need to spell it out for you because it truly is an offensive word and you should know what I’m referring to. A word I never want to say, but … I have written a couple of stories in which the characters have. Because it’s who they are. To me, the art of fiction, while fictional, also must reflect the reality of the human existence. Unfortunately, there remain among us many who are racists and who don’t hesitate to use that word, or other offensive words. So, a couple of my characters have, in ways that I think are appropriate to their character and are not egregious, used the n word.

In connection with a conversation I was having on Twitter about another topic, I asked whether me using the n word in my fiction made me a racist. The response I got was that the person I was talking to couldn’t answer that question since she is white. That I would have to ask that question of people who are more directly impacted by the word.

In response to that, I reached out to an African-American writer that I know and asked her the following:

Does the use of the n word in fiction bother you?  In any instance, or as long as it fits the character and the context is it okay?  Does it matter if the writer is white or African-American?  Or is this something that doesn’t matter to you?

I’d love to hear your thoughts on this. While I believe that fiction is fiction, it also reflects reality. And humanity has a whole lot of ugliness. At the same time, I don’t want to be too offensive. 

Here is her response. And I’ve removed certain details to ensure that her identity is unknown. Other than that, I’ve left it unedited, complete with the n word fully visible and there.

Hey Mark, I think that we cannot hide from these words, nor pretend that these characters don’t use them. I do have a serious problem with excessive usage. But sometimes I’m in the middle and think that it’s time to move on, with violence on their rise and people who they have proven themselves to be. 

[Deleted] … for years I could not bring myself to go see “Showboat,” because of the opening song lyrics. “Niggers all work on the Mississippi, Niggers all work while the white man play.” I knew the story, but just couldn’t sit in the audience and listen to that word being used over and over. On the other hand, I also couldn’t handle the whole miscegenation part of the story.

“Showboat is one of the earliest musicals to focus on serious topics and occupies a very important place in the history of the musical.

Then, I pulled it together and went to see a production because I realized that it could be a teachable moment. A few years later, I’d heard that a production in the 60’s had changed the lyrics to, “colored folks work on the Mississippi…”Then several years later, “Negros all Work…  and eventually, to honor the multi ethnic cast, “We all work here on the Mississippi…” That also seems to be absolutely ridiculous, the content is extremely important.

A recent production decided to create a high level, professional recording that included a prestigious African American choir, singing the ensemble numbers. They refused to sing the original words. I get it, I don’t think that I could sing them either. I think a lot of that comes from an individual’s experience with that word. 

I have never been called that word to my face, though I do believe it would trigger me. But I know that my dad had to endure it countless times and he was always demeaned by its usage. It’s a complicated issue and I don’t think that I have a great solution. I might say something different tomorrow, especially if I think that the usage is gratuitous.

A funny solution that I once read in a short work of fiction told the story a group of homeboys who had a white boy who was a part of their crew. The hommies all called each other, “Nigger, but would not allow the white boy to join in, in what they called a term of familiarity and love.  The white guy could not figure out how to get them to let him use it, so he adopted the term, “my zigger,” which they were all very comfortable with, and I thought was a clever way to make a point. 

Once a friend asked me if she could call me “Nig.” I said no. She wouldn’t let it go. We are not friends today. Although there were several other issues.

Although not directly connected, I once received a call from a former clarinet teacher of mine. I had not spoken to this guy in over 20 years and he wanted to know if I thought OJ did it.

In short, I do believe that the intent and the context is so important.

I have a podcast that I started a year or two ago. I read one of my short stories, or an opening chapter, and throw it into the podcasting void for a handful of people to listen to. I haven’t done anything on it for months. There are a number of reasons for that. For instance, I stumble over words a couple of times in each episode and I haven’t learned how to edit those out. But one of the biggest reasons is that I want my next episode to be one of those stories in which the n word makes an appearance. I’m concerned about that, and it would require me to actually say the word out loud and put it out publicly, instead of writing it on the screen and quietly publishing the story amidst a collection of other stories.

I wonder what you think of this. It’s a cousin to the idea of trigger warnings, I believe. Are there offensive words you would consider forbidden in fiction that you either write or read? Or are you open to anything that is on the page? Should writers take into consideration whether the content of their stories will be offensive to some readers? Should readers be open-minded about these types of things?

I’ve decided at this point that I need to do this. I need to read the story and put it out on my podcast. Why? Because it’s real and I’d like it to generate a conversation about this stuff. I fundamentally believe that fiction must reflect human realities, including all of the ugliness.

A Year of Audiobooks

A year ago I took Google up on its offer to convert the ebooks I had in their store to auto-narrated audiobooks for free. In the last year audiobooks have more than doubled my sales on Google, accounting for 65% of those sales. Their ratings match their ebook version. When I converted my newest novel at the end of March, the program was still free, but they had added the option of using different voices for different characters in the story. You select a narrator, and then select from the voices they offer to voice the dialog of the various characters in the story, giving you the option of having an ensemble narrate your story instead of one person doing accents.

Traditional publishers will not sign a contract with an author unless the author gives them the audiobook rights. It is that lucrative of a market these days. Google is a free way of getting a foot in that market, with the bonus of being able to offer audiobooks at a very competitive price.

Sales of e and audio books on Google accounted for 67% of my total book sales for my eighth year of publishing. There are a billion reasons for this. Millions of people read and listen to books on their phones. The Google Play Store is the built-in store on all Android phones outside of China, and there are billions of them. There is no bigger market for your books in the world.

Everyone’s books, audience, and goals are different, but I have to believe that if you are selling wide, and not selling on Google or offering audiobooks, you are leaving money on the table.