It’s a provocative question.
Probably not a fair one, either. It presupposes a lot —
— like, say, that there is anything at all wrong with fiction today.
Still.
Noodle it.
What’s wrong with fiction today?
What’s missing? What’s gone off the tracks, off the reservation?
Is it in the writers? The publishers? The audience? The culture?
If you’re a writer: how do you combat this… thing?
How do you fix what’s broken?
Again: provocative.
But put your mind to it.
And answer the question however you must. Even if it’s to tell me to go fuck myself.
I’ll hang up and wait for your answer.
*click*
Mike Herman says:
You know, i dated Fiction Today for awhile, she was nice. Her sister, Live-for Today was a wild ride. Don’t know what happened to them.
August 15, 2012 — 12:11 AM
David Earle says:
I couldn’t possibly comment. But Charles Stross wrote a short essay about science fiction and whether it’s still generating “big ideas”. Well worth a read: http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2012/05/sf-big-ideas-ideology-what-is-.html
August 15, 2012 — 12:22 AM
Sparky says:
Honestly anything I say is wrong with fiction I can find counterarguments for.
Film is stagnating, but we still get some epic movies and the internet is a great place for new and unusual stuff.
Video games haven’t reached the potential they could as fictional narratives, but the form is still young and the games are fun to play.
You can’t live off of short stories like Lovecraft and Howard. Okay that one is a bit trickier but new markets emerge constantly.
Really shitty stuff is being pushed in the public consciousness. So what, it always has been, but only the good (or the spectacularly bad) stand the test of time.
Books aren’t as popular as they used to be. We still have plenty of folk reading and as the market adapts new people can break in.
Comics are dying out. It’s just Darwinian work cleaning things up as we all go digital.
I think I just became an optimist. That’s kind of scary.
Only this can I say is wrong with fiction: I don’t have access to the time machine necessary to acquire all of the fiction I want right now.
August 15, 2012 — 12:54 AM
Laura Libricz says:
All too often, a new film comes out and my response is (frequently): “Nobody has an original idea anymore.” The same with ‘popular’ music. Not so much the same with books, though. I haven’t read any bestsellers lately, maybe that’s why. I find it depends on where I look for my entertainment. If it’s popular with the masses, the film, book, song is most likely to be one-size-fits-all and I want something that fits like a kid glove! So I have to look a bit harder for it, right?
August 15, 2012 — 4:36 AM
Jo Eberhardt says:
What’s wrong with fiction today?
The majority of adults approach fiction today (in whatever form) with the type of cynical detachment usually reserved for that tin stacked in the back of the pantry. You know, the one that lost its label a few months back. Sure, there’s a slim chance it’s Super-Duper-Seussian-Pudding, but it’s probably just another tin of lunchmeat like all the others. Maybe it’s even rancid.
How do we combat it?
Produce great work. Don’t settle for anything less from ourselves.
Spread the word about great work we read/watch/view/play/whatever. Talk about the great fiction we come across instead of just tearing down bad fiction. Promote the good stuff, not just the work of our friends. (Unless our friends’ work IS good, in which case — Yay!)
Stop creating artifical battlefields of indie vs traditional, literary vs genre, etc etc and just celebrate all the great fiction that exists today. Celebrate it so hard that the people outside the writing community start to find the enthusiasm to open that damn tin with the expectation that it will be Super-Duper-Seussian-Pudding.
*jumping off makeshift soapbox now*
August 15, 2012 — 6:45 AM
R.K. says:
I can’t decide if anything is wrong. I feel like I’m still reading some great books. That being said I think there is too much regurgitation of pop culture. More than likely, it’s because most people gets their ideas from TV or movies that are so abundant and available that it crowds out time for non-fiction reading and general observation, creating a sort of a sameness.
August 15, 2012 — 7:11 AM
Patrick Regan says:
The problem is not, I suspect, with fiction today but with the apparatus that is delivering the fiction to us. Now, I’m not going to go on a big publisher/agent/studio rant. As much as I believe they’re a bunch of knuckleheads, they’re people too.
The problem, in essence, is that our technology of distribution has advanced faster than the business of distribution could keep up. We have e-books, streaming video (for both home and theaters), YouTube, smartphones and things not even invented yet.
Most current models of distribution business are heavily reliant on the old forms of distribution to make money. Trying a new model is risky, and according to my friends in MBA programs, business people are trained to be risk adverse.
So I say unto he business folk: make the jump. We’re here on the other side, and we’ll catch you. Promise. We want to pay for content.
August 15, 2012 — 7:20 AM
Alex Beecroft says:
There’s so much of it! How do you find the good books in the deluge of not-so-good ones? (Or at least, how do you find the books that’ll do it for you among the landslide of books that won’t?) And how does a writer keep up with the pressure to write fast, fast, fast, without sacrificing depth, style and originality to it?
August 15, 2012 — 7:32 AM
Paul Baxter says:
Too many vampires. Not enough ninja assassin unicorns. Although if they were vampire ninja assassin unicorns, I suppose that wou be OK.
August 15, 2012 — 7:41 AM
Shiri Sondheimer says:
See Twilight: not the writing (which irks me, but that’s my issue) or the story itself, but the manner in which an abusive relationship is held up as ideal and acceptable because one of the participants is a vampire. I think that most parents, if they saw their daughter dating a guy who cut her off from her friends and family, told her what to wear, what to do, how to act, etc, would nip it in the bud ASAP. In this case, however, she marries the guy and bears his demon spawn without anyone batting an eyelash. And the best friend and supposed “I love you more than he does?” “Don’t make me angry or I’ll hurt you.” And yet that’s a love for the ages as well. And no one does anything about that either.
Fantasy is fantasy and that’s all well and good. I’m not advocating censorship of any kind, though I do thin parents should pay more attention to what their kids are reading and have frank discussions about it. People need to understand these things so that they don’t perpetuate or fall prey t them. But the idea that because things are couched in the supernatural they’re acceptable? Not okay. Not for kids, not for adults, not for anyone.
August 15, 2012 — 7:50 AM
The Liz with the Aliens says:
Is there a problem with fiction today? I mean, I could find one if I really tried, but for the most part, I’m good.
If I had to choose, though, I’d say….reader expectation. Especially in the age of social media and the internet, where everyone has an opinion about everything. Instead of, “I didn’t like this book, it wasn’t for me, maybe I’ll try something else next time” it turns into “i didn’t like this book, IT WAS SHIT. WHY DO PUBLISHERS KEEP PUBLISHING THIS SHIT I DO NOT LIKE?”
Also, self-publishing. Unless you know what you’re looking for–and are precise about looking for it, hello, JK Rolling–surfing the Kindle store is akin to looking for the holy grail in the city dump. Sure, you might find some contenders, but you’ll have to sift through a couple tons of used cat litter to get there.
August 15, 2012 — 8:08 AM
Jessica says:
A lot of great stuff gets buried.
It’s easier than ever to produce a book and get it published, whether through ebooks, print-on-demand, etc. Unfortunately, it’s not really any easier to come up with great ideas, write them down in an intelligent way, polish up the prose so it flows and end up with a shining jewel of an amazing book.
By removing the obstacles to publication, there are a lot more books being produced there that are awful, bad, mediocre or OK (or could have been good if the author had given them another draft and a bit more polishing) than there have been in the past. There are a few more books being created that are good and not many more books being created that are mind-blowingly amazing.
This results in it being a struggle to find the books that are mind-blowing in the pile of books that aren’t worth the effort.
August 15, 2012 — 8:28 AM
C.D. Kintzer says:
Where content is concerned, I’m content as a reader. I can find stuff that I enjoy reading and set the rest aside or read it and learn. As a writer, I can only hope to join the ranks of those of you pumping out the good stuff. (Get your mind out of the gutter, Chuck)
What I would like to see more of, however, is a greater investment in badass writers. I want to see more well-done book trailers. I want to hear more radio spots and interviews. And, I want to know that the effort and money comes not from the author’s pocket but from backers who believe in that writer’s greatness. There are some awesome writers out there having to pay for their own book tours. Not cool. Sure, there are some who have financial backing. But there certainly isn’t enough of it going on.
Now, here’s the reason: I want to know who to read. That’s all. I spend too much time sifting through reviews and excerpts and experiencing failed purchases. I could very well be wrong, but, if I see authors with shiny things, I’m more apt to believe that s/he has something worth reading.
August 15, 2012 — 8:56 AM
Robert says:
I think that too much focus in fiction today is on the plot or what is possible to do.
In movies: you can make planets explode and make it look good, so let’s do a movie about that, it doesn’t need to be a good story, it’s gonna be cool.
In games: look at how realistic this gunfighting is, look at these graphics. Let’s throw in a bad plot to let the player experience this awesome stuff.
In books: too much plot focus, too little inner journeys with the protagonist. Dig deeper, i want to be the character. I want to feel helpless. I want to risk everything to just maybe get what i want, what i need. I want to do all this from the safety of my couch/bed/chair or subway seat. I am tired of perfect protagonists getting a small wound from killing the impossible dragon..
August 15, 2012 — 8:57 AM
Christopher Gronlund says:
Put me down as one who likes all the variety out there, but dislikes how difficult it’s becoming to find the wonderful stuff from the…not-so-wonderful stuff. (I’m mainly talking self-produced e-books in this case.) But I think that’s too easy to just say. There have always been a lot of books published, and I’ve always been able to find new stuff I love. So really, saying it’s harder than ever to find good stuff isn’t really true. I find it easier to browse a bookstore than Amazon, so that comes into play, but my Kindle and book shelves are still filled with damn good stories.
With actual publishing, it seems publishers are even less willing than ever to take the chances they once took. Used to be the bestsellers brought in money that allowed them to take real risks on writers that might not sell as much. Now, with profit margins getting tighter, it seems a larger chunk of that bestseller money goes to buying more of the same. “Hey, our vampire love stuff sold well…let’s buy even more of that than we once did…and a little less of the stuff that truly excites us as agents, editors, and publishers.”
But even there, good stuff is being produced.
Obviously, there are things wrong with publishing; one of those things, I think, is that many of us are so quick to say there’s so much wrong, instead of looking at what’s right. Sure, traditional publishing is slow and seeming even slower as the world around speeds up, but publishers seem to be reacting to being forced to react. Obviously, they kind of have to, but as slow as it’s been for so long, it’s a glimmer of hope. Being able to buy stuff that has, until now, been kept back by gatekeepers is cool. I sometimes hate wading through all the poorly produced self-published stuff, but there’s still good stuff out there on all fronts.
August 15, 2012 — 9:06 AM
Anninyn says:
I think it’s human nature to focus on the bad rather than the good. What’s wrong, rather than what’s right. I could give you a lsit of what’s wrong, but the main thing?
Brilliant writers, writers who write beautifully, bravely and honestly, aren;t being read widely enough, and are going out of print. People, perhaps in the way they’re taught, are being scared off reading good books or complex books. There’s a level of anti-itellectualism that exists in society and it’s been given a free rein at the moment.
But these things go in cycles, and the backlash is probably coming. As writers, we can do a lot to help it – by writing beautifully, bravely and honestly and refusing to bow.
August 15, 2012 — 9:15 AM
The Liz with the Zombies says:
Mostly I think this is the golden era of publishing.
My one compliant echos what a few other people have already said. When a genre’s bestsellers are established, publishing scrambles to publish a lot more of the same. This is awesome, because there’s some good stuff out there.
But it also produces a double edged sword. On one hand, if you write a teen paranormal romance, even if you put a fresh new spin on it, it’s going to be seen as too “similar” to what’s out there. On the other, if you write a teen paranormal something else, it’s going to be too “different” than what’s currently hot, so publishers are less willing to take a risk.
Even though they say they want something popular with a fresh, new spin, no one knows if the spin is fresh or new enough until after the book is published and it either rockets to the bestseller’s list or sinks like a brick.
Obviously publishing is a business that needs to make a profit, but I feel like they’re less willing to try other perfectly awesome books that aren’t exactly like what’s currently hot.
A possible solution is self-publishing, but for those of us who want to be traditionally published and/or don’t have a giant platform this isn’t a perfect solution either.
August 15, 2012 — 9:24 AM
Cari Hislop says:
Since the printing press was invented (those who could read) have had far more stories available than they could ever read in a lifetime. Yes the wave has become a tsunami (beeep I’ve activated my invisible shield to protect me from being knife-kicked into an alternative universe for using a cliche), but I think the problem with modern fiction is simply the difficulty anyone outside the main “reader-type” has finding what they want to read. We need a whole new categorization system. A few years ago I still assumed that people who didn’t like the same books as me had no taste, but then I had this conversation with a writer/friend. When she told me that she didn’t like stories with a lot of description (she skips over it) and that she just wanted to find out what happened in the story a light went on. Me, I need stories with great dialogue, character driven plots all set in beautifully described settings (Huxley’s Crome Yellow blew me away). Publishers seem to be certain types of reader…hence they choose certain types of books…which end up filling the shelves for similar readers so when people like me go to the library or the bookstore to browse we end up raging at the injustice and find ourselves tempted to start hurling books, but we don’t because we’d end up arrested and the library inside would be worse.
We need the publishing industry to acknowledge that there are readers who want to read stories written in ways they (the editors/publishers) find boring or consider badly written for instance stories written in first person present tense. There’s a market for this, which I personally would never have guessed because reading first person present tense makes my head spin, but for some people that’s what they want to read. If we could list all the different types of readers and then color code the types…imagine if you could go into a book store or library and instead of looking for the Science fiction or romance section you could go to “your” preferred literary style section…with all the genres then broken down inside the colored section…wouldn’t that be nice? I’d love it. Just lead me to my section…
August 15, 2012 — 9:31 AM
Alexa Muir says:
Well, this is quite a hornets’ nest you’re getting us to shove our heads into, isn’t it Chuck? Nothing like that buzzy, agonising stinging sensation, so here goes:
I suspect that the problems in Fiction today are much like the problems in Fiction of yesteryear, just with a different tux on. But in the spirit of picking somethign I’d say that there’s too much emphasis on huge profit. Fiction publishing was of course always propelled by profit (why would a company do it otherwise) but it feels like making a profit now isn’t enough; you have to make a huge, mega-profit, all pulsating and growing like the creature at the end of Akira. Anything that can’t produce it gets dumped or forgotten; no to little marketing, no exposure and eventually withers away. This seems to be happening across most/all industries, so Fiction is nothing unusual in that, but it’s still sad. There are tonnes of great books that could find a huge audience if only someone would give them a chance. And self-publishing is just as bad – I’ve heard a number of self-publishers bemoaning the small profit (or, heaven forbid, breaking even) they experience, as if it’s a bad thing. *sigh*
Expectations – there’s the problem with fiction (and everything else). But then it probably always has been…
August 15, 2012 — 9:31 AM
Francis Knight says:
You know what? Not much, I think.
I can always find books I want to read (my wish list is huge), and books I love, books that make me slack jawed in admiration at writing skills or just blow me away with a great kick arse story. Or both. My husband, who likes vastly different stuff, can also always find books he wants to read, books he loves. Same with friends, kids etc. There really are books out there to suit everyone, and every mood, and that’s exactly as it should be. Even niche stuff can get an audience through self-pubbing, so if I’m looking for something off the beaten taste track, I can find it and indulge my hidden passion for erotic wrestling fanfic, er, I mean fiction. 😀
If I had a small nit, it’s for the amount of GrimDark in fantasy currently, and the lack of *fun*, but that’s a trend, and there’s still lots of other styles around too, so I can get my kicks there.
So, yeah, I can’t say I have any complaints as such.
More ninja assassin unicorns would be good. As long as they are ridden by Undead Viking Pirates FROM SPACE!!
August 15, 2012 — 9:32 AM
Benoit Lelievre says:
The million dollar question. There are more than one answer to it and you can argue that nothing is wrong, but here is my two cents.
The main thing wrong with fiction today is traditional publishing. Their offices have been overtaken by the proverbial marketing-major-who-doesn’t-read-all-that-much. Result? What’s on the shelf is “what sells” and not necessarily what’s well written or compelling. Some of it is, but the business aspect has started eating on the artistic nature of the endeavor. Especially since the eBook revolution has started, publishers are being conservative and don’t take chances.
Like I said, the eBook is creating a revolution, a little bit like the mp3 did about fifteen years ago. The best writing can find its way to (virtual) shelves and word-to-mouth is gaining some power again. Tremendous writers like Vincent Zandri rebuilt their career from the ashes of a big publisher’s contract went wrong. Of course, you have to deal with a lot of garbage on the Kindle Store, but real good writing emerges. The best part is that Amazon created their publishing house Thomas & Mercer who handpicks the best sellers from the Kindle Store and gives them contracts. If things continue the way they are, on a long enough time frame, they will have every single good writer, which is not something you necessarily want. Monopoly is never a good thing, except when it’s played on a board with friends.
Marketing is also terribly off. While genre shows like Breaking Bad, Lost and The Wire are tearing it up on television, nobody seems to see that literature can offer a lot of the same thrills. Even better ones. Starting with your literature, Chuck. Noir and hardboiled is KILLING it on television and it’s being hidden in a closet in literature. The marketing major will tell you: “Yeah, but it’s not the same demographic, at all” Well, what the fuck does he know? If you keep hardboiled authors in a cupboard, how are they going to reach out to the huge audience there is for the genre? One of the great injustices of this world is that Anthony Neil Smith is still relatively unknown. I mean, if you like badass characters, if Sons of Anarchy and Justified are on FX, why the fuck can’t Billy Lafitte be read? He’s more badass than Jax Teller and Raylan Givens combined.
There are many problems with fiction today, but the main issue is the guy selling it. He wears a suit and he’s “too busy to read”.
August 15, 2012 — 9:40 AM
Bryon Quertermous says:
Put me squarely in the Nothing’s Wrong So Don’t Fucking Change It camp. I think we are living in a more pessimistic time because we are more aware of all the shit out there (that’s really always been there but we never knew about it and so we didn’t care) and have a healthy dose of the revisionist 20/20 vision of history in that every time before ours was better. I think there are some amazing things going on in fiction and some great books are being published that would have never been published 20, 30, 40 years ago. I have more books I want to read than I will ever have time for and I’m a picky, elitist reader. That’s a grand thing my friend.
August 15, 2012 — 9:44 AM
Bryon Quertermous says:
@Benoit Lelievre – Comparing books to TV will always be a fool’s chore. The TV shows you mentioned, while popular, are a tiny, tiny fraction of the larger TV audience. I would venture to guess that the readership of somebody like Anthony Neil Smith as a percentage of the larger book market is probably close to the same as The Wire was to the larger TV viewership. But it’s 1% of 100 million as opposed to % of 100,000
August 15, 2012 — 9:50 AM
Phil Norris says:
Where have all the starships gone? There needs to be more starship porn! Looking through Amazon the other day I did a search under “Science Fiction”, in the first 3 pages I could only find one book that I would out and out call SF (Peter F Hamilton’s forthcoming Great North Road), the rest were vague Sf at best, mostly incorporating elves, vampires and zombies.
August 15, 2012 — 9:52 AM
Daniel Swensen says:
I wrote a big screed about the plague of post-apocalyptic dystopian YA copycats and [Historical Figure] meets [Supernatural Critter] copycats (Chester A. Arthur, Werewolf Fighter!) and then realized it wasn’t really anything “wrong” with fiction, just my personal pet peeve about bandwagon-jumping and trying to be the next big thing by copying the last big thing. And the “next Twilight” turned out to be Twilight, so what do I know? Maybe it’s not “wrong,” but just how things are.
August 15, 2012 — 10:11 AM
LJCohen says:
What frustrates me the most about fiction today is in the YA area. Once upon a time–maybe just 5 years ago, YA work seemed a whole lot more diverse than it does today. I have two teenage sons and just about every YA book out there is about some vapid love triangle with magical creatures and an ethereal girl in a prom dress on the cover.
August 15, 2012 — 10:28 AM
Todd Moody says:
I don’t see anything wrong with FICTION today. I see a lot of potential opening up for artists to dabble in different types of media and being able to mix and crossbreed and we really haven’t seen the OMG moment yet for this, to see what can really be done with NEW MEDIA. I think people will fill the void, it always happens. The first one to figure it out will be the next BIG THING. it might be you Chuck. You have th skill set for this, the question is time, as it always is.
August 15, 2012 — 11:11 AM
Stephen Blackmoore says:
I’m going to go with there’s nothing wrong with fiction. That’s like saying there’s something wrong with language. It changes, it shifts, it goes into weird directions. Stories are just stories and whether people like them or hate them or like to hate them is irrelevant.
The whole question presupposes that there’s some qualitative judgment we could place on the whole. That there could ever be something wrong with fiction.
And I honestly don’t think that’s possible. On an individual basis, sure you can do that. You will have good books and bad, quality stories and stories that make you go “meh.” But applying that onto fiction as a whole doesn’t scan for me.
Now, is there something wrong with the business of writing fiction? Maybe. But most of those are because of the turmoil and uncertainty we’re facing now and the only way those will be fixed are by people experimenting with new things and seeing what sticks.
And I’m not sure that’s necessarily a bad thing.
August 15, 2012 — 11:16 AM
Amber J Gardner says:
I don’t see anything wrong with Fiction today. But I’d like to see more stories with different sexualities, genders and races without actually making it a point to point out that trait. So just overall more equality and diversity.
That is all.
August 15, 2012 — 11:17 AM
terribleminds says:
“I don’t see anything wrong with Fiction today. But I’d like to see more stories with different sexualities, genders and races without actually making it a point to point out that trait. So just overall more equality and diversity.”
Then I would say you see something wrong with fiction today. If sexuality, gender and race is underrepresented, then that’s something wrong, innit?
— c.
August 15, 2012 — 11:23 AM
John Murphy says:
It’s becoming movie-like: there’s far more focus on visual and auditory experience at the expense of other senses, and with that I think a kind of interpretive literalism that gives us much less ability to use metaphor as the reader takes literally what’s presented. You describe a character as a zombie? The reader fills in mental images of rotting corpses instead of just someone who’s tired and sluggish. The (hyper?)active style has also meant the loss of the meditative quality that a number of books used to have: long stretches where nothing happens except just luxuriating in description and beautiful prose. I’m so used to snappy pace as a reader and movie viewer that I feel like I don’t have the reading skill anymore to appreciate slow-paced stories.
August 15, 2012 — 11:18 AM
terribleminds says:
It’s becoming movie-like: there’s far more focus on visual and auditory experience at the expense of other senses, and with that I think a kind of interpretive literalism that gives us much less ability to use metaphor as the reader takes literally what’s presented. You describe a character as a zombie? The reader fills in mental images of rotting corpses instead of just someone who’s tired and sluggish. The (hyper?)active style has also meant the loss of the meditative quality that a number of books used to have: long stretches where nothing happens except just luxuriating in description and beautiful prose. I’m so used to snappy pace as a reader and movie viewer that I feel like I don’t have the reading skill anymore to appreciate slow-paced stories.
This is a fascinating answer.
I like it.
I’m not sure I agree, yet — er, being one of the authors of that kind of fiction — but I like it.
— c.
August 15, 2012 — 11:22 AM
The Liz says:
Honestly I find pretty much all my favorite works under ‘Science Fiction’ / Urban Fantasy, so I’m not sure if I have room to comment on ALL fiction. So far I’m still finding great books by new and established authors, and I’m happy with what I’m reading.
Now if we step outside the ‘fiction’ box and take in for example the entire classification of ‘Books published solely because the publisher thinks the WRITER is already famous for something else’… Books by Snooki, books that are printed and hardcover reguritas of peoples twitter accounts (Sh*t My Dad Says, and even Dennis Leary have cashed in on that one), poorly written books by random politicos, ect. THESE are the things that I think are wearing away at the core of the publishing industry, this Pop Culture brand of book sales where the content of a book ceases to matter, so long as the face or name we slap on a book might make it sell. It’s depressing.
August 15, 2012 — 11:18 AM
terribleminds says:
By the way, I’m going to put it out there —
The answer “nothing is wrong” is not acceptable.
Think bigger. There’s always something wrong. We’re adults — we can love fiction but see something we’d like to see different. Not enough play for one genre, or an author, or a system in place for publishing that’s not up to our standards, something, anything. Is work subversive enough? Is it too entertaining? Not entertaining enough? Is there enough bravery in fiction today, or is it all samey-samey?
We can and must be critical.
So, be critical.
And answer the question, what’s wrong with fiction today? Right now. The market as you see it. Or the craft. Or the business. Something. Anything.
— c.
August 15, 2012 — 11:21 AM
GX Knight says:
One aspect that could be argued: Fiction used to be about going somewhere you’ve never been. Planes, Trains, and Google have all but eliminated the need for an imagination. People don’t have to conjure in their mind what the hidden lochs in Ireland look like, they click a pic or hire a travel agent and they are there. Writer and Reader both haven’t had to flex their imagination muscle, and so it’s all become soft and tired.
August 15, 2012 — 11:24 AM
UrsulaV says:
Generic Fantasy Epic Plots That Cannot Be Summed Up Gracefully. Seriously, I go to the bookstore, I pick up a book, I look at the back, and “In the ancient empire of Blah, two warring factions have blahed for control of blah. Now it is left to the last Blah, Blah-Bob, with the help of a plucky young blah and a blah with a troubled past to tame the blah and confront the truth of blah’s heritage before rocks fall and everybody dies.”
Can’t read them anymore. There are probably some really good books in there, but Christ, I’m so bored with them all. Just reading the book blurbs make me want to go lie down for awhile. I love fantasy, I write fantasy, I sell fantasy, but these days I spend most of my time reading mysteries, Gothics, and ghost stories because I do not have the genre conventions memorized yet and I am so tired of most of what my own genre is producing.
The success of George R. R. R. R. R. Martin is probably partly responsible, although he’s a very nice man and I do not wish to blame him personally.
August 15, 2012 — 11:29 AM
Francis Knight says:
“Is work subversive enough? Is it too entertaining? Not entertaining enough? Is there enough bravery in fiction today, or is it all samey-samey? ”
See, now that’s tricky to say across teh whole of fiction. Yes, I could say X author is rewriting the same story over and over, or Y publisher tends to be too circumspect for me. But that’s not fiction as a whole, and for every circumspect publisher, there’s one who loves bringing out new and weird stuff, for every author rehashing, there’s one where you don’t have a damned clue what will pop out of their brains next.
Perhaps…fiction as a whole needs to stop attacking each other (lit v genre, author v author etc) and concentrate on readers…but even that’s only part of fiction. Like I said earlier, there’s too much GrimDark in SFF for me just lately, but I can still find books that’ll take me on a wild ride without rubbing my face in the shit of a world. So again, not all of fiction.
Perhaps my biggest problem is no one has paid me a million pounds yet. 😀 The rest? For each thing I can find wrong, someone else is doing it right. (Hmm, with possible exception of diversity, but that’s getting there too, I think. Some authors/ pubs put out wonderfully diverse stuff. It needs to be more of them though)
August 15, 2012 — 11:32 AM
Tom M says:
I read an interesting take on movies (by Ebert?) that pointed out that the current run of remakes and repackaging of pop culture will soon run into the hard limit of demographic change. Kids now are forming their cherished childhood memories based on the previous generation’s nostalgia. They don’t remember Transformers as toys or cartoons but except as movie tie-ins. At least in the big market blockbuster world, the cycle is going to have to stop for fresh fuel or else it will increasingly start eating its own ass as the loop of nostalgia to adaptation tightens up.
The good news is that books haven’t really fallen into the constant regurgitation trap and new ideas constantly flow into the system. Reaching the market with a good book is still glitchy, but writers have way more options now.
With such low barrier to entry for writers, we currently have an open-mic situation. How awesome is that? New writers get to hone their craft in public with few limits on what they can try. The commercial outlook is iffy for now, but I see the possibility of writers emerging from the current slush pile market in the same light of the horrid stand-up boom of the 80s that produced Louis Freaking CK and the rest of the current comedy renaissance. We might have to endure a lot of the writer’s version of jokes about airplane food but I’m optimistic about the future.
August 15, 2012 — 11:39 AM
Tom M says:
To make my last comment less cheerleadery and more in line with the question– the problem with fiction, in whatever format, is that our cultural horizons are getting shorter. This is especially noticeable in movies, but books that make references to anything more than a couple decades old either go over most of the audience’s heads or are smug little lit fic exercises. That’s not to say that writers don’t make the effort, but drawing parallels to Tolstoy or even Dashiell Hammett don’t register as more than easter eggs for english majors.
I’m certainly not somebody that needs fiction to Mean Something but the lack of marketability in books that dive further into the cultural pool than recent pop references means that quite a lot of what’s out there has kind of become quickly dated pulp. Ironically, self-acknowledged pulp novels actually seem to stretch into new themes and interesting ideas while reaching further into our literary history. Hooray for the New Pulp
August 15, 2012 — 12:35 PM
Gemma Buxton says:
That there often has to be a choice between beautiful writing and a wonderful story.
One is often let down by the other, in my recent experience. Terrible writing but the story makes you unable to put it down. I don’t want to read a story that makes me cringe at least once a page (and not in the good way) but I want to find out what happens next – it’s shooting itself in the foot and makes me feel deflated and a bit sorry that I probably didn’t enjoy it as much as I probably would have done if the two had matched up better.
Also the belief that punchy and fast paced means so condensed there’s no development outside of the central plot. I want a book that I can’t put down, not one that makes me put it down after an hour because there’s no break and it’s exhausting.
August 15, 2012 — 1:29 PM
Aiwevanya says:
I characterize my problem with fiction today as the ‘fun vs serious’ dichotomy, that is that there are largely two justifications for fiction reading either that it’s escapist fun (which may be deemed frivolous, harmless or beneficial due to lowered stress levels) or serious explorations of big ideas in an abstract environment (deemed worthy, cultural or dull) and an increasingly high proportion of books seem to be written to service one or other of those points of view.
Well as it happens I’m a rabid opponent of dichotomies (I think false dichotomy is a redundant phrase) and also I was born with a brain with no off switch and a very low tolerance for tedium so I want cerebral depth in my escapist fantasy and explosions, sex and all singing all dancing musical numbers in my food for thought. I’m demanding like that. I’m finding this harder and harder to find, or possibly I’m getting pickier and pickier I suppose. Either way, I think my solution is to try and write the book I want to read, not an original solution perhaps, but still.
August 15, 2012 — 1:54 PM
Joan (NSFW. Don't click in front of Granma.) says:
I absolutely do *not* want to “luxuriate” in lengthy description and florid prose.
I think it’s just a different kind of wrong. It’s always been “wrong.” It’s always been high brow vs. middle vs. pulp. Or, “serious” vs “commercial.” Long vs. short. Serial vs. bound.
If I had to pick *one* thing, I’d say it’s the Marketing & Branding people taking over. Are we sure it’s fiction, anymore? Is it not valuable content and marketable product? Who needs sci-fi when we’re all replicants and androids.
But they’ve taken over *everything,* at least, everything that can be sold. We’re all little Dale Carnegie clones. It’s creepy.
August 15, 2012 — 2:00 PM
quillet says:
What’s wrong with fiction is the amount of money I have versus the amount of fiction I want to buy. Also the amount of time I have versus the amount of fiction I want to read.
*thinks about how to function with less food and sleep…*
Also, I second the need for more equality and diversity in our characters.
And I second (or third or fourth) the call for less of that GrimDark stuff. “Everyone was miserable, so they did a lot of miserably violent stuff to make other miserable people totally misery-filled and miserable, and then they all drowned in a shit-river of misery, the end.” Pfft.
August 15, 2012 — 3:19 PM
Brenda says:
My first reaction is “There is nothing wrong,” but then I thought about it a bit more.
One of the problems with fiction is there is just *so* much of it and not a real good way to sift through it. I know there is some really awesome stuff out there that I should read, but discovering it is the problem. Almost all of my favorite books (and least favorite, lets be fair) were found by complete chance; either stumbling upon them at the bookstore, a friend recommending it, or an author I like/love tweeting/blogging about it. I may only have an afternoon to sit and read. I don’t want to use that time to sit and sort through reviews trying to find something I might enjoy.
Someone smarter than I should make a Pandora-like site for books, where each book gets a list of qualities that you can then discover new books. Oh, you like the Dresden Files? Well if it’s a smart-ass main male character you like, try the Iron Druid Chronicles. Wizards? Try the Alex Versus series. Supernatural detective stories? Try the Simon Canderous Series. (Does goodreads do this already? I have no idea. I can never find anything on that site)
Another problem is the cost of ebooks, which is more a marketing thing. If there is a book I decide I need to read, and my local bookstores don’t have a copy (which is very likely and a different problem all together), I won’t buy an ebook if I can get the paperback for the same price or less. I’ve read most of the arguments and discussions about why ebooks are priced the way they are, and I just don’t care. As a reader, if I’m given the option for a digital file that I am more or less just renting for an extended period of time and a dead-tree copy for the same exact price, I will take the dead tree. If the ebook copy is less, even as little as $0.50, I’m much more likely to choose the digital copy. When I went to buy Blackbirds, the ebook was cheaper. I had to choose; did I want a dead tree version I could share with friends but I’d have to wait for it to ship or did I want to spend a little less for a digital copy I could get *now*. The ebook won that day.
August 15, 2012 — 3:25 PM
H.M. McInnes says:
Not enough markets for novellas.
It’s a small problem, but it bothers me. I mean, self-publishing is always an option, but as far as more mainstream markets go, the novella gets sort of shafted. Especially in recent years, it seems like not many magazines want to take a chance on longer work. I get why. It lets them pack more short stories into each issue and use their word counts economically.
But still.
They’re a lovely format that don’t seem to get as much love as short stories or novels. Sometimes I don’t want an appetizer or a seven course meal, but maybe…I don’t know, a gourmet sandwich. Something with substance, but not bloated.
I wish I just walk into Barnes and Noble and buy a kickass stand-alone novella for maybe half the price of a book.
August 15, 2012 — 4:45 PM
terribleminds says:
“Not enough markets for novellas.”
Also a great answer.
Self-publishing is closing this gap, though.
Thankfully.
— c.
August 15, 2012 — 7:07 PM
James Clark says:
Well, I think the earlier comment you pulled out about meditative writing is loosely related to what I’d pick out: spectacle/reference without substance.
It’s not a massively prevalent thing in that it doesn’t make up whole books, only sections, but I expect nowadays to be kicked out of the story one or two times by something the author obviously feels is cool. It’s almost every book I read.
It can be a word, like flibbertigibbet in Red Shirts, or it can be a set of action scenes, or even under-the-radar fan service. These are not often unpleasant or intrinsically badly written elements, but they feel shoe-horned in. It’s not easy to give a nod and wink without taking the attention away from the voice and directing it at the author.
I think it’s just that a lot of this generation of writers are fans as well: the impulse to add fan value is part of their reason for writing. It just means that you can get a set piece that is often not foreshadowed, or if it’s supposed to be a surprise you never get the sense that the characters are shocked. Some people will swallow this, I can’t seem to do so.
It’s a silly thing, I know, but it really pisses me off when I pick up fiction with these bits in it. It’s worse when the books (like Red Shirts) are already quite good/fun and just don’t need these extra elements.
August 15, 2012 — 4:45 PM
Chris Mansell says:
I think our strange need to pigeonhole everything into genres is a problem, especially with the line being so blurred in many cases. For example, Blackbirds is filed under fantasy in the book shops, but I think the argument can be made that it could also be filed under horror, or to a much lesser extent, crime fiction. The City & The City by China Mieville is a police procedural set in an urban fantasy world. It gets filed under fantasy, but I think it’s more suited to the crime section. Stephen King is forever typecast as a horror author, despite more of his works bordering on fantasy. But then the most egregious offender is Star Wars. It has spaceships, so it must be sci-fi, right? Nope. It’s fantasy that happens to be set in space. I feel like genres can be useful as a shorthand way of explaining a piece of fiction to somebody, but we’re too quick to use it, and it ends up underselling stories. I get that we can’t have different sections for every crossover or subgenre, but seeing something like Blackbirds put near Tolkien books just seems weird to me.
August 15, 2012 — 7:12 PM
Louise Sorensen says:
I never thought of there being anything wrong with fiction, today, Chuck, until you asked the question.
After reading through the comments, my brain was jogged into a few answers.
I’ve read extensively and omnivorously for the last 50 years. Since I was old evnough to sling a book.
I’ve read a lot of a little and a little of everything.
So what I miss, lately, is collections of short stories. Anthologies on a theme, like Thieves’ World. Marion Zimmerman Bradley’s Swords and Sorcorers.
My first reaction to your question was that what’s wrong with fiction today is that there’s too much of zombies and vampires.
Also, every second book I pick up is a romance. Not interested, unless it’s terrifically well done, like Karen Moning.
I ran out of good books to read about five years ago.
Since then, I’ve discovered a few authors I consider must read. One is Elmore Leonard.
But the explosion of e-books has provided a whole new hunting ground for books to read.
I’ve downloaded hundreds of free books, but more importantly, learned to download a sample of a book to find out if it’s well written enough not to be a painful read.
Now I’ll read a few pages of any book. Sometimes it pulls me in, sometimes it doesn’t.
But I’m discovering new authors and new great reads never available from traditional publishers.
One last thing I’ll say about fiction today, there’s a trend towards very dark cruel stories that sound only like the manifestation of the author’s depression.
In reading many indie books, I’m learning what not to write.
To conclude, no more zombies, vampires or romance between irresistably gorgeous people.
Write what you find interesting. Write what you want to write.
This is where the new stories come from.
August 15, 2012 — 8:27 PM
Peter says:
Random thoughts, but it depends on the genre. Many fantasy authors seem to be striving hard to be original, thinking that a Asian/Middle Eastern fictional setting establishes forward-thinking. Lots of world/concept building, but no characters that you grow attached to. And I’m not just talking about moral protagonists, either. Updike’s Rabbit Angstrom is probably the most compelling character I have read in fiction.
Science fiction has similar struggles. I find many celebrated hard science fiction authors to actually be terrible story tellers. If I want to read about ideas, I’ll read journals or nonfiction.
Horror has completely gone tilt. I miss the long build up of dread where we don’t know the nature of the enemy, but know it is closely lurking. I just finished Laymon’s The Traveling Vampire Show. Even though I felt the book was flawed in other ways, it was a good example of building up narrative tension until the payoff at the end.
August 15, 2012 — 8:32 PM
Chris Lites says:
The problem lies with publishing IMO. I just came out of grad program in writing and publishing and no one seems to know where the industry s headed. That’s discouraging but not insurmountable. The industry will emerge in some form. The problems I see lie in the current model. Publishers have become like movie studios: dependent on the blockbuster to maintain their staff and overhead. The blockbuster is a dodgy proposition to begin with. But let’s set that aside. What’s happening now is that these blockbusters aren’t going to make as much money as ebooks as they did in print.
This only reinforces the mentality to bet only on sure things. Midlisters are being marginalized and new voices aren’t being heralded. The ultimate conclusion of the e-revolution is likely to find a leaner, semi-shell shocked industry in its aftermath. There simply isn’t enough profit in ebooks [for publishers] to maintain the staff levels they now have. I believe most people in the industry know this, and they are [largely] ignoring it and hoping it’ll go away. It won’t. Technology doesn’t get legislated into existence and you can’t rewind it’s appearance in a culture. We’re left with an industry trying to pump out nothing but hits with an audience they don’t generally communicate with. If they did, they wouldn’t pick up on authors like EL James and Amanda Hocking after the fact. I’m not a fan of what those two authors write, but it’s clear to me that the public is voting with their dollars and the results don’t necessarily square with what the industry thinks they want.
All this is to say nothing of the millions the industry sometimes wastes on overestimating the appeal of quasi-celebrity memoirs and tell-alls.
August 15, 2012 — 9:16 PM
R.K. says:
I thought more about it. What’s wrong? Few people of color. Tired of YA all about young white suburban teens in insipid love triangles. More people of color, more strong women of color and books geared to young boys, please!
What’s wrong #2? The romancification of everything. Publishers push too much for insipid romantic plot lines because it a market. Sick of that market.
What’s wrong #3? Women protags whose motivation is love of some moody bastard. See #2. Why can’t women just do things because it needs to be done? Fight to win, conquer for the sake of conquest not because you’re saving some emotionally damaged dude.
August 15, 2012 — 9:21 PM
Mike Herman says:
Wow. So many serious answers.
Does the question, “What’s wrong with fiction today?” imply that reality writing is more wothwhile?
For my part, all the interesting and sometimes silly SCI-FI that i loved as a kid has been caught up to and crowded out by real science. And as fast as someone can write some new SCI-FI, the reality (or unreality) of it makes itself known in the same generation. Reading Scientific American or Discovery seems far more interesting. This is a good thing. We are apparently becoming a reality based society, if judging by the explosion of “Reality” shows is any indication. At some point maybe that reality eye will finally be turned to what passes for religion and society will take another leap forward.
August 15, 2012 — 9:54 PM
kirstenaurelius says:
For me, the biggest issue in traditional published fiction are the boundaries set by an industry that caves to rating and morality standards that are outdated and naive.
I’m tired of reading YA stories where the pot-smoking best friend finally gets in trouble or “wises” up at the end; NA stories with pages of tension but when they finally do have sex, it’s a bad thing; or genre fic where the partner is black or asian, but race does not play a part in any of their actions.
Sometimes I wonder if authors are even making the effort to bridge what seems like a generation gap between publisher and reader.
So, a question:
If you had written your Atlanta Burns series with the intent to submit to an agent or editor, would you have censored any aspects of the story?
August 16, 2012 — 5:11 AM