calm the fuck down, fanfic/YA/SFF/tie-in fiction is NOT serious business

In my youth I got really irate if someone suggested that fantasy was, like, not real literature. Or that Forgotten Realms published fanfiction literature might not quite measure up to Wilde or Nabokov. Because goddamn it it’s serious business. Fuck you. How dare you.

Now this isn’t about Moff’s Law and the thing about saying “it’s just a book/movie/game/comic, stop overthinking the racism/sexism/homophobia!” Rather it’s about how some people will not rest until they browbeat people into humoring them with “yes, yes, fanfic certainly is a legitimate art form” (with the subtext of now can you please stop being an obnoxious cock?) and sometimes even that will not get them to calm the fuck down. Because suggesting that fanfiction is a thing of generally low standards shows you know jack-shit about it, how dare you insult all fandoms, my mom likes my fanfic damn you, and it doesn’t matter that the other party also reads and writes fanfic: you’re shaming mpreg! And fandom is kind of an oppressed minority or something, so don’t go making fun of it, mmkay.

I think we’ve all been there, barring possibly the “how dare you shame mpreg!” Hopefully most of us grow out of it. Because there comes a point, as you approach adulthood, when you realize that there honestly are better things to do and that flying off the handle at this kind of thing just makes you look ridiculous.

Recently it was “revealed” why Tolkien was passed over for a Nobel Prize in Literature (and also revealed that he was only nominated because his BFF C. S. Lewis threw his name into the hat):

The prose of Tolkien – who was nominated by his friend and fellow fantasy author CS Lewis – “has not in any way measured up to storytelling of the highest quality”, wrote jury member Anders Österling.

His fans, plus the usual Westeros troglodytes, naturally reacted with grace and digni–oh who do I think I’m fooling.

subliterate maggot: This speaks volumes of an tradition of art critique that is so far removed from the public perception of what makes a good book as to be utterly laughable. People talk of what makes good prose as though there were a rulebook, ignoring the fact that what one person finds highly engaging another finds mindnumbing. Matters of taste is entirely apt, as the Nobel Prize in Literature is nothing more than a load of pretentious arseholes deciding who to pat on the back.

[...]

The trouble with viewpoints such as yours is that you discern between the opinions of people “in the know” and those who aren’t. That’s just intellectual elitism, and I won’t stand for it. I’m not saying Dan Brown is better than [insert obscure but well reviewed author here] purely on the basis that Brown has sold more copies. What I’m saying is that there is no such thing as better or worse, at least in the objective sense.

[...]

The 5 year old wants something different from a book than you do. Your opinion is superior because….you’re older? You’ve read more? You’re smarter?  So in short I think the 5 year old’s opinion is just as valid as yours.

That’s right. In his hysterical flailing to insist that no objective standards, or indeed standards of any kind, exist for works of prose this manchild actually said “yes, a five-year-old’s opinion on art is just as valid as anyone’s.” A good thing too, because this man appears to be reasoning at the level, indeed, of a five year old. Redditors, amazingly, actually come off as more rational until you scroll down and the fanboy comments start popping up.

It’s a shame his story telling was top notch, not only because of the way he described things but the history he gave everything. Not many authors will create several languages for their books.

Yeah, we should hand out literary prizes for people who make up conlangs, which are so useful and… wait what? Okay, we should hand out literary prices for people who make up fictional history for their self-indulgent zzzzz… hey, George Lucas totally deserves a fucking Nobel, amirite? Priorities, fanboys. Post the Fantasy Novelist’s Exam? Raise the hackles, boys, raise them.

And, of course, the explosion over a negative review of some shitty third-rate fantasy that wouldn’t be out of place under a D&D logo:

The real issue, as I see it, is that Strange Horizons has a track record of publishing attack pieces on works of core genre and this track record continues in the form of an attack piece by a haughty ivory tower intellectual who studies classics of all things.

Some asshat, Adrian Faulkner, cried about bullying:

What I cannot understand is why people would even consider approaching a review without respect for the subject matter?

[...]

I don’t know what happened to make some of these reviewers so bitter. Jealousy of the author’s success, a misguided thought that this will make a name for themselves? I wouldn’t accept racism, homophobia or anti-Semitism in a review, so why should I accept bullying? Surely, in the 21st century, we’re better than that? It genuinely shocks me that the genre community believes that type of behaviour is acceptable in this day and age.

Scathing reviews? Just like racism, homophobia and anti-semitism just so you know. Faulkner is a white man by the way, so it’s not like he’s ever experienced racism. Respect the subject matter please, by the way. You know, the subject of shitty third-rate sword-and-sorcery claptrap.

Then we have this entire goddamn post.

The Arthur C. Clarke Award is a good example, of one that seems to nominate a lot of the same type of books year in year out and books that are written quite “pulpy” or present as “too genre” seem to be overlooked in favor of the stuff that pushes some sort of boundaries, or crossed some level of weird to make it stand out. Does that mean the paperback urban fantasies ought to be overlooked?

That the formulaic urban fantasies or the third-rate sword-and-sorcery that Liz Bourke rightly eviscerated do not deserve awards, or that they deserve to rot, doesn’t occur to these people.

You can see the trend: whiny, childish foot-stamping directed at what they perceive as haughty ivory-tower types (even though Liz Bourke is anything but seeing that she reads and reviews SF/F all the damn time) while, at the same time, desperately trying to gain the mainstream approval that the “ivory-tower types” enjoy. It’s a honking inferiority complex. Much like that suffered by fans of young adult, romance, tie-ins and fanfiction. Nobody very much wants to contemplate whether mpreg fanfic actually deserves to be taken seriously, or whether the latest variant on “rape to love” M/M is anything but mindless dreck: they see someone with shinier toys and, like children everywhere, want toys just as shiny.

At some level people aren’t entirely secure about what they like. SF/F has a reputation for being kind of shit, substandard, and racist/misogynistic/homophobic. YA is the go-to genre for writers of perpetually stunted skills who can’t finagle a tie-in writing contract. Tie-in fiction is shit. Fanfic is… well, it’s beneath discussion. So when people do say things like “SF/F is quite the cesspit, isn’t it?” you are sure to become defensive because you recognize it is true to an extent lesser or greater (and no, Racefail ’09 didn’t “fix” the genre; haha, you wish). No, fanfiction will not be taken seriously; why should it, when most of it is centered around hideously written slash, high-school AUs, and read/written by people who make YA authors having meltdowns look professional? No, YA won’t be thought of very highly because most of it is–like fanfiction–mindless dreck, written at an embarrassing reading level. No, video games won’t be taken seriously because… have you noticed the writing in popular AAA titles lately?

What you need to realize, if you aspire to some kind of adulthood, is that it doesn’t fucking matter.

I no longer give a shit what “the mainstream” (lol) think of SF/F. Neither do I care to combat generalizations largely because they are very often true (e.g. the matter of standards, subpar prose, shitty tropes, misogyny, racism, homophobia, dominated by straight white men): and when they are not, I don’t feel that there’s anything to prove. Writers like Nalo Hopkinson, Ursula le Guin, Catherynne Valente and more exist, and they are justifications unto themselves. I don’t need to defend the genre because these writers are not some kind of genre collective, and let’s be frank: they don’t need me, or you, to ride to their rescue.

Of course, if your schtick with defending SF/F is something like “avant-garde, amazing writers like Joe Abercrombie, Jim Butcher, R. Scott Bakker and Steven Erikson write fantasy!” then you are probably a hopeless cause in any case and deserve only to shut the fuck up.

And even putting that aside: does it honestly, honestly matter if I tell you I think all Star Wars tie-ins are shit? That I think YA is puerile and worthless, and has no purpose in existing as a genre? That I tell you Joe Abercrombie is a talentless hack and will never amount to anything more than hackery which appeals only to lovers of hacks? Of course on one hand fanboys will huff and puff and make noises along the line of “crazy feminazi bitch with obscure blog nobody reads/listens to” but judging by all the lengthy threads and continuous whining (still going on here) they care oh so much, in the same way that the fanfic defenders care, and YA writers are supremely defensive and throw shitfits at the slightest criticism (let alone scatter-shot generalizations like what I just made).

But I’m telling you: stop caring. Stop giving a shit. It makes you look ridiculous. What you enjoy is between you and the book, or the game or whatever. It doesn’t mean you should ignore criticism of the “there’s no woman with agency here, not a single one” or “why are all the gay people dead”: those are different, and should make you push together a few brain cells and think. But if you are provoked enough to rabidly defend something for six pages on a forum thread simply because someone said, unspecifically, “all things of [this type] are kind of shit, so I don’t read them” you should probably reevaluate your life choices. Recognize that what you enjoy is probably quite shit, and the generalizations may have some merit to them, or just stick to the ones that disprove those things and breathe.

Calm the fuck down. Stop being so defensive; all it shows is the hurt on your butt.

Leave a comment

33 Comments

  1. At some level people aren’t entirely secure about what they like.

    This.

    And Faulkner’s post is the essence of pearl-clutching. I was surprised.

    I can’t believe how many people want to mansplain to the reviewer why she didn’t write the review for the reasons she thought she did, that her tone is a problem, etc. Oh wait, I can.

    • acrackedmoon

       /  January 16, 2012

      Oh yeah, there was so much ‘splaining–the guy who went “gee, dollface, you must have mental health issues” was particularly charming. This guy isn’t much better.

      • angelrenoir

         /  January 16, 2012

        That guy kind of sounds like he’s defending the review, but… Am I misunderstanding something here? That guy’s writing is suffocatingly stiff and oh-so-formal.

        • acrackedmoon

           /  January 16, 2012

          He isn’t really. He is derailing and mansplaining away feminist concerns, mostly.

  2. Interesting that you brought up LeGuin, since she tends to be one of the authors who do defend fantasy/SF as a genre.

  3. an attack piece by a haughty ivory tower intellectual who studies classics of all things.

    Hahahaha wtf grow a fucking brain.

    But it’s cool that we get ivory towers when we study classics. We can carve it up and sell that shit on the black market for our tuition fees!

  4. Does she? Shame, I thought she’d be secure enough about it not to bother.

    I don’t think it’s just a matter of insecurity. Sure, the type who gets frothy at the mouth defending their favouritest book rarely has an argument to stand on, but there’s a genuine disregard among some mainstream/literary people that is truly tiresome. Many universities that teach writing programs will dismiss anything that looks remotely like fantasy, regardless of whether it’s shallow hack-n-slash adventures or genuinely insightful work a la Hopkinson, Valente, etc; it’s judged for being fantasy rather than on its actual merits, because fantasy = bad, literary = good. And I do think that’s ridiculous, because literary work is as likely to be terrible as any other genre, but these people won’t recognise that. I do get annoyed at people who dismiss fantasy as a whole and will argue against it, sometimes, especially because some of them then go on to list works that clearly contain fantastical elements as literary works simply because they’re “good” (although frothy-mouthed defense has always struck me as sinking to their own frothy level, as well as being usually pointless). I think what Le Guin is doing is trying to point out that, no, fantasy is in no way inherently better or worse than other genres, and each work ought to be judged for what it is, not what genre label it’s had slapped on it.

    It’s a whole stupid mess on which far too much ink has been spilled, but tl;dr I think there’s more than just insecurity.

    • acrackedmoon

       /  January 16, 2012

      Oh, I agree–I’m certainly familiar with the academic disdain toward genre anything; it’s just that I can’t make myself care anymore.

      A reasoned defense is definitely different to raging how Tolkien DESERVES THE NOBEL OH MY GOD FUCK YOU for pages on end.

  5. linesdrawninred

     /  January 16, 2012

    This is your third post in which you’ve referred to the members of westeros.org as troglodytes! :o D-d-discrimination!!

    And yeah I used to think fanfiction was so cool and ~a legitimate art form~ and got so ridiculously angry when it was insulted, but then I turned fifteen. Unfortunately that was the year I discovered a surface level comprehension of Marxism so I got to make an ass of myself in new and exciting ways! Of course I still make an ass of myself quite regularly but I’ve learned that if you say something stupid and people call you out on it, you ought to spend some time thinking about what you’ve done wrong instead of automatically engaging the F-bomb. And honestly it was so relieving to admit ‘yeah ASOIAF is racist as hell’.

    Also, I actually think that if more people in the SFF fandom were like you it would be a better genre on the whole. I’m not talking about any specific opinions, I do disagree with some of them despite being a fawning sycophant, or the vitriol with which you write your rants, but of the fact that you are most definitely not afraid to hold to your own beliefs and opinions in the face of overwhelming opposition and that you are willing to examine your own particular reasons for liking a book while being able to acknowledge that it is problematic or in some places badly written. If more people did that, if more authors accepted criticism, maybe authors like Nalo Hopkinson would sell better than Abercrombie.

    • acrackedmoon

       /  January 16, 2012

      I’ll probably end up doing that a lot to be honest, since Westeros.org members seem to like a lot of troglodyte material. :p

      I think recognizing things that are problematic in what you enjoy is one of the most crucial stages of learning useful criticism.

      If more people did that, if more authors accepted criticism, maybe authors like Nalo Hopkinson would sell better than Abercrombie.

      And maybe Bacigagaga wouldn’t have won a Hugo.

      (And aww, thank you.)

  6. MY MOM LIKES MY FANFIC DAMN YOU

    Because there comes a point, as you approach adulthood, when you realize that there honestly are better things to do and that flying off the handle at this kind of thing just makes you look ridiculous.

    Yes. I often feel a certain amount of sympathy for the fanboys you sear on your blog, because… I used to be them. Well, I like to think I was never that bad… >..> But everyone has to go through a growing-up process, and for reasons too convoluted to summarize in a blog comment, I think that process is being stunted on a large scale in our society. Which is why the only two people I’ve ever had to ban on my blog are a raging basement-dwelling psychopath who’s older than me, and a somewhat younger troll (but still old enough that he should be acting like a goddamn grown-up) who to this day is VERY VERY FUCKING ANGRY AT J.K. ROWLING because Harry ended up with Ginny instead of Hermione. I mean, seriously. These are adults who are supposed to be living lives, supporting themselves, even (shudder) supporting families? And this shit is the mountain they get online to die on?

    The real issue, as I see it, is that Strange Horizons has a track record of publishing attack pieces on works of core genre and this track record continues in the form of an attack piece by a haughty ivory tower intellectual who studies classics of all things.

    Third-rate self-published AD&D fanfic is “core genre”? And yes, Minerva forbid that someone who reviews fantasy be, you know, educated or something.

    I will disagree with you slightly that “it doesn’t matter” at all. I agree with Alex MacFarlane above. I think SF&F is worth defending, even if a lot of individual works are not. Contrast Le Guin with Margaret Atwood, who also writes science fiction but for a long time denied it. (Although she published an essay in defense of “speculative fiction” so… there you go.)

    • acrackedmoon

       /  January 16, 2012

      It’s not that I don’t think SF/F is worth defending, but that defending it in a particular way is neither worthwhile nor very mature–and, for select sections of the genre, there’s nothing else left to prove IMO. Good works exist. No amount of convincing will sway the viewpoint of a die-heard academic… but they exist, and they stand on their own, proving themselves, if you know what I mean?

      who to this day is VERY VERY FUCKING ANGRY AT J.K. ROWLING because Harry ended up with Ginny instead of Hermione.

      Ahaha. The amazing part is that my hatred of Rowling’s works has earned me the idea that I’m a closet Harmonian, because that’s the only reason I could possibly hate on Harry Potter: not that I think it’s shittily written, that it has troubling gender/sexuality/racial politics, no. It must be because I’m an outraged shipper. Fannish reality distortion field at its finest.

  7. The prose of Tolkien – who was nominated by his friend and fellow fantasy author CS Lewis – “has not in any way measured up to storytelling of the highest quality”

    While this is completely true, I would argue that this statement describes the work of most nobel-winning authors. Literary awards mean even less than the Oscars.

    I’ll throw my lot in with what Alex D McFarlene and the rest said. I think genre work (and YA for that matter) should be scrutinized fairly compared to literary books. The problem is that most of that stigma is coming from writers of Sci-Fi/Fantasy/YA themselves. If people want to defend these genres they’d be better off yelling at the legions of terrible authors out there instead of yelling at critics.

    • acrackedmoon

       /  January 16, 2012

      Erm, I didn’t suggest not scrutinizing genre work fairly actually–quite the opposite, considering the content of this blog. It’s that rabid defensive fanboys are ridiculous. And naturally the problem comes from most genre fans not scrutinizing the things they consume critically, while demanding that they be taken seriously and/or tilting at the strawman dichotomy of “classics vs genre works” (ala the responses to Bourke’s review).

  8. Heh, whew you missed quoting my defense of Tolkien in that thread. Though I like to think I wasn’t foaming at the mouth, nor does it matter much to me who wins the Nobel. (And there are problems in the works, but less so than Dante’s Divine Comedy or lots of ancient mythology.) Of course I think the humanities overall takes itself too seriously anyway so none of it can really get my goat.

    I do admit I find people who are willing to dismiss authors such as Marquez or Rushdie on the grounds of being fantastical a bit disgusting. (And given the respect Dante and Milton will maintain there is the stink of prejudice IMHO.)

    I think, in general, people like to defend their little niches. I find the humanities to be way over emphasized when it is represented as a checklist of works or mere factual knowledge, and I usually get a lot of flak for whatever I am deriding at the time. (As, heh, Bakker would say, everyone likes to think they won the belief lottery – here it extends to college majors.)

    The issue with literary hierarchies is that few people manage to put forth a good checklist. Larry is one of the few I’ve encountered who really examines all kinds of works and gives you an understanding of why they are good and bad.

    • acrackedmoon

       /  January 17, 2012

      Oh, I saw your post, but I thought it was reasonable enough–not at all useful in a post, apparently, “pushing an agenda”! (Do you know who which Westeros fanturd this guy is btw?)

      The thing with certain parts of fantasy is that the peoples who read them over-identify with author/material; this is the case for a lot of neckbeard types with GRRM and Jim Butcher and the like. They’re so used to this stuff being consumed uncritically that it’s a shock when there is criticism of it of any sort (let alone the “this is racist/sexist dreck”); somewhere in the between lit criticism transforms into, in their heads, a criticism of them as people.

      • His handle is Gormenghast at Westeros, Abileno (or something close to that) on other forums.

        • acrackedmoon

           /  January 17, 2012

          …remind me to never piss you off. <3

          olol, he tweeted it too. Dear me. Perhaps a chance to engage publicly. Would I be correct in assuming he’s of the, y’know, straight-white-dude persuasion?

      • Oh, I definitely used to be one of those people who took all this shit way too personally. Then I got a grip and also decided to see what else was out there in the world of books. Still always come back to fantasy, but glad I wandered out of the village.

        p.s. Glad to see Larry is in charge of the Matrix. ;-)

  9. hey, George Lucas totally deserves a fucking Nobel, amirite?

    For borrowing storylines and names from sources as wide-ranging as Kurosawa and Flash Gordon, to the Japanese term for period films (“jidaigeki”——> “Jedi”), to the fact that Star Wars is basically a purposely textbook example of Campbellian hero journeys…..a Nobel prize?

    I shouldn’t be surprised, white people borrowing not-white people’s ideas/inspiration is usually = critically acclaimed somehow. (see: The Hunger Games, and foaming piles of “feminist” fangirls who insist that it is edgier and darker than Battle Royale, and how dare you suggest that they are in any way similar because white-lady author denied knowing of its existence!)

  10. Also, as far as the genre defending thing goes…..I don’t know. It’s not like every author who’s ever been made a Nobel Laureate has had a lasting impact on literature, or that their work is even read decades after the fact. And idk why people are so hung up on awards, because most times they mean fuck-all.

    I mean, to take a similar analogy with film, does anyone really believe that whatever film they hand a Best Picture Oscar to every year is actually the best thing you could watch that year? Really? I wish people would just grow up and realise that they’re all – literary awards, the whole shebang – actually just a big popularity contest and meant for publicity. Who gives a fuck what some snotty columnist in the Guardian or the New York Times has to say? Just read what you like and don’t get bent out of shape if someone has an opinion that is different from yours.

  11. M Caliban

     /  January 17, 2012

    I’ve see this article spring up all over fantasy forums and the reaction is typical fanboy outrage, bashing of literature, and ignorance.

    1. Tolkien wasn’t skipped over because he wrote fantasy. In 1964, there was no ‘fantasy genre,’ so this wasn’t the evil literary types looking down their noses at the noble fantasy-loving masses.

    2. The Nobel Prize in Lit isn’t about a single book or series, but one’s entire body of work. Tolkien’s lectures on Beowulf and translations of early Anglo-Saxon poetry is as much a part of his nomination as Lord of the Rings.

    3. The Nobel Prize isn’t the Mann Booker. It’s not about a generic ‘best’ but a body of work that illuminates cultures and viewpoints outside the modern, Western default. Toni Morrison got hers because of her portrayal of African-American viewpoints. Ivo Andrić for his writings about Bosnia under the Ottomans.Yasunari Kawabata was one of the first Japanese writers whose works became well-known in Europe and he worked hard to get Japanese literature *in general* translated to other languages.

    That’s not to say it’s without it’s prejudices (it’s still very Eurocentric, imho) but I’d argue that Tolkien doesn’t illuminate British culture or experience the way these other authors do.

    4. His prose is stilted at times and he’s guilty of stopping the narrative for a exposition dump. The judges thought both of those elements took from the quality of his work, and I happen to agree.

    • acrackedmoon

       /  January 18, 2012

      Nor, for that matter, does Tolkien say anything particularly new–the ways in which he says the few things he has to say in his fiction isn’t anything to write home about. I could write reams of stuff on that and the typical defenses of fanboys against charges of Tolkien’s triteness, racism, and the like.

      His prose is lol for me. Never saw the beauty in it that apparently a lot of people do.

      • His prose is lol for me. Never saw the beauty in it that apparently a lot of people do.

        That’s because all they read is Tolkien, his contemporaries, and his derivatives.

        At the risk of outing myself as an elitist literary snob, there’s a reason why most colleges and universities do not include Tolkien on a syllabus for a contemporary fiction course. There’s a reason why most English-language literature courses would not have a unit on the Inklings but would (or should) cover the Harlem Renaissance. There’s a reason why schools make people read Mark Twain and not R.A. Salvatore. There’s a reason why, if someone asks me about novels by women, I’d name Toni Morrison way before I’d name Anne Bishop.

        While those reasons are often racist, sexist, classist, and Eurocentric as all fuck, there’s no denying that these works are things people can really sink their teeth into. They can withstand not only casual reading but also sustained analysis. By engaging with these works (I hesitate to use the word “enjoy” since a lot of it is frankly harrowing), you are not just exercising your ability to escape into a made-up world (and a great number of the best stuff is far from what I’d call realistic), but your ability to engage with the world as it is now.

        In contrast, mainstream genre fic (especially romance and sci-fi/fantasy) tends to pride itself on its inability or unwillingness to aspire to this.

        • acrackedmoon

           /  January 19, 2012

          At the risk of outing myself as an elitist literary snob, there’s a reason why most colleges and universities do not include Tolkien on a syllabus for a contemporary fiction course.

          Girl, no risk. That’s a completely reasonable, sound thing to say.

          They can withstand not only casual reading but also sustained analysis.

          The horrifying part though? Is that the fanboys will insist Salvatore is very deep and can certainly withstand analysis, then will write you epic-length essays on the sophisticated symbolism of naming your sword “Twinkle.”

        • I know! That’s what pisses me off about it. It’s so much angels dancing on the heads of pins – interesting questions (I suppose) that have absolutely no meaning for anybody who lives in the real world.

  12. I’ve read Battle Royale and The Hunger Games. I believe Suzanne Collins when she says she was not familiar with Koushun Takami’s novel before she wrote hers.

    I’ve never seen any fans claim that The Hunger Games was darker and edgier, though. I can’t believe anyone could read both books and claim that.

  13. This quote made me think of this discussion:

    “For a comics fan scorned, it seemed, the measure of evil lay not in genocide or child abuse but in continuity details deliberately overlooked by self-important writers, of plot points insufficiently telegraphed, and themes made opaque or ambiguous. If only one-tenth of the righteous, sputtering wrath of these anonymous zealots could be mustered against the horrors of bigotry or poverty, we might find ourselves overnight in a finer world…”

    - Grant Morrison, Supergods

  1. Bookish news and publishing tidbits 17 January 2012 | Read in a Single Sitting - Book reviews and new books
  2. » Choose your battles Looping Wor(l)d

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: