The big idea: should we abolish literary genres?
Briefly

"In those days historical fiction wasn't respectable or respected," she recalled. "It meant historical romance. If you read a brilliant novel like I, Claudius, you didn't taint it with the genre label, you just thought of it as literature. So, I was shy about naming what I was doing. All the same, I began. I wanted to find a novel I liked, about the French Revolution. I couldn't, so I started making one."
She made A Place of Greater Safety, an exceptional ensemble portrayal of the revolutionaries Danton, Robespierre and Desmoulins, but although the novel was completed in 1979, it wasn't published until 1992 - widely rejected, as she later explained, because although she thought the French Revolution was the most interesting thing in the world, the reading public didn't agree, or publishers had concluded they didn't. She decided to write a contemporary novel - Every Day Is Mother's Day - purely to get published; A Place of Greater Safety emerged only when she contributed to a Guardian piece about writers' unpublished first novels.
Genre is a confining madness; it says nothing about how writers write or readers read, and everything about how publishers, retailers and commentators would like them to. This is not to criticise the many talented personnel in those areas, who valiantly swim against the labels their industry has alighted on to shift units as quickly and smoothly as possible.
Read at the Guardian
[
]
[
|
]