Comments on: Gay literature: separate genre or marketing niche?

By: Fiona Veitch Smith

Fiona Veitch Smith — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 09:37:04 +0000

I agree with you Penny. If we limit ourselves to what we know from personal experience that wipes out the entire historical genre! There is also the interview method. If we have no experience ourselves, speak to someone who has. In that way we become mediators rather than just imaginers. Of course tht brings into play issues of censorship, bias. filtering and so on, but that’s unavoidable.

By: Penny Culliford

Penny Culliford — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 08:10:32 +0000

There’s another question here, expecially in Derek’s comment which has wide reaching consequences for any writer, in this case straight writers writing gay characters and their stories – can we write meaningfully about something we have never personally experienced? In one sense the answer hast to be yes, otherwise our stories would be severely limited. Most writers of detective fiction have never murdered and most, I would imagine, have never had anyone close to them murdered either. I’m sure Robert Harris wrote “Silence of the Lambs” without ever eating anyone. Is there a kind of authenticity that can only be reached through personal experience, or can good research and imagination reach the same level?

By: Fiona

Fiona — Mon, 07 Sep 2009 07:44:31 +0000

Thanks for stopping by Caroline. I think the reader rather than the writer or content is the key here. Or at least the reader as perceived by the powers that be. Readers actively looking for ‘gay lit’ will look first and foremost to the gay lit shelf if it exists. But readers who are gay and don’t want to be limited to ‘gay lit’ will look elsewhere. What am I saying? I think you can have a novel chockablock with gay characters dealing with issues pertinent to the gay community and it will not become ‘gay lit’ until it’s stuck on that shelf. I would be reluctant to label something gay lit unless you had an overt intention to reach an almost exclusive gay readership. Good luck with the novel (I assume it’s a novel). Fiona.

By: caroline

caroline — Sat, 05 Sep 2009 20:41:23 +0000

This is very interesting. I found this page by googling, ‘can straight people write gay characters?’ as I have an idea forming that involves having two male characters instead of the standard girl meets boy stereotype. The fact that they are both male is almost irrelevant to me, its not going to be about full on sex, just an increasingly intimate relationship. But I found the discussion about pigeonholing fascinating. Is it a matter of percentage of gay characters or interactions, is it how intimate they get, is it whether its making a point about the LGBT experience in a mainly straight world? To me it wouldn’t seem to matter, but, it seems to be a matter of comfort, of agents, of editors, publishers, bookshops (I work in a small bookshop) and readers. They feel more comfortable if they know where a book belongs. I guess its human nature. Wouldn’t it be wonderful if there were no such categories because people didn’t see the differences, the divisions?

I also found myself wondering who took the risk on the Time Traveler’s Wife – romance, or science fiction?!

By: Kay Green

Kay Green — Tue, 27 May 2008 17:27:16 +0000

Hi,
I have a point to add to this debate. ‘Pigeon-holing’ books isn’t something that starts after they’re written. I recently attended a lecture by a literary agent who has spent most of her working life as an editor for a major publishing house and her advice to wannabe authors was this: Go into a big high street book store. Look at the category titles above the shelves. If your work doesn’t fit clearly into one of them, re-write until it does. When it lands on an editor’s desk, one of their first questions will be, ‘which shelf does it go on in the shop’?

I was left sitting there scratching my head wondering how they expect authors to do such a thing and yet produce ‘original’ ‘innovative’ and ‘authentic’ work – all adjectives editors often use to describe what they’re looking for!

By: Fiona Veitch Smith

Fiona Veitch Smith — Mon, 12 May 2008 09:32:49 +0000

Hi Harold. Just keep checing back on http://www.thecraftywriter.com for more articles. Or why not subscribe to my feed and you’ll be automatically notified anytime I publish new content. Thanks for stopping by.

By: Harold "Smokey" Beucus

Harold "Smokey" Beucus — Mon, 12 May 2008 06:50:18 +0000

This is wonderful. Please send ALL the articles or information you have.

Also please add to your mailing list.

Thank you.

Harold “Smokey” Beucus
101 PIne Ridge Drive
Bastrop, Texas 78602

By: Fiona Veitch Smith

Fiona Veitch Smith — Mon, 14 Apr 2008 08:54:01 +0000

Hi Derek, no disrespect taken. When I started this discussion, I was hoping people would raise issues themselves – my reference to my play, in response to Rosalie’s comments, was to provoke others to say, one way or another what may or may not constitute gay literature. I never for a moment believed that my play was an example of this. The gay couple in my play (one a nice guy, one a bastard) are used as plot devices. I wanted characters that, in 1957 London, would provoke the prejudice of the police – in order for a murder to not be investigated properly (crucial to the plot). It does not seek to explore in depth issues pertinent to the gay community.

I actually do believe there is a legitimate literary category called ‘Gay Literature’ but, like you, it needs to be something defined from within not without. I object to the commercial categorisation of literature (or art for the matter) into convenient marketing niches, that force writers and artist to produce something to an externally defined spec. Like Andy, I believe this should be resisted as much as possible. I suppose, in your definition, this would fall under the realms of exploitative colonisation.

However, if a gay writer chooses to explore gay issues (however loosely they may be defined) and to declare that their intention is to write gay literature, it is not for we commentators to say they are wrong and there is no such thing. That said, I fear that categorisations such as these may become modes of exclusion, rather than inclusion. What then are the boundaries of gay literature? Who can and can’t write it? Are there certain themes that every ‘gay’ book must address? Does this mean that gay people cannot write anything else? Does this mean that straight people cannot write about gay people without being accused of being ‘colonisers’? These are serious concerns. A similar debate, as I’ve said, may be explored relating to other categories, including ‘black’ and ‘Christian’.

As a white person who grew up in South Africa, this issue of what constitutes ‘African’ literature, is highly pertinent. Can only black people write it? Can only black people read it? What if the black or white author of ‘African’ literature doesn’t intend it to be so narrowly defined? Will the publishing houses allow it to be marketed to a broader readership?

I’m currently editing a book set in South Africa. I’m encouraging the writer to consider a wider readership than just South Africans. She’s now busy grappling with the idea of whether or not her book is ‘South African’ or ‘international’ and what changes, if any, are necessary to break through what, in my opinion, will be a restrictive marketing category. Does she want to address a broader readership or not? That is her decision.

By: Derek A Collins

Derek A Collins — Sun, 13 Apr 2008 20:01:04 +0000

I think I’d want to stick with my Gayatri Spivak idea. With all due respecept to you, Fiona, your writing a play about a gay couple would not make your play gay lit, because, with the best will in the world, your play will be about ‘them’ and will not be about lgbt people finding their own voice. Because of this colonialist dimension I believe it will be a long time before be can do away with genres of gay lot.

Understand, Fiona, I’m not accusing you personally of prejudice, or of being insensitive to queers, simply that as a straight person (a straight writer if you like) you will always be one of the colonisers, and not the colonised.

By: Andrew Philip

Andrew Philip — Wed, 09 Apr 2008 09:24:22 +0000

Ultimately, don’t we — writers and readers — diminish ourselves and our reading experiences if we make no attempt to resist such pigeonholing? Maybe it’s easier to achieve breadth in poetry, which is already a niche market in itself. That is, as long as you stay within the sub-niche labels such as “mainstream”, “performance” or “experimental”.