Skip to content

Prestige Creates a Permission Structure for Experimentation

10
Share

Prestige Creates a Permission Structure for Experimentation

Home / Prestige Creates a Permission Structure for Experimentation
Book Recommendations book culture

Prestige Creates a Permission Structure for Experimentation

Thoughts on literary snobbery, creative experimentation, and how our preconceptions shape our reading experience...

By

Published on March 27, 2024

10
Share
wide shot photograph of a bookshelf

I absolutely loved the novel Infinite Jest by David Foster Wallace when I read it back in the day. I devoured it, forcing myself to read all of those bloody footnotes to pick up every weird bread crumb, and reveling in how silly and yet cohesive the whole thing felt. It was one of the books that fueled my determination to try and write fiction myself, along with Iain M. Banks’ Culture novels, Katherine Dunn’s Geek Love, and Nalo Hopkinson’s Brown Girl in the Ring.

But I often think that if you stripped the cover off of a copy of Infinite Jest and slapped on a less-artsy cover that claimed this book was the work of a middle-aged lady in Nebraska, nobody would have liked it. They wouldn’t even have given it a chance. Book nerds would have taken one look at the time-jumping structure, the rampant non-sequiturs, the plethora of strange conceits, the unconventional narration—and said that this lady needed to learn how to write.

This is something I think about all the time when I’m writing my own stuff. My books come out from a science fiction publisher and I didn’t get an MFA or fellowship from a fancy school, so I assume that I need to “hook” the reader on page one, and reassure them in various small ways that I know what I’m doing here, and I’m not going to waste their time (too much). I can get experimental and confounding, sure enough, but page one—and probably also page ten—need to be engaging and exude a kind of quiet competence.

I swear I’m not writing this to whine about literary snobbery, which has benefited me at various points in my career and failed to benefit me at others.

I’m actually super interested in the ways that our preconceptions shape our reading experience, and the permission this gives some artists to create works that ask more of their readers. Speaking for myself, I know that when I pick up a book that is packaged as “literary,” I might read a bit more slowly and carefully because of the assumption that every word has been chosen with care by a Craftsperson. And I might also give the book slightly more of a chance to win me over, instead of expecting it to suck me in by page three. I’m also pretty convinced that certain kinds of stylistic and narrative experiments are a bit more feasible if you’re either a recognized literary writer, or an underground experimental writer being published by a small press.

This is part of what I was getting at in my writing advice book Never Say You Can’t Survive, when I said that you always have an ideal reader in your head—that ideal reader may in fact be a different person, depending on the genre and other designations of the book you are writing. Very few books, in fact, are written for “everybody.”

And here’s a good place to reiterate what I’ve said many times before: What we call “literary fiction” is actually several different types of writing that we lump together, encompassing breezy beach reads as well as dense, challenging books that deliberately avoid giving you any personal information about their protagonist(s). Being categorized as “literary” doesn’t require authors to push the limits of the novel, it merely grants them a certain amount of permission to do so, in my experience. Literary publishers include Knopf and FSG, but also tiny university presses that reach a few hundred people.

Also, before anyone else says it, the walls between genre and literary books are getting wobblier all the time—recent books like The Archive Undying and The Saint of Bright Doors are as experimental and full of literary signifiers as anything coming out of Tin House or Graywolf, and I’ve seen no shortage of straight-up, well done science fiction and fantasy come out from “literary” imprints.

And yet, my subjective sense is that the prestige gap remains: If Infinite Jest came out today, it would still be given more careful mainstream attention when packaged as a high-brow literary book than in most other circumstances.

You see the prestige gap most strongly in television, where shows that at least dabble in messing with narrative and feature less straightforward characters are actually called “Prestige TV.” (See the career of Jonathan Nolan: Person of Interest is brilliantly complex and has many eloquent things to say about surveillance and technology, but it received a tiny fraction of the attention that Westworld garnered because it was a case-of-the-week procedural and didn’t feature Anthony Hopkins, Thandiwe Newton, and Jeffrey Wright.)

Sometimes, a lucky creator gets catapulted from “obscure weirdo” to “beloved craftsperson” seemingly overnight. You see it in the case of so-called “Outsider” artists like Henry Darger, whose obscure work becomes celebrated in mainstream circles. Something of the sort happened for a while to Philip K. Dick, who gained a literary cachet in the 1990s that had eluded him during his lifetime.

For those of us who are operating outside of the innermost circle of literary prestige, making weird storytelling choices can sometimes involve a smidgen of social engineering. You have to trick people into paying attention and then bamboozle them with some bonkosity.

Case in point: my novel All the Birds in the Sky has a pretty weird structure and breaks a lot of what were considered ironclad genre-fiction rules at the time I wrote it. (It’s a bit YA and a bit adult, it has an occasionally omniscient narrator, there’s some strong sexual content, characters discuss the Categorical Imperative for a long time, etc.) Indeed, almost every literary agent who looked at All the Birds rejected it for various reasons. At the same time, I sweated endlessly over the first few pages of the book, making sure you were drawn into Patricia’s situation and empathized with her instantly. I actually love doing this, because it feels like a fun trick to lure the reader in and then start whacking them over the head once they’re fully inside the story. Ironically, the moment when I was convinced most readers would throw the book away in disgust—the shopping-mall scene where Patricia and Laurence sit under the escalator and speculate about people’s shoes, only to be correct about the assassin Theodolphus—turned out to be many people’s favorite moment in the book. So you really never can tell.

Similarly, N.K. Jemisin’s breakout hit The Fifth Season contains some really startling stylistic choices, including second-person narration and a brilliantly time-jumping POV structure. (Trying to avoid spoilers here, for the handful of people who haven’t yet read it.) But I swear I read an essay that Jemisin wrote back in 2015-ish in which she talked about trying to “hook” the reader right away with a big splashy event, the destruction of the city of Yumenes. (I can’t find that essay now, in part because Google ain’t Google anymore.) And on her blog, there’s an essay about “Tricking readers into acceptance” of her main character, Essun.

Of course, it’s not just literary prestige that plays a role in shaping the expectations you approach a book with. You inevitably bring everything you know (or think you know) about the author when you crack a book open. The same book might read very differently if you believe the author is a Fox News commentator, versus an anarchist labor organizer. And of course, we expect marginalized creators to serve up stories about their own marginalizations, in a way that sometimes can feel a little bit tokenizing or exploitative. Especially in this day and age, when authors are increasingly encouraged to market themselves as personalities online, as I wrote about recently, your perceptions of an author’s persona will inevitably bleed into how you receive their work. Oftentimes, this works out great—e.g., if an author cultivates a snarky funny persona online and also writes funny snarky books.

This brings me back to the thing I wrote a while ago about J.K. Rowling and the question of separating the author from their work. I think there may have been a time when authors were intensely private people and you came to their work untainted by any preconceptions about the human who produced it. (John Updike certainly moaned a lot when he felt like this was going away.) Those times are absolutely over, and they’re not coming back, and authors and their work will always be intertwined in ways that can be delightful or toxic.

I guess in part, I would like to separate the concept of “prestige” from the notion that a piece of art might require you to do a little bit more work as you consume it, but that work will pay off because you’ll be rewarded with a rich story. (And of course, the concept of “doing work” is complicated too—a hard science fiction novel with long, math-heavy discussions of orbital mechanics also requires “work” from the reader, but it’s not exactly the same kind of “work” as a very literary book that makes you comb through footnotes to figure out what the heck actually happened here.)

We associate the idea of reading something experimental or challenging with a certain level of education, or other things that easily become class signifiers. But anyone who’s paid any attention to the world will know that class and education level do not correspond that neatly to reading taste. And people contain multitudes! A single person can enjoy all kinds of books, and the books you read don’t define who you are. If anything, I would say that the notion that a highbrow book conveys some sort of aura of privilege or prestige to its reader is bad for anyone who writes the kinds of books that could feasibly be labeled as “highbrow.” There is a great, distinct pleasure in reading an expectation-defying book like Infinite Jest (or The Saint of Bright Doors, or or or…), and that pleasure exists independent of any pride that you might feel in being seen as a fancy bitch because you read a fancy book. To reduce the value of a book to status marker is to downplay or deny that pleasure, because it implies that reading is not its own reward.

I apologize for the rambly nature of the above thoughts—this stuff is hard to talk about, and murky as hell, and I feel like I am raising questions way more than offering answers here. Hi ho. Please share your own thoughts in the comments…

This article was originally published at Happy Dancing, Charlie Jane Anders’ newsletter, available on Buttondown.

About the Author

Charlie Jane Anders

Author

Charlie Jane Anders is the author of the young-adult trilogy Victories Greater Than Death, Dreams Bigger Than Heartbreak, and Promises Stronger Than Darkness, along with the short story collection Even Greater Mistakes. She’s also the author of Never Say You Can’t Survive (August 2021), a book about how to use creative writing to get through hard times. Her other books include The City in the Middle of the Night and All the Birds in the Sky. She co-created Escapade, a trans superhero, for Marvel Comics, and featured her in New Mutants Vol. 4 and the miniseries New Mutants: Lethal Legion. She reviews science fiction and fantasy books for The Washington Post. Her TED Talk, “Go Ahead, Dream About the Future” got 700,000 views in its first week. With Annalee Newitz, she co-hosts the podcast Our Opinions Are Correct.
Learn More About Charlie Jane
Subscribe
Notify of
Avatar


10 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Avatar
Eugene R.
1 year ago

My issue with “prestige” literature is somewhat allied, the feeling of “reputation = guilt”, either for something “highbrow” or insanely popular. (“You have *not* read The Fifth Season?! <gasp!!>”) Which is not to say that guilt is not a good motivator, just that it is not a terribly comfortable feeling, one that may distract and detract from the reading pleasures of a challenging work. At the moment, I keep my guilt under wraps, so that it may nudge me towards reading more Pynchon, but it cannot overwhelm me (at least until I hit a bare patch on the reading trail, with lots of open space ahead, which is rare enough). In the interim, I can also buffer my guilt by transfer to our monthly reading group selections. Babel, here we come!

kymirakythe
1 year ago

Lots of interesting food for thought here and in your linked essays, Jane; thanks for sharing!

I need to keep thinking about everything written here, but the point about “a highbrow book convey[ing] some sort of aura or privilege of prestige to its reader is bad” is, perhaps, the crux of the conversation; and perhaps feeds into what R. brings up about readers trying to guilt other readers into reading “prestige” books.

However, I think there’s also that aura or privilege of prestige perpetrated by the author; I always feel that there’s a certain amount of “Look at me, I’ve written a highbrow book, praise me as a genius” expectation built in, even if I don’t know anything about the author… and it’s even worse if the publisher has singled them out on a pedestal. It’s why I really dislike “literary” books.

Avatar
1 year ago

Not rambly at all, or if it was, it was in service to making some important points.

Avatar
1 year ago

I know that I give a familiar author more leeway than one I haven’t read before. For my favorite authors, I’ll give a book a second read, where I’ll give up on a book by an unfamiliar author after 50 pages if it hasn’t grabbed me.

Avatar
Blue Delliquanti
1 year ago

Great essay! Something worth thinking about as a potential downside of approaching “prestige” anything, at least from my personal experience, is that the prospect of engaging with it becomes “homework,” even if I’m fairly sure I’d like it. Hence Fifth Season, Hannibal, and House of Leaves all sitting accusingly on a to-read/watch list for years while I look more enthusiastically for Una McCormack DS9 novels.

kymirakythe
1 year ago

Homework – yes!! I firmly believe the fastest way to ruin a perfectly good book is to assign it in school.

(…That said, should I admit I read House of Leaves for homework, literally? It was in a college course on nontraditional storytelling, and I. Loved. It… I’ll be very clear that it was the exception that proves the rule, however.)

Avatar
1 year ago

Such a fascinating topic, in part because we’re not just talking about a literary piece of work, but also our reaction to it. I have less anxiety about this because I along ago realized my taste in books (and art, and music) is weird and inconsistent, and subject to change without notice. I feel no need to explain why I like one book, but hate another, regardless of how well they were received or reviled by others. Us readers are individuals, not a monolithic block.

I always have assumed that “High-brow” was just another sub-genre, which is to say it exists as much as a marketing ploy as it does a literary tradition. Sometimes I’m in the mood for “fancy”, sometimes I’m not. I’ve picked up some books and slugged my way through them because I thought the process was fun. I’ve put down other books, even from favorite authors, because I just didn’t have time in my schedule to wade through 400 pages of beautiful writing waiting for them to get to the point.

Neither is a reflection of the work, but of my emotional state at the time. In other words, my reaction to these works are largely meaningless, outside of my own head. Sure, I care about what I’m feeling, but I don’t expect you to, and I certainly don’t expect anyone to mirror my weird tastes, because weird.

This isn’t an olympic event, folks. It’s just us having fun. We get to choose what is meaningful in our own little gardens in our heads, and that’s okay (as long as we’re not hurting others, or ourselves).

But I also try and remember that authors are people (with bills and expenses), and while my emotional reaction is meaningful only to me, my financial reaction (that is, if the author is getting paid) is a whole other kettle of fish. Feel what you have to feel, but pay the ones who write stuff that makes you happy.

Avatar
Toni Lea Isom
1 year ago

Been thinking about this TONS since the return of X-Men: The Animated Series in the Disney+ reboot, X-Men ’97. I’ve been in love with animated pulp fiction for thirty years, which is certainly reflected in most of my SFF obsessions. One of the things I strongly feel that “prestige” has done to SFF is attempt a watering down of its pulp foundations, rather than what I always preferred, which was a buttressing. For many decades, writers took such ludicrous concepts as super/psi-powers, time travel, FTL, etc and attempted to create a more firm foundation for them via the vast toolkit all worldbuilders require yet aren’t always adept at using to the fullest.

What am I saying? I guess what I’m trying to say is that the “prestige” question can be wonderful, but I often feel that its impact on SFF in the past decade has only served to water down all of the things that’ve always drawn me to these fictions.

Having said that, as a queer black writer, it is not lost on me how much repurposing of the old ideas has found purchase in a wide range of writers of color, women writers, LGBTQIA+ writers. What isn’t occurring as heartily alongside it is a more thorough examination of the tropes themselves. Either these tropes are discarded or simply “altered” to fit the black, queer (to use myself as an example) “reality” (as if there can only be one) within these tropes or vice versa.

dalilllama
1 year ago

Speaking for myself, I know that when I pick up a book that is packaged as “literary,” I might read a bit more slowly and carefully because of the assumption that every word has been chosen with care by a Craftsperson

I’m the opposite; if I see that a book is billed as “literary” I’m likely to read it with a sceptical and jaundiced eye, because I assume that the author is going to spend more effort being pretenious than telling a story. Solid craftsspersonship is something I expect more from explicitly ‘genre’ writers than ‘literary’ ones.

Avatar
8 months ago

Enjoyable piece, commenting just to express appreciation for “bonkosity.”