Literary Fiction vs. Genre Fiction

The problem with distinguishing between genre and literary fiction is that there are lots of components that make up a "good book," and the public and the critics tend to focus on different things. An average reader is most likely to gravitate towards books with engaging plot lines. This is reflected in Best Sellers lists, where romance, mystery, and thrillers float to the surface. Equally prevalent on these lists are novels adorned with medals and awards for literary merit. The critics who hand out these tokens are often less concerned about the book being a break-neck paced page-turner; the focus is on the writing. At the forefront of their minds is how the author shapes the language to develop characters and scenes with subtle complexities, introduce symbolism, and generally create meaning outside of the small world their characters inhabit.

Although many critics seem to separate literary and genre fiction, I have seen novels that accomplish both provoking, meaningful social commentary wrapped up in excellent writing. But perhaps for critics it's not worth digging through the coals to find a diamond. Genre fiction is, after all, drowning in books sold on plot alone (has anyone ever lauded Twilight for its complex, heart-wrenching prose?), and critics shouldn't be blamed for wanting to stick to a genre that tries to give them exactly what they're looking for. Don't we all do that anyways?

People read books for as many different reasons and there are paperback in print. The type of people who go on to be critics-- passionate about literature, majored in English, strong at writing-- do not represent any reader who casually picks up a book and wonders if it's worth their time. Genre fiction is as much loved and adored by a popular audience as literary fiction is by critics, so to judge a book by the attention it gets from review panels would be lopsided. People like what they like. Perhaps there should be more critiques written by the everyman.