> But what is the "genre" of literary fiction? It's far too broad compared recognized genres like science fiction.
How are you measuring “broadness” here?
My experience with literary fiction is that it is as much a genre as sci-fi, mystery, or romance. It has its own clichés, as well as novels that avoid or deconstruct those clichés. The only thing I can think of as being substantially different is the cultural attitudes towards literary fiction, and the curious insistence that some people have that literary fiction is not a genre. I don’t see any justification for calling it “not a genre” other than argument which specifically defines “genre” in a way to exclude literary fiction.
I think if we sat down and tried to come up with a definition of “genre” that includes sci-fi, mystery, romance, and western, but excludes literary fiction, I would find a problem with the definition.
How are you measuring “broadness” here?
My experience with literary fiction is that it is as much a genre as sci-fi, mystery, or romance. It has its own clichés, as well as novels that avoid or deconstruct those clichés. The only thing I can think of as being substantially different is the cultural attitudes towards literary fiction, and the curious insistence that some people have that literary fiction is not a genre. I don’t see any justification for calling it “not a genre” other than argument which specifically defines “genre” in a way to exclude literary fiction.
I think if we sat down and tried to come up with a definition of “genre” that includes sci-fi, mystery, romance, and western, but excludes literary fiction, I would find a problem with the definition.