tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4512901970142754617.post6371461520868370820..comments2023-10-28T07:08:29.965-07:00Comments on Right Fans: Sci Fi from the Other Side: Another (Delayed) Monday Commentary: Reclaiming "Literary"SABR Matthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00879056167130238382noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4512901970142754617.post-24900445675984058572014-10-25T10:50:37.266-07:002014-10-25T10:50:37.266-07:00An awful lot of writers seem to think that "l...An awful lot of writers seem to think that "literary" means using lots of seldom-used words in an incomprehensible plot filled with 2D (albeit PC) characters. I don't think so. But it probably isn't Louis L'Amour, either. Dick Whittenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11404408277979394299noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4512901970142754617.post-92083976484263988742014-10-16T09:44:41.092-07:002014-10-16T09:44:41.092-07:00I love you for posting on this! I think we should...I love you for posting on this! I think we should distinguish between the two forms by calling the pretenders to the throne "glitterary". :)<br /><br />Why? Because I do not want to insult John C Wright with the term literary, if it includes dreary depressing gray goo, or a trumpeting SJW rant about humans as classes of widgets that aren't lined up properly. Yes, he writes rousing stories with action, beginnings middles and ends, and much daring do. But his style is not the mercenary barebones prose beloved of spy thrillers and mil-sf. He loves language and urges his readers to think beyond the every day to stretch the mind. But he doesn't fall into the navel gazing rabbit hole that so many others fail to escape. His is also a form of escapism. Yes, it is different than the traditional form of exploding space ships, though <i> still includes </i> exploding space ships. <br /><br />I think there's room for that. The record shows he does not have difficulty attracting readers.Talithahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00609037188135802885noreply@blogger.com