Pulp fiction
As Wired reports, U.S. firm Paizo Publishing, which makes roleplaying games, has launched a new book imprint, Planet Stories, dedicated to reviving out-of-print pulp fantasy novels by the likes of Michael Moorcock and Robert E. Howard. The imprint may also branch into new original titles as well, and they’re also tweaking the conventional publishing business model:
One of the most tantalizing prospects of Planet Stories is the subscription package Paizo offers. An extension of their Adventure Path and GameMastery roleplaying products, where readers can get regular installments of gaming materials by mail. “Subscriptions are an easy way for readers and collectors to stay abreast of the series without having to remember to go to the store every month,” [publisher Erik] Mona said. While the subscription model was mainly for customers’ convenience, Paizo offers a 20% discount to subscribers. However, Mona was quick to clarify that traditional methods of buying the books still work, with the series available online and stocked at bookstores. “Even major chains like Borders and Barnes & Noble have gotten in on the action,” he said.
And speaking of genre fiction, Canadian sci-fi giant (and regular Quillblog commenter) Robert J. Sawyer expounded on his blog this week about the difference between commercial and literary writing:
Commercial fiction tends to emphasize characterization, plot, action, and dialog, and may, or may not, include beautiful, or highfalutin, or arch language, and may, or may not, have an overall theme.
In contrast, literary fiction usually gives short shrift to plot and action, but often has a theme (a statement other than a plot synopsis describing what the story is about).
However literary merit is often found in commercial fiction including that subset of commercial fiction called genre fiction.
But having literary merit is not a requirement of successful commercial fiction, and doing well commercially is not a requirement of successful literary fiction.
In any event, to call oneself a “literary writer” has always struck me as either a silly redundancy (I’m a “woody carpenter”) or pretentious; if the person saying that means that his or her work has literary merit — sorry, that’s for others to judge. :)
