Talk:Literary fiction

message: In the article, 'literary fiction' is said to be broadly distinguishable from genre or popular fiction because the former deals more with character, style and psychology, while the latter focuses on narrative and plot. Is there a source for this assertion? I had always considered that the distinction was merely a matter first of the novelty or poignancy of a work and second of market. It's just a personal opinion, but as it stands right now the article seems to state little more — I don't even see an appeal to common consensus in the statement as it stands. Wally 08:27, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Division 

message: Is it worth it to try to tone down the POV/OR a little bit, or is it a hopeless case that no one cares about anyway. Adding sources for something other than the Updike quote would help quite a bit. But..."somewhat uneasy"? This is encyclopedic? Dybryd 17:15, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources?? 

message: Statements like "does not fit my personal definition", "I think it lacks the cohesion" and "I would be hard pressed" are blatantly POV unless they are quotes from someone that haven't been designated as such and properly attributed and sourced.--209.7.195.158 (talk) 16:33, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, I was about to say the same thing. This article is ridiculously bad. 128.195.223.168 (talk) 17:58, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV 

message: Surely the idea of the term as a genre definition only applies to its modern sense and a particular cluster of modern texts and their production and reception. I don't think, therefore, that it needs to cohesively describe Beckett, High Victorianism, etc, as well. The Victorians had their own version and idea of 'literary fiction.' We've simply given ours a blunt designation. I think that sentence should be removed or substantially altered to be less ahistorical.   —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.56.69.87 (talk) 08:15, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  

message: Wouldn't the more appropriate target for Prose fiction be the present article? __meco (talk) 15:30, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Prose fiction redirect 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Literary fiction. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090203054558/http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/356 to http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/356
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:20, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The opening sentence of the lede badly needs improvement. A better definition is needed. Possibly old Nobel speeches could be a useful source? Rwood128 (talk) 16:33, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Right now, I think the lead sentence is good because it includes a resumed version of the definition form Saricks that is employed later in the body of the text.James343e (talk) 19:18, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Definition 

message: I think that there is a problems with the sentence about literary writers being employed by universities. I know of numerous local published poets who were university professors, but that job came first in all cases. I know of several writers of fiction: one is a free lance editor, one is a university librarian, two are now retired professors, who wrote as a hobby, and a deceased professor, who had tried to be a full-time writer {supported by his wife), but he got his job before ever being published. Other local writers may get work teaching creative writing, or as writers in residence for a year, both of which they would be qualified for. I know of two other locals who work in film and TV. When I google this topic I learn that most writers struggle and if they win a major literary prize that goes toward paying off debt. I imagine, however, that a successful literary author is more likely to be employed to teach creative writing than a writer of romance novels, but a citation is needed here, not my personal opinion. Rwood128 (talk) 18:55, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: You can delete all that sentence if you think is too generic and problematic. James343e (talk) 19:21, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I deleted it to avoid confussions.James343e (talk) 19:34, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. Rwood128 (talk) 20:55, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Writers and academia 

message: This article begins as follows:
: Literary fiction is a category of fiction that explores any facet of the human condition, and may involve social commentary. Generally speaking, literary fiction is regarded as having more literary merit than genre fiction, especially the most commercially oriented type of genre fiction. 
: 
I wonder how intelligent people can take something like that seriously. I seems to imply that if a work of fiction is firmly and emphatically within some particular genre, then it does not explore any facet of the human condition or involve social commentary.
: 
That is absurd and imbecilic and probably dishonest.
: 
I would have guessed that literary fiction is fiction that lends itself to being read not merely to enjoy the story but to savor the artful way in which it is written, either in the use of language, or the profound nature of something in its content, or perhaps other things. In this I am probably influenced by having read C. S. Lewis's An Experiment in Criticism, and it could easily be that I am wrong since I don't know much about this, but I can't believe that that opening passage of this article makes sense. Michael Hardy (talk) 20:12, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: This article probably should be merged with Fiction (but see above). Rwood128 (talk) 00:23, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  The first two sentences in this article seem very stupid. 

message: Is this an article on literary fiction, genre fiction, or both? The weight of the article seems to rest on genre fiction and seems to be written by genre fans trying to validate genre fiction.
:See "Merge" and other discussion above.Rwood128 (talk) 13:32, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: What is the subject of this article?

message: This article now begins as follows: Literary fiction is a term used in the book-trade to distinguish novels that are regarded as having literary merit, from most commercial or "genre" fiction. However, the boundaries are not fixed, and major literary figures have employed the genres of science fiction, crime fiction, romance, etc, to create works of literature. Given the acknowledgement that literary fiction and fiction within a genre are not mutually exclusive, why not try a definition that identifies what is essential, thus:  Literary fiction is a term used in the book-trade to refer to novels that are regarded as having literary merit. After that, one could say something about its relationships to genre fiction and commercial fiction, without treating comments about "distinguishing" it from them as essential to the concept. Michael Hardy (talk) 16:29, 15 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Michael Hardy is my revision, especially "generally regarded", acceptable? By many? Some? Rwood128 (talk) 10:22, 16 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Non-essentials and essentials 

message: The talk page dates very far back, and, thus, and central idea is not established. I feel the article itself reflects that genre and literary fiction are not two distinct things, but interlinked things. I don’t believe all genre non conforming books are literary fiction just the same as not all genre books. And books within a genre shouldn’t be considered so boldly as “lower art” or lesser literature. This idea seems to be insinuated in the article with minimal support.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by WesPhil (talk • contribs) 22:32, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I mean this article needs some serious work. One author from 2009 is used in nearly five different citations in the first section describing literary fiction. I don’t see how genre fiction only focuses on plot and can’t be focused on human conditions or political criticism. The article from here treats genre and literary as two separate things when they really aren’t.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by WesPhil (talk • contribs) 22:35, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll take a further look at this. Rwood128 (talk) 12:06, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

text: Yes, it does appear that the body of the article needs revising.Rwood128 (talk) 21:46, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I also tend to agree more with your revision revision to the citation I initially removed. I still think broadly labeling literature in such a way needs a source with a consensus view from scholars. I think the current citation could fall under “original research” errors. Still an improvement. Overall the biggest improvement to the article would be to find recent scholarly consensus on the issue. As an example of logical errors I see here, a book that is written outside of any established genre could be awful and not artistic at all, while a book written within genre bounds could easily be artistically written. So genre doesn’t exclude literary.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by WesPhil (talk • contribs) 16:14, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposition for shifting what literary fiction is considered in the article. 

message: I've added two synonyms here - mainstream fiction or non-genre fiction - which I believe discuss the same topic. I wonder if one of them wouldn't be a more clear name, as "literary fiction" seems very generic and ambigious. Thoughts? Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:27, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name 

message: An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect :Mainstream fiction and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 September 24#Mainstream fiction until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 11:46, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Mainstream fiction" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]