I was talking with another writer friend recently about subgenres. She was complaining that people lumped anything that was sent in a contemporary period and contained some form of magic together as “urban fantasy,” when there have been long-standing authors like Charles de Lint who set a prior standard.
Well, there’s a point to that. The lines between subgenres, and even genres, have faded over the last few years especially. I’ve seen categorizations that don’t make any sense; some people categorize anything with a vampire in it as horror, and that’s simply not the case. (Especially when you wonder, looking at some paranormal romance heroes, if the poor vamp even has fangs.)
Between Paranormal/Fantasy Romance and Fantasy, there’s one major dividing line, and that’s the focus of the primary plot. If the primary focus is the romantic relationship between the hero and the heroine and there is a happy ending for them, then it belongs in Romance. If the romance is the secondary focus or not even there on the radar, or the ending is tragic, then it belongs in Fantasy (or depending on the tone, Fiction).
Subgenres are a bit of a different beast. There’s a lot of them, and you can find combinations of them, or sub-subgenres. For instance, urban fantasy is a subgenre of fantasy and dark urban is a subgenre of urban fantasy. (Or a combination. It can be argued either way.) Both romance and fantasy as genres have evolved over the years, and so have their subgenres. The paranormal romance of decades ago is not very much like what you see now, and the epic fantasy of today very little resembles Tolkien, for instance. The only urban fantasy I recall from the 90s that’s like what is branded urban fantasy (technically, dark urban) nowadays would be Laurell K. Hamilton’s early Anita Blake and Mercedes Lackey’s Diana Tregarde novels (and Sacred Ground, a stand-alone she did in the same vein).
Where am I getting at with this?
Genres have to evolve over time, otherwise people lose interest. Who wants to read the same story twenty bajillion times? (I’m going to jerk my head toward the obvious Tolkien rip-offs and secret baby stories here. :P) Sure, there are people out there that love those stories to death and would never get sick of them — but I bet there’s a lot more of us that want variety.
The problem with evolution is reader expectation. I talked last week about romance novels that lacked the requisite HEA. Is this a sign of bad marketing or an evolution of the genre? Let’s say for theory’s sake (though I doubt it is actually the case) that it’s the latter. There are a lot of people angry and disappointed. They expected chocolate cake and got a fruit tart. Even if you liked fruit tarts to begin with, if you bought a box labeled Triple Chocolate Delight cake and opened it at home to find a fruit tart inside — you’d be pissed as all hell, right?
The same is true of readers. But, to take the analogy further, there are many different types of chocolate cake available. (I’m not going to list them for fear of death glares from dieting divas. 
) So, you’re expecting one thing when you see Triple Chocolate cake — but when you open the box, it isn’t what you expect. Sometimes it can be a pleasant surprise. Sometimes it can piss you off, because dammit, you wanted a specific type of chocolate cake.
But is it fair to get pissed off because the Triple Chocolate cake you ordered wasn’t a three-tier with a chocolate frosting interior but a chocolate cake with a Godiva liqueur center? They still fit the bill. They just are different.
And I guess that’s what’s bothering me about some of the rants I see. Once people get a certain expectation fixed in their head, any deviance from that is automatically disliked and spurned — sometimes viciously. (Granted, in some cases, it’s deserved — a fruit tart is not a chocolate cake, after all.)
Anybody else notice this around the web? What do y’all think?
October 17th, 2007 at 7:56 am
I think I’m hungry *sigh*
And you’re right, the expectation of one thing, only to receive another is what leads to this problem. I like happily ever afters, I really really do. If I’m not going to get one, I like a little forewarning. (even with forewarning, I bawled my eyes out in Bridge toTerabithia. I blame pregnancy hormones)
I’d never thought about it much before meeting romance-writers though. I mean, in all the fantasy books I’ve read, good triumphs over evil. Sometimes the guy doesn’t get the girl (or maybe not the girl you thought he would) but there’s still a pretty satisfying resolution.
And I think THAT’S what I need. A satisfying conclusion. Preferably a nice and happy one, but if I’m set up from the start to realise that’s notlikely the case…I’m not going to throw a fit. I’m expecting that fruit tart, thankeemuch.
Maybe we just need to brand books “HEA guaranteed”…
As for fantasy genres…oy. I could write a whole other post. I still can’t get behind vampires as urban fantasy (especially the nicey cutesy ‘trying to do the right thing’ kind of vampires. I could maybe get behind them as high-urban fantasy if there was at least the cosmic battle between good and evil thing goin’ on. But please. Put my vamps in paranormal. It’ll make me happy.)
I don’t know why that one makes me so crusty, but it does. I’m stopping now, my reply is as long as your post
October 17th, 2007 at 9:28 am
Perhaps, like scientific theory, there has to be immediate rejection of a genre before there is acceptance and finally, expectation.
Erotic romance was spurned and vilified by much of the romance community when it first broke on the scene.
Now, many of the larger publishing houses are trying to get in on the cash that it generates.
Chick lit had no place anywhere and was disparaged as a genre. Then, it exploded on the scene and movie deals ensued.
Maybe the trick is to write the story that plagues you and worry about the “genre” later.
If the story is strong enough, (or if the cake is yummy enough) the fact that I was expecting a “Triple decker” won’t matter as much.
October 17th, 2007 at 1:47 pm
I say when paranormals hit it changed the meaning. Before when I thought or picked up a paranormal it meant one or both characters had psychic abilities. There may be a haunted house involved.
Now when you say paranormal you’re thinking vampire, werewolves, shapeshifters and such.
As a writer who still think of paranormals the same way how do I market my book with a psychic without making the person reading my query think they are getting a vampire story?
Another term that died and came back in another form is chick-lit. Most people don’t say it because it’s dead. Now it falls under the umbrella of either romantic comedy or women’s fiction.
From this standpoint I can understand why and how people get mad about the changes in what genres are what called or how they are defined. Whether you want to or not you come with a set of expectations when you open a book to read. The anger stems from getting something you didn’t pay for.