Has genre fiction ever been close to literary /lit/?

>>8172584
Please learn how to punctuate your sentences, you dense cunt.

tolkienfags think so.

some detective shit is.

some literary shit happens to have scifi in it.

but for the most part, no, not even close.

Lots of readers are unaware Fyador Dostoevsky was a genre writer.

So THICC! O_O

JG Ballard

>>8172584
To answer this you need to consider firstly what is literary.

If we believe that literature is language that is mindfully crafted in order to achieve a specific emotional effect, then a lot of genre fiction has literary merit.

It can be found in Lovecraft's elusive descriptions of his monsters, or the way Arthur C Clarke creates a sense of wonder when he describes space and ecology.

These can be contrasted with writers of less literary merit, like Robert Howard. While he may be diverting, there is little artifice and deeper meaning to be found in his works.

>>8172728
>These can be contrasted with writers of less literary merit, like Robert Howard.

But Howard was objectively better than Lovecraft in almost every aspect.

The answer to this depends on how strict your definition of genre fiction is. If Kafka's Metamorphosis was released in 2015 instead of 1915 it would've been considered genre fiction upon release.

>>8173166

If you really believed that you would at least point out these respects. And I say this as somebody who enjoys Robert Howard. He is a schlocky adventure writer with none of Lovecraft's subtlety and depth.