How do you reconcile a desire to write science fiction or a subgenre

I think the content of a work determines whether or not it's low literature, not its genre.

>>9004595
Not to most of /lit/. The act of being 'genre fiction' has been turned into a non-term essentially. 'genre fiction' in and of itself has been diluted as a term until it means almost nothing.

>>9004602
I don't see that tbph. /lit/ doesn't generally use 'genre fiction' as a synonym for, say, 'bad book'. If it did, people who didn't like Hemmmingway (or who were rusing) would call his stuff 'genre fiction'.

>>9004620
I have seen people call hemmingway 'genre fiction' on this very board.

>>9004602
I think that's just a generalization made because most genre fiction does tend to be pretty poor in quality.

>>9004587
By writing it as high literature?

>>9004587
>low vs high literature
A spook if I ever saw one.

>>9004595
What is genre defined by if not content? If I write a book and the content is spaceships, robots and lasers, haven't I written a book in the scifi genre?

>>9004587
By not wanting to write science fiction or fantasy. Usually this entails not being a fucking autistic nerd who's spent his life in his basement reading Warhammer novels

>>9004631
I meant the quality of the content, of course.

>>9004644
Ah, right y'are.

>>9004632
Is Science Fiction and Fantasy inherently bad?

Personally what I want to write is urban fantasy conspiracy theory mystery set during the dot com boom.

>>9004587
There is nothing wrong with anything you said you want to write. Wanting to write higher literature instead of SciFi/Fantasy won't make you any better a writer.

>>9004587
(a) write 'low literature', there's nothing wrong with that
(b) use a pseudonym and write 'high literature' under your real name
(c) don't be part of 'the most part'

>>9004660
No, but
>urban fantasy
pretty much is.

>>9004811
Why? I am curious as to your reasoning.

by following in the footsteps of aristophanes and lucian and not giving a fuck

>>9004587

"High literature" is always shit. Always.

Novels like Moby Dick are kept alive solely by academics, who like "high literature" because it lets them write endless apologia for weak art.

>>9004883
It seems to be a popular genre currently, and frequently dips into bad YA and "ow the edge" territory.

>>9005033
Generally the idea I am working with is the life cycle of information as a separate entity to humans. Humans, animals, etc being information repositories but that the information themselves exist as a memetic disease. Starts with a professor who determined poltergeists exist as a form of memetic disease and committed suicide in his home to try and trap his memetic imprint there. Then forcing himself on the next occupant of the house to try and get him to aid the professor to get a new body. However this would require finding someone who has committed ego suicide, is willing to, or that he is willing to commit ego murder against. Goes into the professor's belief that what he is now dealing with has firmly left established science and that anything from this point has become guesswork.

I just like the idea of phantoms, poltergeists, and the like as a form of memetic plague.

File: trump dance.webm (930KB, 480x480px) Image search: [Google]

930KB, 480x480px

>>9004602
why do you care what people on /lit/ think? if the approval of strangers on the internet is all you have then you have bigger concerns.

>>9005050
Professor for reference committed suicide because he had cancer and realized if he waited much longer he'd be hospital bound and unable to off himself in the proper way.

>>9004587
Don't reconcile it. Write it. Make it good. Ignore anyone who discounts it just because it exists in a genre. They're not worth listening to.

It's marketing, it always is. If you look into the past, you'll see that every 'genius' got hyped up by some journalist/book to represent a greater intellectual movement.

Literature is selected as examples of the era that represent the thoughts and feelings of the time most succinctly. It's part reverence of the past(every 'period' piece, where victiorian london is some fantasy novel where you can have this wonderful romance) part technical expertise.
Calling literature 'skilled' compared to regular novels that like to throw in a dragon to make it more 'fun' is a way to let people know that you're reading serious, important things.
Where is the real serious, important work being done in this age? Writing a novel? Hardly, science will literally save your life, literature introduces new ways to appreciate it.
Literature is worthwhile not because it has dragons but because it's about humans. People will yell at you for including dragons because they are not human. If you want to write a serious fantasy, you merely have to prove them wrong with your writing alone.
People always believe tons of things about the past and about what other people believe is cool. You, as a living person and not as a revered icon of literature, have the responsibility to represent your own thoughts and desires in your writing.
That's how you become literature, you put your thoughts into book form and do it cleverly. If you decide to make star potter #334 then I think everyone deserves to reserve the right to shit on you, because you made something awful that isn't even any fun.
As Brandon Sanderson said, "It's a story for no one." Make a choice why you want to write a story, if it's to show off how intelligent and well-read you are you might end up writing Middle C. If you want to sperg out you might end up writing Lord of the Dongs.
It's all up to you. You, as a writer, have to rely on your words alone instead of genre conventions, introductions, a popular name, or a new york publishing contract.

Isn't that horrible?

Brave New world, neuromancer and 1984 are sci fi