Is it ever beneficial to leave your reader saying "what?"
Not "what" in the sense of "what is the writer trying to convey?" so much as "why is the writer spending time on this?"
I'm thinking of writing genre ebooks for purely economic reasons, but fuck, I don't know. I don't think I would be able to resist subverting things, which is not what the readers want. But is this necessarily the case? Has there ever been an airport novel that managed to smuggle in some literary merit up its rectum? Is it automatically a waste of time?
Twin Peaks related, because it took a murder mystery soap opera and gradually converted it into cosmic horror.
be subversive now, or never
>>9984065
the best types of commercial works are commercially subversive. Nobody likes it more when they think they are consuming something different and new while what they are consuming is exactly the same shape as the previous thing. For example think of Pulp Fiction or Fight Club or Clockwork Orange. All of these are completely conventional story telling in every sense other than its slightly subversive content. However also note that the general moral of each three works are completely mainstream too. We like to hear spelled out for us what sort of lurks in the shadow but isn't an entirely new concept. We can absorb stories about violence and anti-capitalism and nihilism and etc. these are mainstream things. Also think of the culture's fetish for relishing how surveilled we are. While horrifying, we enjoy being told how oppressed we are. With that being said, a literary work that takes place in an airport or something like that making fun of airport novels and the term 'airport novel' would be pretty funny. But you should really examine what kind of contemporary novels are the ones that sell, you might be surprised.