What's in a genre, really?

We all understand what's meant by "genre." We easily place a new piece of writing into one of a number of genres--mystery, romance, horror, sci-fi. Well, maybe it's not always so easy, but we certainly try; even when it means concocting blended genres, such as "techno-erotica." What we forget in our hurried attempts to categorize writing is that genre is primarily descriptive. When we think of a writing genre, we're not simply picturing a sorting-bucket full of like pieces; we're picturing all the elements--the characters, plot, setting--that describe that piece of writing. When we forget about the descriptive function of genre, we forget genre has an actual function beyond categorizing. Genre reminds us, the audiences and readers, about what is important in the piece.

In my recommendation of Michael Crummey's Galore (over at Advent Book blog), I describe the novel as a comedy of manners. Admittedly, the genre "comedy of manners" is taken from theatre, but it is still wonderfully descriptive, and exceedingly apt for Galore, which is a comedic--and somewhat tragic--commentary on the social relations and mores of historical Newfoundland. The novel has all the elements of a comedy of manners: it satirizes manners and affectations, questions whether certain characters meet social expectations, and concerns itself with an illicit love affair or two. But who would categorize Galore as a comedy of manners? Would you look for it in the "comedy of manners" section of Chapters? Not likely; because genres are defined as categories to pigeon hole writings, and so need to be accommodatingly broad. But doesn't Galore read as more than a historical novel? Doesn't "comedy of manners" evoke the awkward social atmosphere, strained relations, and personal foibles narrated in Galore?

Genre isn't always the most discrete. There is a lot of ambiguity found in attempts to place a piece of writing into a genre. But that shouldn't discourage our use of genre as a descriptive aid. Instead, we should embrace the ability of genres, especially those considered outdated or archaic, to evocatively set out the elements of narrative--character, plot, and setting. Maybe it's not that we as readers have forgotten the descriptive quality of genres, but more that we've become content to re-use or re-purpose the same tried-and-true generic categories. I cringe to think what someone who expected a typical historical novel might think after reading a few pages of Galore. It might be in fact a historical novel, but at its heart, Galore is a comedy of manners, a tale of social people, and all that that entails.

*****

Succession Planning: or, Who's Going to Do This When I'm Gone?

I try not to be a crabby-puss, but sometimes I wake up on the wrong side of the bed, the weather changes, it's a full moon, or whatever. Today is one of those days. And since I spent a couple of hours talking to publishers and editors about the prospects for freelance editors in the Atlantic region, my ire is now directed toward the publishing industry in general. Specifically the realization that there's no money in publishing; if you want to print something, print cash!

I'm sure this isn't a new realization for a number of people. It wasn't really an epiphany for myself, either. Rather, it was a growing realization that the state of publishing (especially among periodicals) in Canada is as dismal as suspected. Well, some people still get paid, but that number has declined. Why? The simplest reason is declining revenues for publishers. Without enough revenue, from advertising, book sales, and subscriptions, to cover the expenses of operations, publishers are forced to cut costs where they can. Typically the first place businesses look to cut costs is personnel, followed by products and services purchased, like freelance work.

In my case, the service publishers aren't buying is editorial: copy editing, proofreading, and substantive editing, to name the most common. Instead, publishers have turned inward, focusing on their own staff to meet their editorial needs. You can't really blame them, because, in fact, their reasoning is sound. Why spend money outside when you have the resources inside? I might be disappointed that there is a trend among publishers away from hiring freelance editors, but I'm not angry at the publishers. I'm more upset with the myopic foresight of the publishing industry as a whole.

There are a lost generation of professionals in a number of industries, professionals who should be in mid-career, but instead are still trying to find their place in their industry. This is true for academia, where there is a paucity of mid-career professors, but a significant number of new professors, working beside a glut of those ready to retire. The publishing industry, too, is facing the problem of retirement-age editors, master craftspeople, who's skills will be sorely missed. Unfortunately, the publishing industry doesn't have its succession planning in place, to replace those crafty wordsmiths with young, mentored editors. I'm sure some publishing houses and periodicals have thought about this, but on the whole, it seems there hasn't been the planning, or the money, to ensure the quality and character of the editor's craft continues.

At one time--not too long ago, I'm told--editors would work in-house for a decade or so before going freelance. Now, you're lucky if you can even get an in-house position, let alone make a living as a freelance editor, after a decade of experience or not. But what's lost isn't only the livelihood of freelance editors, but their skills, too. Without the same opportunities for training and experience, the current generation of editors sadly will be less versed in the editor's craft than their forbearers. Young editors don't have the same opportunities to work with manuscripts, authors, and senior editors, because the economics of the publishing industry dictate their working relationships. A young editor might wait a decade before having the opportunity to gain serious experience in substantive editing. And who's loss is that, really? The publishing industry as a whole.

The State of Print Media

I don't have time to write a long post, but I did want to get this out there, what's going on with print advertising? I just finished reading the Project for Excellence in Journalism's report on the state of the news media in 2009, and I have to say, it doesn't look good. I never thought I'd care so much about marketing, until I realized not anyone in the periodical publishing industry will hire a freelance editor when they're forced into an economic corner, a corner that requires them to cut costs.

One interesting thing that was suggested to me was to start talking to publishers "top line," or their revenue stream. But how do you make editorial about marketing or revenue? I'll have to give it some thought, because apparently the freelance editors days of (marginal) profitability are through, unless they can convince publishers freelance editors can increase revenue (and not just cut costs).

Is Blogging Social Media?

I'm not looking to start a fight. I honestly wonder if blogging is what certain people have in mind when they talk about social media. Now I'm an expert in neither blogging nor social media, but recently I've come to realize both offer useful ways to connect with people. Armed with that realization, I've set out to learn to tweet, facebook, and flickr, but stumble (oh, I should learn to stumble, too) over whether blogging is part of social media.

Talking with a friend, who has far more experience and skill using social media than me, we readily agreed social media is about building relationships. So, does blogging build relationships? I have a few blogs I follow, checking them every couple of days. I even feel a certain familiarity with the authors of these blogs. But do I have a relationship with them? I'm not sure. One of the things my social media-savvy friend suggested about this apparent lack of relationship was that relationship building on blogs happens through comments. I have to admit the comment sections of some blogs make me socially envious. I wish my Facebook updates could muster as much response. But do the comments let bloggers build relationships? (Share your thoughts in the comments!)

NB. Not that a blog has to be social media to be an effective media, for sharing, marketing, ranting, or whatever. I hope to share some thoughts on publishing, editing, writing, and related miscellany here. Not so sure about ranting, but I'm sure it could happen.