Ani-nouto had an
entry on conventions that I just have to echo: "Authors on the average conform to conventions, and it’s just the fact." There's not anything particularly wrong with this; it gives a measure of stability in this uncertain world (or, more prosaically, it gives consumers a reasonable heuristic to decide whether something is worth buying).
Rachel Donadio a few weeks ago had
an article in the NY Times entitled "It's not you, it's your books." At least one person I know reacted to it approvingly, which amazed me. The essay isn't
bad, really -- an anodyne collection of anecdotes disguised as advice, quickly glossing over any controversial stance. By drawing on the myth of a canon of great authors, Donadio could gloss over the critical prejudices of her readers, knowing she wouldn't get called on it.
I probably would have thought no more about it, until in the week following the essay's publication she was on a public radio program broadcast locally talking about it, dealing with call-in shows (unfortunately, I don't remember the name of the show; I meant to try to track down what was in the timeslot, but I didn't get around to it, and now don't remember the day of week or exact time). Donadio was pressed by several callers (and, to a lesser extent, the host) on the topic of, as she put it, "genre fiction."
These are things like "Romance", "Science Fiction", and "Mystery" ... books shelved separately in mainstream bookstores from the "highbrow" "literature" category. Donadio said, in effect, that they could be entertaining, but the genre conventions bound authors unduly, preventing them from being truly challenging. She said that real literature had no constraints, and that's why she appreciated reading it over genre novels. This is balderdash, of course: if you were to run a clustering algorithm over novels in the "literature" section, you'd find many other genres. Regency Romances, for example, or College Professors who Sleep With their Students (a subgenre nicely lampooned in
Music and Lyrics); or Nazi historicals. The conventions that provide a structure in some of the genres are conventions that are alternatively adhered to, subverted, or ignored.
Perhaps the capstone of that call-in show was a woman who called in complaining that her husband had low tastes (I forget the example she used -- it might have been
Chicken Soup for the Soul). When asked what she was reading, she proudly said that her reading group had just finished
The Kite Runners and was starting on something else, perhaps
Memoirs of a Geisha. I laughed to myself -- her highbrow tastes were evident in reading books brought to prominence by that esteemed bastion of intellectual culture, Hollywood.