18 July 2026

The Washed and the Unwashed (Once Again)




Literary fiction, genre fiction. What are the differences?

I fully understand that we've discussed this and argued about it many times, at this blog and elsewhere, but the question is still asked--and I still agree that it's an interesting subject.

And an important subject, to those of us who write and (try to) publish fiction, and especially short fiction. Why? Because even though markets for our work seem to be fading as we speak, those markets that remain are usually looking for either literary stories or genre stories. But not both. So, to avoid wasting our time and the editors' time, we need to know and understand the difference.

"Okay, then," says the beginning writer, or the hopelessly bored dinner companion, "what IS the difference between literary and genre?"

Views and Opinions

Some have said literary fiction is an Oprah's Book Club pick and genre fiction is a "beach read." Others say lit fiction is what you find in The New Yorker and genre fiction is what you find in AHMM, Asimov's, etc. I once read someplace that literary stories are good for you and genre stories just taste good. (I like that one.) My wife says literary stories are what she watches on TV and genre stories are what I watch. One of the most straightforward observations I've heard, although it's wrong, is that genre fiction is mystery, Western, SF, romance, and horror, and that literary fiction is everything else.

I've even heard some rude folks say that literary fiction should be read by those who want to be challenged mentally, and that genre fiction should be read only by the mentally challenged. Others, just as rude and not to be outdone, say that reading too much literary fiction can make you mentally challenged. 

In my short-story writing classes, I used to tell students that so-called literary works deal mainly with relationships, emotions, and "the meaning of life," while genre writing deals mostly with action, excitement, and adventure. I think that's a pretty fair definition.


 

Examples

An extreme example, I think, of a literary story is Hemingway's "Big Two-Hearted River." It's a short piece about a guy who hikes into a pine forest, pitches a tent beside a river, spends the night, and fishes for trout, and that's pretty much it. There's no plot, no conflict, nothing except one character doing a lot of thinking and (hopefully) making the reader think as well, about implied but never-mentioned subjects like war and rehabilitation. There's also symbolism, as he watches the river (like his own life) flow past him. 

The opposite extreme, the ultimate genre story, might be something I remember hearing in elementary school, a story called "The Hook." You've all heard it: (1) A teenaged boy and girl go out parking despite warnings that a deranged killer with a prosthetic hook is on the loose, (2) they think they hear someone sneaking around outside their car while they're romantically involved, (3) they bug out for the dugout, screaming and spraying gravel, (4) they later decide they overreacted and probably really didn't hear anything at all, and (5) when they get to the girl's house and the boy walks around the car to open her door for her, there's a hook hanging from the passenger-side door handle. No deep meanings there, no profound messages, no disillusioned or dying or suicidial characters. The whole story is plot--a twist-ending plot designed to scare the bejesus out of you--and the characters are there only to carry out the storyline. And it works.

Straddling the fence

Sometimes the difference between literary and genre is obvious: The Grapes of Wrath on one end of the field, let's say, and a Rambo movie on the other. But sometimes, as is true of many things in this life, the lines can get a little blurry. 

James Lee Burke's mystery novel Cimarron Rose is considered by some to be both genre fiction and literary fiction, mainly because of his use of beautiful, elegant, descriptive language; crime novels like Mystic RiverL.A.  Confidential, and The Silence of the Lambs combine the categories because of the strength and depth of their characters; and classics like To Kill a Mockingbird and Shane are a mix of literary and genre mostly because of the life lessons they teach. Scout Finch and Bobby Starrett both undergo extreme changes in the way they look at life and their fellow man, and many consider this process of "becoming a different person during the course of the story" to be the single most important gauge of whether a piece of fiction belongs on the literary side of the courtroom.


Lucky with critics, unlucky at love

One thing you can count on: the critics will like you if you succeed at writing literary fiction, and the public will like you if you succeed at writing genre fiction. There's a reason that genre fiction is also called "commercial" fiction and "popular" fiction: it sells. Stephen King once said, and I'm paraphrasing, that if you specialize in writing literary fiction there's a good chance you might find yourself sitting down with your family one night to an Alpo-and-noodles casserole.

Does that mean that all of us who actually want to earn something (rather then just learn something) should try to write only genre fiction? Of course not. I think you must write the kind of stories and novels that you most enjoy reading, and feel comfortable writing. If you try to do otherwise . . . well, you'll probably fail.

It's sometimes not even safe to try to write in more than one genre. Some can do it effectively (Nora Roberts/J.D.Robb with her romances and mysteries, Loren Estleman with his mysteries and Westerns, etc,), but it's not easy. I don't know either of those authors, but I would bet the house and farm that both of them enjoy reading the two genres they've chosen to write in. And my hat's really off to those who can successfully write both literary novels and genre novels. There are many, but Larry McMurtry and Ed McBain/Evan Hunter come first to (my) mind. I still find it impressive but hard to believe that the same writer created both Lonesome Dove and Terms of Endearment.


More Opinions

The often-stated view that literary fiction is character-driven and genre fiction is plot-driven is correct, I think, but it's an oversimplification. To be successful, both categories need engaging plots and interesting characters. But I do agree that in literary fiction the characters are probably more important than whatever it is they're doing, and in genre fiction what they're doing is more important than who they are. As you probably know by now, I love to quote Stephen King, and I often find myself thinking about his observation of literary vs. genre. "Literary fiction," King once said in an interview, "is about extraordinary people doing ordinary things. Genre fiction is about ordinary people doing extraordinary things."

Here's another quote that I wrote down in a notebook long ago--I think it's attributed to Bill Stephens: "The characters in literary fiction spend so much time thinking, they never get around to doing anything. They constantly are confronted with deep issues of: Who am I? Why am I here? What should I do? Where am I going? Why can I not love/be loved? . . . and a myriad of other 'Woe is me' considerations. There just is no time left to do much."


Alas, there is also no time left to do much in this post. Let me say, though, that I am primarily as genre reader and a genre writer. I admit it. I do occasionally read and enjoy literary works, I certainly appreciate the effort and talent that it took to write them (I've actually sold some stories to literary journals), and I understand that many folks prefer to always read and write that kind of fiction. As Seinfeld would say, "There's nothing wrong with that."

But, God help me, I usually prefer to wallow among the unwashed. I simply LOVE stories like Die HardJawsPsychoBlazing Saddles, and The Big Lebowski, and I love the goosebumps I get when I think of "The Hook."

I also still remember the childlike excitement I felt a few years ago when I heard about an upcoming movie called Cowboys and Aliens, featuring Daniel Craig and Harrison Ford. Good grief, I thought--James Bond and Indiana Jones, fighting it out with Predator? How could that not be fun?


How about you? Do you like to write, and read, literary fiction? Genre fiction? Both? If you're a writer, have you been successful in either, or both? I'd love to hear your thoughts on all this, in the comments section.

Over and out.


 

 

21 comments:

  1. John, good stuff. You might want to mention that both of those cartoons are from the excellent Tom Gauld. Another famous distinction is that literary fiction ends without the last page, but I guess that's part of the No Plot thing. When I wrote an essay analyzing dozens of types of fiction by describing a car going off a cliff I included: "If it turns out the driver died for no reason and everyone spends the rest of the book feeling very, very sad about it, this is mainstream literature."
    https://www.sleuthsayers.org/2017/03/cliffhangers.html

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi Rob. Yes, thank you--Tom Gauld did those great cartoons. And I love your car-off-the-cliff example. (I remember that SS post.)

      I once heard that those sad-ending foreign movies--you know the ones I mean--are often made from "literary" stories.

      Delete
  2. "Others say lit fiction is what you find in The New Yorker and genre fiction is what you find in AHMM, Asimov's, etc." All I can say is they haven't been reading the short stories in The New Yorker lately, which of late have drifted into the BDSM genre. And I can't say enough bad things about John Updike (who so many people love) and HIS genre, which is men in search of the perfect woman to bang and then dump because she's not perfect, i.e., he needs to move on to the next and complain about HER.

    Now Gabriel Garcia Marquez? Toni Morrison? James Agee? Lit fiction I love.
    Genre fiction? Oh, we do not have enough time for me to list all the ones I love.
    As for me, I write mostly genre, because I like it when people actually live more than they think about living. And life is so weird, it seems a shame not to write about it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So right, Eve!!--I too like it when people "actually live more than they think about living." Love that.

      Yes, there are certainly some literary stories and novels that I've enjoyed. But I will always prefer entertainment over enlightenment. I think the highest compliment I can get from a reader is that my story was entertaining--and that's something that I think is hard to find in literary fiction.

      The best quote I've heard in a long time: "I can't say enough bad things about John Updike."

      Delete
  3. Melodie Campbell18 July, 2026 10:04

    I write mainly genre fiction, but I have actually won a few literary awards (strange as that sounds, even to me!) John, to add to your list, this is what I had to write about literary fiction, for a humour column "What to eat when you read" a few years ago:
    "Literary fiction:
    It will be unusual, expensive, and unpalatable. You won’t “understand” why others think it is so good. Your palate has not been suitably developed to appreciate such fineness. Caviar. Escargot (it always sounds so much better in French.) Duck liver (you can look up the French spelling.) If you get beyond the first bite (er…page one,) Yay for you. Hard to read – hard to eat."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Melodie, I guess what I should eat when I read is hot dogs and burgers. I'm not sure I WANT my palate developed to appreciate fineness.

      "Unusual, expensive, and unpalatable"--That sounds correct to me!

      Delete
  4. Oooh, Melodie! What a great description!

    ReplyDelete
  5. Reed Farrel Coleman defines literary fiction as "books without plots." In my grumpier moments, I have defined it as the last refuge of people who can't tell a *$#&ing story.
    I've never been able to ascertain when bookstores began labelling types of books to guide readers to their preferences and increase sales, but I suspect without evidence that it was after WWII.

    Because my school system reimbursed me for graduate courses within my field of study/certification, I hold three graduate degrees in literature and theater (My own novel, Postcards of the Hanging, became my sixth-year project/thesis at Wesleyan and was only published 30-some years later. My advisor considered it "literary" enough to earn an "A.")

    Between 1970 and 2003, I taught all levels of 10, 11, and 12 grade English at two high schools. We revised the curriculum at least three times during that stint, and all these books appeared in the reading lists. I assigned most of them. You can label ALL of them as sci-fi, mystery, romance, western, gothic, or some other genre.

    Le Morte D'Arthur, Chaucer's "The Pardoner's Tale," Oedipus Rex, The Oresteia, Most of Shakespeare's plays, Wuthering Heights, Jane Eyre, Austen's novels, Huckleberry Finn, Pudd'nhead Wilson, The House of the 7 Gables, The Turn of the Screw, Great Expectations, Our Mutual Friend, The Stranger, Something Wicked This Way Comes, Of Mice & Men, The Pearl, The Grapes of Wrath, All the King's Men, One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest, Intruder in the Dust, Murder in the Cathedral, Death Comes for the Archbishop, The Trial, Crime and Punishment, Shane, The Virginian, The Ox-Bow Incident, The Painted Bird, Lord Jim, Heart of Darkness, Native Son, Beloved, The Bluest Eye, We Have Always Lived in the Castle, Their Eyes Were Watching God, Cry the Beloved Country, To Kill A Mockingbird, The Killers, The Great Gatsby, Sister Carrie, An American Tragedy, A Soldier's Play, Zooman & The Sign, The Time Machine.

    This is about half the list, but I think it makes my point. "Genre" is a label invented by people who need to feel superior. If you want to read a book, read it. Why should you care what other people think?

    ReplyDelete
  6. Steve, I have enjoyed many, many of those book in that list. And yes, I think the ones you listed make your point.

    I also like Reed Farrel Coleman's definition of literary fiction. In fact I think everyone's opinion on this topic is interesting, because it's such a subjective issue. Maybe a good definition of literary fiction is like the one Justice Stewart made about pornography--"I know it when I see it."

    Thanks as always, my friend. With your background, you have a unique perspective on all this.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Always learn something from you, John!
    I tire of labels. I write what comes to me and let whoever publishes it label it. My stories are character driven with plots. James Patrick Focarile

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hey James--thanks for the note.

      I tire of labels too, and I hope and would prefer that the better editors ignore them completely, but I know that sometimes labels do come into play, with regard to our submitted stories. I was once told (not by the editor but by someone very familiar with a certain market) that one of my stories was almost certainly rejected because it wasn't "literary" enough. I'm not sure that was the reason--maybe it just wasn't a good enough story--but I still remember that, and have tried to understand these labels enough to avoid problems. I would agree that "character-driven with plots" is probably a perfect description for fine stories.

      Delete
  8. I think, in some way, writers should find a middle ground between the two and I try to do so with my novelettes/novellas. My recent short stories are in different genres and a couple of literary stories. Likewise, the novels I read are mostly crime/mystery/detective, although I occasionally read literary works here and there. I even have two bookshelves above my bed right now. Most selections are of that genre, but I do have a collection of William Faulkner's writings also. I have works in many genres available on Amazon and Audible, my biggest success right now is non-fiction.

    Frankly, several have told me to write about my Cerebral Palsy ordeals, helping raise an Autistic brother, and travel to campgrounds even to the point it feels intrusive. This is why I've been writing these ordeals as crime/mystery/detective novels because the literary novel/memoir path doesn't hold much appeal for me, despite any merit. And it would rehash the same approach others have taken. I don't find that interesting.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Justin, the middle ground between literary and genre isn't a bad goal to shoot for. Another way of describing those kinds of stories, I think, is a *combination* of literary and genre content--and some of the most successful novels/movies are examples. One of those is To Kill a Mockingbird--it's certainly a literary story, in that it shows Scout Finch's coming-of-age transition and the valuable lessons about life that she learned from what she's observed--but it's also a mystery (consider the Boo Radley reveal at the very end) and is loaded with suspense and excitement.

      As for nonfiction, I think it's common knowledge that--so far at least--nonfiction books and articles are usually more financially rewarding than novels and short stories. I say "so far" because I'm not all sure how much the use of AI will affect some nonfiction publications in the future.

      Thanks for the thoughts!

      Delete
  9. Cowboys and Aliens, one of the most disappointing, bad films I ever wasted time on. Someone (writer/director/money guy/distributor) couldn't decide what the story was supposed to be about. jimguigliauthor.com

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ha! I agree it fell short, Jim. But boy was I looking forward to it, when I first saw that it was upcoming.

      It didn't lack star power, that's for sure. Wonder how Ford and Craig feel about that one.

      Delete
    2. I, too, couldn't wait to see it, which intensified the disappointment. Ford and Craig cashed their checks and moved on. Jim Guigli

      Delete
  10. Like many others who have responded to your post, I write on whatever ideas grab me. Since I read primarily mysteries, my ideas drift in that direction, but not always. I have written a few stories that I consider literary (Don't believe I sold them!)
    But what I think of as "literary" is basically "everything else." If it's not mystery, thriller, SF, romance, spy novel, adventure, comedy, etc., then it's "literary."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Bob, maybe writing literary is its own reward, right?

      I have tried it on purpose several times, and I managed to somehow sell those stories to literary magazines, but mine always did have a crime in the plot so I think they could also have been considered genre fiction. As mentioned earlier, *I* think literary fiction results in a definite change in the viewpoint character, between the beginning of the story and the end of the story. I believe if you write a story like that, where the hero or heroine becomes "a different person" in the course of the story, it can be categorized as literary. It's for that reason (again, *I* think) that literary stories are almost always standalone stories, not installments in a series, because that profound character change wouldn't happen in a series story. James Bond and Indiana Jones and Nancy Drew remain the same at the end of the story, the same person they were at the beginning. For that matter, readers/viewers don't *want* them to change. My opinion only.

      Bob, I appreciate your thoughts, as always!!

      Delete
  11. Great post, John. For me, the distinction is between stories in which something happens and nothing happens. I gave up on the latest Tana French, always considered a literary crime novelist, a quarter of the way through, because absolutely nothing was happening. Yeah, a young woman disappeared, but the book was people thinking and sometimes talking: literary fiction. Boring! I disagree with plot vs character, because pure plot-driven genre fiction bores me too. I write and read stories about characters who are real, vivid, lovable, and unique--to whom all sorts of things happen. An interesting twist in my family plot: my husband, a non-fiction reader and no literary critic, recently picked up a collection of short stories by Amor Towles. His verdict: "He'll lead you down the garden path. You get to like the guy, and you know he's heading for disaster." It's literary, but something happens. It's well done. And the stories aren't page-turners. My husband can read five pages, put it down, and come back to it two days later, taking maybe four sittings to finish a story with enjoyment. Interesting, huh? Readers differ.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Liz, I too can read a few pages or a couple of chapters, leave the novel, and come back later--maybe tomorrow or the next day--and then keep reading. My wife, on the other hand, hates that--she'll sit down and read until the book's done, even if it takes all day. Readers do differ.

      As for literary vs. genre, I once heard someone say he admires the authors of literary fiction. He said it takes great talent to write an entire book that's hard to read.

      Interesting subject.

      Delete

Welcome. Please feel free to comment.

Our corporate secretary is notoriously lax when it comes to comments trapped in the spam folder. It may take Velma a few days to notice, usually after digging in a bottom drawer for a packet of seamed hose, a .38, her flask, or a cigarette.

She’s also sarcastically flip-lipped, but where else can a P.I. find a gal who can wield a candlestick phone, a typewriter, and a gat all at the same time? So bear with us, we value your comment. Once she finishes her Fatima Long Gold.

You can format HTML codes of <b>bold</b>, <i>italics</i>, and links: <a href="https://about.me/SleuthSayers">SleuthSayers</a>