What Is a Literary Novel?

The definition of literary

Today’s guest post is by Dr. Sanjida O’Connell, a literary author based in the UK. Her latest book is out in paperback, Sugar Island.


The Literary Novel. We all know one when we see it, although deciphering what it is or telling someone else how to spot one is problematic.

In a tautological definition, literary works are often defined as those that win literary awards, such as the Booker Prize for Fiction. Which would rule out any novels written before 1969 being classed as literary. Another definition is that this type of fiction is “writerly”—clearly nonsense since every book is, by definition, writerly—someone wrote it, after all!

Recently a number of critics, publishers and publicists have suggested that literary fiction is simply a genre, like crime or chick lit and should be marketed as such (to ever decreasing readers, according to April Line in her guest post here, Why Isn’t Literary Fiction Getting More Attention.

I am defined and marketed as a literary author, although I have never won the Booker. I didn’t set out to be in this genre, but now 15 years since the first of my four novels was published, I’ve been wondering exactly what it is that makes a book literary.

First, for me, is that it should be Intellectual. A literary novel is about ideas. It has an overarching theme distinct from the narrative and a leitmotif running through it. The theme of my first novel, Theory of Mind (perhaps too densely cluttered with ideas), was on the nature of empathy viewed through the prism of a young boy with Asperger’s syndrome, a sociopathic boyfriend, a robotics expert and the emotional life of a bunch of chimpanzees.

A.S. Byatt, who famously won the Booker for Possession and who “wept and wept” when her publishers asked her to remove chunks of Victorian prose and poetry, said that she had accepted her novel would only be read by academics and that she imagined she would certainly “fall into the intellectually challenging box.”

Linked to their intellectual side, I think literary works have Depth. Of course, novels with great plots usually have sub-plots too, but I’m talking about the interweaving of ideas, themes, plot, and sub-plots. My third novel, The Naked Name of Love, took me ten years from concept to publication and that, plus the Big Ideas (God, evolution and love), helped give it depth. My fourth, Sugar Island (out in paperback this March), was written much more quickly and I believe it has less depth. It wasn’t just the time it took to write but also the themes. Sugar Island deals with slavery, with freedom and free will, and because as a society we find slavery abhorrent, there is perhaps less to explore since the issues are so much more black and white for us than they were at the start of the American Civil War.

Critics often say that literary novels are about Character and commercial “mainstream” fiction is about plot. This seems a bit of a simplification. I do think literary novels should have fantastic characters, but the best books all have fantastic plots too. For me, in a literary work, the plot stems from the characters. The main character behaves in a particular way because that is who he or she is and it is their key character traits that drive the plot. Thrillers, for instance, can often have a plot that is external to the character. I’m exaggerating, but in this genre almost anyone could be the “hero” and go through the same process. Dan Brown’s The Da Vinci Code is a classic example of a pulse-quickening, page-turner, but would seeing into Robert Langdon’s soul help move the plot along?

And last but not least is Style. I think we all expect a classic novel to be written in such beautiful prose it makes you want to weep, pause and stare at the sky or feel the words rolling through your mind like pebbles smoothed by the sea. Again, this is not to say that novels in other genres do not need to think about style but the prose can be more workman-like if plot is the driver. Take Stephanie Myers’ Twilight Saga. Supremely popular, these books do not fit into the literary fiction category. They do have interesting characters, they contain ideas (about the nature of vampires and vampire-human hybrids), they reference literature (Tennyson, Wuthering Heights, Romeo and Juliet), but they are predominantly plot-driven, the prose is on the workman-like side, the characters are not deep and the books lack depth. They’re still a great read.

So what I’m saying is literary books are not better than any other type of book and elements of what makes literary fiction literary are found in most novels. But if literary fiction is what rocks your world, then go for Wuthering Heights.

How do you define literary fiction?

Share on:
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

63 Comments
oldest
newest most voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Jessica A. Kent

I’ve often attempted to characterize literary fiction; you’ve done well in capturing the elements of what make literary fiction what it is, and how it stands apart.  I’ve always gravitated towards the idea of developing really great characters, putting them in a room together, and seeing what happens – plot based on how character conflict moves it along, not characters created to move along the plot.  I see that as a big element.  Also probing those deep thoughts or constructing intellectual space within the novel (i.e., Melville’s chapters upon chapters of whale biology and whiteness) is elemental for literary fiction.  I’m a also huge on having stylistic elements in there as well.  Most commercial fiction novels are written at a high school (or lower) reading level.  Literary fiction must challenge even the most intellectual reader with words, and inspire the most creative soul with its imagery!  I would say literary fiction has got to be a book that acts upon the reader’s mind and soul, not passive entertainment.  Thanks for this post!

Sanjida O'Connell

 Thank you! Very insightful comments.

Where I get stuck is exactly with your last comment, how challenging to make a piece of writing.  My tendency is not to explain too much but let the reader work it out herself – readers are intelligent, right?

But publishers seem to want more explanation to make the work accessible to a lower reading level and therefore more commercial.

Bonnee

I get confused by the term every time I hear it, it sounds like it’s doubling up on itself. But fair enough, I think I get where you’re coming from. I don’t think it’s a matter of whether or not it’s better than other genres in writing, because let’s face it; the bottom line is whether it is an individual reader’s preference, and whether the individual book is written to that reader’s taste… right? 

Sanjida O'Connell

 Right!

But I guess novels that are ‘literary’ may be more likely to stand the test of time. I’m thinking of novels that we view as ‘classics’  now but may not have been viewed as literary when they were written, e.g. Dickens; Austen. We’ll just have to hang around a few more decades and see what’s still in print…!

Stuart Ayris

This is a wonderful article. Thank you for defining a genre that is a mystery to many but a joy to those who write within it. Cheers!

Sanjida O'Connell

 Thank you Stuart!

Laura Lee

I have written what I believe to be a literary novel, but is is published by a genre publisher.  So one element that you miss out of your definition of what is considered “literary” is that a publisher has not labeled it as something else for marketing purposes.

Sanjida O'Connell

 That’s true. I’ve been told by my publisher that they don’t like publishing books that could fit in more than one genre so tend to choose the genre they want to market the book in.

trackback

[…] janefriedman.com – Today, 7:18 AM […]

trackback

[…] Via janefriedman.com Please spread the word:TwitterFacebookPinterestEmailPrintStumbleUponDiggTumblrRedditLike this:LikeBe the first to like this post. […]

Jean Ryan

Gorgeous writing.

Sanjida O'Connell

 So kind of you, Jean. Thank you.

florence fois

 
Thanks Sanjida, I enjoyed this thoughtful post on what literary fiction is or is perceived to be by modern readers.
I was disappointed that you selected Stephanie Meyers as the representative of “pop” fiction instead of Rowlings. Classically educated during a time when educators believed it was important for every child to have a superior education, we read Silas Marner in third grade while they now assign this magnificent book to college students.
I do agree that literary novels are more thought provoking, but as the post you sited above, I cannot see why we feel the need to classify it as better, deeper or that readers are so uneducated they are unable to appreciate something that does not involve the equivelent of a car chase in film.
Reading choices are based more on the “time” than culture and language. Carnegie was not permitted to enter a library in Pitsburgh and thus we have public libraries today. This was also a time when the “masses” were not educated beyond third grade.
That public education and mass media has expanded the availability of books and other forms of entertainment, does not mean that the same people who once read “literature” are not still reading it … it means that the rest of the world is reading and viewing what appeals to them.
In an odd way, your work and the work of those who write the most thought provoking angst of the human condition, have the same readership you had 100 years ago when there was no middle class, when what was defined as the “under” class had no education and little spending power.
I feel sad that literary writers are not seen in the same light as popular fiction writers, but they are still being read by the same small group of readers. What makes me feel sadder is the need to define this under appreciation by claiming the rest of the reading public is not bright enough to appreciate the mastery of language.
The analogy might be that the film version of A Room With A View was not a summer blockbuster like Lethal Weapon … the joys of Masterpiece Theatre is not as widely viewed as Desperate Housewives. In a wonderful turn of events, Downton Abbey is as popular as the new Sherlock on Masterpiece, which is as well done as the new Sherlock by Robert Downey, Jr. or as complicated as The Death of Roger Ackroyd or The Black Cat in literature, unless of course, you believe that Agatha wrote down to the general reading public.
It would be so nice to live in a world where you could make as much money as James Patterson, but it would also be nice to have more women reviewed by the “reverant” New York Times Book Review, or to see more women represented on the 100 best novels ever written as published by Random House. Count them: Not more than ten women are among the 100 best novels ever written. And to this day the real name of the “female” author of Silas Marner (on the list by the way) is not given. Looks like you are fighting two battles to be recognized, not just by the general reading public, but by the same all white male establishement who judges what is the best for the general reading public. Good luck with that J

Sanjida O'Connell

 Thank you for your thoughtful comments, Florence.

I picked the Twilight Saga simply because it’s very popular and I’ve read all the books in the Saga. I found I couldn’t get past page 1 of JK Rowlings first book. Great that children are reading, but I agree, it would be refreshing if younger children were encouraged to read classics too.

I too feel sad that literary fiction isn’t read by more people but I certainly don’t think it’s because readers aren’t bright enough. It’s a matter of taste and time – and marketing by the publishing industry.

At a book signing on Saturday, a woman said to me she didn’t want to buy my books because she was looking for a novel to read on the beach and she didn’t want to have to think too hard. Fair enough!

Thanks for all the points you made.

Anderson-rita

It is refreshing when one thinker can, so distinctly, clarify for us essentials that we can sense but not distill into words. Currently, I am working toward a PhD, but I have an MFA in Creative Writing and I taught English for years; in the interim, I have written four literary novels–and I am surprised every time when someone says, “What’s that?” Perhaps the next time a fellow teacher or a learned friend who is not familiar with the term, let alone its components, asks me I will have an able answer.

Sanjida O'Connell

 Thank you, that’s very kind of you. It sounds as if you are far more qualified than I am to comment as I didn’t study English past age 18.
Best wishes with your books.

Court Merrigan

Seems to me that “literary” is just another genre.