Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 14:39:09 -0400
From: "Michael Walsh" <MJW at press.jhu.edu>
To: <WSFAlist at KeithLynch.net>,<wsfa-forum at yahoogroups.com>
Subject: [WSFA] Re: The difference between "genre fiction" & "fiction" ...
Reply-To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at KeithLynch.net>

Y'see ... that's icky, smelly, genre crap ... $3.75 million gets
"Fiction".

I leave you with these two comments:

'Sf's no good,' they bellow till we're deaf.
'But this looks good.'--- 'Well then, it's not sf.'
-- Robert Conquest, Spectrum 2, 1962

And the previously posted Ursula Le guin response:
http://news.ansible.co.uk/a240.html, go to "On Serious Literature"
towarrds the end.

mjw

>>> macbuccfo at msn.com 07/16/07 2:00 PM >>>
Does someone want to tell these cluess fools that Amazon can supply
them
with close to 40 novels published in the last year dealing with
vampires and
other critter that nibble in the dark? The article makes it sound like
no
one is writing in this venue. I guess the romance-vampire near erotica
that
has popped up the last few years is beneath Publishers Weekly's radar.

Bob MacIntosh

>From: "Michael Walsh" <MJW at press.jhu.edu>
>Reply-To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at KeithLynch.net>
>To: "WSFA List" <wsfalist at keithlynch.net>,   "WSFA Forum"
><wsfa-forum at yahoogroups.com>
>Subject: [WSFA] The difference between "genre fiction" & "fiction"
...
>Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 17:45:58 -0400
>
>$3.75 million
>
>http://www.publishersweekly.com/article/CA6460071.html?nid=2286&source=title&rid=132399408

>