>
> Date: Fri, 17 Jul 1998 12:57:10 -0500
> From: Kristen Valyi-Hax <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Foucault's Pendulum and SF pidgeonholing
> Disch touches on this subject in "The dreams our stuff is made of." He
> mentions some titles including "Brave New World," "1984," "Jurassic
> Park," "Fahrenheit 451," etc., which could easily be considered SF, yet
> are considered "literary" and thus they get more respect and readership.
> I had an argument with my director because she wouldn't let me classify
> our new copies of "Brave New World" and "Fahrenheit 451" with the SF
> collection (we separate the genre fictions in our library). I argued
> that it was hard enough to get patrons to read SF--why couldn't I put
> these classics in with the proper genre and maybe generate some more
> readership since people in that area might pick up another title?
> Amazingly enough, the boss won. Oh, well. :-)
>
> Kristen Valyi-Hax
> Reference Librarian
As Kingsley Amis wrote (or quoted: I forget which)
"SF's no good!", they holler 'til we're deaf.
And if it's good: "Why, then it's not SF."
I wouldn't particularly call FOUCAULT'S PENDULUM sf, but I
know a lot of sf fans who have read it. Even if it all
comes down to marketing categories in the end, why on earth
wouldn't Fahrenheit 451 be seen as an sf novel? (I used to
put both Huxley and Bradbury in our sf sections when I was
a public librarian.)
----------------------
Andy Sawyer
Librarian/Administrator
Science Fiction Foundation Collection
University of Liverpool Library
PO Box 123, Liverpool L69 3DA, UK.
Reviews Editor: Foundation: The International Review of Science Fiction
[log in to unmask]
Web: http://www.liv.ac.uk/~asawyer/sffchome.html
|