How the hell do you explain a book?
Tuesday, September 25, 2012 at 10:38AM
Maybe not the most elegant title for a post, but something I have been thinking about... a lot. One of the issues the Big 6 publishers had with Correction Line (as forwarded to me by the agent for the novel) was that it couldn't be easily placed in a genre. It was too literary to really be a suspense thriller, but it had too many suspense type elements to really be a literary book. (And no one seemed to be buying literary books anyway).
Oh, and then there is the whole supernatural thing.
Insert Homer voice: D'oh!
Now, back then, I was pretty bitchy about the whole thing. I mean, c'mon, cross-genre books are the new black right? (As in, the dress everyone wants). But after self-publishing Correction Line on Amazon, and having to talk about the book, I am seeing their point. (Gasp!) It is a book that sits in-between.
As the reviews come in, and they have been very favourably thus far, I am seeing how the book can elicit different opinions. Comparisons run from James Lee Burke (love) to Clive Barker (never read). And of course I am delighted when a reader drew a comparison to Marquez (a definite influence) and Allende (only read one of her books).
The minimal approach is mentioned, which for me rest in Carver, but even more so with Richard Ford. Note - a big fan post will be upcoming, as I am seeing him read tonight.
So this is all to say, in this soup, how do you tell somebody what your book is about? Readers seem to often want some sort of touchstone, notably a book that they've read, or at least heard of. Well it's kinda like Moby Dick, but without the whale. Or it's a kind of Harry Potter, but with Meth. (Breaking Hogwarts?)
Okay, that's just silly.
I digress. Often.
But take one of your favorite novels, and try to explain it without comparing it other books. For me, it's Underworld by Don DeLillo. What is Underworld about? Everything.
DeLillo combines life in New York (the Bronx), with Truman Capote, J. Edgar Hoover, with the Cold War, Nuclear bombs, waste management, the Zapruder film, installation artists in the desert, chess, Jackie Gleason, Lenny Bruce, nuns, miraculous visions, the internet, and oh, of course: BASEBALL!
Now, did I mention this is one of my favorite books? Maybe this sheds some light on things.
If you do pick up Correction Line, shoot me a message and tell me how you would explain it.
I'd sure like to know.
Reader Comments (2)
I have this EXACT problem every time I try to explain a Murakami novel (currently one of favorite living authors). His novels are surrealist. 1Q84 is essentially about two people separated 20 years prior who have spent those 20 years seeking each other out without knowing it...in 1984. But it's so much more than that that it pains me to describe it that way. Doing so makes it sound like some romance novel WHICH IT IS NOT.
The best way to explain 1Q84 and all his other novels is simply this: It's 900 pages of a drug-free immersion into the life of any number of mental illnesses to which you "enjoy" a first person account.
Love Murakami! Haven't read 1Q84 yet, but I want to. Especially after your description : )