It really was an act of self-help, but I'm very pleased it resonates. I'm the same way with television/film. I can get into some of the deep stuff, but for the most part, I just want to be occupied for a couple hours. Reading meets a different need for me, though sometimes a good, rip-roaring commercial book meets that need.
This has been most helpful in helping me understand why certain books appeal to me and others don't. While I find that my tastes are similar to yours, I could never explain to people why certain books appeal to me. I loved The Book of Goose and was totally engrossed in it. I'm thrilled it won the championship.Lessons in Chemistry just didn't do it for me. I am an 81 year old white woman so there are exceptions to the rule.
If you like Yi Yun Li's work, you definitely should check out her remarkabe first book- the short story collection A Thousand Years of Good Prayers. I put in the top tier of what I call "the poignant ponds", classical stories like Chekov, Joyce's Dubliners, William Trevor, Grace Paley, Pat Barker's Union Street, Richard Wright's Uncle Tom's Children, Sherman Alexie, ram.]rand James Alan Mcpherson, for years the lead teacher at the immortal IOWA MFA Program. McPherson also wrote two of the finer short story collections ever vwritten anywhere - Hue and Cry, and Elbow Room.
Agree. For me, upmarket fiction is a bit irksome, a bit wanna-be. Often well written, technically, sometimes they seen to have been run past too many focus groups and taken on all feedback to appeal to a generic market. They are usually instantly forgettable, no flavour lingers.
Fascinating read this morning. I too find upmarket fiction grating, thanks for the path to illumination as to why. Also? The Lit Hub and McSweeneys links are hilarious. I still think you should read A Gentleman of Moscow, btw.
I think Jodi Picoult is upmarket that shades towards the commercial side, probably depending a little book to book. I've read a couple and enjoyed them, but I think for the same reasons I enjoy commercial fiction, just get me turning the pages.
Nail on the head! Upmarket fiction is “character” driven not person driven. It often feels like a sitcom with a laugh track. I have been disappointed by most famous book club picks and truly thought I was becoming pretentious while still trying to claim “I’m just like everyone else” since I love TJ Reid and most thrillers. You may have solved a crucial piece of my reading personality. Also - Leave the World Behind is the most open-ended book I have ever seen as part of Book of the Month and people DETESTED it which made me horribly sad but now I see why and what those people might be craving instead. Cheers!
It's a good point about Leave the World Behind having an open ending. I loved that about the book, and I think lots of people don't mind it because it really fits, but I have heard people say that they liked it, except for the ending.
I had never heard of upmarket fiction, but this may help me understand why I don't like certain books. I tried A Gentleman in Moscow and got nowhere with it, finished Where the Crawdads Sing but felt like it didn't quite work. Water for Elephants is another good example. They just try too hard to be crowd-pleasing (or as Caz says, like they've gone through too many focus groups) and feel watered down. That said, writing even a bad novel is a lot of work so I shouldn't be too critical of the mediocre ones! I did love Writers & Lovers, though; did not know it was a Jenna pick and am trying not to reconsider my love based on that, lol.
I loved this piece! I appreciate your being honest that this was a thinking-out-loud piece. This is the sort of writing that I subscribed for. Your application of the literary-vs-commercial-vs-upmarket fiction taxonomy is helping me categorize my giant TBR.
Now I feel really bad that we encouraged you to read Lessons in Chemistry at book club… I think it might surprise you if you finished it, but who knows. I appreciate the discussion on upmarket fiction. Historically, I don’t read much contemporary fiction but I’ve been doing it more (blame The Village Bookseller) and this framework is helpful to process how I feel about these books (many of which I’ve loved, but also found forgettable). Interesting because I just finished The Violin Conspiracy and haaaaated it, in great part because of the reasons you didn’t like Lessons. And based on reviews, I expected it to lean more literary, but instead I found it to be a barely-upmarket example if there ever was one (and a tediously written one at that).
Oh, and A Gentleman in Moscow. Do it. It might meet many of the criteria for upmarket fiction, but the writing… oh, John, the writing.
I think this is really interesting when thinking about romance. Romance is already probably the most character-driven of commercial fictions, but when romance goes upmarket, it tends to underdevelop one of the leads at the expense of the other.
There is also a suspension of disbelief that the romance genre enjoys, and upmarket often tries to be "above" needing that, but still wants to have the same emotional response, which doesn't work as well.
That is really interesting to think about as a particular commercial genre intersects with upmarket features and what gets lost in the genre when it goes upmarket.
I think suspense and crime tend to intersect well because deeper and more nuanced character work don't undermine the plotting. Romance, though, may be a different beast.
I was just thinking this about romance, too, and a few genres that intersect with it. Commercial, absolutely, but I would not say that the characters or degree of characterization creates meat puppets flung around by plots. In fact, meat puppets in romance and a few other genres ruin the story. A non-romance example would be the Murderbot books -- it has a high octane plot but OH the characterization! Murderbot is certainly not a meat puppet.
Oh, my, thank you! I read Lessons in Chemistry, based on my sister's book club recommendation. I doubt my book club would have read it. I finished it but barely and could not articulate why I didn't like it. Well written, topic of females in the sciences, etc. Nope, it left me cold. I read literary fiction, (in the middle of Book of Goose now!) then balance with what I call mind candy, commercial fiction, tending to police procedurals i.e. Sue Grafton, Sara Paretsky, Ian Rankin, Sarah Hilary, Jo Nesbo. The British and Scandinavian murder plots are much darker than American, I find. These endings balance the open ended literary fiction's final pages. BTW I'll second Julie V. and your mom about Gentleman in Moscow. As my grandson told me recently, Suck it up, buttercup:-)!
Ah, this was helpful. I never could quite figure out why trendy books often didn't with for me. (It would have been more of a help if I'd had this before choosing 'Erotic Stories for Punjabi Widows' for my book club... worst pick and most disliked by the group so far).
You say "An upmarket book is unlikely to disappoint when it comes the expectations the novel sets for the audience." But, I think my issue is that the books promise more than they can deliver. They claim to address big problems, but never really get into the meat. If the characters are constructs, so are the issues they face, with only surface level explanation and little nuance.
Romance is my pulpy fiction of choice, and yet I'm always disappointed when I find a book that's being marketed as socially important is just a romance that's been dressed in plausible literary clothing.
I agree re: the nuance when it comes to those books that are predicated on tackling big issues and the disappointment when they fail to get into the meat and reveal something interesting.
I just finished the "Namesake" by Jhumpa Lahiri and I had a similar response. This blog dropped in my inbox at the right time to alleviate my anxiety on what's going on with my book taste. Thank you so much!
I could not agree more! I bought it because of all the hype and found myself repeatedly putting it down after another few pages. It just didn’t engage me. Thank you for your clarifying analysis of the three categories of fiction. I’m firmly in the Writers and Lovers camp. P.s. I cannot abide the writing of Amor Towles.
John, first of all, thank you for the enlightening column. As so many have said, it clarifies something that I felt but couldn't describe. I don't read all that much contemporary fiction, preferring that of other centuries, but you and my book club have given me some great suggestions: Elizabeth Strout and Claire Keegan to name only two. Finally, I must tell you that you should NOT read Gentleman in Moscow, not only for the reason you cited, but also because it is completely implausible. Yes, the author did an impressive amount of research, and I can see the appeal of the premise, but the entire plot is simply not a thing that would have happened, and therefore I find it absurd. Sorry to be Captain Bringdown, but I could not willingly suspend disbelief, as they say, enough to enjoy it. 🙄
In AI/robotics, and also in art, there is a concept of Uncanny Valley. That is when at the one end of the spectrum we have a cartoonish robot like Azimo, and on the other end an entity undistinguishable from a human. Robots that are almost human, but not quite, exist somewhere in that Uncanny Valley in the middle of the spectrum. Some people find them creepy. One- or three-dimensional are okay, but two-dimensional are not.
It seems that for some readers Upmarket Fiction falls into the Uncanny Valley territory.
Oh my gosh! Thank you. I'm trying to read Lessons in Chemistry now on the recommendation of my friend. She read it in 2 days. I'm three weeks in, and I'm only on page 75. I will read literary fiction, commercial fiction, and non-fiction until 4 in the morning. However, this and other upmarket fiction (as I just learned the title), I just can't seem to delve in to them. I end up feeling disconnected from the main characters, cheated out of gripping plot or a mind altering commentary on the human condition, and frustrated with the general half truths. You say character driven, but I feel like there needs to be more character development, as though all characters are surface characters that aren't complex. I'll finish the book out of loyalty, but I find myself searching overdrive and dreaming of my next book.
It really was an act of self-help, but I'm very pleased it resonates. I'm the same way with television/film. I can get into some of the deep stuff, but for the most part, I just want to be occupied for a couple hours. Reading meets a different need for me, though sometimes a good, rip-roaring commercial book meets that need.
This has been most helpful in helping me understand why certain books appeal to me and others don't. While I find that my tastes are similar to yours, I could never explain to people why certain books appeal to me. I loved The Book of Goose and was totally engrossed in it. I'm thrilled it won the championship.Lessons in Chemistry just didn't do it for me. I am an 81 year old white woman so there are exceptions to the rule.
If you like Yi Yun Li's work, you definitely should check out her remarkabe first book- the short story collection A Thousand Years of Good Prayers. I put in the top tier of what I call "the poignant ponds", classical stories like Chekov, Joyce's Dubliners, William Trevor, Grace Paley, Pat Barker's Union Street, Richard Wright's Uncle Tom's Children, Sherman Alexie, ram.]rand James Alan Mcpherson, for years the lead teacher at the immortal IOWA MFA Program. McPherson also wrote two of the finer short story collections ever vwritten anywhere - Hue and Cry, and Elbow Room.
Agree. For me, upmarket fiction is a bit irksome, a bit wanna-be. Often well written, technically, sometimes they seen to have been run past too many focus groups and taken on all feedback to appeal to a generic market. They are usually instantly forgettable, no flavour lingers.
Fascinating read this morning. I too find upmarket fiction grating, thanks for the path to illumination as to why. Also? The Lit Hub and McSweeneys links are hilarious. I still think you should read A Gentleman of Moscow, btw.
Ha! Every time I mention that I haven't read A Gentleman in Moscow I get urged to read it. I know my mom will be on my case about it if she sees this.
Ha--upmarket fiction = books your mom urges you to read. Does Jodi Picoult qualify? My mom used to push her on me constantly.
I think Jodi Picoult is upmarket that shades towards the commercial side, probably depending a little book to book. I've read a couple and enjoyed them, but I think for the same reasons I enjoy commercial fiction, just get me turning the pages.
Nail on the head! Upmarket fiction is “character” driven not person driven. It often feels like a sitcom with a laugh track. I have been disappointed by most famous book club picks and truly thought I was becoming pretentious while still trying to claim “I’m just like everyone else” since I love TJ Reid and most thrillers. You may have solved a crucial piece of my reading personality. Also - Leave the World Behind is the most open-ended book I have ever seen as part of Book of the Month and people DETESTED it which made me horribly sad but now I see why and what those people might be craving instead. Cheers!
It's a good point about Leave the World Behind having an open ending. I loved that about the book, and I think lots of people don't mind it because it really fits, but I have heard people say that they liked it, except for the ending.
I had never heard of upmarket fiction, but this may help me understand why I don't like certain books. I tried A Gentleman in Moscow and got nowhere with it, finished Where the Crawdads Sing but felt like it didn't quite work. Water for Elephants is another good example. They just try too hard to be crowd-pleasing (or as Caz says, like they've gone through too many focus groups) and feel watered down. That said, writing even a bad novel is a lot of work so I shouldn't be too critical of the mediocre ones! I did love Writers & Lovers, though; did not know it was a Jenna pick and am trying not to reconsider my love based on that, lol.
I loved this piece! I appreciate your being honest that this was a thinking-out-loud piece. This is the sort of writing that I subscribed for. Your application of the literary-vs-commercial-vs-upmarket fiction taxonomy is helping me categorize my giant TBR.
Now I feel really bad that we encouraged you to read Lessons in Chemistry at book club… I think it might surprise you if you finished it, but who knows. I appreciate the discussion on upmarket fiction. Historically, I don’t read much contemporary fiction but I’ve been doing it more (blame The Village Bookseller) and this framework is helpful to process how I feel about these books (many of which I’ve loved, but also found forgettable). Interesting because I just finished The Violin Conspiracy and haaaaated it, in great part because of the reasons you didn’t like Lessons. And based on reviews, I expected it to lean more literary, but instead I found it to be a barely-upmarket example if there ever was one (and a tediously written one at that).
Oh, and A Gentleman in Moscow. Do it. It might meet many of the criteria for upmarket fiction, but the writing… oh, John, the writing.
Peer pressure!
I think this is really interesting when thinking about romance. Romance is already probably the most character-driven of commercial fictions, but when romance goes upmarket, it tends to underdevelop one of the leads at the expense of the other.
There is also a suspension of disbelief that the romance genre enjoys, and upmarket often tries to be "above" needing that, but still wants to have the same emotional response, which doesn't work as well.
That is really interesting to think about as a particular commercial genre intersects with upmarket features and what gets lost in the genre when it goes upmarket.
I think suspense and crime tend to intersect well because deeper and more nuanced character work don't undermine the plotting. Romance, though, may be a different beast.
I was just thinking this about romance, too, and a few genres that intersect with it. Commercial, absolutely, but I would not say that the characters or degree of characterization creates meat puppets flung around by plots. In fact, meat puppets in romance and a few other genres ruin the story. A non-romance example would be the Murderbot books -- it has a high octane plot but OH the characterization! Murderbot is certainly not a meat puppet.
Oh, my, thank you! I read Lessons in Chemistry, based on my sister's book club recommendation. I doubt my book club would have read it. I finished it but barely and could not articulate why I didn't like it. Well written, topic of females in the sciences, etc. Nope, it left me cold. I read literary fiction, (in the middle of Book of Goose now!) then balance with what I call mind candy, commercial fiction, tending to police procedurals i.e. Sue Grafton, Sara Paretsky, Ian Rankin, Sarah Hilary, Jo Nesbo. The British and Scandinavian murder plots are much darker than American, I find. These endings balance the open ended literary fiction's final pages. BTW I'll second Julie V. and your mom about Gentleman in Moscow. As my grandson told me recently, Suck it up, buttercup:-)!
Ah, this was helpful. I never could quite figure out why trendy books often didn't with for me. (It would have been more of a help if I'd had this before choosing 'Erotic Stories for Punjabi Widows' for my book club... worst pick and most disliked by the group so far).
You say "An upmarket book is unlikely to disappoint when it comes the expectations the novel sets for the audience." But, I think my issue is that the books promise more than they can deliver. They claim to address big problems, but never really get into the meat. If the characters are constructs, so are the issues they face, with only surface level explanation and little nuance.
Romance is my pulpy fiction of choice, and yet I'm always disappointed when I find a book that's being marketed as socially important is just a romance that's been dressed in plausible literary clothing.
I agree re: the nuance when it comes to those books that are predicated on tackling big issues and the disappointment when they fail to get into the meat and reveal something interesting.
I just finished the "Namesake" by Jhumpa Lahiri and I had a similar response. This blog dropped in my inbox at the right time to alleviate my anxiety on what's going on with my book taste. Thank you so much!
I could not agree more! I bought it because of all the hype and found myself repeatedly putting it down after another few pages. It just didn’t engage me. Thank you for your clarifying analysis of the three categories of fiction. I’m firmly in the Writers and Lovers camp. P.s. I cannot abide the writing of Amor Towles.
John, first of all, thank you for the enlightening column. As so many have said, it clarifies something that I felt but couldn't describe. I don't read all that much contemporary fiction, preferring that of other centuries, but you and my book club have given me some great suggestions: Elizabeth Strout and Claire Keegan to name only two. Finally, I must tell you that you should NOT read Gentleman in Moscow, not only for the reason you cited, but also because it is completely implausible. Yes, the author did an impressive amount of research, and I can see the appeal of the premise, but the entire plot is simply not a thing that would have happened, and therefore I find it absurd. Sorry to be Captain Bringdown, but I could not willingly suspend disbelief, as they say, enough to enjoy it. 🙄
In AI/robotics, and also in art, there is a concept of Uncanny Valley. That is when at the one end of the spectrum we have a cartoonish robot like Azimo, and on the other end an entity undistinguishable from a human. Robots that are almost human, but not quite, exist somewhere in that Uncanny Valley in the middle of the spectrum. Some people find them creepy. One- or three-dimensional are okay, but two-dimensional are not.
It seems that for some readers Upmarket Fiction falls into the Uncanny Valley territory.
Oh my gosh! Thank you. I'm trying to read Lessons in Chemistry now on the recommendation of my friend. She read it in 2 days. I'm three weeks in, and I'm only on page 75. I will read literary fiction, commercial fiction, and non-fiction until 4 in the morning. However, this and other upmarket fiction (as I just learned the title), I just can't seem to delve in to them. I end up feeling disconnected from the main characters, cheated out of gripping plot or a mind altering commentary on the human condition, and frustrated with the general half truths. You say character driven, but I feel like there needs to be more character development, as though all characters are surface characters that aren't complex. I'll finish the book out of loyalty, but I find myself searching overdrive and dreaming of my next book.