Genres and Formats

Part 4: Genres and Formats

Why might “genre” be misleading to students? Sometimes, this label is used too loosely to refer to many sub-genres, or even broader, formats. Thus, students may find the use of the term genre to be confusing. Fiction and nonfiction are the only true genres; everything else is a sub-genre.

In the genre of fiction, there is basically realism and fantasy. Realism can be contemporary or historical. Realism is fairly straightforward, but fantasy has varying aspects. Fantasy fiction may also be modern or traditional. Traditional fantasy includes folktales, fairy tales, myths, ballads, legends and fables. The modern side of fantasy fiction includes both hard and soft science fiction, and high and low fantasy.

“Hard” science fiction focuses mainly on aspects of science. “Soft” science fiction involves science elements in the story, but focuses more on characters. High fantasy includes created worlds and languages, such as Lord of the Rings. Low fantasy is more realistic in that the setting may be real, but with unrealistic elements such as talking animals or fairies.

Nonfiction also has various sub-genres. Informational nonfiction, expository, and narrative can be further broken down into subcategories. Biography itself, while informational, includes autobiography and memoir. These are separated by timeline; autobiography likely covers the entire span of a person’s life, while memoir focuses on specific aspects of the writer’s life, in a limited timeframe. Narrative, while nonfiction, is written more like a story, in such a way that the reader has a more emotional response, as opposed to receiving straight facts.

Common categories used to break out books in libraries may include things like chick lit, mystery, horror, sports fiction and classics. While books within these subject areas have common characteristics that may be more easily identified by grouping, these are not technically genres, but subject categories. A recent trend in “genrefying” or “genrefication” has seen them referred to as genres incorrectly, while the goal of helping students to identify their favorite types of fiction by subject is based more on a bookstore model. Those for it point out increased circulation, while those opposed to genrefying fiction point out that abandoning the Dewey Decimal Classification has not been empirically proven to help students, who themselves fall into different categories of reading types.

Formats, as opposed to sub-genre, are also not genres. Rather format is how both fiction and nonfiction are written and presented, such as in the form of a novel, poetry, short story, picture book or graphic novel. They too, however, may be included as “genre” in a genrefyed library. For example, narrative nonfiction may be told in the format of a graphic novel; this raises the question of where it should be classified in the library with genrefication. Many books do fall into these various sub-genres and formats, defying simplified classification. Genrefication by gender also raises concerns of appropriateness.

Genrefication of the library is a preference, and it’s one that I have often debated without coming entirely to a conclusion on how I feel about it. Clearly it is aimed at a very specific type of reader, and that is the student who is a browser, and who prefers to browse only narrow subject matter. Research has shown that this is not how the “avid” reader is defined, and as a student myself, I was an avid reader open to really any subject matter, though I would most often return to specific sub-genres. I also question whether defining a book based on its most obvious characteristics is the best way to categorize it, seeing that students and staff will not always agree on the categorization. However, I admit that when walking into a very large library, even a large campus library, I feel a little less overwhelmed to see it broken down into color-coded sections of categories. This is due to a personal trait, though, of being able to be overwhelmed by too many choices, which certainly doesn’t apply to every student.

One thing I have never felt comfortable with is the categorization of anything (including but not limited to literature) based on gender. It seems unnecessary at its best, and at the other end of that spectrum, potentially offensive. As pointed out in the presentation, I've often thought it highly unlikely that many boys will walk into the “chick lit” section of their library, with pink labels, to browse the books. A newer YA novel that comes immediately to mind in defying this classification would be Not if I Save You First, which is currently on a number of awards list. While it has a teen girl as the protagonist and does contain romance, it is also an action/adventure story with plenty of gritty elements. A “girl power” story perhaps, but to include it on several recommended reading lists and then relegate it to “chicks” only seems bizarre.

It is important for the Library Media Specialist to take all of these factors into consideration when presenting sub-categories or formats as “genre.” Circulation may go up, but students may end up being hindered in the breadth and depth of their reading, or in their personal responses to literature. Moreover, it is clear in recent years that students do not have a firm handle on what genre actually is, and what it is not.

Rampant miscategorization of sub-genres and formats as "genres" has left students confused, and may limit their interests and reading.