'accessible' isn't a dirty word.

http://blog.nathanbransford.com/2009/10/reverse-snobbery-of-low-literary.html

if you haven't yet visited nathan bransford's blog, do so immediately. don't even read my entry, just hop on over and save him to your favorites. go ahead, i'll wait.

the linked post is particularly interesting because the question's come up more and more often for me. i'll pass it in my internet browsing, my newsstand browsing, my eavesdropping on people browsing in the bookstore. . . you get my drift.

the barrier between readers who read for entertainment and readers who read to be challenged feels flimsier these days, and that's progress in my eyes. good writing should do both. the growing number of literary stories involving genre aspects is a sign of hope for the reader formerly stodged in character study and dry-rot drama. the higher quality of published writing on the genre shelves can only help raise the overall level of brain engagement in the average consumer. or, the average genre book consumer, anyway. i can't help the guy who reads nothing but the occasional menu or stop sign.

but i've had issues with a strictly academic approach to fiction writing, and have historically leaned more in favor toward writing for fun and profit, falling into that reverse snobbery trap nathan discusses. i've had a recent shift of heart. i'd say it was an epiphany, but i think it was more gradual than that.

good writing is good writing, regardless of the label. i'm in love with the idea of writing a literary genre novel--one which embraces both action and character, transformation and juicy, shiver-inducing shadows. if i can accomplish what i hope i can with my stories, i can offer up a smorgasbord fit for anyone who appreciates a well-told, fun story regardless of labels or shelf location.

okay, except the stop-sign guy. i can offer him a moist towlette for that drool on his chin.