What makes a story "mature"?

@Night: Well, if we dont agree on the premise, then laying out the arguments would certainly be a waste of time (I will only say now that you seem to be strawmanning me- I never said half of those things). Lets discuss definitions:

"Genre Writing", when used as a label for a genre itself, generally refers to the specific genres of fantasy, horror, mystery/suspense, and science fiction (others are sometimes included as well). Sometimes people draw an historical connection to myths and legends written in the distant past (Tolkien did). The main theme of such works is a heroic protagonist overcoming epic challenges that seldom/never occur to ordinary people in real life. The famous "Heroes Journey" plot structure lays all this out.

Generally, in such works, since the main theme are the deeds and accomplishments of the protagonist, the main focus ends up being on plot and setting where the action takes place. These elements have to be well written, otherwise the work will lack coherence. In addition, an author can also choose to include other elements that are more characteristic of other approaches, such as literary fiction, but that's optional, and most often such elements are either missing, or mentioned more or less in passing. This isnt a question of "quality" or "superior writing", it's simply a function of the fact that an author only has so much time and energy to invest, and has to make choices about which narrative elements to emphasize, and which to ignore.

"Mature" or "Literary" fiction is the counterpart to all this. As a label for another genre (the term is confusing) it generally refers to a focus on the emotional lives of more or less ordinary people while they experience what are often termed "mature" problems: death, sickness, betrayal, simply not liking each other; the kinds of things that make ordinary life especially challenging (they are called "mature" because the process of learning how to deal with them is part of "maturity"). People often draw a historical connection to the earliest novel forms: Don Juan and the Canterbury Tales. The main theme of such works is usually the nuanced emotional consequences of decisions each character makes in response to these kinds of challenges, and the response other characters make to each others decisions. You can find some further guidelines on the differences between these two genres here.

Again, such works can include elements from the other genre: fantastic people or phenomena, heroic actions, etc. But the same dilemma still occurs: given a limited amount of time and energy, what elements will an author choose to emphasize? Mere inclusion of a theme does not qualify a work as "Mature"- a relative emphasis on that element does.

By the way, these two approaches are not the only ones that exist. For example, some people distinguish contemporary fiction from both of the above.

All of this is premise, that is its a statement about definitions. If you can agree on these definitions then examples that fit them are not hard to find. If you dont agree, thats fair, just that you should realize that a lot of people see things this way, including authors, publishers and readers. If you dont agree that "Godzilla" primarily focused on the heroic deeds of the titular monster, then our perceptions are probably too far apart to have a productive discussion, sorry.

Remember, as I pointed out, that everything is relative. How much time and space does Tolkien (I'm deliberately using the best genre author I know of) use exploring how the characters feel about themselves as people and the life choices they have made? There is some: the scene in which Galadriel uses her psychic powers to determine what would most tempt each member of the team to abandon the quest is very well done. There are some scenes between Samwise and Frodo are quite nuanced. But compare that to the amount of space he devotes to describing the heroic deeds of his huge cast of characters. It's obvious what his emphasis is.

"The Game of Thrones" is more toward the middle of the scale, but it's still leans toward genre. "Love in the Age of Cholera" is also near the middle, but in spite of including some fantastical elements, it still leans literary. A Jane Austin novel is as far to the literary end as Lord of the Rings is genre. Yet they are all equally good, and equally worthy as works.

I want to re-emphasize that "mature" is not an evaluative term- a more mature work is not a better one. It just spends more time exploring different themes.

The bulk of your post, as I said, appears to be straw-manning me, so I wont respond to it point by point.

@imadinosaur: Adrien Brody would beg to differ:

That is extreme method acting, and also exactly what I'm talking about. Can you travel back in time and live the life of someone from a different time and a different country? No, you can't (unless you're in genre fiction, huehuehue ), but doing your best to simulate it is not impossible, and sometimes it's not even hard (from a practical standpoint, not an emotional one). On the other hand, climbing into the cockpit of a giant robot and decking an entire planet in the face isn't really something you can experience for yourself without fiction, and neither is the identity crisis inherent in finding out you're a clone or a cyborg replicant, or just dead all along. You also can't confront the grim realities of being unable to survive as an inhuman monster who can only exist by killing innocent people to feed or the challenges of falling in love with someone from another species, or even becoming one yourself. You can't live through the end of the world or ever find out what it feels like to be the Last Of Your Kind.

These are all deep, engrossing topics that genre fiction boldly confronts, whereas so-called "literary fiction" can only sit their twiddling its thumbs because it doesn't have the balls to step outside the arbitrary limits of "realism" it's placed on itself. What's more, literary fiction can't tackle the kinds of themes genre fiction can, but genre fiction can easily adapt literary fiction's own "mature themes" to serve their narrative. Genre fiction can be the best of both worlds, whereas literary fiction will always be limited.

Does this mean that I dislike all literary fiction or that I think it doesn't deserve to exist or be written? No, I don't. I loved The Pianist, and I loved The Things They Carried. But the key to writing good literary fiction isn't being "mature" or "deep", it's about writing an entertaining story that can immerse the reader in a world they wouldn't otherwise be able to visit themselves. You can live out what it would be like to be Elizabeth in Pride and Prejudice if you really tried hard enough and were dedicated to emulating that lifestyle, but you couldn't relive the experiences of a soldier in Vietnam no matter how hard you tried.

I guess what my point is that writing a "mature" or "deep" story doesn't matter as much as writing an entertaining one, and a genre like literary fiction that, by and large, arbitrarily limits itself with "realism" and "maturity", is missing out on all the wonderful things fiction is meant to offer us.

KSPAM, are you intentionally taking the snob attitude and applying it the other way 'round to make a point, or is it just coincidence?

Somewhat related.

I really like that scene a lot because it wonderfully sums up the problem many writers seem to have with developing a compelling story.

In my academic and personal experience, the distinctions between literary fiction and genre fiction, while important, are overstated by both aspiring writers and literary critics. I feel that maturity in a story should be reflective of the human condition, and weak stories are most often stories that have nothing to say about human nature and the world at large, however realistic or fantastical the story may be.

I can think of several examples. Neon Genesis Evangelion initially seems like it's about giant robots and kaiju battles, but it's actually a fairly intelligent, if jumbled, exploration of lonliness, depression, selfishness and the paradoxical desires for personal space and affection. Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the Patriots is a pretty over-the-top military stealth game about giant robots, a dude who talks to his hand, a guy with irritable bowel syndrome and other wacky antics. But it's also about a legendary soldier fading into obscurity and being regarded as obsolete. It's about the inevitability and pain of the aging process and how other people don't react to it very well.

Fans kept clamoring for Snake to return to each iteration, and Kojima being the way he is, decided to bring him back again in one of the most unsettling ways possible. Even in a bizarre and silly game that is more or less meant to be taken with a few laughs, it's a very effective storytelling mechanic that maintains an element of maturity while driving home a powerful message about why we should let our heroes retire.

Kate Chopin's The Awakening is one of my favorite stories, and its plot is quite simple. Some would say exceedingly so. It's basically about a bored housewife getting in touch with her wild side, and that doesn't sound like an epic yarn (because it isn't), but on a deeper and more mature level, it's about prototypical feminism, the suffocating monotony of a socially imposed lifestyle and premature enlightenment. These things don't sound too fun to read, but there are several good examples on the Better Than It Sounds trope page, and I think it's at least partially related to what De Marquis is saying.

As I've said before, your story can be deeply mature or flighty and fanciful (or both, such as Mark Twain's The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn or William Shakespeare's Twelfth Night), but either way, I want to know your worldview as an author. Why should I care what you think? Why should I be invested in your characters, your setting and your plot? I often find that the difference between good writers and bad writers is that good writers both have something meaningful to say, and they know how to convey that meaning in a way that doesn't fall apart upon execution. This is also a critical difference between good storytelling and good writing, but I'd rather not get too long-winded with the details right now.

edited 23rd Sep '14 10:26:03 AM by Aprilla