Do You Cross the Line? ……… by Alex Beecroft

Today’s post by Alex Beecroft is an issue I’m sure many authors have struggled with, especially if they have been around for a while and have an established fan base in a particular genre. What will their fans think, for example, if they crossed genres from writing horrors to entering the world of romance like Rick R. Reed has done? How about moving from murder/mysteries to fantasy like Josh Lanyon did a couple years ago? Or writing a historical romance set in the 1960s a year ago and a recent fantasy novel like Marie Sexton? These are just a few examples where the transition to another genre was done successfully and the author expanded his/her fan base in the process, but how many have crashed and burned? Doing this takes a lot of guts and determination and for the authors it’s probably like entering a minefield.

Alex’s new books mentioned in this post – Bomber’s Moon and Dogfighters will be released in April and May of this year and I’m looking forward to reading and maybe reviewing them since I love fantasy. Here’s Alex’s essay:

************

Here’s a topic that’s on my mind at the moment – crossovers and crossing genres. As an author I hold my hands up and confess to being a serial monogamist as far as inspiration goes. That means, if I’m fired by enthusiasm for the 18th Century, I’ll spend five or more years writing stories set in the 18th Century. And that’s great, isn’t it, because people will get used to the idea that if you pick up an Alex Beecroft book, it’ll be set somewhere around the 1750s and will probably involve sailing ships. I’ve got this branding thing sorted.

The trouble is that eventually my happy little butterfly of a writer’s mind decides its got all the juice out of the celandine of historical fiction, and flits off to the bluebell of fantasy instead, where it hopes to suck up enough sugar to last another half decade. But butterflies are flighty things, and who knows how long that will last before it’s off to the daisy of contemporaries or the purple flowering loosestrife of gothic murder mystery? And as if that wasn’t bad enough, who knows when it will cycle round to historical again and set in for a five book series set in the stone age?

From my point of view as an author, I love the fact that I can write about what takes my fancy at any time, and I’m rather pleased to know that if one obsession peters out, I can find another one. It’s much preferable, from my POV, for me to be writing from love and enthusiasm than it would be if I felt compelled to write more of the same over and over because that was what was expected of me. I think that writing something simply because I felt I ought to would make my life not worth living, and it would also lead to the slow but inevitable descent of my stories into lifeless rubbish.

At the risk of being a little controversial, I can’t help feeling sometimes that that’s what happened to the later volumes of Harry Potter, or the Anita Blake novels – the authors got fed up of churning the same thing out and lost interest, and it showed.

But I can’t help wondering what readers think of that. I, for example, know that I will read anything at all written by Ursula LeGuin, no matter what the genre, but I will only read CJ Cherryh’s Science Fiction and not her fantasy.  What about you? Will you follow an author whose work you enjoy across genres? Or do you think “oh, I wish she would stop messing about with werewolf cop romps in Barbados, and get back to her 12th Century gardening detective novels.” Does the butterfly author risk losing everything every time they try something new?

And since I’m talking about crossing lines, lets talk about crossovers too. Here I’m on even more personal territory. I’ve realised that while I love historical romance and I love fantasy and mystery, what I’d like most would be to write historical fantasy romance. Maybe even historical fantasy mystery romance. The book I had most of a blast writing was The Wages of Sin – a historical ghost story murder mystery m/m romance.

Even my new Fantasy novels, Under the Hill: Bomber’s Moon and Under the Hill: Dogfighters have a strong streak of World War II in amongst the elves and the contemporary romance. I’m trying to have my cake and eat it – trying to amalgamate all the genres I like into every story.

But again – lots of doubts. Does, say, a historical fantasy appeal to both historical and fantasy fans, or does the presence of fantasy put off the historical fans, and the presence of history put off the fantasy ones, so it ends up appealing to neither?

These are the questions that are keeping me up recently, and I don’t have any answers. What do you think? Is it a good thing if authors jump genres? Should they change pseudonym if they do to avoid confusion? Is it a good thing to amalgamate genres, or should the genres be like noble gasses and resolutely refuse to be made into compounds? And if you like the idea of crossovers, what would you like to see crossed over with what, and why?

*************

 

Alex Beecroft was born in Northern Ireland during the Troubles and grew up in the wild countryside of the English Peak District. She studied English and Philosophy before accepting employment with the Crown Court where she worked for a number of years. Now a stay-at-home mum and full time author, Alex lives with her husband and two daughters in a little village near Cambridge and tries to avoid being mistaken for a tourist.

Alex is only intermittently present in the real world.She has lead a Saxon shield wall into battle, toiled as a Georgian kitchen maid, and recently taken up an 800 year old form of English folk dance, but she still hasn’t learned to operate a mobile phone.

You can find me at http://alexbeecroft.com or I talk more on LJ 🙂

 

 

Author

I live in Canada and I love big dogs, music, movies, reading and sports – especially baseball

68 comments

  • Great post, Alex! I know we’ve talked about my strong resistance to reading the fantasy subgenre before, but I will dip my toes in again with your book. I’m the same with scifi – I do love good scifi and have read a huge number of classics in the past, so to see it done poorly is aggravating, to say the least. And half-arsed fantasy worldbuilding is just intolerable to me.

    I’m happy for writers to change subgenre as many times as they wish, but I’m probably more likely to read contemporary stories than any other. I’m not entirely sure why, but it’s probably something to do with mainly reading at either end of the day when I’m tired, and can’t cope with too much detailed worldbuilding to keep track of. It’s a lot easier to remember what’s going on in a contemporary.

    Reply
    • Thanks Jo! Well, Under the Hill has a sort of contemporary backbone, if you see what I mean? The spooky things that happen do so at least half of the time in Matlock in Derbyshire. So it’s a case of Faeries versus bluff no nonsense Northerners, resentful at having the ferret-racing interrupted by eldritch creatures from the ether again.

      But I make no promises about my worldbuilding, as it’s not my place to say whether it’s good enough or not. I’ll leave it to the readers to decide that.

      Yes, SF is a hard genre to do right. Space Opera is easier, but even then the readers are looking for genuinely new ideas, not rehashes of Star Wars or Star Trek, because of all genres SF/F is the one where it’s most vital that you do something original – someone no one else has done before. And that’s a really tall order to set infront of yourself as a writer unless you already have the idea and are prepared to put the work in to grow it.

      Reply

Please comment! We'd love to hear from you.

%d bloggers like this: