Sunday Times Books LIVE Community Sign up

Login to Sunday Times Books LIVE

Forgotten password?

Forgotten your password?

Enter your username or email address and we'll send you reset instructions

Sunday Times Books LIVE

Penguin SA

@ Sunday Times Books LIVE

Interview with Gillian Slovo: Why She Chose Literary Fiction over Crime

Gillian Slovo

An Honourable ManGillian Slovo recently spoke to Lissa Christopher of the Sydney Morning Herald about her newly published book, An Honourable Man, which is set in 19th-century Sudan. An Honourable Man continues the “literary” trajectory of Slovo’s more recent work, which has come to characterise her novels ever since she decided to depart from writing crime fiction.

Slovo says that the “safety” of the crime plot was what drove her to the genre in the first place – but it was this same safety that drove her away:

The South African-born author left the safety of crime fiction for the drama of history and found herself in 19th-century Sudan.

Gillian Slovo is the author of 13 published novels, a play and a memoir. She is the president of English PEN, she will turn 60 next year and her daughter, Cassie, is well into adulthood. Yet she is still often introduced, first and foremost, as the daughter of famous parents.

Their biographies precede hers on the cover sheet attached to the (unfinalised) manuscript of her new novel, An Honourable Man, given to the Herald. Her Wikipedia entry used to start with ”Gillian Slovo is the daughter of” until she altered it and, if you Google her name, the phrase pops up all over the list of hits like a rash.

Book details

Photo courtesy the Guardian

 

Recent comments:

  • <a href="http://kelwynsole.book.co.za" rel="nofollow">Kelwyn Sole</a>
    Kelwyn Sole
    January 27th, 2012 @15:47 #
     
    Top

    Oh,oh...

    Bottom
  • <a href="http://rustumkozain.book.co.za" rel="nofollow">Rustum Kozain</a>
    Rustum Kozain
    January 28th, 2012 @08:14 #
     
    Top

    What? That Shakespearian Rag?

    Bottom
  • <a href="http://helenmoffett.book.co.za" rel="nofollow">Helen</a>
    Helen
    January 30th, 2012 @12:26 #
     
    Top

    I saw the heading and slumped in a heap. But the points she makes are practical, not about one-up-personship or misplaced snobbery. Writers are flexible. They're allowed to try new things. Like what she says about the challenge of writing landscape. Now THAT fascinates me, given her exile history and life in a "cold thief place" (Jean Rhys, I think, on London), and the immense complexity of writing landscape in a colonial context.

    Bottom
  • <a href="http://kelwynsole.book.co.za" rel="nofollow">Kelwyn Sole</a>
    Kelwyn Sole
    January 30th, 2012 @14:02 #
     
    Top

    Helen, I think there IS critique there, probably about formal constaints, as GS sees them - 'constraint of plot'; 'safety of crime'; wanting to 'explore other things, ... feelings.' etc. On the other hand, the inside/outside dichotomy appears to be more personal than generic ... there are very few crime writers keep their characters inside a room, surely?

    I'm still a bit vague as to what 'genre fiction' is, nor what 'literary fiction' is. What marks the difference? There may be some distinction, although I am still unsure that there is, or what it is: and I think the manner in which the two terms are being thrown around may do more damage than anything else (to put it more forcefully - the two terms are immediately disprovable, it terms of watertight definition).

    Let's take two very fine novels, Pynchon's 'Gravity's Rainbow' and Mieville's 'The City and The City'. I find myself thinking of the former as belonging to some sort of putative postmodern mainstream, but with a lot of usage of tropes and conceits of sf ... while the latter still seems to me to sit within the genre of fantasy - although no one could reject it out of snobbery; it's just so good, and CM's done what its very difficult to do, it terms of writing skill.

    Is that kind of distinction useful? I'm not sure.

    Bottom
  • <a href="http://louisgreenberg.com" rel="nofollow">Louis Greenberg</a>
    Louis Greenberg
    January 30th, 2012 @14:14 #
     
    Top

    But despite Slovo's decision, the rot is setting in. All sorts of front-shelf writers - Jeanette Winterson and Helen Dunmore among them - are throwing themselves on the grizzly bandwagon: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/jan/29/horror-fiction

    Also, Damien G. Walter has compiled a list of literary sci-fi must-reads, further muddying the waters: http://damiengwalter.com/2012/01/29/7-literary-sci-fi-and-fantasy-novels-you-must-read/

    Bottom
  • <a href="http://richarddenooy.book.co.za" rel="nofollow">Richard de Nooy</a>
    Richard de Nooy
    January 30th, 2012 @14:59 #
     
    Top

    I don't really care how my book is genre-lised. The more labels, the more readers, the better.

    Bottom
  • <a href="http://kelwynsole.book.co.za" rel="nofollow">Kelwyn Sole</a>
    Kelwyn Sole
    January 30th, 2012 @15:17 #
     
    Top

    Ja, but it does matter re the cultural capital that comes to surround one's work.

    I dunno if this is an analogous situation emerging here, but when I was deep into sf in the 1960s/970s I used to find mainstream imitations of what the sf writers were doing pretty flou (Damien Walter's list is a bit of a disappointment, though it's nice to see someone give 'Lanark' a bit of a plump) - in terms of the lengths sf writers were prepared to go to follow an extrapolation, and the risks they were prepared to take....that critic who said Philip K Dick's novels 'make most of the European avant-garde seem navel-gazers in a cul-de-sac' had a point, I think. At the same time, Dick was looked down on as an inferior just because he was marketed within a 'genre'. It's only very recently people outside of sf realised his importance.

    Bottom
  • <a href="http://louisgreenberg.com" rel="nofollow">Louis Greenberg</a>
    Louis Greenberg
    January 30th, 2012 @16:19 #
     
    Top

    Agreed, Kelwyn - Walter's list is not very exciting. (Do note the absence of Murakami.) And it feels a bit like Winterson and Dunmore are off on cowboy camp for a week, just for a lark - I don't imagine their input will invigorate anyone as much as someone like Mieville, who's deadly serious about what he writes, does.

    Bottom
  • <a href="http://kelwynsole.book.co.za" rel="nofollow">Kelwyn Sole</a>
    Kelwyn Sole
    January 30th, 2012 @17:40 #
     
    Top

    The mainstream people can also be a bit gutless with their use of 'genre' ideas and tropes, Louis - I remember being told with excitement by an academic friend about one of Ishiguro's novels - the one on cloning - which, when read, felt a bit tame vis-a-vis what's available in the 'genre' of sf.

    Come to think of it, I guess there's also snobs both sides of the divide - my fave example is the 1973 Nebulas, when Arthur Clarke's 'Rendezvous with Rama' beat out 'Gravity's Rainbow' for the prize! I guess it's a question of not being blinkered, whichever way one looks....

    Bottom
  • CA
    CA
    January 31st, 2012 @10:54 #
     
    Top

    Just to complicate matters:
    Are books dead, and can authors survive?http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2011/aug/22/are-books-dead-ewan-morrison?INTCMP=ILCNETTXT3487

    Bottom
  • <a href="http://margieorford.book.co.za" rel="nofollow">Margie</a>
    Margie
    January 31st, 2012 @14:57 #
     
    Top

    Authors are generally better off dead

    Bottom
  • <a href="http://kelwynsole.book.co.za" rel="nofollow">Kelwyn Sole</a>
    Kelwyn Sole
    January 31st, 2012 @17:50 #
     
    Top

    On the contrary: Barthes is dead, but the authors are doing fine ...

    I think there's too many imponderables in the future projections on this. There's also an assumption that once one goes digital, one does everything digitally without recourse to 'marginal' forms. It flattens out the possibility that people may choose to move between different modes of receiving information and knowledge. One thing of interest about the Y Generation, for instance: they do a lot of theirr socialising online, but there's some evidence that they are e.g. turning away from online learning, and prefer face-to-face (again, the evidence is not conclusive here).

    Bottom
  • CA
    CA
    January 31st, 2012 @18:33 #
     
    Top

    Here is a more sober and optimistic response to the first article:
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2011/aug/30/death-books-exaggerated?intcmp=239

    Bottom
  • <a href="http://louisgreenberg.com" rel="nofollow">Louis Greenberg</a>
    Louis Greenberg
    February 1st, 2012 @09:15 #
     
    Top

    Read this also: http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2012/jan/30/self-e-publishing-bubble-ewan-morrison. I find it a convincing and depressing prediction of an unbalanced industry gone out of its own control. What scares me most about Morrison's prognosis is that even if the bubble bursts and by some miracle the industry is regulated and rebalanced to be fair to writers, publishers and retailers alike, this self-devouring circus will have left indelible scars.

    Bottom
  • <a href="http://kelwynsole.book.co.za" rel="nofollow">Kelwyn Sole</a>
    Kelwyn Sole
    February 1st, 2012 @18:34 #
     
    Top

    These are very valuable and useful: thank you both!

    I can't help but wonder - if this is the scenario, what is literature for? I am starting to see a scenario where (to exaggerate only slightly) everyone wants to talk, and no one wants to listen....but when I think about it, what is valuable in literature and books is precisely what I gain from other people; I get excited because they give me something (emotion, and information, and knowledge) I don't have.....

    Bottom

Please register or log in to comment

» View comments as a forum thread and add tags in BOOK Chat