*joins you in penniless drooling, and tag wrangling*
I was only able to read a few stories in the first anthology, due to time constraints, but I think I agree with you about the slight smugness of the premise. Or maybe 'precious' is the word I'm looking for. Something in there. I kind of came away from the first anthology thinking that text was the worst example of interstitial art--I think you could make an argument for most good books and stories that they bend genre(s) in some way, or alternatively that genre is something that is hard to define whether from the inside or the outside, or maybe that they were putting a negative spin on a positive categorization? As you can see, this is all rather inchoate. But I think I will have more to say when I finish The Secret History of Science Fiction. And I can't wait to read Interfictions 2.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
regna
(no subject)
Date: 2009-11-20 03:00 (UTC)I was only able to read a few stories in the first anthology, due to time constraints, but I think I agree with you about the slight smugness of the premise. Or maybe 'precious' is the word I'm looking for. Something in there. I kind of came away from the first anthology thinking that text was the worst example of interstitial art--I think you could make an argument for most good books and stories that they bend genre(s) in some way, or alternatively that genre is something that is hard to define whether from the inside or the outside, or maybe that they were putting a negative spin on a positive categorization? As you can see, this is all rather inchoate. But I think I will have more to say when I finish The Secret History of Science Fiction. And I can't wait to read Interfictions 2.