"However, Julie Crisp, editorial director at Tor, defended the BBC’s programming. She said: “If you looked at The Big Read programming [in 2003], The Lord of the Rings was the best-loved book, and there was a good selection of science fiction and fantasy in the top 20. Even now, the BBC broadcast the sci-fi show “Seventh Dimension” on Radio Four Extra."

I think this is an incredibly dismissive response. Using the justification of programming aired in 2003 to justify your programming in 2011 is pretty lame. If the BBC really do want to make this the ‘year of books’, then they need to ensure that all genres that people read are represented in their programming and coverage, not just traditional forms of Fiction.

We all know there are loads of fabulous genre Fiction titles released every year that get completely overlooked during the awards’ season and by the mainstream media, and it's not about us being 'a passionate bunch' (read: a bunch of overexcited nerds), it is the fact that there is still a massive snobbery in the book world that Genre Fiction can't also be Literary Fiction. Until this changes, I daresay we’ll just see more of the same.

Genre fiction can be literary fiction - it just generally isn't.

It reminds me somewhat of how comedies and their actors are routinely ignored by the Oscars. The Golden Globes redresses the balance somewhat by having a specific categories for comedy (lumped in with musicals), but this misses the point.

Although, this did give us that priceless moment in 2004 when Bill Murray won Best Actor (Comedy/Musical) for Lost in Translation. In his speech, completely deadpan, he said:

"I think it's too often we forget our brothers on the other side of the aisle - the dramatic actors. And I'd just like to say without them, where would our war, our misery, and our psychological dramas come from? Let's not forget them tonight."

Zing!

Of course we should all welcome a Culture Show science fiction special, while at the same time wanting our books to appeal to general readers and not just some well-defined niche audience. As with the Ballard comment above, I’ve lost count of the number of times people have said to me, “I never read any science fiction, but I love your books”.

Banks’ recent novel Transition was published here without the M. despite its parallel world science fiction premise, yet in the US it came out with the M. Does that mean only his Culture novels now merit the M. in the UK? Yet these are the most magnificent pieces of writing about a future potential human utopian civilization to be found. Who wouldn’t want to live in the Culture, which has so much to say about the hangups of contemporary society?

When the general public go mad for Stieg Larsson, are people thinking they must buy this blockbuster “crime fiction” novel, or do they just want a well-crafted story – the unputdownable read we authors all hope to be able to pen? I’m baffled that people conflate science fiction with fantasy (and now horror) in the first place and, in my general day-to-day life think I would never dream of reading a “fantasy” novel full of elves and goblins. Yet I devoured The Lord of the Rings as a kid (who didn’t?) and am nowadays thought one of Harry Potter’s biggest fans (and there are lots of those). In the end, it’s about the brilliance of the writing and the story, regardless of genre.

The separation of literary and commercial fiction has always been a strange one. In an era when we have to fight harder than ever to defend the relevance of the book compared with other art or entertainment forms, everyone who loves books would be wise to focus the wider public’s gaze on those titles, of all genres, that people will find engaging and popular.

doh!

I'm afraid the BBC's default standpoint on genre isn't unlike much of the media. More people watch Doctor Who every week than attend football matches yet Doctor Who fans are the minority geeks? Look at the top films and books and they are filled with horror and science fiction - yet some reviewers, publishers etc feel that this is beneath them. Thank goodness the viewers don't! I'm a horror writer, and independent (ie, self-pubished) so I have two prejudices to deal with - but thankfully not from readers, who are just bothered about whether the book is good or not. My horror novel, The Well has more 4/5-star ratings on Amazon than many mainstream books and I'm grateful that readers don't share many of these petty hang-ups. But it's good to see the BBC has bowed to some pressure, but I'd like to see that grow from being a one-off.

There was a Gold Dagger-nominated crime author's name on the open letter sent to the BBC, as well as some children's authors, too.

No doubt made angry by the Martin Amis comments on the BBC shortly before this protest blew up - you know, that anyone who writes fiction for kids is brain-damaged. I guess that includes me too, then!

>>She said: “If you looked at The Big Read programming [in 2003],<<

Programming from 8 years ago is supposed to count?

>>Even now, the BBC broadcast the sci-fi show “Seventh Dimension” on Radio Four Extra.<<

Or this? (Not to mention that the discussion is books, not media--or that of course they'll air sci-fi programming, because it makes money.) We're talking about genres that rang from Plato's UTOPIA and Rabelais' GARGANTUA and PANTAGRUEL to the works of Edgar Allen Poe and H. G. Wells to the work of Greg Bear, Samuel R. Delaney, Stephen King, Clive Barker, Diana Wynne Jones, Philip Pullman, and Terry Pratchett.

Virtually all of us read fantasy as children--talking animals, fairy tales, wild things, myths and legends--and yet the literati who sneer at genre fiction seem like people who are so terrified they'll repeat something in their pasts that they'll say anything to deny it. What they deny is their childhoods, and the love of readers for the adventure of pure imagination.

I say this as an outspoken fan of genre: outspoken genre fans need to pick their battles better.

Complaining, en masse, to the home of Doctor Who (have we already forgotten that we proclaimed the BBC the saviour of genre in 2005?), doesn't make us seem any more mainstream or mature. Why don't we focus on more legitimate areas of complaint, like the Booker Prize?