Weird Fiction discussion

From Jim (giving his post its own topic):

Eraserhead Press publishes 'bizarro' fiction. I assume that is part of the weird fiction genre. It seems a step beyond to me, but I haven't read much of it.

Their web site is here:
https://eraserheadpress.com/

Thanks for sharing this, Jim. The only thing I know about Bizarro relates to a Superman nemesis from the 1950s. So you sent me to the Wikipedia on this one. Reading the definition there convinces me that at the very least bizarro fiction is a close cousin not fit for marriage. One main distinction between bizarro and weird I could see is that weird fiction does not have to be absurd or irreal for the sake of being absurd or irreal the way bizarro fiction does. By making this distinction I hope I'm not placing bizarro into an ill-fitting box that doesn't belong. It's just the way I read its definition.

The website itself is like a newspaper of what's going on in bizarro world. Unlike StrangeHorizons.com there were not any actual stories at the website for us to sample, were there? Or am I missing something?

Interesting. I see your latest link in the "About This Group" topic has a link to 'Bizarro' fiction
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bizarro...
which I read, too. I really don't know where the breaking point is between 'new weird' & 'bizarro', although I see you've broken my post in another topic out which is fine. I don't really see the point in separating it much less the new & old weird, though.

It's probably a failure on my part, so I decided to post this here. It's all about me. I often have difficulty with genres, even major ones. Like the 5th dimension, I just can't see them. Years ago, I used to try to arrange my bookcases by genre, but I gave up since I couldn't classify many & I'd rather keep an author's work together.

I finally decided to separate fact from fiction, but found issue there, too. John Jakes had his books split with Brak the Barbarian staying in fiction, but his Bicentennial series is in with my nonfiction historical books. Yes, they're fiction, but they contain a lot of factual information &, through the curiosity they generated, spurred me to read more factual history than ever before. There's a separate set of shelves that hold my few books on philosophy, religion, & mythology, so the Christian Bible rubs covers with Ayn Rand & Grimm's Fairy Tales.

Anyway, with that background, using short words, I'd like to try to sort the sheep from the goats.

You note that weird doesn't have to be absurd or unreal (at least I assume that's what 'irreal' meant) while bizarro does. OK, that's a step in the right direction. The few bizarro stories I've read certainly have been both, but that applies to most of the horror, fantasy, & even SF books I've read unless we stipulate that some things aren't really silly like FTL drive, ghosts, & talking unicorns. I can 'see' a difference between them & living in some gal's vagina, but I can't define it much less separate it out with a written definition.

No, I don't see any stories on Eraserhead's site, but they do have a list of books. It looks like half are written by Carlton Mellick III, though. He's the author of The Haunted Vagina, one of the few I've read in the genre.

Jim wrote: "No, I don't see any stories on Eraserhead's site, but they do have a list of books. It looks like half are written by Carlton Mellick III, though. He's the author of [book:The Haunte..."

It's okay that there's no stories there. I'm just surprised because their setup makes it seem as though there would be. It's still a great website, and I look forward to reading some bizarro with my new weird. I agree. The distinction between the two seems small indeed.

However, I think most of what is written as horror, fantasy, SF can't be categorized as New Weird very well. Take a Stephen King novel, for instance, most any one except perhaps for the Gunslinger series, some of those come close, but The Shining or Carrie for instance. The reason I don't think anyone would or could consider them Weird is because the narrative is straight. King never jazzes around with the reality of a situation he's writing about. His characters may have doubts about the reality of their situations (like in It and Pet Semetary), but the reader always knows what's going on. That's the opposite of what New Word tries to do. Narratives there tend to be ambiguous to one degree or another.

Anyhow, I still think the best way to define Weird is to simply read it, lots of it. After a while, you just know.

I think there's something to "the reality of the situation" from the reader's point of view that is central to the definition. Well, we've had enough arguments over the definition of porn & SF that I doubt this one will be solved easily or soon save by reading, as you suggested.

As I was reading the discussion about Loenen-Ruiz in this group, GR showed me an add for a book titled "God's Vagina: No Vacancy". I can't imagine why it thought that was relevant. ;)

I have sampled a few works of Bizarro literature. The titles really suck me in. The contents are often disappointing. I admire Carlton Mellick III for publishing The Faggiest Vampire which can teach kids that being faggy can be a good thing. Basically taking an insulting word and embracing it. There is absolutely nothing about sexuality in that book, it just takes that word and treats it like something one would aspire to be called. (I would not call that book 'bizarro literature', though the author does attach that term to most of his output.)

One other bizarro work that I've liked is Rampaging F***ers of Everything on the Crazy Shitting Planet of the Vomit Atmosphere. It is 3 short stories. One about penis enhancement gone wrong. Another about a spelunking expedition by miniaturized people, and one monkey, into some woman's colon. They also open a Starbucks in there. I'd forgot about that. I forget the other story. I rated it 5 stars for pure fun, though who knows whether I'd still like it if I re-read it.

By the way, there is a group for bizarro fiction. I have no intention of joining. I think I've had enough of it.

Also by the way, while there are authors who brand their fiction as "bizarro", there aren't many (that I'm aware of) calling their stuff "new weird". There is tons of weird stuff, but it is weird in all sorts of different ways. Like, today, I came across a book about a black man in Nigeria who wakes up one day and discovers that he has turned white, except for his ass. It is called, naturally enough, "Blackass". I'm sure it is weird, and I'm sure it is making at least passing reference to Kafka's Metamorphosis. But it just feels like a whole different thing from the "New Weird" writers.

You read some strange, I mean weird stuff, Ed, and I mean that as a compliment. Would one of those titles make a good nomination? Nominations for April’s read are still open.

I think a number of people may be writing in a New Weird tradition, or close to it, without calling it that or knowing they're doing so. I was just looking at C.L. Hernandez's work earlier yesterday, particularly her Complicated Life of Deegie Tibbs series. I don’t believe she calls her own work Weird, but based on interviews she has given about what she aspires to write, it certainly sounds New Weird, and descriptions of her work sound like it too.

Also, I suspect the Literary Horror group reads a lot of material that crosses over into New Weird. In fact, I’m fairly certain of it. One of the books read for discussion last year was The Grief Hole by Kaaron Warren. She calls her work psychological horror, wins horror awards, and I’ve never heard her or anyone else call her writing New Weird, but it certainly fits the definition as I understand it. There are no doubt other authors writing in the style.

To make things even more challenging, Ann VanderMeer when she edited Weird Tales often published pure steampunk stories that to my way of thinking were in no way New Weird. She published steampunk there, I think, simply because she liked it. So that normal reference point for publications Weird became less reliable under her editorial stewardship.

I read the three novels Warren put out through Angry Robot and while they were all original takes on genre, I don't think I would call them weird as I understand the term.

Dan wrote: "You read some strange, I mean weird stuff, Ed, and I mean that as a compliment. Would one of those titles make a good nomination? Nominations for April’s read are still open..."

I am attracted to novelty, so, yes, I read plenty of things that people think are weird. Sometimes this is to my detriment, as I pass over high quality stuff that sounds too "normal". After a few "bizarro" works, the style isn't novel to me anymore and I must seek new horizons.

I'm not nominating anything because I don't want to commit to another group read at this time. I want to catch up on my to-read pile.

Scott wrote: "I read the three novels Warren put out through Angry Robot and while they were all original takes on genre, I don't think I would call them weird as I understand the term."

I categorized The Grief Hole as horror and weird, and am the only one of a small group to have categorized it as weird. So I could be wrong on it being weird. I've only read one weird novel prior to this one (We Have Always Lived in the Castle). All my other weird reading has been short stories. I can't base my categorization on broad experience.

I haven't read that one so it may well be weird. The ones I read were Slights, Walking The Tree and Mistification. I'd recommend them all.

And I recommend The Grief Hole. It has stuck with me long after I've forgotten more recent reads. The only other book I have by Kaaron Warren is a collection of short stories that I'd also call Weird, or borderline so, and which I would not be able to recommend, just three stars: The Gate Theory.

I have read one or two short stories in anthologies and liked them as well.

This quote by Warren may be revealing: "I love to read anything and everything. Weird specialist magazines are a fave. I love the secret language they use, and the way people can be famous in their field but unheard of elsewhere." From https://www.angryrobotbooks.com/our-a...