Straight down the line, just fiction. I suppose you could call it literary fiction, but that is as far as you could go. Genre fiction would be sci-fi, crime, horror etc. He falls into none of these.
2007-10-17 07:25:11
·
answer #1
·
answered by patchcassidy 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
I used to live next door to him in London years ago when he started publishing, and I have read everything that he has written. But he doesn't fit into a 'genre'. He's contemporary fiction. His work is very uneven. On Chesil Beach is terrible, but Atonement is excellent. Amsterdam is dreadful, but Black Dogs and A Child In Time were excellent. But this is what so often happens. A good writer becomes 'established' and then everything they write gets published, good or bad.
PS: Don't waste your money seeing the film of Atonement. Keira Knightley speaks in a silly voice, and is more self-admiring than ever. Huge disappointment.
2007-10-17 11:13:42
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
As Daniel R has already said, contemporary fiction, cos that is what it is.
I know he sets his novels in the past, but what I've read of his is approached in a contemporary manner.
It sounds as if "On Chesil Beach" , nominated for the Booker prize, is another contemporary novel.
If you like his way of writing, visit the link to find other contemporary writers.
http://www.contemporarywriters.com/
2007-10-17 09:40:26
·
answer #3
·
answered by i_am_jean_s 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
It's usually known as Contemporary Fiction, or occasionally Literary Fiction.
2007-10-17 07:33:26
·
answer #4
·
answered by Daniel R 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
I'd call it Paul Bowles and water
2007-10-17 07:29:03
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋
I would go for thriller... not very good thriller but that's a matter of opinion...
2007-10-17 06:39:17
·
answer #6
·
answered by Ben H 1
·
0⤊
1⤋
fwiwwa
2007-10-17 04:08:11
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋