Speculative Noir

I am still searching for a genre name for The Book Of Lost Doors. I’m currently going with Speculative Noir.  I’m not entirely happy with it, but it’ll do until something better comes along.

In any event, I think I can sum up what I think are the defining characteristics.

Speculative Noir: A definition

  • Metaphysics: The Universe contains elements which are both Fabulous (in the sense of violating natural law as we understand it) and Mysterious (in the sense of following laws which are not explicitly revealed to either the protagonist or the audience.)  The sense of Metaphysical Anarchy is central to the cosmology of Speculative Noir–nothing can be trusted, even things so ubiquitous and quotidian as gravity may fail without warning. 
  • Epistemology: Existential truth has primacy over theoretical truth.  In a world where reality is fluid, one can trust only the sensory data of the moment. Speculative Noir relies upon a hypnagogic  attention to detail.  Everything has the potential to be new and strange, and consequently everything must be treated as if it were sui generis.  We are transported into the world of the infant, in which around each corner lurks a new world, full of new wonders and dangers.
  • Ethics: What is good is what ensures the survival of the self–in this case the audience’s symbolic self of the narrator. Because nothing is certain, the social contract becomes a fragile construct, contingent upon the by no means certain continuity of identity of the parties involved. This strengthens rather than weakens the role of personal integrity–fragile things require protection. The Speculative Noir protagonist must be alert to the nigh-inevitability of betrayal while being scrupulous to the letter of the agreement so as not to prematurely provoke it.
  • Politics: Following directly from the above, politics in Speculative Noir is ruthlessly pragmatic.  The needs of the moment give rise to alliances of convenience.  Rather than the tradition division of heroes and villains, the protagonist is faced with characters who offer both promise and threat. Success in politics then becomes a matter of finding as much common ground as possible.
  • Aesthetics: The primacy of the sensual is the signature characteristic of Speculative Noir aesthetics.  What is real is what can be seen, touched, and tasted.  The audience knows that any theoretical structure will always be unstable and incomplete, so the author is obligated to compensate by hyper-realism. If pigs can fly (and they might) then their wings must be painted down to the littlest feather.

Speculative Noir is concerned with the struggle of a rational self against an irrational reality. It is a rage for order, not to discover an order that exists of itself, but to impose an order on the face of the howling void. The protagonist of Speculative Noir knows that the world only makes sense when you force it to, he or she fights an ontologically losing battle, building sand castles upon the shore.

The tide is coming, and it will wash it all away.

But not yet.

Not on my watch.

Advertisements

About MishaBurnett

I am the author of "Catskinner's Book", a science fiction novel available on Amazon Kindle. http://www.amazon.com/dp/B008MPNBNS
This entry was posted in Artists That I Admire, On Promotion, On Publishing, On Writing and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

11 Responses to Speculative Noir

  1. Sue says:

    I sent this to Bernie, my hussband, who’s the philosopher in the group

  2. That’s an interesting combination. Your genre has a nice ring to it. 🙂

  3. Dave Higgins says:

    Excellent definition.

    I look forward to the ensuing armchair-librarians bun-fight over whether specific books are or are not “really” speculative noir. 🙂

    • MishaBurnett says:

      I have been trying to come up with examples other than my own work, and the best one I’ve come up with is Samuel Delany’s “Dhalgren” (unsurprisingly, one of my favorite novels) although a lot of Phillip Dick’s stories fit the definition as well.

      • Dave Higgins says:

        I have not read Dhalgren yet; although I do really like Jewels of Aptor and Babel-17 so all of Delany’s works are on my read-if-seen list.

        I am fairly certain Dick set out to write what he felt like too; he just became famous doing it.

      • MishaBurnett says:

        “Dhalgren” is a huge brick of a book, and not the easiest to get through, but I think it rewards a patient reader.

        And Phillip Dick got famous, but he never got rich. Even the award-winning books didn’t tend to be big sellers.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s