Are litrpgs modern pulp fiction?

JordanIda said:

Not annoyed at all. (Well, with you, a little.)

There's a fundamental difference that doesn't seem to be obvious or apparent to anyone, so no one will agree. I didn't think I needed to explain, but I guess I will.

Pulp fiction and LitRPG (as practiced on Web Novel venues) are both serial in nature, it is true. But even that isn't much of a similarity, because the serialization is executed on different scales.

Pulp fiction novels did repeat serially, but each volume adhered to the novel form. We don't have to get all pedantic about what that means. One attribute matters most: every installment finished. Each volume had a satisfying ending. That is what kept readers coming back.

Some pulp serials were effectively never-ending, just like Web novels. How many pulp westerns did Louis L'Amour publish? Hundreds! I won't look it up, someone else feel free. But each volume caught the bad guys, saved the maiden, jailed the cowpokes, and so on.

Editorial boards made sure that every volume ended. Editors also enforced a loose system of peer review. Even serials were accepted or rejected. Loose standards were enforced, before trees were committed to the enterprise.

Web novels? In contrast? And LitRPG in particular? Back in the day, the first precursors to the genre were novels. Subject to editorial review. They developed, climaxed, ended. But no more. That's gone. The Patreon system is antithetical to the novel form. Now these "web novels," almost universally and with rare exceptions, are never-ending stories. They are not serial in terms of stories. They are serial in terms of chapters. Never-ending chapters that develop toward nothing and lead nowhere. Most of them do not finish until the drip feed runs dry or until the writer loses interest.

They are not peer reviewed, so there is no counterbalancing force to check them. Anyone can "publish" anything.

Pulp fiction? Not the same. There were hundreds of Nancy Drew Mysteries. Maybe even thousands. And yet, each and every one solved its case. Each one finished. Each one had an editor who made damn sure of it.

Click to expand...

JordanIda said:

Not annoyed at all. (Well, with you, a little.)

There's a fundamental difference that doesn't seem to be obvious or apparent to anyone, so no one will agree. I didn't think I needed to explain, but I guess I will.

Pulp fiction and LitRPG (as practiced on Web Novel venues) are both serial in nature, it is true. But even that isn't much of a similarity, because the serialization is executed on different scales.

Pulp fiction novels did repeat serially, but each volume adhered to the novel form. We don't have to get all pedantic about what that means. One attribute matters most: every installment finished. Each volume had a satisfying ending. That is what kept readers coming back.

Some pulp serials were effectively never-ending, just like Web novels. How many pulp westerns did Louis L'Amour publish? Hundreds! I won't look it up, someone else feel free. But each volume caught the bad guys, saved the maiden, jailed the cowpokes, and so on.

Editorial boards made sure that every volume ended. Editors also enforced a loose system of peer review. Even serials were accepted or rejected. Loose standards were enforced, before trees were committed to the enterprise.

Web novels? In contrast? And LitRPG in particular? Back in the day, the first precursors to the genre were novels. Subject to editorial review. They developed, climaxed, ended. But no more. That's gone. The Patreon system is antithetical to the novel form. Now these "web novels," almost universally and with rare exceptions, are never-ending stories. They are not serial in terms of stories. They are serial in terms of chapters. Never-ending chapters that develop toward nothing and lead nowhere. Most of them do not finish until the drip feed runs dry or until the writer loses interest.

They are not peer reviewed, so there is no counterbalancing force to check them. Anyone can "publish" anything.

Pulp fiction? Not the same. There were hundreds of Nancy Drew Mysteries. Maybe even thousands. And yet, each and every one solved its case. Each one finished. Each one had an editor who made damn sure of it.

Click to expand...

Lysander_Works said:

The question encapsulates "all" litrpg fictions, which there will naturally be some exceptions to

Click to expand...

CountVanBadger said:

Holy semantics, Batman!

Click to expand...

TinaMigarlo said:

First paperback, a novelty premise.
But as stated by this poster, it was a *complete* story.
It had editorial gatekeeping, minimum standards.
True, the premise was open ended.
Every paperback installment, was a different time period. A different war.
But it had in its own paperback... a beginning and premise, a conflict, and a resolution/ending.
all within 180 to 250 pages.
That's markedly different from what we get today (with most WNs)

Click to expand...

TinaMigarlo said:

this person gets it.
Take the pulp serial paperback "Casca: the eternal Mercenary"
(Barry Sadler, author)
First paperback, a novelty premise.
But as stated by this poster, it was a *complete* story.
It had editorial gatekeeping, minimum standards.
True, the premise was open ended.
Every paperback installment, was a different time period. A different war.
But it had in its own paperback... a beginning and premise, a conflict, and a resolution/ending.
all within 180 to 250 pages.
That's markedly different from what we get today (with most WNs)

Click to expand...

BearlyAlive said:

On the whole "editing" discussion: If pulp writer/publisher had gotten away with unedited loose collections of letters or chapter releases, they totally would have done the current "patreon format" most web novels are doing.
They just couldn't because the people then had actual expectations for books, so everyone involved needed to at least do the work expected of them.

Now? Now we're flooding AI with never-ending books that are neither coherent nor grammatically correct, so the AI can write even worse BS for us.

Click to expand...