Siege mentality?

[dolorosa_12]

Apropos of nothing, I came across this article in my daily wanderings of the interwebs. I thought it was very interesting, and also valid. What do you think?

Comments

[dusabre.livejournal.com]

slogging through that was informative, to say the least. it or parts of it may be valid, but i couldn't quite get whether it was an attack on sf/f ...fundamentalists, let me say as one sraffie to another, or whether it was meant to apply to the specific genres mentioned as an anomaly, or whether it was a larger scheme in which there will always be some group that feels itself beseiged to the extent that they are more riled about their worries than one might be over a real issue. since you've titled your post as such i'm inclined to believe you understand me, and also that it was probably a mixture of things. it really is bizarre how people can care so much what others think, say, do or read when it hasn't a chance of affecting them in any serious way.

[dolorosa-12.livejournal.com]

hmm, what I got out of it was that it was concerned that SF/F in particular seems to encourage these cliquey sub-genre groups that claim to be the One True SF (or Fantasy) and all the others are commercialised market-driven trash. The author was suggesting that, as members of a literary genre that is scorned by the 'mainstream' literary world it might be better to bury their differences and get on with the business of writing, reading and enjoyment.

The thing is, when groups feel like they're a besieged minority, instead of turning to face their attackers (in this case, the 'mainstream' literary community), they tend to engage in bitter, pointless infighting, thus giving their detractors more ammunition? Does that make sense?