I actually did read a parody romance written to flaunt the "rules" once, although, you're right, they still didn't call it *that*, no.

But expectations don't cover *only* the outcome. Other genres do allow for more than one kind of ending, but each genre demands certain elements ... or a book doesn't fall within the genre anymore.

That's true. But the genre elements are less plot defining except in perhaps Mysteries which - like Romance - needs a money shot satisfying ending. Science Fiction can go just about anywhere storywise, it just needs elements addressing how advances in technology can affect the story. Similarly a Western is defined by it's setting and era and to a lesser extent it's themes, but within that can tell any story it wants.

But mystery has about fifty billion categories, which is cool, until you start think about how Chandler would feel about being shelved next to the mystery solving Siameses. Then, it's a little sad.

opps - real life too real. sorry.

But the genre elements are less plot defining

Right. But my point was simply that there *are* expectations, however loose, in genre fiction. So you need to know what those expectations are to satisfy the bulk of readers. You can't answer *only* to yourself, and what you think equals a good book, not if you'd like to sell it.

Yeah, something like that. Of course, George Pelecanos swears the caper story is the new Western.

Right but Mystery as a genre requires a certain ending. The mystery must be revealed. Romance requires a certain ending - the lovers get together.

Science Fiction doesn't have a plot requirement, its genre requirements relate to an element of the fantastic which is technologically feasible.

Science Fiction doesn't have a plot requirement, its genre requirements relate to an element of the fantastic which is technologically feasible.

Isn't that what I said? That it was simply the elements of some genres that are expected? In other words, an author might write a novel set in 2736 and consider it sci fi without including any tech advances or explorations of what those advances have done to society, and *think* it's a really good book.

And it might be, story-wise. But it wouldn't be a really good *sci fi* book.

I feel like we're talking around each other now, so.

So you need to know what those expectations are to satisfy the bulk of readers. You can't answer *only* to yourself, and what you think equals a good book, not if you'd like to sell it.

But going back to the original question of what the writer owes to the audience, I think he or she can satisfy the First Principle (write the best book) without pandering.

In fact, I'd say that the best books in any genre are the ones which thwart, play with or redefine the genre rather than those which fulfill its requirements. Genres evolve over time because writers push against expectations. The conventions of Romance are very different now than they were in the sixties. Some writer had to push for something truer to their experience than the genre convention allowed, so now you can have a divorced lead, or sexual content in a Romance.

an author might write a novel set in 2736 and consider it sci fi without including any tech advances or explorations of what those advances have done to society, and *think* it's a really good book.

That's kind of what Doris Lessing did.

I feel like we're talking around each other now, so.

I'm arguing that while all genres have conventions, some genres restrict the narrative/plot more than others. That's all.