MAPACA

Mid-Atlantic Popular &
American Culture Association

User menu

Skip to menu

You are here

Genre Trouble: Some Motifs in (Big) Gay Dystopian Detective Fiction

Presenter: 
Alexander N. Howe (University of The District Of Columbia)
Presentation type: 
Paper
Abstract: 

There is nothing more dear to the detective fiction scholar than the emergence of a “hot” new sub-genre that gathers a small sampling of talented up-and-comers to riff cleverly upon canonical detective works at the same time as they remorselessly critique contemporary culture. Academic mysteries, parson mysteries, vampire mysteries, quilting mysteries—no niche is too small to hide from the watchful eye of the sleuth. For years prognosticators have claimed that dystopian detective fiction would be the next “big thing,” but despite a few transient examples somehow this subgenre never quite caught fire among mainstream readers. However, among gay authors over the past 20 years, dystopian detective fiction has indeed gained traction and continues to enjoy a niche popularity. This brief presentation will assess three recent gay dystopian detective fiction novels according to generic accommodations and innovations. To these ends the focus will be on the structure of mystery and atmosphere of the novels, as these works cleverly engage with the history of classical, noir, and anti-detective tropes. In the midst of this analysis, I would like to address why it is that these detective authors are drawn to science fiction to address issues of body, identity, and sexuality—what we might gather, more broadly, in the yet-useful term posthumanism. Authors include Simon LeVay’s Albrick’s Gold (1997), Randy Boyd’s The Devil Inside (2002), and Lois McMaster Bujold Ethan of Athos (2011).

Scheduled on: 
Thursday, November 6, 3:15 pm to 4:30 pm

About the presenter

Alexander N. Howe

Alexander N. Howe is an Associate Professor of English at the University of the District of Columbia where he teaches courses on American Literature, Detective Fiction, Film, and Literary Theory.

Back to top