Some literary critics and authors held a little reunion to define the “slipstream canon,” whatever “slipstream” is. The result is a list, posted by Paul DiFillipo, that makes little sense. I’m sure it must have been fun to have a little people over, hand them some paper and feel like you’re doing something important, like defining a canon. Hey, I wish I was doing that. But at the same time, I have no idea what good it does having books we’ve been reading for decades now being touted as “slipstream,” whatever that is. It’s not like we need new categories. “Slipstream” seems really broad and probably encompasses everything that’s not realism but not blatantly fantasy, horror or science fiction. Paul Kincaid responds.
One of the more elaborate and well-buttressed panels I participated in at Readercon this past weekend involved an attempt to create a “canon” of Slipstream literature. The panelists involved, besides myself, Paul DiFi, were John Kessel, Cat Valente, Dora Goss, Brett Cox, Ron Drummond, Victoria McManus, and Graham Sleight. Con organizer Eric Van participated heavily as well.
Here’s the document we came up with, after the break.
