What does 'literary' mean and what makes something literary?

Strictly speaking, "literary" means only "of or having to do with literature." The question then becomes, What constitutes "literature?"

Any body of written work can be called "literature" -- you can reasonably refer to the "literature" on just about any subject. However, we tend to use the word to refer to elevated, serious, written material, most often fiction, produced for an educated, informed audience by professional authors dedicated to the craft of writing well. (That's a very narrow definition, but I think it addresses the question). This means that the word "literary" is most likely to be applied to a written work that meets that definition.

So, for example, a book by Joyce Carol Oates will be called "literary," but a book by Danielle Steele will not be. They are both professional writers and both are naturally concerned with selling books, but Steele's books are directed to a popular mass market and Oates' are not; the quality and type of writing in their books is quite different.

I hope that makes sense.

I would also like to add that any printed, published item in forms of "book" deserves the name of "literature" in terms of modern communication ...

I think it applies when conscious attention has been paid to the form of the writing (structure, language etc.) as opposed to concentrating primarily on the content.

In her intro to the latest BEST AMERICAN SCIENCE FICTION AND FANTASY anthology, editor Carmen Maria Machado has a few things to say on the subject:

https://www.tor.com/2019/10/17/read-editor-carmen-maria-machados-intro-to-the-be...

The history of the word literary is some what different than the above explanations. According to the OED it initially referred to the letters of the alphabet (in the 17th century, but meaning now obsolete). In the 18th century it meant carried on by letters or applying to letters in a polite society, or more generally something written with a sense of value. It was only Boswell in 1791 that use literary to mean acquainted with or versed in literature.

>4 MonarchVal: Boswell sure had an oversized impact on things. Given that he was basically writing a fan work about Sam Johnson. :)

To me, it has become any piece of fiction that makes me think on a deeper level beyond plot, setting/world-building, and character development. It has to have that extra thought-provoking element where it is also the author's way of commenting on a subject through the fiction. This is purely a subjective definition. Most of my "literary friends" (ie, the people I discuss books with) say that "literary fiction" is not a thing because all fiction is literature.

#6--Including shapeshifter paranormal erotic romance?

https://www.amazon.ca/Dragons-Ritual-Paranormal-Interracial-Shapeshifter-ebook/d...

I dunno...your friends may not understand the depths bad writers will descend to...

I'm reminded of a cartoon I saw many years ago, showing a conversation between a literary author and a hack:

"What are you working on at the moment?"

"At heart, it's a study of the Beast as god figure, coupled to a powerful new re-interpretation of the Atlantis myth."

"Sounds good. Got a title for it yet?"

"Er…. 'King Kong versus the Mermen'."

>7 CliffBurns: They are such tedious clichés, and ones performed in such bad faith, that all they tell me is that the offending thinker is more interested in victimhood or condescension than in reading good work or becoming a better writer. It is solipsistic, irritating, and the opposite of useful.

I have to say, I agree with Machado there.

I think categories like "literary" or "genre" are less about classifying literature than they are about the reader's expectations of a book. I think a book is genre or "popular" when the author writes to meet the expectations of the reader, and the book strays into literary when the author doesn't. Or at least, doesn't give reader expectations any primacy. And I don't think the difference between the two are necessarily matters of craft or talent. The world is full of very literary genre books. I just think they get the designation "literary" because they have allowed the needs of the story to have precedence over the criteria that classifies the book as "a mystery" or "scifi" I suppose I think to some writers, "genre" is a house they live in, while to others it is one of the many sets of tools in their toolbox.

#9 "I think a book is genre or "popular" when the author writes to meet the expectations of the reader, and the book strays into literary when the author doesn't."

This distinction has a lot of truth to it, methinks. Authors who write please their audiences, earn their approval, tend to be more commercial in their approach to their craft, whereas those who challenge readers, deliberately defy expectations, fall into the category of literary.

It's not perfect, but there's something to it.

in response to #7 - I mean, if you're a deeply philosophical person, I'm sure you can overanalyze and overthink anything into being literary. (disclaimer: I did not click on the link -- I trust you, if not the part of link that is shown)

hmmmmm
I think I would define "literary fiction" as something I could read twice and find something new the second go . . . and the third