"A lot of genre writing produces a commodity and there are readers who want that, and that's fine. But there should remain a large and noble place for the writing that is not meant to sell but to be itself."
Since reading it, I've been mulling over those two statements made by author Ursula K. Le Guin in the September 25 issue of The Week. Though Le Guin is well known, she's not a superstar. Consequently, I'm optimistic she'll respond to the questions below that I've posted to her website. Your answers are equally welcome and will be solace if Le Guin ignores me.
How would you define genre writing?
If the words "music" and "listeners" replace "writing" and "readers" does the formulation remain valid? If no, why not? How about if the words "movies" and "viewers" are used?
Is writing (or music or film) that is "... not meant to sell ..." the only writing (etc.) that can "... be itself ..."? How does a writer (musician/filmmaker) know when they are creating something meant to "...be itself ..."?