but there was an interesting review in the LA review of books, on some 2012 best of SFF anthologies:
i haven’t been reading much fiction, and in fact have my lovely signed margo lanagan to dive into when i do feel the need to go fiction again. but, the argument is interesting. some time ago i had a debate about a critique i had offered, in which i thought the overall story was pretty solid but it could have been set anywhere, not necessarily in the dystopian island community that was its designated backdrop. it was funny too, because the story-writer had made remarks about lit vs. genre, when really their piece was a rather standard litmag tale transplanted onto this island . . . whatever. these things, these arguments, they are an ourobouros. the question i ask now is this: how does the change of locale affect this story? what makes it different than if it had, say, happened in modern staten island instead? 19th century isle of man? and i am not talking about the overall narrative arc per se: but locations, times, cultures, they put their mark upon you. they mark your decisions, and they mark the framework within which you are approached and wooed and dismissed and judged. boy may still get girl, the witch may still get kicked down the mountainside, but how we get there will be inflected by the when and where.
to not think about these things seems wrong.