What Amitav Ghosh gets wrong in his chapter on literary matters in his brilliant but wrongheaded essay whhen it comes to literature THE GREAT DERANGEMENT

A reader writes:

''While much of this book brilliantly exposes the problem we have with coming to grips with climate change -- in many different types of narratives, such as historically and politically -- the one glaring error is Ghosh's assumption that artists and authors aren't properly dealing with climate change in their works. This is so very untrue.  

Maybe because I actively research and talk with authors and read these novels and short stories, I am more aware of what's actually happening -- but then that would point to poor research in this area on Ghosh's end.
I agree that climate change in fiction perhaps shouldn't have one particular genre -- that it's the story that counts, despite the newer genres ....readily trying to wrap their hands around global warming and the older genres still doing the job .....

That brings me to another point, that there does exist the assumption in Ghosh's book that literary fiction is the only fiction that matters when it comes to climate change.

Shouldn't this movement be readily open to all readers and writers, regardless of what genre the work is in?

Genre fiction and literary fiction may be miles apart, yet many times the lines are blurry.

No reason to be elitist about genres and their potential impacts, especially when global warming, as a huge crazy reality that everyone finds difficult to grasp and talk about, would seemingly call for a tolerance globally to discuss and immerse artistically in whatever way (journalism, art, fiction, etc.) one can. This is not an issue reserved for only a few people. ''