Wow this generated a lot of feedback!
Was this horror? Yes.
Was this SF? Also yes. I see genre as a series of checkboxes, rather than radio buttons: "Select all that apply".
Was this rape-porn? Hell no. For it to be pornography it would have to have the goal of sexual gratification of the listener. Which, I'm with scattercat on this one, was either clearly not the intent or if it was the intent was a complete and total failure (but I really don't think that's a possibility here). None of the scenes are written in a way that suggests arousal as a reaction, unless perhaps for someone who's into some really freaky stuff and then I'd really prefer they keep that to themselves...
For me the intent here was clear, to tell a horrific and tragic story of dying for love. I totally understand why that doesn't work for everybody, and everybody has to draw a line where they draw the line for themselves. A pre-episode warning was totally justified here (and yikes, LaShawn, for having accidentally missed that!).
Was this snuff? I don't see how that label could possibly make sense here. Unless my passing definition of snuff is not what I think it is. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought the Wikipedia entry was accurate in that a snuff film is:
A snuff film is a motion picture genre that depicts the actual murder of a person or people, without the aid of special effects, for the express purpose of distribution and entertainment or financial exploitation.
motion picture genre
So, since this is not a film, of course it's not a snuff FILM. But is it a snuff short story?
for the express purpose of distribution and entertainment or financial exploitation
This is surely true. The story has been distributed on an entertainment podcast, and she's been paid at least twice for it.
actual murder of a person or people
Well, did Mary Robinette Kowal actually kill someone and then write a short story about the murder? I'm guessing not, though I don't have sufficient evidence to rule this out for sure, I have not seen any hint that this is the case.
without the aid of special effects
The definition of special effects in prose is, I guess, embellishment or deviation from actual events. For Mary to have written this without embellishment she would've had to observe some actual future where these events were possible. Which I can't totally rule out, but for which there is also no evidence to support.
It's kind of a funny idea to have a snuff short story where someone would go to the legal risk of committing a murder just to write a short story about it without having to embellish. Might make a funny flash story. Maybe I'll try that.
So, if you take away the "special effects" part, and the "actual" part, then you're left with a fictional story in which there is at least one murder for which the author intends to distribute and/or make money. Which much of the Mystery genre is specifically centered around, much of the horror genre, and large subsets of any other genre.
Is there another definition of snuff that I'm unaware of?
And snarkily name-drop to contradict my point?
Sweetie, if you want snark, I can bring it on. That wasn't it. This is, however, the point at which I've crossed from being interested to being pissed. Stop assigning motivations to me.
I'd also add that "name-drop" is much too strong a word. Mary mentioned the people that she worked with on this, and an feedback that led to a change in the story. The latter was information directly relevant to the current state of the story, and the former is the origin of that feedback.
To me at least, name-dropping is the gratuitous use of names to impress others, especially if it's not actually relevant to the discussion at hand. But it was totally relevant here.
Also, hi Mary! And thanks for stopping by. We can be a contentious lot, but I love the discussions here.