Foundling discussion

I am listening to this on audio right now, and part of me wants to include it in the steampunk subgenre. However, technically I can't really say that it has any steam elements. It definitely has that gadget-infused world that brings to mind steampunk. I am getting a 17th century vibe pretty heavily with the clothing styles, the lack of modern technology, the antiquated feel to the medical practices. I really do find the worldbuilding elements interesting. What would some other readers consider it?

I considered it steampunk

I don't really think things like "steampunk" are so easy to define. In fact, if I were an author I would hate for someone to put "steampunk" on the jacket blurb for my book. Even if it did contain steampunk elements. What a way to get pigeonholed.

I would think of it in terms of whether or not there are steampunk elements.

I never considered it Steampunk, but I also read it before steampunk decided to get popular.

My first thought was, "No", not steampunk. But, I thought of a better idea. Why not ask the author? He frequently interacts with readers on a Facebook fan page for MBT: https://www.facebook.com/groups/14140...

I like the biopunk argument that was made.

Yeah, I do, too, Danielle. I'd never heard of that kind of thing categorized as its own genre before but those aspects of the MBT series that fall into the biopunk genre are part of what makes Cornish's the Half-Continent such a unique world.

I always considered this book as part of the steampunk genre (or at least something that steampounks would like) because it was recommended to me when I searched for steampunk literature. And after reading it, I still agree with that definition but it really depends on how one defines "steampunk". If you stick to the retro-SciFi thing then it's obviously not steampunk. If you insist that it need steam, then it would not be steampunk either, but despite the name, steampunk works don't necessairily contain steam technology. Wikipedia names a sub-genre called "clockpunk", due to the technology based on gedgets that have to be wind up (I hope this makes sense). But steampunk itself is a sub-genre of scifi, and making a fuss about a sub-sub-genre doesn't make sense, besides, I've hardly found some steampunk writers characterizing their works as "clockpunk" or "teslapunk" or whatnot.

When I tried to find an answer to the hard question: "What is steampunk?" I read the Steampunk Magazine which started long before steampunk became popular and is directed to those who see steampunk as an alternate way to live - the subculture.
Steampunk is also dealing with political questions, it's picking handmade stuff over mass-manufacturing and the imperfection of technology. Men and machine live in a symbiosis because they're both allowed to get sick or rust, to fail and die... unlike the time we live in now where our lives are ruled by the technology. (But I'm rambling. Sorry.)
What I want to say is: having engines replaced by biological organism would be the utopia for a "real" steampunk. Of course, Monster Blood Tattoo is lacking the cool steampunk asthetic but the members of the sub-genre who keep stating that steampunk is more than the aesthetics will definitely like it. Let's just say, that due to the historical setting and the alternate biotechnology it can be considered as something very special, set on the outer rim of the steampunk genre?

I think Monster Blood Tattoo is in some ways more steampunk than a few of the newer mainstream works that were written intentionally to appeal the steampunk genre without caring about the proper steampunk zeitgeist.

Besides, MBT is awesome and steampunk is awesome. And I'm happy as long as no one comes and says "this is fantasy". I've read a lot of fantasy books and though there is no clean line between fantasy and SciFi (the Horrof-Genre usually lying somewhere in the middle of this), just the fact that it contains monsters wouldn't be enough for me to call it fantasy. The word "magic" never appears and even supernatural abilities of the lahzars are scientifically explainable. Which makes MBT part of the SciFi genre.
If it's steampunk or not really depends on the reader's individual definition of "steampunk".

Thank you so much for your erudite thoughts, Martine. That makes a lot of sense to me. I am no expert in steampunk, but I love what I've encountered of the genre, and my feeling is that this book fits firmly in the genre, although I couldn't elucidate why. Thanks for giving me some information I needed.

I'm not sure if this technically falls into the steampunk genre, but there are some elements that could be construed as such. I think it more falls into the fantasy fiction genre like Lord of the Rings and such.

I love this series. I love the strange jargon and the very bizarre characters. I love how our titular Foundling gets kicked in the pants and vindicated alternately. I love the supporting characters, man and monster alike.

However, I wouldn't consider the series Steampunk due to it's technology level. It's closer to Clockpunk, and even then, contains far more fantasy elements than anything else. It does have the same sort of tongue-and-cheek tone, but the subject matter is predominately about monsters. Thus, if we place it in the punk spectrum, I would call it "Monsterpunk." These books will turn your idea of what a monster can be on its head.

I think, perhaps, what bothers me about labeling "Foundling" or "Lamplighter" as "steampunk" is not whether or not the technology is "steam" enough. We could easily put it in the realm of "Gaslamp Fantasy" and get away from that debate, and argue that Cornish has come up with a unique, though similar, form of Victorian Gaslamp technology.

I think what's missing, for me, is the "punk" part--the idea that the protagonist should be somehow rebelling against the status quo, or underground somehow. The main character, far from rebelling against the powers that be, is actually on his way to work FOR them, and is employed by them in the second book of the series. I think, perhaps, that given the nature of the plot, "Factotum" might be considered steampunk, but the first two just don't have that edge or rebellion that make it "punk."

I think the term 'bio-Victorian' fits the technology best. It's, as you said Joshua, not very punk, but it has that 18th-19th century feel, but I wouldn't go as far back as the 1600s. I also feel that the 18th century may be a little early, do to the prominent use of ironclad warships.