Search This Blog

Sunday, December 15, 2013

Messages in Fantasy – Part 2




This is part two of my post about Messages in Fantasy. If you have not read the previous post, you can read it here.


Fiction, in general, can be, and has been, a medium used by writers to express their thoughts, passions and beliefs. Classic literature has been scrutinized in classrooms and in non-fiction books for decades, spelling out the authors meanings and intents. Fantasy fiction is no exception. It is a genre which is more pliable for infusing meanings; however, one could spend years reading in the genre and not really grasp what the author is wishing to convey—whether it’s subtle or obvious. As I pointed out in my last post, the story is everything, and a message should not overpower the story.

Now, this is not to say that all of fantasy fiction has a “message” to put forth. Most of the stories are just entertainment, as they should be, but, in the most part, there is usually always some kind of theme. The sort of themes that you find in most fantasy stories are things like: overcoming adversity and fears; comradeship between individuals; fighting injustice; banding together for a cause; discovery of one's potential; and what-ifs. This is only naming a few, but these themes tend to be universal and less complex—or less intrusive, for lack of a better word.   

When an author interjects their worldview into their stories the reader should be able to come out of that story with their own conclusions, not with a forced view by the writer. The reader may come away with misconceptions, but as long as they enjoyed the book the author should be content. In answering a question in regards to someone reading their own meaning into the story (fairytale), instead of his meaning, George MacDonald said, “Why should you be so assured? It may be better that you should read your meaning into it. That may be a higher operation of your intellect than the mere reading of mine out of it: your meaning may be superior to mine.” In a forum on his own website, author Stephen R. Donaldson wrote: Reading is an interactive process. Readers have always supplied their own interpretations of what they read. In my case, the issue is simple: I've never had a ‘message’ I wanted to communicate (impose on the reader), so rejecting my message should be effortless. (I'm a storyteller, not a polemicist. As such, my only mission is to help my readers understand my characters and appreciate what those poor sods are going through.) In general, however, one might say that the task of any writer is to communicate his/her intentions so clearly that the reader will—as it were spontaneously—arrive at the appropriate interpretation. And if that task has been accomplished, what would be the point of rejecting the author's message?”  

Stephen R. Donaldson’s The Chronicles of Thomas Covenant the Unbeliever series has been described as “existential fantasy”. The books hold a firm view of Existentialism, which gives the stories a pretty grim, melancholy setting, as the main character, Thomas Covenant, is a leper whose life collapses around him and he becomes a man of despair—suicidal—which makes him into the kind of character you really don’t enjoy following. Existentialism is a philosophical movement that sprung from Europe in the 19TH century, but rose to prominence after World War II, which focuses on the human condition. In his book, From Hegel to Existentialism, American professor of philosophy, the late Robert C. Solomon, wrote: “Existentialism is not simply a philosophy or a philosophical revolt. Existentialist philosophy is the explicit conceptual manifestation of an existential attitude—a spirit of the ‘present age’. It is a philosophical realization of a self-consciousness living in a ‘broken world’ (Marcel), an ‘ambiguous world’ (de Beauvoir), a ‘dislocated world’ (Merleau-Ponty), a world into which we are ‘thrown’ and ‘condemned’ yet ‘abandoned’ and ‘free’ (Heidegger and Sartre), a world which appears to be indifferent or even ‘absurd’ (Camus). It is an attitude that recognizes the unresolvable confusion of the human world, yet resists the all-too-human temptation to resolve the confusion by grasping toward whatever appears or can be made to appear firm or familiar—reason, God, nation, authority, history, work, tradition, or the ‘other-worldly’, whether of Plato, Christianity, or utopian fantasy. The existential attitude begins with a disoriented individual facing a confused world that he cannot accept.”

Solomon’s summed-up description of Existentialism just about lays out the theme in The Chronicles of Thomas Covenant. Author Stephen R. Donaldson created a character that is a man in the real world, a successful, bestselling novelist, with a wife and a son, and financially secure, but he is diagnosed with leprosy, and all comes crumbling down. Thomas’ wife and son leave him, he loses his confidence and ability to write, and people around him reject him as one accursed. One day he finds himself in another world, known as The Land, where he is embraced as a foretold hero who has returned to save them from Lord Foul. The people try to raise him up as someone of great significance, but Thomas is determined not to believe such things, and resists the inclination that this other world that he has found himself in is real—so much so that he goes to the extreme of raping the young woman that was simply trying to sympathize with him. The story follows Thomas’ conflict of seeing himself as a man of any worth, holding on to his own assured death in the real world, and resisting the realty of the “fantasy” world (the Land). Thomas feels that the Land only offers a false hope, something that gives him escape from his condition. However, as the story progresses, Thomas begins to see that he is of worth and begins to resist the thought of suicide. He begins to believe in the Land and the people around him, and he sees himself as someone who can be effective.

Stephen R. Donaldson’s choice to take a character and inflict him with one of the worst diseases know to man, and bring him into loss and despair, illustrates a character that takes an existential view of life. This character is aware of his human condition as a leper and his assured death, but he later finds purpose for his life; therefore, shunning the thought of suicide. His discovery of purpose is not obtained from a higher power, but by taking his own action, and being responsible for himself.

There are essays and books that go into great detail in pointing out the Existential themes in The Chronicles of Thomas Covenant. One essay is called Suicide and the Absurd by Benjamin Laskar, available online here. Books like Variations on the Fantasy Tradition by W.A. Senior and Stephen R. Donaldson and the Modern Epic Vision by Christine Barkley also discuss, in part, about the Existential message in Donaldson’s work.

Donaldson wrote in his essay, Epic Fantasy in the Modern World: “Now that the door has been opened, what I want to do is to bring the epic back into contact with the real world. Putting it another way, I want to reclaim the epic vision as part of our sense of who we are, as part of what it means to be human. For that reason, I chose to focus my epic on one ‘real’ human being. . . He is an ‘Unbeliever’ precisely because I wanted to bridge the gap between reality and fantasy: I wanted to take a fantasy-rejecting modern human being and force him to confront all the implications of an epic vision. Epic vision is powerfully seductive—because it is powerfully human—and I wanted to consider the question of what might happen to a modern man who was seduced by such beauty. . . Also because I wanted to bring the epic back into contact with the real world, I chose the technical device of reversing Tennyson's method. He took one epic character, Arthur, and surrounded him with ‘real,’ ‘modern’ human beings. I took one real, modern human being, Thomas Covenant, and surrounded him with epic characters. . .”

The Chronicles of Thomas Covenant the Unbeliever is a series that one either loves or hates. Not everyone can endure such a flawed and depressing character long enough to see him overcome his despair; and the Existential overtones flowing through Thomas Covenant may make an interesting story for some, while causing others to discontinue their journey in the series.

See Part 3 of Messages in Fantasy here.  



Wednesday, December 4, 2013

Messages in Fantasy



The fantasy genre was born from the essence of mythology, folklore and fairytalesfrom sources that were created to craft illustrations of existence and beliefs; as well as morals, fears and superstitions. These primary sources fed the imagination, and manifested in civilizations, taking the forms of art, literature, traditions and religions. From the ancient times to the modern world, myths, legends and tales, in the most part, were infused with messages and morals. Allegories like the epic poem, The Faerie Queene, by Edmund Spenser, gave praise to Queen Elizabeth I and told tales of virtue; and the novel The Princess and the Goblin by George MacDonald gave a message of faith and hope.

In modern fantasy, as character-driven stories becomes the archetype, the story is no longer just a tale of good against evil, but illustrations of life with a fantasy setting. Now we are journeying into the human experience within the pages of today’s fantasy fiction. There’s no longer a blatant moral message or an unapproachable virtuous hero laying out an artificial image of honor. Today, when we open fantasy fiction, we are presented with a whole slew of underlined worldviews, philosophies and messages.

In an interview, sci-fi/fantasy author Michael A. Stackpole said, “Writers forget that, first and foremost, we’re entertainers. Anything that gets in the way of that, like a message poorly delivered, hurts our work and our credibility. Story must carry a work. If you can get information in or get readers to think about an issue, that’s a bonus. And there’s nothing wrong with going for the bonus, as long as it doesn’t overshadow the story.” I believe Stackpole speaks for many authors here. A writer should always aim to write a good book; but if they can convey a message in the process, then it could be beneficial. But if a writer goes into their story with the intent to push forth a message, then it’s more likely to harm the work.

I don’t think readers in general care too much about an author interlining a message in their work; however, no one wants to be beat over the head by a didactic story. We want to experience how such a lesson affected or changed the character(s). I think this is the only way that this could work.

For the readers of Terry Goodkind’s Sword of Truth series, the main complaint of the latter books in the series is the heavy theme of Objectivism, a philosophy developed by Ayn Rand, which concludes that reason is man’s basic means of survival; and that one should pursue life for one’s self (“rational self-interest”). The philosophy also shuns faith of any kind, because religion is accepted only by emotion, or it’s something that one is born into—it was not chosen in a rational sense. Objectivism also teaches that morality is to follow reason to the best of one’s ability—so that rationality is the basic virtue from which all the others proceed. These beliefs are circulated throughout Goodkind’s series, with books like Faith of the Fallen and Naked Empire really pushing the Objectivist message. For example, in Faith of the Fallen the main character, Richard Cypher, says, “The only sovereign I can allow to rule me is reason. The first law of reason is this: what exists, exists; what is, is. From this irreducible, bedrock principle, all knowledge is built. This is the foundation from which life is embraced. Reason is a choice. Wishes and whims are not facts, nor are they a means to discovering them. Reason is our only way of grasping reality—it's our basic tool of survival. We are free to evade the effort of thinking, to reject reason, but we are not free to avoid the penalty of the abyss we refuse to see.” Later on in the book, Richard also says, “Reason is the very substance of truth itself. The glory that is life is wholly embraced through reason, through this rule. In rejecting it, in rejecting reason, one embraces death.”

It is obvious that Terry Goodkind strongly embraces Ayn Rand’s philosophy of Objectivism. Those who know Ayn Rand’s novels, Atlas Shrugged and The Fountainhead, have caught the likenesses in Goodkind’s books (mostly Faith of the Fallen) compared to Rand’s work. Some go as far as saying that Goodkind is writing fan-fiction based on Rand’s novels. This takes away some of the originality of the story; and the maneuvering of the plot to give the characters opportunity to debate and give speeches to drive the Objectivist message slows the flow of the story. 

In an interview, Terry Goodkind said, “Art is the way we express the things that are important to us. When you read a story, you’re seeing what’s important to the author. When you see a story about characters that inspire us, that artist—that author—is telling you that’s what inspires him.” Goodkind doesn’t hide the fact that he weaves the tenets of his beliefs into his story. I believe all authors have something to say in their stories, but like what Michael A. Stackpole stated, a message not delivered right could hurt the story—a message should never overshadow the story.

In my next post I will continue the discussion of messages in fantasy, taking a look at the works of other well-known authors in the genre.


RELATED POSTS: 
Messages in Fantasy – Part 2

Thursday, November 7, 2013

Good vs Evil – Part 2



This is part two of my post about Good vs Evil in fantasy fiction. If you have not read my first post on this subject then you can read it here.


French philosopher, Simone Weil, said, “Imaginary evil is romantic and varied; real evil is gloomy, monotonous, barren, boring. Imaginary good is boring; real good is always new, marvelous, intoxicating. Therefore ‘imaginative literature’ is either boring or immoral (or a mixture of both). It only escapes from this alternative if in some way it passes over to the side of reality through the power of art – and only genius can do that.” She says a lot here in these four sentences. Basically, in fiction, evil is romantic and diverse; but in real life, evil is not great at all. In fiction, good is not so intriguing, but in real life good is wonderful. Weil makes a strong statement in saying that fiction (“imaginative literature”) is either boring or immoral (considering that good is boring in fiction and evil is fascinating in fiction), but can escape such an outcome if it would depict reality—but “only genius can do that.” Now let’s keep in mind that Weil’s comments are from the early part of the 20TH century, and, just like the talk of most philosophers, her comments are from the fountains of her own thoughts and opinions; but one cannot deny the degree of truth in those profound words.

American writer, Flannery O’Connor, stated, “I know nothing harder than making good people believable.” It’s true, writing characters that are good, and trying to make them believable is quite the task for a lot of writers. The same can be said of characters that are evil; however, I think writers don’t have as much of a struggle writing a flawed, twisted character than writing a character that is good and noble in an interesting and believable manner. Readers want to read flawed characters, because in real life all people are flawed—nobody is perfect. Readers can relate to characters that are more like them than they could with characters like King Arthur or Aragorn. To me, a character that is “good” will have that struggle of good and evil within them; however, they tend to master, or suppress, their own “evil” desires to do what they know and believe to be right to oppose the external evils. Stephen King does a great job of writing flawed characters that are capable of standing against evil; but sometimes, in my opinion, King can go a little too far and make a character kind of goofy or bizarre, where it just doesn’t work all that well.     

George R.R. Martin has destroyed the likes of the chivalrous knight, and made him a murderer or rapist; and he’s smothered the likes of the noble king and made them brutal and manipulative. This completely grays out the contrast between good and evil, compared to the more traditional fantasy. Of course, Martin is not the only one doing this, but he’s the top of the fantasy chain right now, so I use him as an example.  

English writer, G.K. Chesterton, wrote: “This is also why the new novels die so quickly, and why the old fairy tales endure for ever. The old fairy tale makes the hero a normal human boy; it is his adventures that are startling; they startle him because he is normal. But in the modern psychological novel the hero is abnormal; the centre is not central. Hence the fiercest adventures fail to affect him adequately, and the book is monotonous. You can make a story out of a hero among dragons; but not out of a dragon among dragons. The fairy tale discusses what a sane man will do in a mad world. The sober realistic novel of to-day discusses what an essential lunatic will do in a dull world.” This quote is from the dawn of the 20TH century, yet it is so relevant for today (over one hundred years later). Chesterton simply argues that the traditional stories of taking an ordinary person and putting them in extraordinary circumstances stand the test of time. But the stories where the character is ultra flawed in a world just as chaotic lacks any kind of variety. Think of a photo that has no contrast. It’s dull and washed-out looking. But the photo with good contrast is nice to look at, and makes for a much better picture. Fiction should be viewed likewise.  

Here is another quote from G.K. Chesterton: “The sane man knows that he has a touch of the beast, a touch of the devil, a touch of the saint, a touch of the citizen. Nay, the really sane man knows that he has a touch of the madman.” This goes back to my earlier point; a good person will have that struggle within, conflicting between the good and bad within them. This brings such a realistic contrast within a character; and this can go both ways—with hero or villain. The villain is no exception. He/she should have the same inner battles, but, of course, they tend to lean more towards the bad. Think of it in this simplistic way: a character is being good when they act selflessly; a character is being bad when they act selfishly.

A story should take the conflict of good and evil within the characters and display the same contrast externally. So when the hero acts out their selflessness (goodness) against the villain's selfishness (badness), there’s that iconic clash between the two, and the reader gets to sit back and watch a story of good versus evil unfold. When good and evil is blurred together in a story, and all the characters are acting selfishly, in most part, then you have a monotonous story. Everything is just grayed out, with no variety of color. Since modern fantasy is trying to steer more toward realism then it should reflect the real world, which has contrast and variety; and has people who do selfless acts and selfish acts, and the two acts battle each other for eons. Good and evil exists; and it should not be diminished in today’s fantasy fiction. 


RELATED POSTS: 
Good vs Evil 

Sunday, November 3, 2013

Discussion Panel on Black Speculative Fiction - VIDEO



Back in April of this year, I posted about the rarity of black fantasy authors. Below is a link to a video of a panel discussing the State of Black Science Fiction at the 2012 DragonCon in Atlanta, GA. This blog concentrates mostly on epic fantasy, but I found this discussion worth sharing, and think it is very relevant to my post in April.

Sunday, October 27, 2013

The War Ingredient


Lord of the Rings, The Chronicles of Narnia, the Riftwar Cycle, Wheel of Time, Malazan Book of the Fallen, A Song of Ice and Fire, and a multitude of other fantasy books consist of battles and wars of epic proportionconflicts that shake the very foundations of the worlds these stories inhabit. Much of epic fantasy seems to be lost without the presence of warfare. Without war in fantasy, the stories almost fall into the identity of fairytales.

Unfortunately, war is in the fabric of the existence of mankind. It’s a dark, horrible blemish that writes our histories and forms the boundaries between nations. War is the death and destruction of lives and civilizations that causes an effect throughout existence for centuries and millennia. So for fantasy not to have at least a history of war within the story, it takes away the believability of that world and the civilizations therein.

The classic epic fantasy story takes the reader into a great conflict against a cancerous evil that is taking over the world. Another kind of fantasy story deals with the conflict between an antagonist building a force to dominate a region. Another story brings wars between different races, tribes or classes. These are usually the main three formulas, formed into different variations. Again, war does not have to be in the fantasy story itself, but at least a history of war, or the possibility of war tends to dwell in the world-building.

This element of fantasy seems to bring to life all the other elements in the genre. A wizard’s use of magic appears much more powerful and active in the setting of warfare. Dragon-riders soaring the heights, unleashing flames on their enemies below, bring about some of the most exciting moments of dragons in a story. The thrust and parry of a skilled swordsman, the lethal hack of a dwarf’s axe, and the graceful combat moves of an elf bring life to a battle scene on the pages. A sovereign’s declaration of war ups the stakes in a story of intrigue.

Just think about your favorite fantasy books without the battles. There wouldn’t be much of a story. The conflicts between good and evil, and the struggles between opposing kings would just be a game of chess. If only it was that easy. It’s sad that a genre where we go to escape this life carries over the vices of this world, but the difference, at least in traditional fantasy, is that we get to see the bad guys get their due justice, which is not always the case in our world.

Fantasy helps us look at reflections of our own existence. But, in most works, war in fantasy is usually glorified, and is used as a tool to entertain, and bring action to a story, yet leaving out the tragic consequences that real war tends to bring. However, in the majority of epic fantasy, war is a necessity. After all, the dark lord, the evil witch, the dark gods, and the force of chaos must not prevail; and they can only be stopped with the call for war—compromise, a therapy session, and a soft teddy bear just won’t do the trick.


RELATED POSTS: 
The Dragon Ingredient

Saturday, October 19, 2013

Discussion Panel on Epic Fantasy - VIDEO

I found this video to be an interesting discussion on Epic Fantasy. See video below (divided into 4 parts).

A panel from the World Fantasy Convention in 2010, featuring David Drake, John Fultz, Blake Charlton, David B. Coe and Freda Warrington.

Filmed by Moses Siregar III of http://sciencefictionfantasybooks.net

Part 1 of 4


 
 Part 2 of 4
  
 
 Part 3 of 4

 

 Part 4 of 4

 

Saturday, October 5, 2013

Good vs Evil



Just about every fantasy story is based on the struggle between good and evil. How many dark lords have been defeated by the hero and his band of friends? How many wicked witches have been vanquished by innocent youths? How many dark wizards have met their end against the gifted brave? How many warlords have been defeated by the noble king? I could go on and on. The battle between good and evil is the foundation for almost every kind of fiction (fantasy, action, thriller, suspense, horror, etc). We go to the movies and we sit expecting to root for the “good” guy against the “bad” guy. It’s common in our culture, and it’s common in our nature. Mythology and folklore have been saturated with it for centuries.

In today’s fantasy fiction, there are times where we expect to root for the antihero. There are times where we see the lines between good and evil blurred. We’ve come to a place where the “all-good” hero and the “all-bad” villain no longer appeals, and shows no realism. It’s funny to see the genre which was supposed to be a vehicle of discovering the fantastic and speculative—to take us away from reality—is now being forced to make things as realistic as possible (in which I agree with). But I think the main purpose is to make things believable in the author’s created world, while giving the reader characters that are realistic.

It seems like today’s modern fantasy is trying to veer away from characters that are good and evil, and just make the characters grey (or amoral). This is a good thing for the genre, but it’s not good if this is done only to rebel against the old tradition of good versus evil. It should be done because that’s what the story calls for, and that’s who that character is. Also, a character shouldn’t be made dark just to put a dark spin on the story. There should be a believable reason why that character is that way.

There’s the belief that there is no absolute good or evil. But if someone believes in an all-good higher power, and believes that any force that defies that all-good higher power is evil, then there is absolute good and evil, in that concept. If someone does not believe in an all-good higher power, but believes that society sets the standards of what is right and wrong, then there is a degree of good and evil; for if anyone goes against what your society believes to be the right thing, then that person could be seen as evil in a way, and vice versa.

In the real world, there is good versus evil. That’s realistic. The generation known as the Greatest Generation, who fought Nazis in World War II, were not saints, but they were the good guys, going up against an evil empire. What Hitler did was evil. The Allies that fought him were good. That man that took those girls in Ohio and held them captive in his house for a decade, doing terrible things to them, did evil; and the people that helped those girls escape did good. A person that walks into an elementary school and slaughters children does evil; the people that tried to save those children, and tried to stop the murderer were good. The people that go and blow up innocent men, women and children are evil; the people that fight to stop those people are good. Do you see what I’m getting at here? Unfortunately, in our world, we see the evil that people do all the time. Fortunately, we see the good that people do all the time as well.

The key point here is that the struggle against good and evil is a part of our world, and of our existence, since the dawn of man. The battle of good and evil happens in the world, and it happens inside each and every person, as they make the choice to do the right or wrong thing everyday. This is reality, and this is the good against evil that we should see in fantasy fiction. So if an author is only going to give us grey characters, then show us readers why that character is that way. Also, show us the struggle inside the character as he/she strives to be a person that does the “right” thing; or if he/she strives to do the “wrong” thing.

So, authors of the dark and gritty, don’t try to make it an effort to exclude good and evil from your stories; but try making an effort to make your stories more realistic by including good and evil in the degree that your story calls for. Again, this could be an external struggle or an internal struggle for the character(s).

I think the things that bother us modern readers, in regards to the old-fashioned good versus evil plot, is that the hero and the villain have no depth. They’re just put there to fight each other, with nobility as the hero’s reason, and power and greed as the villain’s excuse. Readers want to get into the soldiers’ minds, and into the Nazis’ minds, so that the struggle becomes an explosion of good story, with depth and conflict; and the climax at the end is not predictability (even though you know the good guys will win), but a conclusion where you feel the triumph of the protagonists, because you fell in love with them, and you wanted them to succeed. 

Click here to see Part 2 of this post.


RELATED POSTS: 
Good vs Evil – Part 2

Saturday, September 28, 2013

The Royal Ingredient


It’s quite difficult to find a fantasy novel that does not have some sort of character or plot dealing with royalty. Even if the central focus of the story and its characters have nothing to do with sovereigns, thrones or kingdoms, there still tends to be someone or something in the plot that relates to things of royalty. I believe this is mostly due to the setting of most fantasy worlds taking place in a medieval-type era. The Middle Ages was a period of emperors, kings and lords.

Another look at this is that the utter most of us do not stem from royalty; therefore, experiencing the royal lifestyle is the dream (or fantasy) of many people. I think that’s why a lot of the western world is so fascinated with the royal family of England—it’s like a fairytale—something so far from us, and unattainable, that it’s like a fantasy.

So it has been since the dawn of fantasy fiction that kings, queens, princes and princesses have been the orbital point of stories. There are tales of dynasties holding their thrones (or trying to take back their thrones); tales of regicide and machinations; tales of usurpers. There are so many methods in the use of the royal ingredient in fantasy; and it has almost…almost become as common as magic (excluding urban fantasy).

Are there any fantasy books where there is no ruler somewhere in the story? Is it possible to have an epic fantasy without some element of the royal or imperial? I’m sure such books exist, but they are few (and I’m sorry to say that I cannot think of any at the moment).

I think the royal element tends to bring the grandeur scope of things into fantasy worlds. Palaces, castles, crowns, scepters, thrones, riches and servants, these are cool things (apart from magic). I just feel like a good fantasy would be amiss without some of these things in the mix.

The British folklore of King Arthur may have had influence on the genre—a legendary king mentored by a wizard (Merlin). Princesses and princes have been quite common in the fairytales of old; as well as kings and queens. Early fantasy novels like The Well at the World’s End by William Morris, published in 1896, and an influence to J.R.R. Tolkien and C.S. Lewis, contains characters of royalty; including Lord Dunsany’s novel, The King of Elfland’s Daughter.

I’ll leave this thought with you… Imagine A Song of Ice and Fire without the royalty ingredient. It would be more like the Hatfields and McCoys; which may be quite good, but it would lack the grandeur scope—lacking that epic scale.


RELATED POSTS: 
The Dragon Ingredient

Saturday, September 14, 2013

A Follow Up to The Dark and Gritty




A couple of months ago I posted about The Dark and Gritty in fantasy fiction; and I just found a post by bestselling author Elizabeth Moon on Orbit Books’ website that I feel gives an excellent illustration to the point I was trying to make.

Check out her post here.


RELATED POSTS: 
The Dark and Gritty

Saturday, September 7, 2013

George R.R. Martin vs J.R.R. Tolkien


For awhile now, there's been talk about George R.R. Martin being the next Tolkien (or the American Tolkien). But how can you even compare the two? Tolkien started the modern fantasy genre. Martin didn’t really start anything. People say that Martin brought in a new kind of fantasy—realistic and gritty. But Glen Cook started “realistic” and “gritty” fantasy over a decade before A Game of Thrones was published. Sure, Martin has produced deeper characterization and intrigue in his books, but I wouldn’t say that he started anything.

In my opinion, to compare Martin to Tolkien is not fair to both writers. First off, Tolkien is an inspiration to nearly all modern fantasy authors, Martin included. Tolkien has put the “epic” into fantasy, and set the mold. No one today, if ever, will be able to build the kind of detailed world that he did—and who has the degree and time to create their own language like Tolkien did? He spent decades on this stuff. His knowledge and time spent creating his world is in itself “epic” in scale. Tolkien gave the world a story that people of all types and ages could enjoy over and over through generations. It is set in stone as a classic, and recommended reading, even for those who do not read fantasy. The story of Middle-earth has been a source for academic purposes, and a tool for the craft of storytelling and world-building. The Hobbit and the Lord of the Rings is a world-wide literary phenomenon, that will continue to pass on to my children’s generation, and to their children, and their children’s children, and so forth.

Martin is a fantastic writer that has produced a good, gritty, graphic piece of fantasy fiction. A Song of Ice and Fire is a treat in modern fantasy, and is a trend-setter, but that’s about it. Like Twilight is to Paranormal Romance, or like Fifty Shades of Grey is to Erotica, or like Harry Potter is to YA Fantasy; A Song of Ice and Fire is to modern Epic Fantasy. That’s it. It has just become popular. Just because A Game of Thrones is hugely successful doesn’t make Martin out to be some great, groundbreaking writer of our time who will set the standard for a new genre. There’s no doubt that Martin has and will inspire a lot of new authors, but every great and popular author does that. It’s nothing new. A Song of Ice and Fire is not something that can be past along to one’s children; or is acceptable to many types of people like the Lord of the Rings.

So let Tolkien be Tolkien, and let Martin be Martin… Let the Lord of the Rings be the Lord of the Rings, and let A Song of Ice and Fire be A Song of Ice and Fire… And may I add, let A Song of Ice and Fire be completed some day (two more books to go, yet no end in sight). It’s not right to compare the two authors. Tolkien is of a whole other literary time and generation; and Martin has yet to complete his series, and has grown into huge success for only the past few years. He is still with us, and has not left a legacy of great, epic literary accomplishments.

Let’s put aside the comparisons between these two authors, because it just doesn’t work. Let’s enjoy the classic, and let’s enjoy the modern—and let’s enjoy the diverse fantasy genre.

RELATED POSTS: 

Saturday, August 24, 2013

The Wizard Ingredient


Magic is prevalent in fantasy fiction; and without it, fantasy does not exist. Mainly, magic is willed in the countless tales and books of fantasy by the likes of wizards, magicians, sorcerers, mages, druids, witches, and other types of characters. Wizard is the name mostly used in fantasy stories for a practitioner of magic (mostly male). Famous wizards in literature, such as Merlin, Gandalf and Harry Potter, have kept the wizard tradition alive and strong.

Traditionally, wizards have been depicted as tall, old and often bearded, in the likes of Merlin (Arthurian legend), Gandalf (Lord of the Rings), Allanon (Shannara Trilogy), and (beardless) Zedd (Wizard’s First Rule). However, the latest popular wizards like Harry Potter, Harry Dresden and Atticus O’Sullivan (The Iron Druid Chronicles) sport entirely more modern images.

Merlin is likely the most famous and most adapted of the wizards, spawned from Geoffrey of Monmouth’s 12TH century pseudo-history books, Historia Regum Britanniae; and later embellished by poet Robert de Boron, and many others afterward. From the original folklore, Merlin comes into being when an incubus (a demon in male form) impregnates a king’s daughter, which is why he has magic abilities. Robert de Boron’s version of Merlin’s story adds that Merlin’s mother has him baptized at birth, which liberates him from the power of Satan. Later tales formed the Merlin that we are accustomed to today—with him being the wizard advisor to King Arthur.

The wizards of Middle-earth are the Maiar, who were sent into creation by the (angelic) Valar to assist the elves and men of Middle-earth in contending with the dark lord, Sauron. Five wizards were sent, with Saruman the white as their chief. Gandalf the grey and Radagast the brown are the other two wizards that we are familiar with in Tolkien’s four books; but the “Blue Wizards”, Alatar and Pallando, are only mentioned in the Unfinished Tales edited by Christopher Tolkien.

Most other wizards in the genre do not hold such supernatural origins like the ones mentioned above. They’re generally people practicing the craft of magic, or inborn with the gift of it. Harry Potter had to become a student at Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry to learn his magic abilities, even though his parents were wizards, but were killed when he was a baby. Harry Dresden had a wizard for a mother and a magician for a father; and he used his abilities to do his detective work. Kvothe (from the Kingkiller Chronicle) is not your typical wizard, but holds similar abilities, especially in book two when he is caught up in a battle. He learns his abilities at the University with subjects like Sympathy (sympathetic magic), Naming (a type of magic), and Alchemy.

While the old stereotypes of wizards may be fading, there is certainly no lack of creativity in the modern form of the genre for magic users. Whether they’re good, bad or gray, wizards continue to go strong in fantasy; even in the height of Urban Fantasy, in the growth of Flintlock Fantasy, and in their long reign in High/Epic Fantasy.


RELATED POSTS: 
The Dragon Ingredient 

Tuesday, August 13, 2013

Mormon Fantasy Authors


It has been a long discussion and debate over the past several years in regards to the reason(s) of why so many Mormons are successful writers of Science Fiction and Fantasy. It’s even a long discussion among Mormons themselves; many giving their different theories and assertions.

Since this is a blog that mainly focuses on fantasy fiction, I will try not to go too far into other genres of speculative fiction where there are a good portion of Mormon authors; but I would certainly have to bring up the mega success of Stephenie Meyer’s paranormal romance series, The Twilight Saga. I’ve never read the books nor have I seen the films (and probably never will), but I have certainly seen the mania that swept the world for the past several years.  

Orson Scott Card is probably the most successful in the Science Fiction and Fantasy genres when it comes to his awards and accomplishments, starting in the mid-80’s with Ender’s Game—which has finally been made into a movie, and releasing in theaters this November.

Tracy Hickman is well known for his Dragonlance books, collaborating with Margaret Weis, and also has many other works of fantasy that he’s written.

Brandon Sanderson is another best-selling author of fantasy, praised for his Mistborn trilogy, and honored to be the one chosen to complete the ultra-popular Wheel of Time series by Robert Jordan.  

A Mormon author that is probably the most acclaimed amongst the others that write YA Fantasy is Brandon Mull, with his Fablehaven books, and his latest YA Fantasy series, Beyonders.   

Dave Wolverton is popular for many works in SciFi/Fantasy, as well as a few Star Wars novels; but he is also well-known for his Runelords series, which were published under his pen name, David Farland.

John Brown is the author of Servant of a Dark God, which was published through Tor, and was supposed to be a series, but due to some “differences” in regards to the project, Mr. Brown and Tor mutually terminated the contract. The other two books in The Dark God series will be published independently by Mr. Brown.   

Anne Perry is not a SciFi/Fantasy author, as she is entirely famous for her Victorian-era mystery novels (in which I personally enjoyed a few books in her Thomas Pitt series); however, she wrote two novels, Tathea and Come Armageddon, which were categorized as fantasy, but are really more of religious allegory.

The list of authors above, of course, doesn’t cover all the Mormon writers in genre fiction, but it gives us a view of the success and impression that these folks of the Mormon faith have on speculative fiction. Some say that it is due to their belief in Mormon theology that these Latter-day Saints tend to be drawn to write almost exclusively in speculative fiction—as they explore their beliefs and imaginations through fiction. Others say that it is the close-knit writing community that the Mormons have. Some say it’s both. When reading statements from Orson Scott Card and Brandon Sanderson, as well as other Mormon writers (published and not published), regarding this subject, everyone seems to have their own opinions. I’m not Mormon, so I dare not debate the reasons, but it makes a lot of sense to me that if you have a tight community of people who love genre fiction, and they have a large focus on writing and reading in their schools and universities, then it’s obvious that you will see a lot of writers come out of that circle. Keep in mind that these are authors producing pretty good fiction, and published by major houses; so the classes and writing workshops must be doing something right. There’s also a lot of support within the community. So when you have successful writers teaching, inspiring and supporting aspiring authors in the community, it makes fertile ground for more successful writers to sprout out of.

People say that there is a disproportion of SciFi/Fantasy writers that are of the Mormon faith, but I don’t really agree with that. Sure there are a lot of authors in the genre that are Mormon, but I would not say that they dominate the genre. There are still more authors who do not profess a religion or have a different belief system. The real dominating community in the genre is geeks (people who love fantasy and role-playing games).

The good thing about Mormon authors is that they are moral writers. I feel that the fantasy genre started off in the beginning with stories that encouraged morals. Today, that is missing in the genre, especially with the rise of dark and gritty fantasy and urban fantasy. You can pretty much rest assured that when you pickup a book by Tracy Hickman you’re not going to find scenes of sex or foul language. Even Stephenie Meyer’s Twilight series had the main character saving herself for marriage. Imagine if Laurell K Hamilton or Sherrilyn Kenyon had written the Twilight books; Bella would’ve been getting it on with the vampire and the werewolf—at the same time.

That’s the great thing about the fantasy genre: that folks of all walks of life and beliefs can write and read in the genre; and we all can enjoy multiple types of stories according to our tastes. Lovers of fantasy fiction are a community of their own, made up of many types of people.