Oh, I know, in the last post I sounded all cranky and boo hiss. But really, I love reading epic fantasy, heroic fantasy, the old, ruin laced adventures of travelers searching for treasure amongst fallen civilizations. Always good, always fun, when done well or interesting. Problem is, there is only so much you can do to keep it well or interesting without turning to experimentalism, modernism and etc.
I think that’s why I’m really liking Charles Coleman Finlay’s shorts as well some others that push and change and try new things with the whole classical setups. And I think that’s why this whole “snobbery versus Conan crush skull” argument sets my teeth on edge. It’s not snobbery, period, because if you ask any genre author if they like the old stuff, Lieber and Howard and Vance and etc, they will say yes, yes, yes. Hell, there was a Vance tribute anthology coming out for whoopiesake! But besidethepoint and all the rest.
That’s why I’m (hesitantly) excited about Beneath Ceaseless Skies. It has the potential to be interesting. Potential. For awhile I’ve often thought of creating a similar themed anthology or magazine, where writers take classical, secondary world fantasy, and then push it into new extremes, poke at it, prod it. Smash it between their fingers into a small little thing, eat it, digest it, throw it on the wall and see what sticks and what’s shit. Hah. But do something interesting with it, something new with it.
It would be for writers of ye olde phanstica that also enjoyed reading Epic Pooh. Writers who have read Dunsany and the original translations of countless folk lore and fairy tales (1,001 nights, grim’s, calvino’s itilian tales, ete, etc etc) who take things someplace new and interesting. Not people tied to video games, with no knowledge of history of the genre, who would just repeat, repeat, repeat, their little quests they’ve played with controller or dice in hand, not knowing what their repetitions represent.
I’m trying something new, something combined with my Raven’s Cycle Stories. I’m not sure what I’m doing just yet. It’s definately different from what I normally write, and its definitely good. We’ll see, as they say, we’ll see.
“We will fight with all our might the fanatical, senseless and snobbish religion of the past … We rebel against that spineless worshipping of old canvases, old statues and old bric-a-brac, against everything which is filthy and worm-ridden and corroded by time. We consider the habitual contempt for everything which is young, new and burning with life to be unjust and even criminal.”
– F.T. Marinetti
It just struck me how a proper Futurist would want to destroy participants on both sides of this argument, based on the way you’ve positioned it here. Not that the Futurists have (or had, now that they are more or less history themselves) any special authority, but in trying to demonstrate non-snobbery you may be trapping yourself.
Bah, doesn’t matter to me. Futurists are things of the past, relics, no better than Nostradamus and Dadaists, their concept of revolution has become stale anyway. I’m not saying I’m not a snob, I’m just saying that people who want a certain kind of fantasy fiction they write to be published are very quick to call everyone snobs who don’t publish them.
It’s the old literary versus populism debate that rears its ugly head almost every week since the New Wave throw bricks into the stained glass windows at the church of Space Opera. And it seems to crop up more and more constantly now that there is an internet.
Problem is, the argument relies on two things- supposing a snobbery onto someone just because they don’t eat whatever junk food of literature that are passed to them, and assuming that what they consider popular actually is. Usually, both accounts are wrong.
But you have set up a rule of valuation, and that becomes an easy thing to rebel against.
“In order for something to be good, it must be rooted in history.” At the same time, you’re dismissive of the modern experience of the majority of your potential readers.
Sounds like a formula for clever, irrelevant fiction to me. And safe, too, given the unassailable stature of its foundation, and the protective layer of sacred history. Even if the cleverness fails, you can always fall back on the richness and variety of its sources to show its value, right?
New feet treading old ground can be just as entertaining as old feet (which yours become when you cover them with Dunsany moccasins) treading new. In fact, these days I might be more interested in reading someone whose worldview is informed by ChronoTrigger than by Grimm.
Given the poor ratio of quality to crap that the human race has managed over the years, there’s probably even still value in old feet treading old ground, if it’s done exceptionally well.
And as for the dadaists … the postmodern freedoms and the back-sliding conventionality that we’re free to self-consciously engage in owe much to them and those like them. Futurism was cute until it turned fascist, and only relevant here to highlight an alternative to the closed system of either/or that you objected to in one post and were complicit with in the next.
We can all agree, however, that unpublished authors who feel victimized and entitled should never be trusted, and their opinions always doubted.
I’m going to keep this as un-personal of an “attack” as I can, and I expect you to do the same.
First of all, this struck me, as a soon-to-be-published author, as a desperate attempt to feel superior:
“We can all agree, however, that unpublished authors who feel victimized and entitled should never be trusted, and their opinions always doubted.”
Second of all, have you noticed that the heroic fantasy epics–Harry Potter, LOTR, Artemis Fowl, Star Wars and other space opera books–have all been wildly successful? I talked to someone @ work about this and he agrees that cliched heroic fantasy (a la Warcraft) is more appealing to him, as a simple factory worker (does that immediately discount him?) than magic realism and literary fiction. I am 100% populist. I believe in entertaining people more than expecting them to grasp arcane concepts. I love the past more than the present, and find the “modern experience” heartless, dull and incredibly unsatisfying. The success of the epic fantasies proves that it IS popular. The magazines are just desperately trying to be “in style” and “cool,” worried about their appearances with the head honchos (“The Man” of the writing world). I love what I see, as a reader more than a writer, in small-press sword n’ sorcery mags, far more than established fantasy magazines. I’d prefer a brainless Conan tale to some souped-up pretensious tale with no plot any day.
Now, I’m going to brace for wild hyena flame attack.
Three Oranges-
“But you have set up a rule of valuation, and that becomes an easy thing to rebel against. ”
Hell yes! Rebel! I might even rebel against it myself at some point in time. People should rebel. Revolution, counter thinking, whatever, just so long as there is no stagnation. Also, again, I’m not listing any sort of proscriptive list of what is good and bad, I’m just listing and saying.
“In order for something to be good, it must be rooted in history.”
A knowledge of history as a writer is important (and by history, I mean history of other fictions and other like fictions) – it’s the same reason as a painter you study the classics, and the same with architecture. You can’t rebel against a structure if you don’t know what that structure is, or why it exists, or what you’re rebelling against.
In other words- know your enemy. Fiction is political.
“Sounds like a formula for clever, irrelevant fiction to me. And safe, too, given the unassailable stature of its foundation, and the protective layer of sacred history. Even if the cleverness fails, you can always fall back on the richness and variety of its sources to show its value, right?”
You’re completely missing what I’m talking about.
“New feet treading old ground can be just as entertaining as old feet (which yours become when you cover them with Dunsany moccasins) treading new. In fact, these days I might be more interested in reading someone whose worldview is informed by ChronoTrigger than by Grimm.”
And I bet their work will be derivitive crap, that reads like a video game. But, I bet they could make a cool video game? Although, probably not. My woldview is informed both by ChronoTrigger and Grimm, always have been. I used to write console style RPG’s in C++ code for fun. If you want, some day I can show them to you.
I’m all for cross-pollination. But at the same time, if that person just plays a handful of video games and then says, “I want to write a fantasy novel” I bet you there novel will suck. It will suck suck suckity suck. Just like if that kid sat down to make a video game, and all he played was Chrono Trigger, and hadn’t played, Oh I dunno, the old Ultima games, Dragon Warrior, etc that preceded it and led up to make Chrono Trigger what it was.
The history of an art is important to those who practice said art, ESPECIALLY those who rebel against it. It’s got nothing to do with a veil of secrecy and everything to do with skill. Skill is developed by consuming, studying and working on said practice. If you just wander in and jot something down, there is a small possibility it could be genius, but a larger possibility it will be crap.
“And as for the dadaists … the postmodern freedoms and the back-sliding conventionality that we’re free to self-consciously engage in owe much to them and those like them.”
Speak for yourself, I’m not a postmodernist at all In fact, I could consider myself, if anything, a dadaist or a surrealist. But I’m neither, not really, could neither be, because both are artifacts of their time period, and their revolutions won’t work now because our time is different, our history is different, our rebellions are different and our revolutions are different.
“We can all agree, however, that unpublished authors who feel victimized and entitled should never be trusted, and their opinions always doubted.”
Yup.
AC (Anonymous Coward? Come now, this is my personal blog. Use a real name, please)-
“First of all, this struck me, as a soon-to-be-published author, as a desperate attempt to feel superior”
I guess it’s because it made you feel inferior? Still, advice from a novice isn’t advice, it’s guess work. Duh. Unless you’re a prodigy, but even then, a prodigy’s first works are they least impressive.
“Second of all, have you noticed that the heroic fantasy epics–Harry Potter, LOTR, Artemis Fowl, Star Wars and other space opera books–have all been wildly successful?”
Not as successful as Romance Novels. Also- I bet most people would read that list and thought you were talking about movies. I bet 10% of the people that watched LOTR had read the book, if that. Wildly successful? Star Wars is the only Space Opera you list. Do you consider LensMen wildly successful? How about Ender’s Game? In the long run, Romance outsells any of those, hands down. By using this populist method of quality, why write or read anything but Romance books?
“I talked to someone @ work about this and he agrees that cliched heroic fantasy (a la Warcraft) is more appealing to him, as a simple factory worker (does that immediately discount him?) than magic realism and literary fiction.”
Yes, but does he read. 90% of the population doesn’t even read. If you ask that 90% they will compare what they think they could like reading compared against what movies and video games they like to play. Your simple factory worker, sadly, is not the target audience for almost any form of fiction. Fiction is geared towards middle class, college educated people. It’s a sad fact, but there is a reason for it. They’re the ones who buy it. Also, 10% of the US population is still a huge HUGE huge ass number.
“I am 100% populist. I believe in entertaining people more than expecting them to grasp arcane concepts.”
Um, arcane like what? Oh, if you mean like Post Modern techniques, you better not tell me you like Lieber. or Robert E. Howard. or Micheal Moorcock. Because you will easily, and quickly make yourself into a liar.
“I love the past more than the present, and find the “modern experience” heartless, dull and incredibly unsatisfying. ”
That is, then, your personal opinion. That doesn’t make for an argument at all.
“The success of the epic fantasies proves that it IS popular.”
So, you consider selling 5% of 10% hugely popular? I don’t. If you want popular, read romance.
“The magazines are just desperately trying to be “in style” and “cool,” worried about their appearances with the head honchos (”The Man” of the writing world).”
Dude, “The Man”, by DEFINITION is the populist persona. That is what makes it the man. And how can you know what the editors of these magazines are even thinking? You don’t even read them. I can tell right away.
“I love what I see, as a reader more than a writer, in small-press sword n’ sorcery mags”I love what I see, as a reader more than a writer, in small-press sword n’ sorcery mags”
Oh, so you’re a writer for Flashing Swords then, eh? I’ve heard this argument before, from the same crowd. If you’re not a writer for them, you want to be one so badly it hurts, and love sucking up. but how well is it selling? How well are any of these (non-existent) sword n sorcery mags selling? If they really are “populist” they would be selling at least the same amount as the big three, don’t you think?
“I’d prefer a brainless Conan tale to some souped-up pretensious tale with no plot any day.”
You have no idea what you’re talking about, do you? If you did, you wouldn’t consider Conan brain dead. That’s very insulting.
See? This is the exact same thing I was talking about in my other post. Stop it. Just stop it. You’re making a fool out of yourself and out of anyone else who repeats this clap trap. These are political lies, poor ones, and they don’t match actual numbers of sales, data, or anything else. You don’t read anyone but your cronies, and maybe a few smatterings of what they tell you to read.
“You’re completely missing what I’m talking about.”
Nuh-uh.
Remember the Water Willy? He sits in the middle of a group of kids spraying water all around. The Water Willy is your history. It sprays its influences and sources all around, and the writers play in like children. The unimagitive cliché-o-philes just plop themselves down and let it hit them in the face. The merely creative and competent scamper about having some genuinely enjoyable fun. You and yours perform some impressive acrobatics, perhaps pick up the Water Willy and direct its gushing tentacles in unnatural and unexpected way, or craft entirely new games to play amongst the spray.
Then the neighbor kid peeks over the fence with his homemade SuperSoaker and blasts your ass, knocking you into your history puddle.
What’s great about this analogy is that enables me to completely avoid offering concrete examples.
“You can’t rebel against a structure if you don’t know what that structure is, or why it exists, or what you’re rebelling against.”
That’s actually my point. The rebel is by defined by his oppressor, and so work created in a spirit of pure rebellion is inherently limited. Likewise, and author who drives toward the new and is too thoroughly educated in the old has burdened himself from the outset with baggage his own choosing, voluntarily adorning shackles so he can break them.
This leads to a lot of cleverness that no matter how well-executed or powerfully written, really doesn’t elicit much more of a response than “I see what you did there.” It responds to or perhaps subverts the canon, while still being far too accepting of the idea of a canon in the first place.
“But at the same time, if that person just plays a handful of video games and then says, “I want to write a fantasy novel” I bet you there novel will suck. It will suck suck suckity suck. ”
That’s true of most other people, too. Including the well-read people.
In all this discussion about conventionality, I’m annoyed that I haven’t had the opportunity to take a shot at David Eddings. Seriously, what a jerk.
I think I’m not conveying it correctly until this exact moment, and here’s what I mean:
In order to be a great writer you need to LOVE IT. You need to love every inch and thing and burning piece of word, you need to love books, every piece of book, every age of book, every tasty piece of book. You need to chew on words, swallow them spit them out. Suck on the spines of discarded library love, put knife and fork through textual machinations of Machiavelli and Proust. To be a genre writer you need to love it, love genre, love all those old dusty retro futuristic tomes, love every spaceship blasted, every troll kicked in, every single article of lambas fucking bread in the world, every made up city, every burned and battled war in space and beyond, everything that is part of it, part of the architecture of this world
in this love comes the skill. Without it, there is no skill. There is no reason. Not with writing. Writing is such a pointless task that it requires a burning, breaking, heart singing love. For it to be done great, good, amazing. I’m not talking about recycling here.
Look, see above? I said that I wanted this anthology/magazine (notice its still hypothetical, nyar!) that they loved reading these works- NOT imitating them. not playing with the structure. Only that they devoured, and in their devouring, loved them.
I agree w/ Paul, in his last post, for what it’s worth. In order to be a writer you have to love it.