Fantasy authors especially (I welcome all to read this)
claguire
wrote:
> Only a few fantasy authors have stood the test of time....
I think you are limiting what you consider to be fantasy. It is the
oldest and longest living form of fiction. For instance, I think
Shakespeare has stood the test of time pretty well. Ovid even better.
If you just go by what is stuck in the category markets, you aren't even
looking at all that the authors THERE are writing. (Also, fantasy, as a
separate category, stuck in with science fiction, is pretty new. You can
hardly say such authors hasn't stood the test of time, when they have only
been set apart for a single generation.) Many fantasy writers are put
everywhere, from the literary shelves, to mainstream, to children's
fiction. You'll see Harlan Ellison, Jane Yolen, Ursula LeGuin EVERYWHERE,
but not as heavily on the fantasy shelves as you might think. Since there
weren't fantasy shelves before these authors, I don't think you can really
complain when you have to look elsewhere for the fantasy writers from the
past.
As for what we should do; we write what we write. We don't have a duty to
our genre so much as a duty to our fiction. We write what we write the
best we can, and if that isn't something that lasts, well, that's too
bad. (Although, I believe that if we are true to our fiction, and master
our craft, it WILL be something worth keeping.)
Camille
Rick Waugh
>But what I'm
>urging everyone else to do is to write something that will stand the test
>of time. By fusing literary styles with our realms, we stand a chance of
>being accepted by the mainstream. Until then, we are just hacks.
>
>That was a condensation of about six weeks of bulletin boards. I got
>responses back saying that these styles "limit" the writer. I disagree, i
>think they free the writer and discipline him/her.
>Comments?
I think that you just need to write the best way you can. Piers Anthony
sells, though I don't know why.
I don't believe in conforming to anyone's styles, though. I try to create the
best story, the best characters, the best book that I can.
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Rick Waugh
rick_...@mindlink.bc.ca
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
TClark
replies, but I am still dumbfounded that no one can understand why I say
this. So anyway, here it is.
Only a few fantasy authors have stood the test of time. Everyone knows
the 'Big T' and he deserves all praise given to him, for the reason that
he made fantasy literary.
I know there are others out there, J. Branch Cabell, C.S. Lewis, but
there are very few of them. And when you look at todays market, all you
see is a bunch of hacks (Piers "How-many-Xanth-novels-can-i-plug-out"
Anthony, R.A. "Really Awful" Salvatore, etc.).
What I'm asking is that we, the authors of the future, look into putting
respect into the field by fusing literary styles (realism, modernism,
imagism, post-modernism) with the fantasy realms. Sci-fi has done it,
look at Neal Stephensons _Snow Crash_ and most of William Gibson's work.
I'm working on a fusion of modernism and fantasy, myself. But what I'm
urging everyone else to do is to write something that will stand the test
of time. By fusing literary styles with our realms, we stand a chance of
being accepted by the mainstream. Until then, we are just hacks.
That was a condensation of about six weeks of bulletin boards. I got
responses back saying that these styles "limit" the writer. I disagree, i
think they free the writer and discipline him/her.
Comments?
Travis Clark
claguire
wrote:
> I personally put these... <Harlan Ellison and Ray Bradbury>... under the
> category of science fiction. I worship Ray Bradbury and I live by his
> 'Zen & the Art of Writing' but he is the difinitive science fiction writer
> (that and Issac Asimov). I know science fiction and fantasy mesh,
> but they are two different genres.
Agreed that fantasy and sf are different genres (sf is a sub-category of
fantasy), and I can see how you would consider Bradbury to be an sf
author, although he has written a great deal of excellent fantasy.
Ellison, however, is definitely a fantasist (particularly when you take
into consideration all the things you are calling for us to use when
writing fantasy).
> Lastly, all fiction is fantasy, but I am genre-izing it because that is
> how the publishing field looks at it. Fantasy's (Big F) name implies the
> fantastic. This is just taking it to the extreme.
I don't think that all fiction is fantasy (in the way we are speaking
about it here). However, there is a looooonnng tradition of fantasy that
has existed within literature since the begining of, well, literature.
You mention a great many literary styles people should use to upgrade
their fantasy fiction. I think that people need to know more of the roots
of what they are writing. (For instance, those who are really into Magic
Realism really should read Ovid's Metamorphoses, and discover one of the
first of their kind.)
I also agree with you that the publishing industry has put certain books
on the fantasy shelves. But that's my point (and I think Melanie's point,
although I can't remember all she said); the publishing industry is
putting only certain things on the fantasy shelves. Those books that fit
the criteria you were talking about ARE out there, but they get put on
other shelves. The problem is not what we are writing, but what the world
is calling it. You can only change that by pointing out all the stuff
that is fantasy on the regular shelves.
Camille
Melanie Fogel
> Only a few fantasy authors
have stood the test of time... 'Big T'... J. Branch Cabell, C.S. Lewis,
but > there are very few of them.
Harlan Ellison, Ray Bradbury, etc. Not all fantasy has witches in it.
> What I'm asking is that we, the authors of the future, look into putting
> respect into the field by fusing literary styles (realism, modernism,
> imagism, post-modernism) with the fantasy realms... what I'm
> urging everyone else to do is to write something that will stand the test
> of time. By fusing literary styles with our realms, we stand a chance of
> being accepted by the mainstream. Until then, we are just hacks.
You're confusing form and content. Tell a good story in a way that people
want to read it and wait for time to catch up with you. Hamlet, A
Midsummer Night's Dream, Macbeth, etc. are fantasies by modern standards.
Nobody calls them that because they're snobs about the content. The form
is pretty standard.
Good writing is good writing. It doesn't matter what the genre, and
deliberately imposing some aesthetic won't make bad writing good writing.
Trying to write a style that doesn't suit you, that you may not even like,
is disaster. Good luck to you if you like writing "isms." Me, I prefer a
good read.
--
Melanie Fogel ai279
Writing & Editorial Services
TClark
>Harlan Ellison, Ray Bradbury, etc. Not all fantasy has witches in it.
>
I personally put these under the category of science fiction. I worship
Ray Bradbury and I live by his 'Zen & the Art of Writing' but he is the
difinitive science fiction writer (that and Issac Asimov). I know
science fiction and fantasy mesh, but they are two different genres.
>You're confusing form and content. Tell a good story in a way that people
>want to read it and wait for time to catch up with you. Hamlet, A
>Midsummer Night's Dream, Macbeth, etc. are fantasies by modern standards.
>Nobody calls them that because they're snobs about the content. The form
>is pretty standard.
>
>Good writing is good writing. It doesn't matter what the genre, and
>deliberately imposing some aesthetic won't make bad writing good writing.
>Trying to write a style that doesn't suit you, that you may not even like,
>is disaster. Good luck to you if you like writing "isms." Me, I prefer a
>good read.
>
I prefer a good read myself, and I don't consider those above 'snobs.'
But I consider a good read is an intelligent read, something that makes
me think. Again, if they weren't good reads they wouldn't have lasted as
long (Then again, look at Last of the Mohicans, <shiver>) as they have.
But I can't sit down and read a book that insults my intelligence, and
unfortunately writers today, especially Fantasy (notice the Big F)
writers have insulted me so much that I have almost quit. I still read
Saberhagen, Bradbury, and a few others religiously. I pick up new stuff
just to make sure I'm not missing anything, and usually I'm not.
For heaven's sake, if you don't like modernism don't write in
modernistic style. But most writers today are ignorant of these (imagism
and all the 'isms' you want), and blatantly ignore them. Again, if we
want to make sure that our work stands the test of time, we need to do
something drastic, because the hacks aren't hacking it.
Like Bradbury, I want to live forever. And he will, Farenheit 451 and
the Martian Chronicles are standards that should and will last until far
after I am gone. But to do so, I need to make mine literary.
I think people would actually enjoy writing in the 'isms' if they
understood them. There's a reason why T.S. Eliot is the influence of
every Poet today, and that's because he was the master of modernism.
Study modernism and you may enjoy it. Or study imagism, romanticism,
etc. Then say no.
Lastly, all fiction is fantasy, but I am genre-izing it because that is
how the publishing field looks at it. Fantasy's (Big F) name implies the
fantastic. This is just taking it to the extreme.
I am sure you will be hearing from me later,
Travis Clark
P.S. Sean Stewart's Passion Play and Ressurection Man - both good books
and both Post-Modern.
Rick Waugh
>>Harlan Ellison, Ray Bradbury, etc. Not all fantasy has witches in it.
>>
>I personally put these under the category of science fiction. I worship
>Ray Bradbury and I live by his 'Zen & the Art of Writing' but he is the
>difinitive science fiction writer (that and Issac Asimov). I know
>science fiction and fantasy mesh, but they are two different genres.
>
Something Wicked This Way Comes is fantasy/horror novel.... and a magnificent
one at that. One of the best examples of a surreal child-like nightmare every
done....
Rick Waugh
>I don't think that all fiction is fantasy (in the way we are speaking
>about it here). However, there is a looooonnng tradition of fantasy that
>has existed within literature since the begining of, well, literature.
>You mention a great many literary styles people should use to upgrade
>their fantasy fiction. I think that people need to know more of the roots
>of what they are writing. (For instance, those who are really into Magic
>Realism really should read Ovid's Metamorphoses, and discover one of the
>first of their kind.)
>
century Irish writer, who wrote absolutely beautiful short stories and
novels, that would fit into any fantasy book shelf now.
When Ballantyne had their adult fantasy series, (late 60s, early 70s,) they
repackaged his stories in a number of collections. The first was called 'At
the Edge of the World', and it was lovely. The imagery puts to shame most
modern fantasy writers. He also wrote a number of novels, my two favourites
being 'The King of Elfland's Daughter', and 'Don Rodriguez, the Chronicles of
Shadow Valley.'
Let us not forget Clark Ashton Smith, who was one of the first writers of
what you'd call dark fantasy, or H.P. Lovecraft, who not only wrote
horror/fantasy, but some lovely dream like books and stories. The best of the
these was 'The Dream Quest of Unknown Kadath.'
A little earlier than all of these was George MacDonald, a Scottish
children's book writer, who wrote 'Lilith', and 'Phantastes,' both gorgeous
works.
All worth reading if you want to see some decent writing, and find out where
all the things that are being published today came from. Much of the work
that is on our shelves now seems *very* formulaic compared to these.
But that's the same with all writing, especially genre writing. There are
good things being published. Sometimes you just have to wade through a few
thousand pages of uninspired work to find it.
Hound of Cullen
(Rick Waugh) wrote:
:Has anyone read any of Lord Dunsany's fantasy work? He was a turn of the
:century Irish writer, who wrote absolutely beautiful short stories and
:novels, that would fit into any fantasy book shelf now.
Oooh, yes! Dover has a collection of his best short fiction, including
"The Sword of Welleran" (which is one of my favorite short stories).
Occasionally, his shorts are included in some new fantasy anthology, but
he's becoming increasingly hard to find (which is a tragedy). I _think
the Dover collection is still available.
:Let us not forget Clark Ashton Smith, who was one of the first writers of
:what you'd call dark fantasy, or H.P. Lovecraft, who not only wrote
:horror/fantasy, but some lovely dream like books and stories. The best of the
:these was 'The Dream Quest of Unknown Kadath.'
It's funny you should mention Lovecraft's dreamlands stories in the same
post where you mention Dunsany. Lovecraft was a big fan of Dunsany, and
his dreamland stories were greatly inspired by Dunsany's works.
Chaosium, the game publisher, has been releasing a series of books about
Lovecraft's Cthulhu mythos. The best of them explore the development of
HPL's critters, including stories Lovecraft was known to have read. The
introductions trace the development, pointing out references throughout
Lovecraft's writing. The best of these is "The Hastur Cycle". (the others
suffer from bad writing and poor editorial choices).
I'd also like to recommend "The King In Yellow" by Robert Chambers. It is
a collection of short stories, some of them quite remarkable, written
around the turn of the century.
If you haven't read Mervyn Peake's "Gormenghast" trilogy, you've missed
one of the best sets of fantasy books written. (I hear the BBC did a
radio-play version a few years back. I'd _love a copy...).
Manley Wade Wellman's "Silver John" stories and novels (which I've
recommended before) are wonderful modern fantasies based on folklore and
legends of the Ozarks and southern Appalachia.
As others have said, there is a great deal of powerful, innovative fantasy
out there, you just have to go beyond the "fantasy" shelf at your local
Waldenbooks.
Check used bookstores, SF/F bookstores, and Science Fiction Conventions
for more obscure titles that are worth reading.
Hound
TrinaL1
> There's a reason why T.S. Eliot is the influence of
>every Poet today, and that's because he was the master of modernism.
T.S. Eliot is "the influence of every Poet today"? According to whom? And
why do people keep insisting on categorizing everything that's ever been
written? If you want to follow a particular style, go ahead. But please
don't be telling other people how they should be writing.
Locke Breaux
style one can write in seems a bit disingenuous to me. I can see how we,
for sake of simplicity, may refer to "literary" as a genre, but I also
think that literary refers to a certain quality that an author's work has
that's the result of that particular author's native ability, something
new or profound or whatever it is which stands out and causes people to
cherish and reproduce his or her works for years and hundreds of years.
This is an evanescent yet real quality that authors' contemporaries quite
often miss when deciding what's literary and what's not. I think that
before we bandy about these terms it's sometimes important to step back
and see exactly what it is we're talking about. My point is that
"literary" has a more profound meaning and existence than as a genre,
which we as individuals have little or no control over. What that has to
do with something called fantasy, or science fiction, or black fiction,
or women's fiction, or Madagascar Neojournal Bark Shuffling, I have no
idea.