SciFi and Fantasy Book Club discussion
Members' Chat
>
Putting Books In Boxes: The Genre Wars
Chris wrote: "I think it's a mistake to look only at a book itself when considering classification. Readers, authors, and publishers have formed loose communities around various kinds of fiction. A book builds on the shoulders of giants, but which giants may not obvious from a blurb. Genre-SF authors may assume that many of their readers are familiar with Heinlein and Asimov, whereas literary authors may be alluding to Proust and Joyce. The SF community has adopted George Orwell for Nineteen Eighty-Four and Animal Farm, but he was first and foremost a political writer, who happened to use some science fiction and fantasy devices in a couple of books."
Pretty much exactly this.
The only disagreement I have with this is, I would say is that those loose communities are a lot more firm than you would think, often to the point of people being blissfully unaware of them.
I feel it's often more descriptive to describe what they are pulling from instead of trying to place it in a much larger box.
CBRetriever wrote: "it hurt the music industry. When I was growing up, Rock included: funk, soul, heavy metal, folk, blues rock, country rock, and even the precursor to rap. And everyone was exposed to many different ..."No, she was actually blaming the Beatles.
She wasn’t saying, “Everyone is trying to imitate the popular Beatles,” she was insisting that they had somehow forced everyone to buy their records, forced other bands to sound like them, forced record companies to release those records.
It was the most insane bathsit conspiracy theory I’ve ever heard. That was hardly the only bizarro thing she believed in. She was a total tin hat nutter.
(She also failed me for daring to disagree with her craziness. I had to petition the school to get my grade changed. They changed it to an A. She was not invited back.)
I, personally, think the Beatles are a bit over-rated... but I'm not sure I'd blame them for anything aside from popularizing bad haircuts. ^_^
Donald wrote: "Ok, I obviously misunderstood the ambiguity in your original post. "You only say that because you haven't experienced it" came across as suggesting I hadn't experienced my expressed preference so I explained why. Given your reaction I'm guessing you actually meant I hadn't experienced your local library, in which case I completely agree I haven't been to whereever that is.It really is a nightmare and I've never experienced anything like it in my life. And I am a library lover. I'd BE a librarian if I had have been smart enough to take IS in college.
I am confused about books that are set in what looks like the usual high fantasy world, but there are absolutely not fantastical elements whatsoever. Namely, The Winner's Curse and Captive Prince. They are both more political romance. And its not just that the magic isnt a big part of it, there is no magic at all, or characters besides humans, or any unearthly creatures. They seem more like historical fiction, but they are most definitely not set on earth. Is there a sub-genre for that? Or is that just lazy fantasy?
Rebecca ♥ Warner, Kishan, Magnus ♥ wrote: "I am confused about books that are set in what looks like the usual high fantasy world, but there are absolutely not fantastical elements whatsoever. Namely, The Winner's Curse and ..."From looking at the blurbs, it's not technically fantasy, it's Romance, sub-genre fantasy, sub-genre non-con (the other looks like Romance/YA/Fantasy). But having magic isn't required for Fantasy, just creating your own universe.
MrsJoseph wrote: "Rebecca ♥ Warner, Kishan, Magnus ♥ wrote: "I am confused about books that are set in what looks like the usual high fantasy world, but there are absolutely not fantastical elements whatsoever. Name..."Would they qualify as high fantasy? Since they have a unique setting my mind automatically goes to high fantasy, but the next thing I would usually look for to categorize a HF would be its own world rules, but there are none. Is setting alone enough for that, or would you just use the fantasy umbrella and call it a day? I don't know why I am obsessed with genre subtleties but I always have to make sure everything is labeled correctly, even if just for my own shelves.
Well, I wouldn't classify it as fantasy to begin with. I'd classify them both as Romance.
MrsJoseph wrote: "Well, I wouldn't classify it as fantasy to begin with. I'd classify them both as Romance."Romance is clear, its the setting and world I'm confused about. Romance can happen in any world. If I were to tell someone, this book is a romance, they would probably imagine a contemporary in their mind. It doesnt give them the full picture.
Mod
Romance
-Fantasy
rather than
Fantasy
-Romance
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romanti...
Rebecca ♥ Warner, Kishan, Magnus ♥ wrote: "Romance is clear, its the setting and world I'm confused about. Romance can happen in any world. If I were to tell someone, this book is a romance, they would probably imagine a contemporary in their mind. It doesnt give them the full picture. "Romance, as a genre, is not typically in a contemporary setting. I grew up on historicals (bodice rippers) and HPs (contemp). Contemporary is simply a type of romance - so if the person you recommended the book to is expecting Contemporary, they just are not familiar with Romance as a genre.
Romance does not have as many requirements as some other genres. Setting of time/place/space are incidental and only required to fit in the subgenre.
Example: Ilona Andrews mostly writes Fantasy: Urban; Romance. The primary genre is Fantasy and she prefers an Urban setting but she adds a decent amount of romance as well. Her most well known series - Kate Daniels - fits this profile. It is NOT a Romance and thus has to adhere to Fantasy standards.
She actually wrote two Romance series: The Edge and Hidden Legacy. Those series still fit her typical profile but she increased the romance content to the point it became Romance. The major requirement for Romance genre is that the romantic relationship is the center of the story - meaning that without the relationship, the story falls apart.
The books you are concerned about are not primarily Fantasy and just take on the subgenre fantasy due to the setting.
I understand all that. I read a bit of everything and I think that's part of why I like to be clear about all the labels I can apply to a book. And its not just these books I am concerned with. They are the only examples I have come across so far. But if there was a book set in this type of world with no romance, I would still want to know. The fact that they are both romance has no bearing on my question. But I can just move on. I dont think I am going to get the kind of answer I was looking for. I will just put them under the fantasy umbrella.
Mod
Oh, I see. Sorry, going that granular is hard to hypothesize about. For me, I'd call one with romance front and center romance fantasy, and one about political intrigue/mystery/life in a secondary world something like "secondary world mystery/thriller). I think *technically* you're right that they could all be cast under high fantasy, but I only classify high fantasy if it does have those internal rules you were mentioning. I need *something* I couldn't find on Earth to classify it high fantasy.
Rebecca ♥ Warner, Kishan, Magnus ♥ wrote: "I understand all that. I read a bit of everything and I think that's part of why I like to be clear about all the labels I can apply to a book. And its not just these books I am concerned with. The..."What Allison said is correct: I would classify these books as subsets of Romance and not fantasy.
I get what you are saying but you will have to draw your own lines.
For Captive Prince - its easy:
Romance -> M/m -> non-con -> fantasy ->political
This book is a Male/male romance that is specifically non-consensual. That is the most important part. The book becomes subset fantasy due to the setting. There may be no magic (I cannot say as I will never read it due to non-con) but there are non-human characters who are not "aliens." That puts the setting squarely in Fantasy. If you want to be more specific, I'd say Low Fantasy, not High Fantasy.
ETA: Do you see how far away I place fantasy as a subgenre from what I denote as the primary genre: Romance?
Allison wrote: "Rebecca ♥ Warner, Kishan, Magnus ♥ wrote: "I understand all that. I read a bit of everything and I think that's part of why I like to be clear about all the labels I can apply to a book. And its no..."Thanks. I guess it’s really up to me. 😂
Is dystopian a sub genre of sci first? what are major sci first tropes?
MrsJoseph wrote: "Rebecca ♥ Warner, Kishan, Magnus ♥ wrote: "I understand all that. I read a bit of everything and I think that's part of why I like to be clear about all the labels I can apply to a book. And its no..."It makes sense. But I love fantasy and romance separately, so when they are put together I love them even more and I can still focus a lot on the fantasy of a romance book and see it as a fantasy. Even if it’s not the most original. When I was looking up some stuff recently to help me with this question I came across an article that was talking about how ridiculous YA fantasy romance, such as books by Sarah J Mass, are. And I can see it’s not for everyone, but I don’t read it just for the romance. The romance is like the gravy for me. Not that I think you were saying that. Anyway I’ve vered off track.
Also I’ve read the Captive Prince trilogy, and it’s not non-con. It’s certainly going on. Slavery is quite prevalent in their world. But between the two main characters in the romance, there is no non-con at all, or even dub-con.
Ikechukwu wrote: "Is dystopian a sub genre of sci first? what are major sci first tropes?"I would need to see the blurb to say if SF or not. Dystopian, alone, simply is the opposite of a Utopia.
SF needs science to be SF. Without science being integral to the story, it's probably fantasy.
Ikechukwu wrote: "Is dystopian a sub genre of sci first? what are major sci first tropes?"Dystopians are usually depicted as a futuristic fall, so advanced technology is involved. But it’s not a must.
Rebecca ♥ Warner, Kishan, Magnus ♥ wrote: "Ikechukwu wrote: "Is dystopian a sub genre of sci first? what are major sci first tropes?"Dystopians are usually depicted as a futuristic fall, so advanced technology is involved. But it’s not a ..."
The weirdest one for me is that Sword of Shananara or whatever its called. It appeared to be the fantasy future of a previously technologically advanced world. BUt omg so boring!
MrsJoseph wrote: "Rebecca ♥ Warner, Kishan, Magnus ♥ wrote: "Ikechukwu wrote: "Is dystopian a sub genre of sci first? what are major sci first tropes?"Dystopians are usually depicted as a futuristic fall, so advan..."
Haha, I have not read that one but I saw the pilot of the show and realize that it could technically be called a post/apocalyptic. But no, I would just call it a fantasy. I agree, that is weird. Now I see what you mean about not really wanting to call those books fantasy. 😂 It’s just too far off from what the focus should be.
Rebecca ♥ Warner, Kishan, Magnus ♥ wrote: "I am confused about books that are set in what looks like the usual high fantasy world, but there are absolutely not fantastical elements whatsoever. Namely, The Winner's Curse and ...""High fantasy is defined as fantasy set in an alternative, fictional ("secondary") world, rather than "the real", or "primary" world.The secondary world is usually internally consistent, but its rules differ from those of the primary world. By contrast, low fantasy is characterized by being set in the primary, or "real" world, or a rational and familiar fictional world, with the inclusion of magical elements"
A lot of Sword and Sorcery books fall into this category even if they lack the Sorcery part of the equation
CBRetriever wrote: "Rebecca ♥ Warner, Kishan, Magnus ♥ wrote: "I am confused about books that are set in what looks like the usual high fantasy world, but there are absolutely not fantastical elements whatsoever. Name..."Yeah, I always saw Sword and Sorcery as a specific type of story that can be told in that kind of world. I’ve seen different definitions of high fantasy (although the above one is the most common since it’s from Wikipedia), but I tend to think of it more as a setting. As opposed to epic fantasy, which indicates the type of story and setting. But that’s just me.
Rebecca ♥ Warner, Kishan, Magnus ♥ wrote: "Also I’ve read the Captive Prince trilogy, and it’s not non-con. It’s certainly going on. Slavery is quite prevalent in their world. But between the two main characters in the romance, there is no non-con at all, or even dub-con."I'm still going to 100% avoid it. From what I've read, one hero tries to break the other before they get emotionally. That is waaaaaay beyond my comfort zone - I'm not into the whole slavery thing and don't believe that slaves can consent*. And that's long before we get into the child sex slave...
NOPE! Not for me.
*I think that the voluntary master/mistress - slave thing is different because the "slave" is voluntary and can get out of the situation whenever they want.
MrsJoseph wrote: "Rebecca ♥ Warner, Kishan, Magnus ♥ wrote: "Also I’ve read the Captive Prince trilogy, and it’s not non-con. It’s certainly going on. Slavery is quite prevalent in their world. But between the two m..."I totally understand. It’s dark stuff. They have a very complicated relationship. But I love books that push me to my emotional limits. I don’t recall one man trying to break the other, but they are both very intelligent men who don’t know who to trust so I’m sure there was some testing done on both their parts before they could be emotional, or physical, with each other. It was actually the slave that was the more dominant of the two, and the master had been sexually abused as a child and was essentially a virgin, so he certainly wasn’t going to jump into anything. It’s one of the darkest and most disturbing books I’ve ever read. Personally that just makes the outcome, the happy ending, all the more rewarding. But none of that would matter for the wrong audience.
Rebecca ♥ Warner, Kishan, Magnus ♥ wrote: "MrsJoseph wrote: "Rebecca ♥ Warner, Kishan, Magnus ♥ wrote: "Also I’ve read the Captive Prince trilogy, and it’s not non-con. It’s certainly going on. Slavery is quite prevalent in their world. But..."Yep. It would be wasted on me. I don't do dark/GrimDark/etc. That yella streak down my back ain't decoration.
Hmmm I’m in the camp of forced oral sex is still rape myself
Rachel wrote: "Hmmm I’m in the camp of forced oral sex is still rape myself"I would agree. Does that occur?
MrsJoseph wrote: "Rachel wrote: "Hmmm I’m in the camp of forced oral sex is still rape myself"I would agree. Does that occur?"
Rachel wrote: "Hmmm I’m in the camp of forced oral sex is still rape myself"
Yes , there was a scene where another slave was forced to perform oral sex on the main slave character if I remember correctly. I suppose you are right. That should count as non-con, even between the two MCs since the master was complicit. I dont remember, but I dont think it was his idea since he was somewhat averse to sex at this point, although he didn't stop it. I forgot about that. But we don’t have to get into any more details about this book in the wrong forum. 😬
Oh yeah , sorry, I meant it more as s warning for anyone who might be reading this thread and reading the book
Rachel wrote: "Oh yeah , sorry, I meant it more as s warning for anyone who might be reading this thread and reading the book"Sorry, maybe I got carried away with the TMI. 😛 I just enjoy talking and the books. Even if just about why someone wouldn’t like it.
Ikechukwu wrote: "Is dystopian a sub genre of sci first? what are major sci first tropes?"Dystopia is not necessarily science fiction story, because, like utopias, dystopias could be told as a traveler's tale.
Not so much nowadays because of the lack of map space to put them in. So usually they fall in SF.
I struggle with the historical fantasy definition.To be classified as historical, must there be some facts that match our history? Or is it meant simply to say there's no modern technology?
Ken Follett (which isn't fantasy) writes clear historical fiction. Does that mean historical fantasy simply adds magical elements to his types of novels, like Diana Gabaldon does with her Outlander series?
Does the book have to be set and be accurate to an historical time period? Logically, magical elements make technology evolve differently so I would accept an historical fantasy book that wasn't accurate to a time period but would it be classified properly? If it's not classified properly, what genre does that make it?
I think historical fantasy would be putting magic into known history
Rebecca ♥ Warner, Kishan, Magnus ♥ wrote: "I am confused about books that are set in what looks like the usual high fantasy world, but there are absolutely not fantastical elements whatsoever. Namely, The Winner's Curse and Captive Prince..."I don’t think there’s a name for this genre yet. It’s clearly a Secondary World, but without the supernatural element it’s not a Fantasy. I’m not sure what to call it. Imaginary History, maybe? IDK
I’ve seen this sort of thing more recently, so it definitely feels like a trend. The fact that this burgeoning style doesn’t have a name isn’t a big deal, as that’s how all genres work. Urban Fantasy existed for well over 15 years before that name was coined. Mystery had an even longer period without a name, and SF was around in its modern recognizable form for nearly a century before anyone tried to name it, and even then the first attempt was “scientifiction”.
Trike wrote: "Rebecca ♥ Warner, Kishan, Magnus ♥ wrote: "I am confused about books that are set in what looks like the usual high fantasy world, but there are absolutely not fantastical elements whatsoever. Name..."Oh wow! That’s interesting. Thank you.
Trike wrote: "I don’t think there’s a name for this genre yet. It’s clearly a Secondary World, but without the supernatural element it’s not a Fantasy. I’m not sure what to call it"In bookstores they're shelved with Fantasy, so that's where I put them at home. Having a subcategory name would be helpful, so let's hope that one is coined soon. ;)
Two authors that write in magic-less secondary worlds are Ellen Kushner with her Riverside series, and K.J. Parker (Tom Holt), with pretty much everything he writes under that pseudonym.
Trike wrote: "Rebecca ♥ Warner, Kishan, Magnus ♥ wrote: "I am confused about books that are set in what looks like the usual high fantasy world, but there are absolutely not fantastical elements whatsoever. Name..."IDK if it really requires supernatural vs just not natural for our world.
I read The Troll Hunter years ago. It's quite the same: low tech world sans magic. The difference here is that they have created creatures (trolls) - unless you consider created creatures supernatural. Some people called it "heroic fantasy" but since a lot of it was military based I went with that.
.
Beth wrote: "Trike wrote: "I don’t think there’s a name for this genre yet. It’s clearly a Secondary World, but without the supernatural element it’s not a Fantasy. I’m not sure what to call it"In bookstores they're shelved with Fantasy, so that's where I put them at home. Having a subcategory name would be helpful, so let's hope that one is coined soon. ;)"
The more I think about it, the more I like “Imaginary History.” It’s not exactly Alternate History or Secret History, both of which are essentially our world but with slight changes, but the examples I’ve seen so far are definitely “variations on the theme” of real history, so to speak.
I also really like "Imaginary History" as a name for that kind of fantasy that isn't high or low or fairy tale or S&S, that doesn't have magic but doesn't require that the reader be interested in 'real' history to appreciate (like Historical Fiction and Alternate History do).
I kinda don't. There's no history in it. Books with settings that are low tech don't equate to history. It's simply low tech.
I will third "Imaginary History." Time to get the rest of the internet/world to buy in!
Not gonna buy in, sorry. ;)I'll stick with Fantasy.
I think I would create a sub-genre under speculative fiction just called "secondary world fiction" or something along those lines.
colleen the convivial curmudgeon wrote: "I think I would create a sub-genre under speculative fiction just called "secondary world fiction" or something along those lines."That already exists. Books like The Lord of the Rings, Brandon Sanderson’s stuff, etc.
Trike wrote: "colleen the convivial curmudgeon wrote: "I think I would create a sub-genre under speculative fiction just called "secondary world fiction" or something along those lines."That already exists. Bo..."
I would consider those secondary world fantasy - as opposed to just sw fiction.
That’s confusing, though, because when talking genre we never use the word “Fantasy” because it’s assumed. “Imaginary History” will immediately distinguish it from existing genres.
I guess. But only if you don't consider those books fantasy. I do.I would be more confused because I'd expect either a book that is set in the history of the fantastical world being discussed OR a fake history set on Earth.
I would never guess it'd be standard fantasy, sans obvious magic.
Imaginary History could be confused with Alt-U or Weird History or Secret History. ***
And I'm not sure that I consider those books fantasy, tbh. I mean, I know they get classified as fantasy in the same way dystopia usually gets classified as sci-fi, but there aren't any other fantasy hallmarks aside from the fact that it's a story that exists in a world other than our own.
SciFi and Fantasy Book Club
Books mentioned in this topic
The Hunt for Red October (other topics)The Sword of Shannara (other topics)
Guards! Guards! (other topics)
Low Town (other topics)
The City & the City (other topics)
More...
Authors mentioned in this topic
Debra Doyle (other topics)Barb Hendee (other topics)
Barb Hendee (other topics)
Joe Abercrombie (other topics)
Adrian Tchaikovsky (other topics)
More...
Well, yes, but the age genres can actually help readers glean whether the book would fit their tastes/interests. I mean, no one is saying, "You're 18-20, so you must read books in the NA genre".
But let's say that I want a fantasy adventure story which is plot oriented but which doesn't get into the 5-page-description issues I have with epic fantasy... is fairly light and fast paced. Then I'll take a gander in the MG section, because that's the types of books I find there.
Let's say I'm looking for a mystery romp mixed with romance, but nothing overly graphic, and which is a bit more character focused? I can usually find something like that in YA.
So on and so forth...