TOPIC IN FOCUS - for new authors to discuss why they write fantasy

[Will]

I do wonder about the success of character types/ races where there exists no point of reference for a reader from their own experience, or existing archetypes.

[Keryl]

I know we're talking about this on another thread, but for new monsters, I highly suggest leaving them really vague and just filling your story with second, third, and fourth hand accounts of how creepy it is.

Let the reader fill in the blanks with his own imagination. He'll do a much better job of scaring himself than you will.

[Keryl]

Will wrote: "I do wonder about the success of character types/ races where there exists no point of reference for a reader from their own experience, or existing archetypes."

Can you think of an example of one? Every character/race I can think of is at least loosely based on some archetype of mythos or history.

[Thomas]

Keryl wrote: "Will wrote: "I do wonder about the success of character types/ races where there exists no point of reference for a reader from their own experience, or existing archetypes."

Can you think of an e..."

The races in my fantasy world are not based on any mythos or history. They are original creations, though they do have some animal features that are taken from real animals.

Narshuks for instance are twelve foot tall lupine creatures with three digits on their hands and feet, six inch claws, and long carnivore teeth. In the book, the MC relates them to very large werewolves, though they do not have any shape changing ability.

[Keryl]

Thomas wrote: "Keryl wrote: "Will wrote: "I do wonder about the success of character types/ races where there exists no point of reference for a reader from their own experience, or existing archetypes."

Can you..."

So giant, bipedal, wolves?

Yeah, that's a werewolf. Shape changing at the full moon is a flourish.

But I more mean along the lines of how your society is designed and the roles your characters play.

I'm not even sure how you'd go about writing a society that is completely alien from anything humans have ever seen before, and do so in such a way that humans could then understand it. Likewise if your characters behave in a way completely outside the traditional human roles and archetypes, how will your readers understand them?

[Sandra]

Thomas wrote: "Keryl wrote: "Will wrote: "I do wonder about the success of character types/ races where there exists no point of reference for a reader from their own experience, or existing archetypes."

Can you..."

This is a little hard to believe since our brains are wired to create images in certain patterns.

[Sandra]

Keryl wrote: "Will wrote: "I do wonder about the success of character types/ races where there exists no point of reference for a reader from their own experience, or existing archetypes."

Can you think of an e..."

C.J. Cherryh does a fairly decent of job of this with some of the alien races in her books, such as Downbelow Station amd the Chanur series.

[Thomas]

Keryl wrote: "I'm not even sure how you'd go about writing a society that is completely alien from anything humans have ever seen before, and do so in such a way that humans could then understand it. Likewise if your characters behave in a way completely outside the traditional human roles and archetypes, how will your readers understand them?"

To this extent, I agree. It would be tough to come up with something completely alien. But originality is not always in the basis for the writing, but in the execution. Two writers could take the same basic plot and end up with two entirely different books depending on their execution of that plot.

This is part of the challenge in writing though.

[Martin]

Keryl wrote: "Can you think of an example of one? Every character/race I can think of is at least loosely based on some archetype of mythos or history. "

Although it's a SciFi and not a Fantasy I would suggest taking a look at may I remind you how it was done in H.G. Wells's The War of the Worlds.
Apart from that it had a fairly well-known effect on radio listeners about a century ago, it also have an interesting narrative from the perspective of the MC, without any first hand experience (at least not any close hand encounter) until fairly late in the book.

[Keryl]

Thomas wrote: To this extent, I agree. It would be tough to come up with something completely alien. But originality is not always in the basis for the writing, but in the execution. Two writers could take the same basic plot and end up with two entirely different books depending on their execution of that plot.

This is part of the challenge in writing though. "

While I agree with your basic point, I'm not seeing how it relates to Will's original comment about a race/society that's completely different from anything we've ever experienced.

Sure, both you and I can write the Hero's Journey and end up with utterly different stories, but neither of us has managed to write anything even remotely alien to human experience.

My guess is if you do manage to write something completely untethered from human experience, then your human readers won't get it.

[Thomas]

Keryl wrote: "While I agree with your basic point, I'm not seeing how it relates to Will's original comment about a race/society that's completely different from anything we've ever experienced."

Will's original point had nothing to do with society. It was about races. I interpreted it as saying he wasn't sure how successful a book could be if it threw out the book on everything familiar to use as far as races go, and started anew.

In fantasy, that would mean throwing out elves, dwarves, gnomes, fey, dragons, etc... and creating entirely new races to base a story on.

When I built my fantasy world, and subsequently wrote my book, I did this, in part (keeping only humans and dragons as familiar races).

[Clinton]

Keryl wrote: "Thomas wrote: To this extent, I agree. It would be tough to come up with something completely alien. But originality is not always in the basis for the writing, but in the execution. Two writers co..."

Keryl,
There is always going to be a seed or kernel of what's come before us from other writers. That is what inspiration is. Also, I agree, even if we're trying to be original readers will take what they already know and use that to help their imagination fill in the details of the monsters/creatures/races we as writers try to create. That doesn't mean we need to lean on the Tolkien staples.

Brandon Sanderson is probably the best writer today creating new and original creatures/races. His Mistborn and Stormlight novels feature some of the most original creatures I've read. If you look hard enough you can pin down the inspirations to the original archetypes but when you get down to it... his stuff is new and interesting. The kolos from Mistborn could be connected to orcs. However, they're not.

I don't think you need the original archetypes from fantasy to make a story work. Arguably the seeds are planted there.

However, creating societies and religions using real life groups and their beliefs and systems can draw the reader in more easily. On that point, I agree with you.

[Keryl]

Thomas wrote: Will's original point had nothing to do with society. It was about races. I interpreted it as saying he wasn't sure how successful a book could be if it threw out the book on everything familiar to use as far as races go, and started anew.

In fantasy, that would mean throwing out elves, dwarves, gnomes, fey, dragons, etc... and creating entirely new races to base a story on.

When I built my fantasy world, and subsequently wrote my book, I did this, in part (keeping only humans and dragons as familiar races). "

Yeah, when I think of races, I don't think of the shape of the creature involved. That's just nothing that interests me.

The way they act, the societies they build, that's what's a "race" to me.

Short, stocky, bearded, forest dwelling, pacifistic (ish) vegetarians, with a moral imperative to dwell in perfect harmony with nature might look like dwarves, but I'd tell you that's an elf.

And, it doesn't matter if it's got six arms, three legs, and fifteen droopy ears, if it's a pacifistic (ish), forest dwelling, vegetarian, nature fan, it's an elf, because that's the bit of the fantasy 'ecology' (for want of a better word) that elves fill.

But, I don't do much visual processing. How things look is pretty far down on the list of things I'm paying attention to when I read. Pretty much anything that's a POV character is a person to me, no matter what the shape of the body it inhabits may be.

[Keryl]

Clinton wrote: I don't think you need the original archetypes from fantasy to make a story work. Arguably the seeds are planted there.

Don't get me wrong, I don't think anything in fantasy needs to be entirely, or even mostly, original.

I'm intrigued with the idea of a completely "new" race, and well, basically I'm not seeing how readers would have any frame of reference for dealing with that.

I write fantasy to look at human emotions, responses, actions, freed from the constraints of our real world. I'm not nearly as interested in "new" as I am in how people respond to different, and how those responses are so similar to what we're all used to.

So, to a major extent, I don't even find "new" particularly compelling in fantasy, especially not new for the sake of new. Likewise, since I'm interested in humans, I'm not very interested in races beyond as a way to study how humans interact with that which is different, or how it feels to be different.

[Clinton]

Keryl wrote: "Clinton wrote: I don't think you need the original archetypes from fantasy to make a story work. Arguably the seeds are planted there.

Don't get me wrong, I don't think anything in fantasy needs t..."

I think it's a matter of how you want to approach fantasy. And I agree, the most interesting aspects of new races and societies is how they interact with the world and how the world interacts with them. Beliefs, government, norms, all that stuff is the backbone of the race and cannot be left to the side. You have a terrific point.

[Will]

I listen to you lot, and come to the conclusion that I'm a lazy git.

But then, I'm not trying to create a glowing new world, more to throw a dim beam into a murky shadow by suggesting that if Elves, Dwarfs, dragons etc did exist, it is likely that they would share many of our worst traits, and by tweaking those traits to make them risible in others, we can start to laugh at ourselves, too...

[Bill]

Jim wrote: "As I mentioned over there, decades ago there was a similar moratorium on time travel stories. These things come & go. I guess editors are humans, too. They get so many stories on a particular su..."

Some would think editors a bit subhuman ;-). I know this thread is about new writer's POVs, but from a reader's so much has been written one can gorge on almost any topic or subgenre. Time travel, dragons. boys or girls coming of age, what have you... Going back and reading every time travel book ever written will take quite some time and leave one more than satiated.

Watching these various groups and group reads there seems to be a general need to read contemporary or current books. I find this sad as there is so much gold buried in the past, much more than is scattered on the surface.

[Marc]

Sandra aka Sleo wrote: "This is a little hard to believe since our brains are wired to create images in certain patterns. "

I'm reminded of the invisible monster from Forbidden Planet, a creation of a mind with access to vast power but no understanding of how anatomy is structured or why.

[Will]

Ah, Forbidden planet. Anne Francis. Great, great film.

[Jim]

Will wrote: "Ah, Forbidden planet. Anne Francis. Great, great film."

Great in so many ways. Many of the props used in it showed up in other excellent shows, like The Twilight Zone. That always gives them an extra kick, IMO.

[Bill]

Indeed! We have been watching a lot of old SF, and those dials from the Krell lab are used in a number of TV series and movies from the 50s and 60s. Robby was featured in one of the better Lost in Space eps. Chris is watching Man from Uncle and they used Robby's head as part of a machine to make people younger. You actually got to see the inside of the head—quite roomy.

I love video quotes!

[Will]

Simpler times, when one effect had to be used, and reused, and reused...

(bit like my jokes, really)

[K.A.]

Stella wrote: "I would like to address the first question about why I write fantasy, if that fits here. Mostly inside the fantasy genre women can break stereotype roles.

I was a great reader of science fiction ..."

I relate to this. I grew up reading books where girls couldn't do things (Misty of Chicoteague is one of my favorite examples) that boys could do in the real world - but in Oz, or Wonderland, girls could do all sorts of things (in fact, in the Oz books, one of the boys turned out to be a girl (Ozma) - take that!)

Of course, I grew up to be a girl who did all that stuff anyway (not the magic! but I have been a law enforcement officer, structural and wildland firefighter, emergency medical technician, and other non-traditional roles). I use those experiences to create what I call "competent women" in my fantasy worlds.

I hope that what I write is enjoyable for both sexes, of course. But in part I want to provide a picture of a woman who can do what she needs to do on her own, and whose skills are recognized and accepted.

[Bill]

K.A. wrote: "...I hope that what I write is enjoyable for both sexes, of course. But in part I want to provide a picture of a woman who can do what she needs to do on her own, and whose skills are recognized and accepted."

Personally I'd rather read works in which gender is irrelevant.

[Marc]

Kernos wrote: "Personally I'd rather read works in which gender is irrelevant."

That's what I try to write. My characters obviously will have a gender, but they are people first, men and women second.

[Clinton]

Kernos wrote: "K.A. wrote: "...I hope that what I write is enjoyable for both sexes, of course. But in part I want to provide a picture of a woman who can do what she needs to do on her own, and whose skills are..."

Is not how the genders are treated by society part of what deepens and enriches the story? Yes, in some stories the gender roles mean little. However, in many stories how men and women are treated ties in to the society they live, the society could dictate how woman or man acts, what jobs and positions they can hold. I always found details like that make the world more tangible and real. It also gives the characters room to break out of the established roles and defy convention, creating conflict and character development.

[Bill]

I don't disagree with you Clinton, it just seems it's been done to death, almost cliché.

[Jim]

I thought it was one of the basic & few plots.

[Clinton]

Kernos wrote: "I don't disagree with you Clinton, it just seems it's been done to death, almost cliché."

It can be, I guess. A lot of writers today are playing with the concept. The trick seems to be to do something different, defy what has done before or being done currently.

[Bill]

Clinton wrote: "It can be, I guess. A lot of writers today are playing with the concept. The trick seems to be to do something different, defy what has done before or being done currently."

That's sort of what I meant by gender being irrelevant. Give me good characters, a good plot and great prose and I don't care what a characters gender is or if it's even human.

[L.E.]

Will wrote: "I do wonder about the success of character types/ races where there exists no point of reference for a reader from their own experience, or existing archetypes."

Neil Gaiman - is a prime example of where using a handful of the right words can spark off the right wicks of the imagination - monsters are always much scarier if they're felt rather than seen.

[Traci]

It depends on the monster. If it's a boogy man type that I'm supposed to be afraid of than I agree completely that less is more. As it's already been said we can scare ourselves more than anyone else can.

However if the "monster" is of the orc, ogre, etc. variety I want more not less.

I feel like a fan girl that I keep mentioning this series, LOL, but Malazan does a good job of creating the second type of monster.

[Clinton]

Traci wrote: "It depends on the monster. If it's a boogy man type that I'm supposed to be afraid of than I agree completely that less is more. As it's already been said we can scare ourselves more than anyone el..."

I have to read Malazan, everyone speaks highly of the series.

[Pauline]

Kernos wrote: "Personally I'd rather read works in which gender is irrelevant. "

I don't think gender can ever be completely irrelevant, because there is still the business of procreation and looking after the kids, which has to go on even in a fantasy world. It's nice to read about a world where women can do any job for which they have an aptitude and inclination (and I've read several fantasies recently which were like that - all written by women, interestingly), but for me it always raises the bigger questions. What happens, for instance, when the kickass female warrior becomes pregnant? And who raises the kid?

It's wonderful to come across fantasy where women are more than just whores and serving wenches and princesses and concubines, but simply shifting them into men's roles isn't the complete answer either.

Or, to put it another way, working out the social structure (including gender roles, contraception, pregnancy and child-rearing) is an integral part of world-building, and therefore something every fantasy author should think about at some stage.

[K.A.]

Pauline, this is something I actually deal with in my book - it's a fairly important sub-plot. I agree that this stuff has to be dealt with in any world where procreation happens the way it does on Earth. What happens when contraception fails? I also agree that you can't throw women directly into men's roles - that's a kind of reverse stereotype I see, where the woman is basically a man in an armored corset.

(I also like to throw in mentions of bathroom facilities, by the way - something else I never see getting dealt with!)

[Pauline]

K.A. wrote: "I also like to throw in mentions of bathroom facilities, by the way - something else I never see getting dealt with!"

Oh, so true. Mostly it doesn't matter, I just assume there's some provision for it, but there are times when it just has to be mentioned - if someone is kept tied up for days, for instance, or a woman is disguised as a man, how do they manage? And if a character is locked up in the dungeon, is there a bucket in the corner, or nothing at all, or is it (like one Scottish castle I visited recently) provided with an en-suite privy? Enquiring minds need to know! Or at least, I like to know that the author has at least thought about it, even if we don't necessarily get all the gory details.

By the way, K.A., your book looks interesting, but I can't find it on Goodreads - am I looking in the wrong place?

[Marc]

K.A. wrote: "I also like to throw in mentions of bathroom facilities, by the way - something else I never see getting dealt with!"

Maybe it's just such a casual and ordinary part of life that most people don't see action adventure moments coming out of it. I've seen a few in horror movies, but only because something horrific happens there. The exploding toilet in Lethal Weapon 2 comes to mind as well. Boondock Saints has an assassin survive a hit because he's in the bathroom when the heroes break in. It's kind of amusing to see someone sitting there one second, and then when the monster breaks in he makes it into the hall with his pants up!
In books I remember a number of references to the jacks in the Paksenarrion trilogy, but not many others. In SF I remember a reference to 'the death of a thousand cuts' from somebody putting on a EVA suit, and of course in Dune the stillsuit is a primary piece of equipment. In Shogun they get mentioned simply because they're so different from what the hero is used to. Leo Frankowski wrote a book featuring living houses, in which the bathroom facilities were integral to providing the house with nutrition. In a different book he had a group of bandits bury a merchant's treasure and then use the hole for a latrine. No one ever found the treasure for some reason.
I mention privies only once or twice in my own books, as places where people might be, that sort of thing. The biggest role one plays is that my heroes use one in a destroyed town, which leads another character to decide they're halfway decent, since they bothered. Like Moon's books these are the only 'casual' references I can remember, and I remember them because there are so few.

[Jim]

We've discussed how some authors write caricatures rather than characters & the consensus, which I agreed with, is that it's poor writing. I just finished reading A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court & realized that Mark Twain does it all the time & it's actually an excellent device for making his points. I didn't want or need the characters more fully fleshed out.

[Jim]

Bathroom facilities, tied up female prisoners pretending to be male, was something that George R.R. Martin addressed well with Arya in A Clash of Kings, I think. I remember remarking in a group how dealing with that made the story seem so much more real.

[Marc]

Jim wrote: "We've discussed how some authors write caricatures rather than characters & the consensus, which I agreed with, is that it's poor writing. I just finished reading [book:A Connecticut Yankee in Kin..."

It's poor writing unless your story's a morality play, in which case it's a fine technique. The question becomes, is the morality play itself poor writing? Certainly I hate being hit over the head with the moral of the story a la Ayn Rand or James P. Hogan. If subtly done I have no problem with it, and in fact that's the way I try to write. We don't write books like The Pilgrim's Progress anymore, but does that make it bad writing?

[Jim]

As I said in my review, I think A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court is one of the finest classics out there & is under appreciated. Yes, I suppose it is a morality play, but it begs as many questions as Twain tries to answer.

My review is here:
http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/...

I agree with you about Rand. I can't comment on Hogan. I think I read a couple of his books, but it's been too long & I don't I cared for them much. I know I see him on the shelves often & have skipped them for years.

[Bill]

Will wrote: "I do wonder about the success of character types/ races where there exists no point of reference for a reader from their own experience, or existing archetypes."

Can you think of an example of one? Every character/race I can think of is at least loosely based on some archetype of mythos or history. "

There are lots of examples. What comes to mind are from SF. EG, the Mesklinites from Hal Clements Mission of Gravity or the Dhrawn in his Star Light. One SF I have been trying to identify again had aliens which required 6 genders to reproduce and asked the protagonist, a human, to participate! And there is the race Ender thought he destroyed completely or the Yuuzhan Vong in the Star Wars universe. Perhaps SF is easier to do non-archetypal/mythic races than fantasy.

I wonder if it is possible to have a novel without any human associations at all, completely alien. One in which we have no points of reference.

Thomas wrote: "The one major race in my first book (other than humans) are called Narshuks, and yes, they are vicious and bloodthirsty. But they have an honor system, and a hierarchy to their society. A lot of thought has been put into this type of thing in my world. :) "

Ah! Reminds me of the Klingons ;-)

[Cynthia]

Stella, what you say also partly motivated me to write speculative fiction, too. I also just wanted to wr ite fantasy and sf. As you say, stories treated as you describe did not exist or there was very little, and so I wrote what I wanted to read. Writing about women and girls having adventures in the way women and girls experience them is important to me as a reader. So often female characters were more often treated as second class citizens or bizarre cookie-cut-outs than believable characters.

I also enjoy the mythologies of fantasy: the dragons, the unicorns, the vampires, the werewolves. Historical ideas about these creatures as real always makes me wonder what the world would be like if they were real in the way people of different cultures thought of them. I love to get into "the mind-set" of the historical cultures to experience these mythological beliefs as "factual"--a luxery only fantasy can give.

[Pauline]

Kernos wrote: "One SF I have been trying to identify again had aliens which required 6 genders to reproduce and asked the protagonist, a human, to participate!"

Might it have been this one? Distress by Greg Egan. Reviews differ as to whether there are five or six or seven genders involved!!! Although, not aliens, just genetically modified humans. Sounds like a brain-frying exercise, frankly.

[Bill]

Pauline wrote: "...Might it have been this one? Distress by Greg Egan. Reviews differ as to whether there are five or six or seven genders involved!!!..."

Hi Pauline! No, but this sounds interesting. What I am referring to was definitely about aliens on other planets and the protag was exploring a variety of planets. The book was probably from the 70s or 80s.

[Stephanie]

It seems to me that gender is never irrelevant...to who a person is or what that person can do. That's just physical reality. Amazonian warrior ladies or women knights are as much a caricature to me as the witch. I have a very hard time buying that any woman could beat men of equal skill in combat more than occasionally. Sure, people want to think women can do everything and they can do an awful lot, but beyond a certain point it's usually only at the price of rejecting their potential as mothers and wives. If you take it too far, I'll say, now that's just silly and the wish for women to be able to do anything is getting in the way of common sense. Now, I understand that makes it more difficult for women in stories to have adventures, but maybe people need to talk about that. I agree that women are people first, but that doesn't mean gender can or should ever be irrelevant. There are plenty of things men can't do too, and fantasy sometimes gets a little absurd on that level. Perhaps I've come to see much fantasy as a little shallow because there doesn't seem to be much place in it for the elderly, or children, or families, though I understand that the kinds of plots we like in fantasy aren't exactly family-friendly. It's a dilemma all around.

[Pauline]

Stephanie wrote: "Perhaps I've come to see much fantasy as a little shallow because there doesn't seem to be much place in it for the elderly, or children, or families, though I understand that the kinds of plots we like in fantasy aren't exactly family-friendly."

The families are there, I think, but not always in a familiar form. Think of 'A Song of Ice and Fire', for instance, where some of the families involved make the word 'dysfunctional' wholly inadequate.

I take your point that gender affects what women (and men) can do, but in fantasy there is always magic in the mix too, and that can even things up very nicely. The warrior babe is as much a cliche nowadays as her male counterpart, and just as silly, but a regular female with some magic powers needn't be silly or unbelievable. Mind you, it depends on the skill of the writer.

Fantasy doesn't have to be shallow, and there are strong female characters being written, women who are good at their roles without being pseudo-men, and also not just taking the traditional roles of wife, mother, whore, serving wench. I find self-published authors are particularly good at breaking away from the cliches and finding a more original and relevant approach to these kinds of questions.

[Clinton]

Stephanie wrote: "It seems to me that gender is never irrelevant...to who a person is or what that person can do. That's just physical reality. Amazonian warrior ladies or women knights are as much a caricature to m..."

You are probably correct in your thinking. And this comes down to genetics, individual traits the genders specifically have. Men tend to be stronger, have more muscle tone, and so they can swing a two-handed greatsword more easily. That doesn't mean a woman cannot swing a sword, it depends largely on her strength. What an individual character can do depends on their physical and mental aptitudes, and society assigning them roles as a consequence. Does society allow a woman to be a warrior maiden? That is the interesting part, for me; it is building a society that accepts specific gender roles. Then the question becomes, why?

While we've been harping on a woman's role in fantasy and how its cliche, we've not touched on a man's cliche role. Men are more commonly saddled with the role of barbarian and/or warrior. Only weaker men are allowed to be priests and scholars. In essence, in fantasy, writers have generally written only the weaker men into roles where the mind is the greatest power. And in these instances, these men are sniveling geeks. Ever seen a GQ model-type baring in his head into some books? Not really. Unless he's been maimed! LOL. Yes, there are generals who are tacticianers and use their minds to plan chess-moves in battles, however, these men still pick up a sword and start chopping limbs off at some point. The only way to make a strong male character who is wise and powerful AND bad-ass, is to make him a wizard (another set of cliches in and of itself) Is this all not a cliche in the writing of male characters?

(just stirring the pot a little)

[Clinton]

Pauline wrote: "Stephanie wrote: "Perhaps I've come to see much fantasy as a little shallow because there doesn't seem to be much place in it for the elderly, or children, or families, though I understand that the..."

Do you agree that women need to keep their femininity, though? That's kinda what I'm reading here, which I would agree with.

[Sandra]

Clinton wrote: "Pauline wrote: "Stephanie wrote: "Perhaps I've come to see much fantasy as a little shallow because there doesn't seem to be much place in it for the elderly, or children, or families, though I und..."

Depends what you mean by 'femininity'.