Avoiding the rehashed themes/plots/mechanics of Fantasy

Unfortunately, my impression is that what genres there are gets decided by the marketing people who decide how to label the shelves (real or virtual) at the bookstore. In economic terms, they are trying to minimize search costs: make it fast and easy for someone who might be interested in the book to find it by putting it near books like it. Authors play little part in that process I believe.

So your "Love Story" genre: does it have a big enough group of (self-identified) readers that if you labeled a shelf "Love Story" they'd go check out the books on it? I don't know. There may not be a lot of readers who want to read about a romance that may fail.

On a related note, "Rivalry Romance" (I'll call it) where multiple suitors compete for one person might be big. In comics/manga, it's huge: "harem" where one guy is chased by many gals, and "revere harem" where one gal is chased by many guys. In long-running series, there's intense fan speculation and argument about who will and should win the competition. But I don't think it's even recognized as a sub-genre of romance in English-language novels.

And on another related note: I write SciFi to be free of the bonds of What Is (because being true to What Is is hard work. ) Fantasy gives you that freedom too, even more so. Perhaps that's why some people don't consider SF/F a genre so much as a setting. But readers self-identify as SF and/or Fantasy Readers, and so in economic terms (i.e. minimizing search costs for potential readers) it's effectively a genre.

 

Well, I, for one, would certainly go to a bookshelf labeled "Love Stories" much more readily than I would "Romance." Why? Simply because I don't want to know how the book is going to end before I start reading it. Some of the world's greatest 'love stories' don't end happily. Ditto perhaps a category called "Unpredictable Mystery" meaning the mystery might not be solved. Or it might. I won't know till I get to the end. (I'm thinking Donna Tartt's The Little Friend for this one.) A better name for the genre is probably called for here ...I just came up with 'Unpredictable Mystery' off the top of my head. But I think the category is worth expansion.

I believe the genre 'Western' has already been expanded to include more than just the Black Hat/White Hat formulas that defined the genre a while back. (Although many people out there still think a Western is always John Wayne-ish.) But it would be nice for the Western genre to have more categories. Historical Western (novels dealing with real historical events and realities.) Maybe "Settler Westerns" like Old Yeller or the Laura Ingalls Wilder books, or the ones written by AB Guthrie Jr, or Mari Sandoz, or Ivan Doig, or The Snowblind Moon—stories that focus on the lives of fictional settlers, rather than on the historical significance of real ones—as well as more focused "Native American Westerns," such as written by James Welch. Or even "Romantic Western." To name a few.

The more categories, the better an out-of-the-box author has to get noticed, and the more a reader has to choose from.

 

No argument. But I'm not sure authors can do much about it. If I asked Amazon to classify my book under "Reverse Harem" I doubt they'd create the category just because I asked.

Instead, authors are actually putting "Reverse Harem" in the titles of their books. LOL.

 

@jannert, perhaps your "Love Story" category would be better labeled "Reality Romance" --

Spoiler: adult humor

the kind where the first time she takes her man to bed, nothing comes of it, because he doesn't last long enough to get his underwear off.

 

Well yes. If every book comes with its own category, then categories become meaningless. But at the moment, I think genres can be too confining.

I've been interested to follow how the Fantasy genre is getting fragmented in several directions. High Fantasy, Low Fantasy, Urban Fantasy, etc. This is good, in my opinion, as it broadens expectation AND reader choice. But if it gets down to Fantasy being split into, say, 40 different categories, then it becomes a tad ridiculous, doesn't it? There's a happy medium we could be striving for here.

I believe Romance has also broadened a bit, to include various forms and writing styles. Again, this is a good development, IMO.

 

Aye, but I think Love Story sounds less a formula. And Reality Romance would probably still mean 'happily ever after, wouldn't it? It would just mean a more gritty setting, perhaps? Or even more mundane? Dunno. I like Love Story, myself. It's more universal, and people have been referring to 'love stories' for many years. These can even be tragic. Or leave the characters unfulfilled and disillusioned, or settling for 'second best.' It's just not a recognised genre category. I think it should be.

 

Expectations would be set by the first few successful books in the category.
"Happily ever after" might instead be "Years later, when she found another love, he and their children would join her around her dog-eared scrapbook, to listen to her joyous stories of that miraculous summer, and that miraculous man."

 

Yeah. The meaning would have to evolve, for sure.

 

Ack. I've derailed the thread (again.) It's supposed to be about Fantasy tropes. Sorry, @MoonieChild .

 

There are a lot of D&D and Warhammer books and many of them have orcs. But not even all of those (or maybe even a majority) feature them, and they don’t make up the majority of what is in the genre. They’re sort of a sub genre of writing in established gaming IP.

 

My biggest advice to avoid genre rehashes are to read other genres. And perhaps read a biography, or two, of historical people to get a view of how lives, also of today celebrated heroes, went which is often a far cry from a "standard" fantasy plot line and thus you can have some ideas about how a person's life can develop.

In my opinion you often write what you read, so keep your reading broad.

 

Is it weird that I want to know who Garvon is and why he thought snargling foopka would uncranch the shtova?

 

You're not the only one. That, dare I say, is the single most intriguing opening sentence I have ever seen on this site. 10/10 would keep reading.

 

LOL. Thank you both.

Among all the nonsense, cranched is an "actual" word, from Cordwainer Smith's classic short story Scanners Live in Vain.

 

I don't read much fantasy. Pratchett... of course. Tolkien decades ago. And some...

What keeps me away it, is too stereotypical and too genre based characters and stories.

To me it looks a bit like fan fiction and fantasy have created "cardboard character creation via writing formulas" -styles.

Characters and stereotypes that are suited for those stories. No research because "you are writer, you can do what you want". "Normal" characters with supernatural elements - which writer does not recognise him/herself. ("Let's put a bunch of big thugs to beat and kick him for several minutes and then he will be ok in short time.")...

What makes Pratchett so good?
- His deep and wide understanding of human nature and it's variations.
- His deep and wide understanding of different kind of societies and they variations.
- His deep and wide understanding of author-reader relationship.
- His skills in character creation.
- His deep and wide understanding of drama and style.

Good fantasy is ok. Nothing is overdone there - I suppose.

Middle grade and the bottom of a barrel... What is overdone is lack of those things that make Pratchett so good.

Not only villains.

There is very much character mass production. Some of it seems to get published - specially in animated form - and most not.

 

It’s odd to say you don’t read much fantasy then make sweeping (false) generalizations about the genre. I agree that you don’t read much fantasy. I disagree with the rest of your post.

 

Unfortunately when it comes to Fantasy that's not uncommon.

 

True. It has happened more than once in this very thread, even after I posted a long list of authors. It has happened in response to other posts on this site as well. I know quite a bit in the genre and feel people should make an effort to find out about a genre before making such broad, conclusory statements.

 

Many people don't realize that SciFi and Fantasy aren't genres the way Romance or Thriller is a genre. It's a category of setting ("substantially different from our current world" as is also true for the Historical "genre") combined with reader-base that reads differently and has different expectations (as is also true in a different way for the Literary "genre") compared to readers of other genres.

Within those defining characteristics, a SF/F work can be any other genre: mystery, horror, romance, thriller, and so on. Just like "Historical" and "Literary."

 

So, this is kind if like, "I've never tried sea urchin, because it tastes terrible." ?

 

I think @Alan Aspie is simply answering @MoonieChild 's question. She asked what people think is overdone in the Fantasy genre, and he answered the question from his perspective. She was asking for his opinion, and he gave it—along with reasons why he gave it. I don't see any reason to dispute him. It's his opinion on a subjective topic. Other people will have other things they feel are overdone. It's interesting to hear what everybody has to say, isn't it?

Let's try to avoid attacking each other on this thread, eh? It's not necessary at all.

 

I think that's true of Romance as well, and kinda suspect that it's true of Thrillers. Romance can overlap with almost all other genres, romance readers have different expectations compared to readers of other genres... I'm not sure what makes SF/F different.

 

SF/F readers will give the author more time to build the world, for example.
Ambiguity that would turn off many readers (like the use of coined words without an immediate explanation) are embraced by SF/F readers, as long as the author eventually provides at least some explanation of what the word refers to.

For example: https://www.writingforums.org/threads/avoiding-the-rehashed-themes-plots-mechanics-of-fantasy.161639/page-5#post-1766318

 

Oh, yeah, I agree, there are different reader expectations for different genres, absolutely. I meant I don't see how "SciFi and Fantasy aren't genres the way Romance or Thriller is a genre." SF/F has a set of reader expectations, Romance has a set of reader expectations, Thrillers have a set of reader expectations...

 

Opinions can be disputed. Especially ones that denigrate a genre that the opinionated person admittedly isn't very familiar with.