I agree that most fantasy novels today are Lord of the Rings and World of Warcraft wannabes. I found a lot of Dungeon and Dragon like novels that sticks to basic races, kingdoms, and magic. Perhaps because most new writers believe that is fantasy, and they are making their own cliche' worlds. My fantasy novel is going to be unique because it takes place in the future. The races are not elves or faeries. They are magical Beasts who used to be humans. Of course there are anthropomorphic fantasy novels, but my characters are more like animals than typical furries. And they have human traits too.
I agree totally with what your saying OP. But playing devils advocate, there are plenty of original and different fantasies out there. But I wonder if that we (as a populas) don't get to see them because the main stream companies only plugs the set formula fantasies. So got me thinking that perhaps the public prefer that formula and thats why the publishing companies cater for it. I might (and hope) be wrong.
Wow do you know how insulting you sound by generalising a HUGE genre like that and then assuming that nearly no one here was smart enough to see what you've seen? Of the "criteria" you've set out, the only thing I've actually written about is demons, and then I'd bet you have no idea what kind or how they work. If you're so bored of western fantasy, go dig some Japanese stuff. They make tonnes. In any case, if you have such a low opinion of fantasy, stop reading it. It's okay, it's not everyone's cup of tea. But to imply nobody who writes fantasy has any imagination is arrogant and insulting. PS. You're really lumping paranormal with fantasy, btw.
Maybe not. It does seem there is a terrible dearth of clever, imaginative, fresh, NEW fiction. My dear friend, proofreader, and muse, is always yelling at me, pushing for more aggressive submissions. He is now pushing me for e-pubs self publishing. That's alien territory for me but I keep hearing the same mantra from many others. Every time there is a commercial on tv for the latest remake of a movie or old tv program he glares at me (as though it's my fault) and says, "NOBODY has anything original anymore. See? They keep redoing the same old..." OUCH! THAT is one of the biggest problems with the fantasy genre! The dungeons and dragons mind set is just one sub-genre of fantasy. Here is an online dictionary definition of "fantasy". Please note: NOWHERE in any definition is the word 'dragon' used! Now, while I may not agree 100% with everything Bright Shadow says, I think there is more than a few grains of truth in the observations overall. Yes, there is certainly some excellent, imaginative and "coloring outside the lines" work in fantasy. But, also true is that too often, what gets into the market - in hard copy, online, or on screen - is the scrapings and drivel that follow the pattern and toe the line of what has sold before. Too often, publishers have reached a point of abject cowardice and are too afraid to step outside the comfort zone. There is not enough courage or confidence to look at something completely different and see the possibilities. And THAT is where self-pub/online publishing will shine and, subsequently, leave the corpse of hard-copy, dead tree publishing industry in its dust. And Albirich's concept of fantasy as a purely dragons and magic genre pretty much underscores the mindset of too many who lack the vision to crawl out from under someone else's imagination. Too often, too many get stuck in a monkey see/monkey do, copy cat mode. They can't write anything new of their own, they merely re-write someone else's success. And that's not limited to fantasy. That, sadly, is pretty much across the boards. If someone writes a spectacularly successful book or script - in any genre, right around the corner are the masses of 'me-too's just waiting to ride the coattails of someone else's success. It's not that online self-publishing will kill the brick and mortar publishing industry. I am so afraid, however, the b-a-m will just commit slow suicide by cowardice.
First, that was not an insult, just an idea for an exercise: come up with a fantasy world that avoids all the old, tired cliques. Most here could do it, and that is the point I'm trying to make. And "changing how they work" can only get you so far before entering "wtf?" territory. For example: sparkly vampires... And "paranormal" and "fantasy" are like hampsters and gerbils: what the hell is the big difference? The only major difference is the degree in which fantastic things happen. And I actually love fantasy, it is just that, recently, its getting pretty tired and starting to run out of fresh ideas.
That's only WTF territory for the people who don't like it. Meyer still managed a $3/4 of a million dollar advance as an unpublished author, and the book sales alone have grossed something like $1.5 billion. My guess is the 'wtf' crowd doesn't bother her very much.
Exactly. I have met so many aspiring writers of fantasy and read their work and had to smile and not say what was really on my mind: that it was thinly veiled D&D fan fiction. Why not make wizards who don't cast spells from books (based on the Western, renaissance idea of what magic looks like based on Hermetism) but instead talked to the spirits of whatever it was they were trying to effect (like shamanism) or harnessed their internal energy (like Eastern Chi)? Why dragons? Why not create a brand new creature that is just as awe-inspiring? Like I said in the OP, "Highlander", while not the best directed film ever, was so much more original than the "fantasy" that comes out now. It was about a new kind of being with new rules and had enough potential to spawn a franchise. Why can't more fantasy be like that?
Aspiring writers are often young. Their first exposure to fantasy may come through D&D or games having similar tropes. To them, it is still 'new.' I say write what you enjoy and what speaks to you. If that's elves and dragons, then write that. If it isn't, do something else.
The difference between the supernatural and the paranormal is something very few people understand, and because of this, in fiction, the lines between fantasy and the paranormal seem very blurred. But there is a massive fundamental difference between them. Massive. Please let me explain, since I write Fantasy and Supernatural Suspense and Paranormal Suspense. Para"normal" denotes events or phenomena that are beyond the scope of normal scientific understanding. "Super" natural denotes a manifestation or event attributed to some force beyond scientific understanding or the laws of nature. What the hell is the difference? The paranormal is not necessarily supernatural. Two hundred years ago if you saw a person using a cellphone, they would be a time traveler using advanced technology, therefore beyond the scientific understanding of the time, therefore paranormal. (Yes I know this example is also technically science fiction) A person casting a spell that actually works, using real magic to do something science says is impossible, would be supernatural. So, for example, contact with extraterrestrials would be paranormal, but not supernatural. What does this mean for literature? Simply this. Fantasy fiction in some way incorporates the supernatural. Paranormal fiction in some way incorporates the paranormal. So a novel about wizards and dragons, in a world where they are the norm, would be fantasy. A novel where wizards and dragons are aliens, would be paranormal.
That is a terrific question @MilesTro . (This is just my opinion) The definition of Horror is an intense feeling of fear, shock, or disgust. So a supernatural story about love and loss and life after death with no fear or shock or disgust, could not be called "Horror." Just as a paranormal story without those same elements could not be called Horror". But a supernatural or paranormal story chock full of scary shit and jump scares and eye-widening and gore, yeah, I would call that "Horror"
Makes sense of why it can be in the fantasy genre. Paranormal can also be in the science fiction genre if the scientific details can explain it.
Seems to me that fantasy, broadly, encompasses both paranormal and supernatural stories (as well as stories that are neither).
What...? My concept for fantasy equals purely dragons and magic? Where did I say that? You're making a lot of assumptions here, and kinda rude too. But that's okay, I'll leave you to your troublesome "fantasy is shit" thoughts - seeing as you don't know me nor my novel. Go on the street and ask random people what pops into their head when they hear the word fantasy. Of course it'll be cliche stuff, but that is what fantasy has been generalised as. This is the point I was making, kinda. If you remove what the audience believes is fantasy, then what do you have? This has been said, fantasy is not a singular genre anymore, it can be mixed and tempered to no limit. And I agree, dragons or magic aren't necessary, BUT, there are always fresh ways to do cliched ideas. Oh, and just because I'm defending the general fantasy genre (partly), doesn't mean I lack vision or that my book is filled with what I'm defending, because it is not. "Get out of the box" some say, and the author forces himself out of the box, trying to make up new stuff and completely forgets about the old, that in truth can be used in a new ways.
Are you really that blind? Go on the street and ask random people what pops into their head when they hear the word fantasy. Of course it'll be cliche stuff, but that is what fantasy has been generalised as. This is the point I was making, kinda. If you remove what the audience believes is fantasy, then what do you have? Good grief... "what is fantasy if not for dragons and magic. " I simply pointed out one of the most common uses in fantasy, nothing else.
The average person on the street might think that way, but keep in mind that as a writer, the average person on the street is not your audience. They are not likely to be familiar with the genre. You can look on these forums and see that even people involved in writing, but who don't write fantasy, have no understanding of the genre. Your audience is the fantasy reader, and those readers are likely to be pretty savvy about the genre, and about the fact that there is a lot of diversity in it.
Already started on that one years ago hon. And it includes a whole cast of new beings that I have never seen in another book, including Imirri, Shifters ( kind of like the twilight werewolves in appearance but that is where all resemblance ends. I mean, you don't see many fantasy wolves with mind control powers do you?), Light and Dark Spirits, Starshades, and of course the humans. As for the plot I am chuckling maniacly on that one. Whoever said life had to have one clean bad guy? Why cannot he have just made an honest mistake after being driven by jealousy? Why can't it be the good guy that, despite their clearly honorable goals, ends up doing more harm than good? despite all of my unusual races, they are all human at heart. Tie that all in with a theme about learning to deal with loss, learning to trust others, and eventually forgiving those who hurt you, and I think these past four years working on said story was so worth it. then again, I am positive this plot has been used before, but it's all in the execution. But a good story will usually come along regardless of what creatures are used in a fantasy novel. Sadly, I have noticed the rising popularity in vampire books, and that the few actual fantasy books I find are just.... Well, though interesting, I usually cannot stick around long enough while the MC talks about battle tactics and such with his generals. I just get put off by huge war scenes, rather than the detailed one on one fights. but that's just my preference. The books that become popular are usually the ones that give a teenage girl some imaginary hunky to gush over anyways. So if you want to make money, go in that direction, but if you want to flesh out a story that you are satisfied with, and it shows that you are more than just another name on a shelf, then i suggest just letting you pen, and your imagination, run wild. Oh, and if anyone were to ask me what I thought fantasy was. I'd say worlds of possibilities, untapped energies, and beasts of any and all variety that you can think of.
Absolutely. In an action story, you want the heroes to fight because you want them to win, but a horror story is where you don't want the heroes to fight because you don't want them to lose. Horror is where the villain has all of the advantages, and supernatural villains would have even more advantages than "mere" psychopaths. The villain still has to have it's own limits - otherwise the writer, not the villain, is the one killing the heroes, and that makes the readers more scared than angry - but the heroes have to earn the knowledge of what those limits are. Also, even when the villain displays new tricks that s/he had been keeping secret, the new tricks have to add on to his established limits rather than replace them: even when Michael Meyers turned out to be immortal, he remained just as easy to outrun, and shooting/stabbing him still made him even slower.
Tolkien is like a father of modern fantasy. He studied languages and was particularly interested in old languages. One of this old languages was old norwegian and as a result, he became interested in Poetic Edda (like a viking mythology). What he did was, he copied many things from this Scandinavian mythology and transformed them in his own way into Middle Earth and its events (Middle Earth is actually Tolkien's version of Purgatory if I remember correctly - that's why you have elves and orcs, like a balance between hell and heaven/angels and demons. Tolkien was a Christian so Purgatory makes sense here). If anybody read Silmarillion and was interested in its structure and looked up Poetic Edda, he was able to see a lot of similarities, especially in gods and their quarrels. What I want to say is, Tolkien was probably the first author that used mythology in his work and USED IT WELL (important), that's why he succeeded. There are tons of different mythologies in the world, if you want to create something new it's not hard to look into different direction. For instance, what would happen if someone looked deep into mythology of Native Americans and created his own world, like Tolkien did? If the mentioned writer would not be under Tolkien's influence, he could create something completely fresh and different. Of course there are many other ways of writing fantasy, not only transforming mythologies. George R. R. Martin was inspired by "War of the Roses" for Game of Thrones. P. S. I looked up Tolkien's history and education quite a while ago, so I may be mistaken in few things.
I think what really matters is the story. For example, many non-fantasy stories are set in modern times, with just humans, but they manage to come up with fresh and original stories (plus the usual horde of derivative works). Perhaps a fantasy CSI story would be good, even if it had the elves and orcs. I think a lot of authors make the mistake of copying Tolkein (or even worse, copying his copiers). It's such a pity when you look at the worlds authors created before Tolkein, for example Dunsany as has already been mentioned, or Howard. I guess the thing to do is to try your best to change fantasy to be as you would like it to.
That's not how you presented it - you said "I challenge you" - forgive me if I read into the tone of your writing (heck, we're all writers here, let's not pretend the way we write things and our word choices have no meaning or impact, and let's not pretend we're not aware of how things come across - as writers we really don't have that excuse). "I challenge you" rings of someone who expects very little, "I challenge you" implies that it's a test, not a writing prompt/exercise. Your post did not imply that you felt most people were capable of meeting your challenge - rather to the contrary. And judging from a later post where you said: It confirms to me that you expect the contrary - you expect people to NOT be able to meet your challenge, but you feel so sorry for their lack of creativity that you've gotta at least *try* to help them, as though you pity them. The truth of the matter is - cliche is cliche for a reason, because it is a GOOD IDEA. Because it works. Because it resonates with masses of people at their core for reasons we're not always sure about. Seeking originality for the sake of originality is futile - it's about how you can use old things in new ways. And western fantasy affects the western world. We can only be inspired by the things we know, by the stories read to us as children, by the shows we've seen as children, by the books we still read now. I'm not objecting to the idea that there may be too many books about dragons and wizards out there (I write fantasy, but funnily enough I almost never read fantasy). But I resent the way you've generalised things without even offering any kind of solution or dug deep enough into the issue to offer any insight. The root of the problem could be that we're just not exposed enough to other cultures, to be honest. In Hong Kong, I watched Japanese anime as well as all kinds of American cartoons. Then there were Chinese cartoons and the kung-fu genre (the local stuff) and then others that I attributed at the time to being Japanese, but turned out to be Swedish and Czech etc. The same cannot be said about England or the Czech Republic. It's only thanks to the internet that we're not as limited as before, by people are by no means "exposed" as they would be to a regular TV show. While I know of Japanese classics like Doraemon as well as Mickey Mouse and Tom and Jerry from a very young age (I don't remember when I was first exposed to any of the 3 I've mentioned), and I know of Totoro as well as your average Disney classic, the English masses hadn't a clue about the cartoons on the other side of the world. Worse still, often they were not interested in the slightest. I showed a Japanese classic anime (a Miyazaki film) to an English friend of mine a week or two ago and she told me, several times in awe and wonder, "I've never seen anything like this." While I was scratching my head thinking, "Really?" (She was also busy telling me it's NOT a family movie, but it is a family movie. Me and hundreds of children watched the film at a very young age - I know the Japanese children at the elementary school I teach have certainly seen it. Shows the great gap between the cultures and what's deemed acceptable to children) In the original draft of my novel - I've since ditched the idea because it seriously doesn't work outside of the anime/manga genres - I had a character who's a weapon of mass destruction lol. That's in no western fantasy I can think of. You have "the chosen one", but do you have sentient weapons? (I do not mean stuff like I.Robot) This is just a glimpse - the kind of ideas you might get if only you were exposed to other cultures. Have you seen Spirited Away and Princess Mononoke? Those two are extremely Japanese, heavily wrapped up in Japanese religion and mythology. Imagine some of that stuff in a western novel. For example I've always thought this Japanese monster is the weirdest thing ever - a woman dressed in a kimono with a neck that can extend like a giraffe, only it curls like a snake, and she grins with a long curling tongue sticking out. But how could anyone write it if they didn't even know of the idea? My friend who had never seen anything as well-known and pretty ordinary as that Miyazaki film - I'm sure she's not the only one in England, and it'll include writers. We limit our imagination by being unaware of the world. Or have you seen some of the Czech illustrators? Their drawings and representation of humans and animals are like nothing I've ever been exposed to in England or Hong Kong. The Czech stuff is distorted, elongated, sometimes extremely dark and other times very colourful - but not bright like children's books, rather their colours are deep, their colours are often between shades rather than simple reds and yellows. The eyes of their drawings are often small, their expressions often ambiguous - this is in the average children's picture books. Whereas the Japanese favour chibi-style with gigantic eyes and the English smooth, polished, round features on the whole, or else slightly pointy and quirky drawings. But nothing like the Czechs - the Czechs - they make watercolours. It's art in the fine art sense of the word, for children. And would this affect the things we later imagine as writers, creatures we later put into our books? Of course it would. Goes to show - if you have a beef to pick with western fantasy, perhaps you should complain about how little we sometimes know of other cultures. Or expose yourself to nature - did you know there's a fish that can walk and breathe outside of water for 4 days, or another blind fish that actually climbs rock walls? Did you know spiders fish, and do you know what a gulper eel looks like? (scary and weird, is what) Did you know there's a type of wasp that injects their larvae into another insect's body, and the young eat their host from the inside out, or a fungi that turns its victim insane and cause them to climb to the highest point before they die, upon which a stalk grows right out of their heads and the spores explodes? Did you know of a Japanese red bug whose mother actually cares for her young, and if she fails, the young actually migrate themselves to a different mother, and when the young are old enough, they EAT their mother? Did you know there's fresh water running through hollow trees, but make a mistake and you'd find a nest of ants inside the hollow tree, or that there're trees built to host ants to the point of growing protein packages for them and having bulging branches, inside which is a ready-made network for the ants to live in? Did you know there're butterflies that drink blood within certain seasons? Seriously, nature's full of wacky stuff, all of which can be great inspiration. Btw, re sparkling vampires - it's your problem if you don't like it. Who are you to decide what works and what doesn't for the entire reading/writing community? (for that matter, who are you to dismiss another writer's idea, look down your nose at them as though your own are always superior?) I'm no Twilight fan, thought it was horrendous and I prefer my vampires to be not sparkling too. But to claim your opinion of what is good, what works, what is original is the standard is arrogant. To dismiss another person's idea as childish and unoriginal is patronising and condescending. How do you know they're not a brilliant writer who could blow you away anyway? But you won't know, because you've already made up your mind before you've even seen the evidence (eg. read the book) The truth of the matter is, if you get readers who love your work - then it works for somebody. Getting readers is the real test. And if you're gonna diss a successful published writer with lots of readers, rather than thinking you're too high and creative to bother with it, maybe you should ask yourself WHY such a supposedly unoriginal book became so successful, and glean a few gems from it. As long as you have no readers, it doesn't matter how original you are - no one's reading it. As somebody else said once, "A writer without readers is like a man shouting in an empty room."
