As both a young writer and a huge fantasy fan, I can tell you why. (maybe, for me at least) Fantasy is a pretty loose genre that many different things and topics can be covered in. This gives the writer more freedom in which to work, which is always a good thing, especially for a noob like me. Your point about LOTR and HP is quite accurate. Books like these have a massive influence on many people's lives, and readers want to emulate that. But as for why I do it? I think it is much more fun to write about an exciting new world full of new things than the world in which we already live. If I wanted to experience the ordinary life and experiences of somebody in the real world, I could just walk outside. Fantasy is an escape from the drab and dull things which make up the majority of what we do in our lives. For a young writer, especially a student, this is not only attractive but perhaps necessary. If we don't ever get to leave our world and be in another for a while, the dull, boring stuff becomes our entire life, and nobody wants that. Also, magic and swords are hecking cool.
Good point. I would gladly embrace a fresh, new look at whatever trope. It's not about actual readers though, it's about what publishers think is safe.
Well...yes. But I've also found out that the escapist factor may be too much of a stretch and that sometimes it's easier to delve into non-existent customs and traditions than it is to foster contact with real-life...people and grow socially in this reality.
That is a remarkably accurate microcosm of the kind of thing happening in most art industries at the moment (film, gaming, television, books etc). Sadly, without a major change in the buying habits of consumers this is unlikely to change.
True, they just deliver what people seem to want...that's why we have call of duty after call of duty being released.
I believe quality is like energy. It does not age and in every age individuals get attracted by it. I look for fringe-games or books because of the criterion of quality. Some of them even have some lure-in tropes to get the numbers.
Not sure where you get that from - publishers have to consider risk, but many (I'd say most) editors are looking for something innovative and fresh. They all want to discover the Next Big Thing and you don't get that from publishing the same story you published last year. If it's TOO different it's no longer in the genre, which is what @Wreybies is always talking about regarding fantasy. And it is readers who like the same tropes and expect books to follow genre conventions. So no, I don't see evidence that publishers are looking for the same thing over and over.
Im starting to wonder if I need to put in a few well known tropes for it to be interesting to people. Guess you have to strike some sort of balance.
I think it's the combination of both. Sanderson said sth like this in one of his lectures but maybe I'm projecting my own take into the issue.
The fact that people keep bringing up LOTR, Harry Potter, etc I think says a lot of the general view on fantasy, that it must contain the elements of these stories, which is in no way the case. It seems that it's high fantasy that's become the golden standard of fantasy, which is kind of a shame, as it's too restraining.
I think people use these a lot because it is pretty much guaranteed that everyone involved is at least semi-familiar with them, which is not the case with a lot of other fantasy series which are not necessarily "high" fantasy.
I'm aware of that and I often wonder what it is about the high fantasy formula that makes it so successful. Who knows, maybe other types of fantasy will get their "hay day" ^^ It seems dark fantasy is gaining some ground in TV series...at least that's what I feel series like Penny Dreadful and Salem is.
Dark fantasy is difficult to pin down in terms of what exactly constitutes it, but it is definitely growing in popularity.
True, I believe GoT is considered Dark Fantasy, though I don't personally see it. But like you said, it's been discussed many times...just hope people don't look at GoT and think that Dark Fantasy is all about sex, violence, and asshole character.
Like some people have already said, many writers who were weaned on epics like Harry Potter and other YA novels of the past twenty (or so) years, are now entering into the authorial pool, seeking to emulate the fiction that drew them into their love of reading. Around the time before novels like Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone came out, young fiction readers had dropped off, simply because there was a lack of fiction that capitalized on their imaginations. So, when Rowling's first novel hit the shelves and started gaining traction, it was like a breath of fresh air to those potential readers. So, after Harry Potter, what do you, as a young reader, go to? Something you are comfortable with; other young fiction with a fantasy stint. Then, when you get old enough to try your hand a a writing genre, what do you write? Obviously, you'll write what you know -- fantasy.
I get that, which is why I mentioned it in the post you quoted. Having said that, I'm not sure that cleaving to one genre because you liked it when you read it is the best way to go. I grew up with a love of epic historical fiction. James Michener, Herman Wouk, Leon Uris, Gore Vidal - these were people who made different times and places come alive. But if I'd read only that, or even primarily that, I suspect it would have left me with very limited prospects in an already severely limited field. But I've also read more widely - now, to the point where I've discovered another genre that interests me, and that I think I might be able to succeed in. So, my advice is to keep the doors open to new ideas and fresh concepts.
My Urban Fantasy WIP appeals to me largely because of how much I borrow from crime thrillers and superhero comics I think my favorite noir film is Double Indemnity, and I was surprised by how much of The Hidden Fortress reminded me of my own characterizations.
I'm thinking about writing Fantasy. Got an idea for a Cougar to go on the prowl for the cub living at the end of her block. Catch being this kitty has claws, so to speak.
I'm old enough to remember a time before Harry Potter, but I grew up under a very dogmatic mother who, heading had two other children diagnosed with special needs at a young age, only gave me much attention if I misbehaved. Dad worked through the week. I was taught to read and didn't have a games console until around 2000, and I looked up to the heroes of fantasy art that time. As a teenager, I got more into the darker side, starting with the early Vampire Hunter D novels, which were then recently translated into English. The thing that fascinated me was how they didn't just look at the villainy of the vampires that D hunted, but also at the behaviour of those around the client (Greco in the first book was determined to make Doris, D's client in the first book, his while the mayor of the village in Raiser of Gales forced himself on his adopted daughter in the bid to raise an heir, the narration noting that if it helped the human race survived old rules about such relations were out the window). I'm writing in an urban fantasy setting, but I'm using supernatural beings as an expression about how humans have this need to have a bad guy to make themselves look better.
i think is because people of this time fancies life in the earlier time and could only get there through imagination.
I don't think fantasy can escape the influence of history. Even the most imaginative fantasy writers have to rely on existing notions as a starting point in their world building. I've been writing fantasy for a long time, but have a strong distaste for magic, magical creatures and Gardens of the Moon style worlds. I agree that fantasy writers should try to escape the influence of High Fantasy as a standard for their works. GRRM stand out in this regard, despite the fantastic elements, his works are a lot more about history, lore and even social, religious, cultural influences, which makes it so convincing.
I love High Fantasy, but, I believe I understand what you are saying. Here's a good article about the 7 Deadly Sins of Worldbuilding: http://io9.gizmodo.com/7-deadly-sins-of-worldbuilding-998817537 Here's a summary of the article: 1. Not thinking about basic infrastructure. 2. Not explaining why events are happening now. 3) Creating fictional versions of real-life human ethnic groups, that never go beyond one dimension 4) Creating monolithic social, political, cultural and religious groups. 5) Inventing a history that is totally logical 6) Not really giving a strong sense of place, like what it smells like after it's been raining. 7) Introducing some superpower, like magic or insane tech, without fully accounting for how it would change society
