Has heroic fantasy stagnated?

[Tobytwo]

I ask this purely to see what people think: how much room is there for innovation in heroic fantasy these days?

By definition, fantasy should be the widest genre of all: technically, fantasy is simply whatever the writer comes up with, even more so than science fiction, which has to work within rules of feasibility. Yet I can't help but feel that a lot of fantasy is very narrow, both in terms of setting and plot. I can think of endless books set in a semi-medieval, European-style world with magic and (usually) vaugely heraldic monsters, and several whose plot revolves around a boy (14 tends to work) who discovers that he is either prophesied or the rightful heir to the throne or will save the world.

Now, I don't want to say all fantasy is that forumulaic, because you have to consider people like China Mieville and Neil Gaiman. But is there room for development in the heroic, descended-from-Tolkein sort of fantasy any more? There certainly was in the 70s, when Moorcock, Brunner and Lieber were writing it. But would modern publishers accept a book where, for instance, the main characters were all over 30, or the setting was mock-Turkish or Mayan, say?

I very much hope there is, but I would be interested in people's thoughts. I'm sure I and many other people wouldn't have a problem with a fantasy novel whose lead character was, say, a woman of 45, or a book that only ran to 200 pages, but would it ever sell?

[j. d. worthington]

Originally Posted by Tobytwo

I ask this purely to see what people think: how much room is there for innovation in heroic fantasy these days?

By definition, fantasy should be the widest genre of all: technically, fantasy is simply whatever the writer comes up with, even more so than science fiction, which has to work within rules of feasibility. Yet I can't help but feel that a lot of fantasy is very narrow, both in terms of setting and plot. I can think of endless books set in a semi-medieval, European-style world with magic and (usually) vaugely heraldic monsters, and several whose plot revolves around a boy (14 tends to work) who discovers that he is either prophesied or the rightful heir to the throne or will save the world.

Now, I don't want to say all fantasy is that forumulaic, because you have to consider people like China Mieville and Neil Gaiman. But is there room for development in the heroic, descended-from-Tolkein sort of fantasy any more? There certainly was in the 70s, when Moorcock, Brunner and Lieber were writing it. But would modern publishers accept a book where, for instance, the main characters were all over 30, or the setting was mock-Turkish or Mayan, say?

I very much hope there is, but I would be interested in people's thoughts. I'm sure I and many other people wouldn't have a problem with a fantasy novel whose lead character was, say, a woman of 45, or a book that only ran to 200 pages, but would it ever sell?

First, I think I'd reformulate the qustion, as you begin by asking about heroic fantasy and then switch to fantasy in general; not all fantasy is heroic fantasy, any more than it is all dream-fantasy or urban fantasy or weird fantasy -- even when it may contain elements of all these. So to be clear: are you meaning the heroic fantasy sub-genre, or the broader field of fantasy in general, when you pose your question.

Second, Moorcock and Leiber especially (I'm not certain about Brunner, as I don't know his feelings about Tolkien) were certainly not following in Tolkien's footsteps in any way; Moorcock's dislike for Tolkien's fantasy is well known, and Leiber (iirc) remarked on being not particularly enthusiastic about it, either, not to mention the fact that the Fafhrd and Grey Mouser stories span from the early 1940s onward, so could hardly have been following Tolkien in that respect. That there may be similarities may simply be the inevitable result of having faux-mediæval (or -Renaissance, -Enlightenment, etc.) or feudal settings, in worlds where magic works, etc.

And the fact that we have had such writers in the past, and are having such as Gaiman, Mieville, etc. at present, would indicate that there is (to return to the question specifically) indeed "room" for innovation; it simply depends on the imagination of the writer and the willingness to accept something outside the stereotype of the reader.

As for whether or not it would find a publisher -- chances are that, if written well, it at least eventually would, though it might be a bit of an uphill battle. But that's nothing new, really. John Campbell grumbled every time he accepted one of Leiber's Fafhrd/Mouser tales, for instance, and the work that Tolkien was most interested in (The Silmarillion) was completely rejected during his lifetime... so much so that it was never finished even in rough draft, as the portions shown to others garnered little to no enthusiasm.

So I'd say yes, there's plenty of room for innovation; the question to me is: how many writers are wanting to tell their own stories in their own way, and how many readers are willing to give something outside the norm the chance it deserves? Given the number of times such questions arise, I'd say there's a growing likelihood of both being on the rise, though it may take some time for it to be recognizable....

[pyan]

Originally Posted by Tobytwo

But is there room for development in the heroic, descended-from-Tolkein sort of fantasy any more? There certainly was in the 70s, when Moorcock, Brunner and Lieber were writing it

Moorcock?

If you want to know Moorcock's views on Tolkien, read "Epic Pooh"...

Epic Pooh - Michael Moorcock

[D_Davis]

I've regained my faith in epic fantasy after reading JM McDermott's book, Last Dragon. It is astonishing, and clearly shows that there is a ton of room to work within the conventions established by the genre - of course it is also masterfully written with prose that sets the pages on fire. It is a new bellwether of fantasy fiction, and I am looking with eyes wide for something of this caliber.

The last fantasy thing that did this for me was the Elric Saga, and I first read this in the late '80s.

I don't think the genre is dead, but I have little use for it. I think it really needs to shaken up, and I think once more people read McDermott's book it will be. I encourage anyone interested in the genre, or anyone who once had an interest in the genre, to read this book. It may rekindle the flame of passion, and clearly shows there is room for innovation.

[GOLLUM]

Well not sure if Erikson and Bakker fit into this mould but they've both shaken the sub Genre a bit and IMO for the better. HMMM... they may be more EPIC fantasy with heroic elements.

Never heard of JM McDermott's book, Last Dragon, who in the past is it similar to in style if anyone?

As JD says, the fact that many authors these days are trying to break out of the Tolkien mould e.g. Vandermeer, Link, Mieville etc... in a broader sense w.r.t. Genre surely points to a greater likelihood of heroic fantasy gaining a renewed lease of life.

[Urlik]

I have to include Tom Holt as an author whose "heroic fantasy" doesn't quite fit with the epic works.

My Hero is primarily a comic fantasy and quite short, but it spans genres and at times is incredibly inventive and has a different angle on the hero in fantasy.

[iansales]

Just had a look at a few reviews of Last Dragon. Seems it's very good.

[Tobytwo]

I didn't know that about Fafhrd: in that case it really is very innovative.

My question was really about heroic or epic fantasy, and I mentioned Mieville and Gaiman to say that I didn't mean to tar all fantasy with the same brush as the more epic stuff. When I said "descended from Tolkein" I really meant fantasy including Tolkeinish elements, not literally by disciples or fans of his.

Epic Pooh is a good read, which like Starship Stormtroopers really shows what a radical Moorcock was, in all senses. But although Moorcock dislikes Tolkein, he did write fantasy that verged on the epic at times, and he did so with wit and originality - and more importantly he didn't tell the story I outlined in my first post. I only started this thread to pose the question rather than argue a point, but I suspect fantasy readers are more flexible and innovative than publishers sometimes think.

[Bentony]

You have a good point Tobytwo. After all, how many fantasies have you read of an initially reluctant adolescent going on some long quest involving (variously) mythic animals, bits of jewelery into which some incredibly powerful god has sealed his powers - and then lost or had stolen, swords and mysterious companions, which ususally include some old reprobate herbman/trader/drunk? Throw in a couple of dwarves, a bunch of supercillious elves, a disaproving female figure - who may or may not be related to said old reprobate and a few "men of the west" and off you go.
There is definatly space for a new departure and a whole new approach because the genre (with some notable exceptions) is getting rather formulistic. I think that the current films are also not helping as they are introducing non readers to this type of fantasy whilst placing a "chill" on the develpment of new ideas.
It is a bit like the Vampire stage that was so popular a few years ago - suddely you could not move for vampires jumping out from everywhere.
Maybe we should call it Tolkiens Revenge.

[iansales]

Vampires are still popular. But now they call it "urban fantasy", a label which was already being used by the likes of Charles deLint, Tim Powers and Jonathan Carroll.

[Connavar]

I dont see why you would put together Heroic Fantasy and Epic fantasy.

You start talking about heroic and suddenly switch to Tolkien and co.

Heroic Fantasy is my favorite fantasy subgenre. I dont care how simple the story sets or how different are a good HF is a great read for me


I havent been reading fantasy for many years so i dont really care IF Heroic Fantasy has stagnated or not when they are many Heroic Fantasy/Sword and Sorcery greats i have just discovered. Leiber,Poul Anderson,Moorcock etc



Although i dont mind a new David Gemmell. Someone that cant stop creating great Heroic Fantasy book after another.

[Bentony]

Well, a lot of the basic formula is seen in Tolkien.
You could also, if you want to get really technical, trace Heroic Fantasy back to tales of questing knights - Arthur et al, the medieval tales of wandering heros, fairy tales - Jack always being on some sort of adventure, and even further back to early epic sagas. That said, the formula is very well laid down in all of these, but I still see Tolkein's influence in a lot of current heroic fantasy.
Look, I'm not knocking it as such, I enjoy an epic journey/ quest in search of a bit of mysterious bling as much as the next person (summer sales here I come) but there are - particularly in b grade fantasy - lots of Tolkein elements. And lets face it, a hobbit is nothing but an innocent adolecent about to be led astray by ye olde friendly wizard.
Look for example at the earlier Shanara novels as well as the Belgariad.
I am currently reading the Deverry series - having steered well clear of this whole genre for the last 5 years - and frankly it is rather the same old ho hum. Lets face it, even a claustrophobic dwarf would be a refreshing change.

[D_Davis]

Originally Posted by GOLLUM

Never heard of JM McDermott's book, Last Dragon, who in the past is it similar to in style if anyone?

I've never read anything like it.

I'm shocked by how few people have read this. I've been preaching the good word for some time now.

[Fried Egg]

Originally Posted by D_Davis

I've never read anything like it.

I'm shocked by how few people have read this. I've been preaching the good word for some time now.

Well, I've just added it to my wishlist...

[Nesacat]

Have added it to mine as well. It certainly sounds very intriguing. Thank you.