The future of Fantasy

[brian]

Firstly, I appreciate that my reading in the gnere is pretty imperfect. But if there's one thing clear it's the influence of Tolkien.

Now we have the LOTR films in straight release, my big question is this:

Is the Tolkien influence going to grow dramatically, and the bookshelves fill with Tolkien-clone-wannabes? Or is this working against a general and continually revitalisation of the very "pagan" themes and influences that shaped Tolkien's own work, and thus will lead to a greater widening - even progression - of the genre?

Simply curious...

[Survivor]

I would hope that if there is a glut of "Tolkien-clone-wannabes" then increased sensitivity to the deeper themes of the work as a result of the movies along with market forces would tend to marginalize simply derivative work and reward original and vital work.

I fear the exact opposite result.

In either case, I think that "paganism" is the wrong direction for fantasy to take. People tend to forget that the deep Celtic and Norse mythologies were largely abandoned voluntarily, for the simple reason that Christianity informed the...what, the zeitgeist of their world more fully. Those myths have been enriched by inclusion in a context of being....

Well, anyway, I think that to the extent that you can understand those stories from a fundamentally Christian rather than pagan perspective, the more powerful they become. Which is why I often refer to certain mythical features as "pre-Christian" rather than "pagan". Which is getting off the real subject.

I think that increasingly, garbage is being fed into all arenas of public discourse. And books, even fantasy books, are no exception. Expect more garbage.

Don't worry, though. There are limits to the process...limits that impose harsh penalties on us, but in any case the increase in the garbage quotient cannot continue indefinitely.

[SirRob]

Is the Tolkien influence going to grow dramatically, and the bookshelves fill with Tolkien-clone-wannabes?

They are already full of them.

[nemesis]

Fantasy is escapist nothing more. Tolkien has proved his marketing value so expect lots more emphasis on imitation of him by the large publishers.

[brian]

Jordan's "Wheel of Time" series seems a particular leader in the industry. I've never actually read any though - is he derivative, or likely to be used derivatively? ???

[Roland Deschain]

You've got to realize that you can't really write a fantasy novel without it being compared to Tolkien. There already are a crapload of clones out there but there are also people like robert jordan that have actually built upon tolkiens ideas. I don't think the future is tolkien I think that it will be pretty much the same as always. People seem to write about the same things a lot, they just change the writing style to something more familiar.

[brian]

I'm sure there are good fantasy authors out there who have nothing at all in common with Tolkien. I haven't actually read very widely through the genre so I can't suggest any specific names.

[teddyrux]

As popular as he is, Jordan lost me as a reader. I read the first 4 Wheel books and I was in the middle of #5 when I put it down. That was when I found out that it was going to be 9+ books.

[brian]

Wow - that's a serious amount of books. Does he actually plan to end the series? From what I hear he hasn't even begun to start drawing in the main plotlines yet.

[dwndrgn]

Quoted from nemesis: 'Fantasy is escapist nothing more.'

nemesis: Please explain what you mean here. By escapist I infer that you are saying that all fantasy is 'fluff' without any real substance and therefore not fit for reading by educated minds. Is this a correct assumption?

In addition you are putting down many other genres by saying that for something to be 'escapist' then it is therefore 'bad'. Hmm. I am not sure that Hemingway, Melville, Eliot, Frost, cummings, Longfellow, Lewis, Browning, Sand, Shelley, and so on would agree with you.

Because something may not 'speak' to you, does not make it bad. Don't put down fantasy because you don't personally enjoy it. Many people enjoy fantasy, and, amazingly enough, wouldn't give a cow's flatulence whether you approve or not.

How much fantasy have you read? Just curious to see how you came to have this belief.

What genre do you enjoy?

[nemesis]

Fantasy is by its very nature implicitly about escapism. A lot of science fiction is as well. There is nothing wrong in reading escapist writings. My personal preference is specualtive fiction so that my ideas of being in reality and the universe can be challenged and enlarged. I notice you did not list a much in the way of contemporary fantasy names. But I will with Eddings and Feist and Gemmel and Hobb. Now compare those to such writers as Arthur C Clarke and Isaac Asimov and William Gibson and Robert Heinlein. There is my point.

By the way I did write a longer post but I was signed out and lost it.

[dwndrgn]

nemesis, you state that, "Fantasy is by its very nature implicitly about escapism." You are partially correct. Fantasy by its label is about escapism. You could say the same thing about science fiction. However, any work be it written, painted, sculpted or what have you, that actually shows you a view of the world that we live in that you have previously not been able to see, is a benefit to the mind. Your use of 'escapism' implies that there is no inherent worth to this type of fiction. I disagree with that view. You could even read what some call a 'bodice ripper' and gain some sort of knowledge that you didn't have before (say, what a bodice is) and you have just enhanced your knowledge, and probably your view of the roles of men and women in our society. In any case, I strongly dislike the word escapism as it has a negative connotation in today's culture. Of course, that is just my opinion.

You say that you prefer 'speculative fiction'. I have no clue what that actually means although just by definition it would have to be fiction that speculates ;D
I've heard the expression before but I've not been educated as to the types of novels that are so classified.

You also say, "I notice you did not list a much in the way of contemporary fantasy names." I listed authors specifically from other disciplines to prove a point. Apparently I didn't get my meaning accross. I was attempting to point out that very few authors set out to 'teach' I know some do, but I'm not talking about them here. The authors I listed didn't write 'fantasy' but many would have considered their works escapism at first. How are they thought of now? When teachers tell their students to study the poetry of Robert Frost, do they tell them that poetry is just fluff? Not worthwhile to read? Of no educational value? Of course not. Anything that a person writes, that another can read can bring value to the reader. Just because it is enjoyable to read at the same time does not negate that value. Even if the only value is better reading and comprehension skills.

Moving on, you list some contemporary fantasists and ask me to compare them with other authors that although I don't know all of them seem to be science fiction (or perhaps speculative fiction? I don't know). Why? Why would I want to compare apples to oranges? They are both fruit and both can be enjoyed by many people, but do they taste the same and give you the benefit of the same vitamins, minerals and energy? Nope. Some people like oranges, some like apples. I like both equally. I like Granny Smiths, dislike Rome apples, like tangerines but don't care much for navels. So, I still don't believe I understand your 'point'.

[brian]

You say that you prefer 'speculative fiction'. I have no clue what that actually means

Here is the only information I could find about that.

[dwndrgn]

Well thanks for the link! I suppose the definition depends upon the person using the phrase.

[teddyrux]

Reading is about escapism.

It appears to me that nemesis doesn't like fantasy. Which is fine. Just say that you don't like it so that we know where you're coming from.

Comparing Eddings and Heinlein (I've read both and enjoy their works) is like comparing Eric Clapton and Tim McGraw.