Tangled

[Rexenm]

It is an innocent take, but fantasy is basically puerile. I read series that are mostly fantasy, though these days I read classics. They don’t have a sword or a shield, but are still fascinating to me. Fantasy is what I know, and have known, and is still what I write, but it seems to me, that it takes a steady hand to write fantasy, and a loose one to read it. Have you any opinion on why there are remakes of movies, but no retelling of books?

 

[CupofJoe]

Try reading Gormenghast [series] by Mervyn Peake
As for retelling. in films the visuals change. SFX and tastes move on. And often the Author [or their estate ] get paid for the retelling.
Why rewrite a story already told to be pretty much like the original but not quite? And are you going to pay the original author?
But I have no idea what you mean by "it takes a steady hand to write fantasy, and a loose one to read it"
SFF readers can be obsessive and have been know leap on any inconsistence, especially in long running multi-author series.

 

[pmmg]

I dont understand the tangled reference? Is this about Disney's animated adaption?

Generally, I dont think books are as open to reinterpretation as movies are. Movies have gone through a long period of slow iteration to get from B/W to CGI monstrosities. Older movies tend to fall out of memory at a faster rate than books, and especially any recent memory, and the technology more exists now to do some of the elements justice. Tarzan is a story in which the author thought it could only be animated, as the Ape-man could not perform his stunts on screen. Disney marketed on that with their animated version, but....with CGI...now his dream can be fulfilled. Not true in the older B/W movies.

But...the statement is not entirely true. Many works are derivative of other works. Sword of Shannara is pretty much a copy of LOTR, and Eragon is pretty much Star Wars without the light show. Many books follow well worn templates, Romance is full of this, and many stories ideas and themes repeat. I dont think it gets the same fanfare, cause no one advertises Sword of Shannara as 'the Updated LORT series'.

And there are also many book that are direct remakings of older tales. Greek myths, Shakespeare, Arthurian Legends....many have undertaken to re-envision them.

 

[Prince of Spires]

I agree with pmmg that the premisse is false. Fairy Tale retellings for instance is a viable and popular sub-genre of fantasy. I've got a translated copy of the illiad on a bookshelf, as well as the Kalevala, 1001 nights, and Greek, Dutch, and Norwegian Myths. Plenty of retellings (and plenty of those were retellings in the first place).

As for remaking movies, there are actually not that many. Disney with their live-action remakes is probably the big one, together with the 200 different spiderman movies. Sequels yes, there are plenty of those. But actually telling the exact same story a second time doesn't happen all that much. When it does happen, it's usually simply a cash-grab. The Aladin had a built in audience when Disney made the live-action retelling, because plenty of people watched it as a kid and they could now take their kids to see it. It's easy money.

Another thing is of course that it's a rights matter. For straight up retellings of books, the author needs to approve of the retelling and has to actually sell you the rights. Why would he do so? He could either just sell more of the original, or he would feel that a retelling would harm either his artistic vision and / or his brand image.

With movie rights on the other hand, chances are the rights lie with a big corporation. They already own the rights, they might as well simply use them a second time. Or the rights will lie with the original creator (after they returned to him after X years), and now he can simply sell them again to the next movie studio.

 

[Gallio]

Some fantasy is puerile, but the best fantasy deals with profound themes such as death, loss, love, hatred, cruelty, and the nature of humanity.

 

[Queshire]

I have to imagine that you need to pump in a lot more money before you ever possibly see a return when it comes to movies vs books. It's not just an author that needs to get paid. The director, actors, technicians and more all gotta be paid. As a result I imagine that a story that has already "proven" itself is going to be appealing.

 

[A. E. Lowan]

'Puerile,' eh? Not sure what you mean by puerile. Can't mean the incredibly intricate and thought-out world building so many of us have spent literal years creating. Can't be the languages we create from boots to blades. Can't be the multifaceted characters we've spun out of dreams until they know us better than we know ourselves.

So, puerile. Not a word you probably want to bandy about in public while talking about your own writing journey, especially when you're surrounded by authors who most certainly have not thought of their work, or the work of others, as puerile. But, just in case this word doesn't mean what you think it means, here's this.

Definition of PUERILE

puerile, adj. & n. meanings, etymology and more | Oxford English Dictionary

Certainly not how I'd describe my team's work, nor the work of anyone else here. If you think fantasy is puerile, you may want to do a bit more reading. You seem to have lost the grasp of something along the way.

 

[Mad Swede]

Um. Do you know what the word "puerile" means? I can think of very many fantasy and SF novels which deal with some very mature themes indeed. Try reading Margaret Atwood's novel The Handmaid's Tale and then tell me that you think fantasy is puerile.

 

[Finchbearer]

Well, we seem to be stuck on the word puerile.

The Handmaid’s Tale is dystopian, not fantasy or Sci-fi. By the very nature of that genre any dystopian work of fiction explores social commentary and dark and disturbing themes.

 

[pmmg]

Y'all know this is Rexemn, right?

He's not always easy to interpret.

 

[Mad Swede]

Well, we seem to be stuck on the word puerile.

The Handmaid’s Tale is dystopian, not fantasy or Sci-fi. By the very nature of that genre any dystopian work of fiction explores social commentary and dark and disturbing themes.

The Handmaid's Tale may be a dystopian novel, but it is also speculative fiction in that it is set in a near future alternative world. We can discuss whether that makes the novel SF or fantasy, but it is certainly speculative fiction as Atwood herself said. It's worth noting that the book was nominated for the Nebula Award, so we can probably regard it as SFF of some form although Atwood didn't think it should be classed as SF.

As for being stuck on the work puerile. Yes, it does matter. That is a criticism which has been made before about SF and fantasy, usually by those critics who think that such authors aren't serious about their writing (yes, I know I'm simplifying the argument quite a lot). And in my view that sort of criticism denigrates the hard work that so many authors put into their books.

 

[Finchbearer]

I think it’s also about picking your fights where they actually matter - in this case I would let it lie.

Yes Handmaid’s Tale is dystopian spec fic…

 

[A. E. Lowan]

Y'all know this is Rexemn, right?

He's not always easy to interpret.

And you are very kind to point that out. So can I, for that matter. Clarity issues are my gravest sin. But that being said, this is a profession where clarity is expected, language is indeed a weapon and should be used accordingly and I honed mine on years and years of study. That means he needs to step up his game if he doesn't want to be misinterpreted. Here on Scribes we understand working with English as a second language, but one can't fall back on that excuse if one wants to be heard, especially when one opens their mouth and insults the work of literally everyone on the site.

 

[Finchbearer]

I am not insulted. Clearly the OP is a fan of fantasy and sci-fi, or else why would they be here. I agree that some words, if the wrong ones are chosen, could be taken as offensive. However, whilst I don’t totally agree with fantasy and SF being ‘puerile’ - I can understand the sentiment and where it’s coming from. Fantasy and sci-fi, as we all know, does not get taken as seriously as other genres for various reasons. It’s the section at the back of the bookstore that is hidden away. If I had it my way, as someone who reads fantasy and is an aspiring fantasy author, that would not be the case. In fact more fantasy is coming out from the hidden corner and into the foreground… but with that it’s like the secret genre that you love is becoming mainstream. I hope it doesn’t lose any appeal because of this shift. I can also see why a story about orcs is seen as less mature than a gritty thriller, even if the story about orcs has some deep meaningful sh*t going on in there.

 

[A. E. Lowan]

There's a long and venerable tradition in believing that Fantasy, and SciFi and Horror with it, are for children because it doesn't tackle "real" stories. That tradition came down to us through the belief that women writers could only write for children because we were incapable of tackling weighty topics. Only men, with their superior intellects, moralities, and literary gifts could produce great works of literature. All else was frippery.

Yeah.

In many corners this has remained like the sticky crap in the corner of your cabinet doors: nasty, damaging, but ultimately believed to be inevitable so why fight it? We fight because to do any less is to permit the crap to continue.

So, what my team does is write gritty thrillers about dragons who drive Lamborghinis and faerie knights with potty mouths on Harleys who couldn't give a rip what anyone thinks, but who tries to save the world, anyway. We write about ugly things. Serious things. We write about violence and heartbreak and death and families and getting up and trying again and again. We have a wizard who's a trauma surgeon addicted to stimulants.

So, yes, half a million words thrown out into the world and I am absolutely going to be offended when all of that work gets insulted. Insulted on purpose I can handle. I can work with that. Out of ignorance? No, now it's time for school.

 

[pmmg]

Also bearing mind, that this thread is a spinoff of a different thread, and pretty much cut and pasted his comment from there over to here at the request of another member. (Which is not apparent if you don't follow all the threads...).

I took his comment as attempting to say, a lot of fantasy (and in the context he first posted it, battles) is aimed at a younger crowd, where getting all the aspects of battle right are not necessary. (I did not understand the tangled reference, as I said above).


But...maybe he didn't. I feel I've dinged Rexemn quite a bit on his lack of clarity over the months. And I don't really like to be in the position of interpreter, so....

I thought the real question of this thread was this one:

Have you any opinion on why there are remakes of movies, but no retelling of books?

 

[A. E. Lowan]

Also bearing mind, that this thread is a spinoff of a different thread, and pretty much cut and pasted his comment from there over to here at the request of another member. (Which is not apparent if you don't follow all the threads...).

I took his comment as attempting to say, a lot of fantasy (and in the context he first posted it, battles) is aimed at a younger crowd, where getting all the aspects of battle right are not necessary. (I did not understand the tangled reference, as I said above).


But...maybe he didn't. I feel I've dinged Rexemn quite a bit on his lack of clarity over the months. And I don't really like to be in the position of interpreter, so....

I thought the real question of this thread was this one:

That does help. He still needs to work on his language usage, and on presenting his questions with the appropriate context, though it's very nice of you to have his back. I am not well-known for my patience.

 

[Finchbearer]

There's a long and venerable tradition in believing that Fantasy, and SciFi and Horror with it, are for children because it doesn't tackle "real" stories. That tradition came down to us through the belief that women writers could only write for children because we were incapable of tackling weighty topics. Only men, with their superior intellects, moralities, and literary gifts could produce great works of literature. All else was frippery.

Yeah.

In many corners this has remained like the sticky crap in the corner of your cabinet doors: nasty, damaging, but ultimately believed to be inevitable so why fight it? We fight because to do any less is to permit the crap to continue.

So, what my team does is write gritty thrillers about dragons who drive Lamborghinis and faerie knights with potty mouths on Harleys who couldn't give a rip what anyone thinks, but who tries to save the world, anyway. We write about ugly things. Serious things. We write about violence and heartbreak and death and families and getting up and trying again and again. We have a wizard who's a trauma surgeon addicted to stimulants.

So, yes, half a million words thrown out into the world and I am absolutely going to be offended when all of that work gets insulted. Insulted on purpose I can handle. I can work with that. Out of ignorance? No, now it's time for school.

I can feel the passion from here.

 

[Queshire]

Well, related to the topic of genres seen as for kids: animation.

There has been a long trend of seeing animation as for kids. Now, if you were certain companies interested in making money that sounds like a perfect excuse to repackage the same story as a more "serious" live action version. Oh, and wouldn't you look at the time? Most of those who were kids when the animated versions came out are now adults. How convenient.

 

[A. E. Lowan]

Well, related to the topic of genres seen as for kids: animation.

There has been a long trend of seeing animation as for kids. Now, if you were certain companies interested in making money that sounds like a perfect excuse to repackage the same story as a more "serious" live action version. Oh, and wouldn't you look at the time? Most of those who were kids when the animated versions came out are now adults. How convenient.

Can confirm. My parents thought anything animated was for kids, because animated, right? Yeah... 8 year-olds don't have any business watching Heavy Metal and there was another one called Fire and Ice that was very graphic. It messes with your development. Just sayin'.