# You have a duty to your genre.



## Skybreaker Sin K'al (Jun 28, 2018)

Whichever genre you are writing in, I want to share this thought with you.

_You have a duty to change your genre; to expand its horizons and most importantly *bring something new to the table.
*_
I write in fantasy. Goodkind brought us the chosen one. Martin brought us realism. Sanderson brought us proper magic systems. Now, I think it is my duty to add something new to this genre.

What are you bringing to the table?


----------



## TheCrystallineEntity (Jun 28, 2018)

I'm genre busting, so does that mean I have a duty to play around with as many genres as possible? The only problem is, I don't like westerns.


----------



## Skybreaker Sin K'al (Jun 28, 2018)

This post is addressed specifically to people writing in a genre, but what does westerns have to do with this?


----------



## TheCrystallineEntity (Jun 28, 2018)

It's the only genre I haven't piled into my series. I was just trying to be funny. *backs away slowly*


----------



## Skybreaker Sin K'al (Jun 28, 2018)

Oh, right!

I didn't understand for a second. Stephen king does this with The Dark Tower, and effectively created his own genre. I can see the same thing happening with your story.


----------



## TheCrystallineEntity (Jun 28, 2018)

No worries. In just the second book of my first series alone, I have fantasy, soft sci-fi, romance, family dynamics, mystery, and a touch of horror.


----------



## Penpilot (Jun 28, 2018)

Sorry, but I'm going to respectfully diasagree. 

Now, it's always, IMHO, a good thing to push the boundaries and push your skills, but I don't think anyone must do anything but write an honest story. 

Sometimes that story may expand horizons. Sometimes that story may tread on familiar ground. All that matters is that it's the author's story and that they tell it in a truthful manner. 

Sometimes the simplest stories that are told well and tread over familiar ground are the most powerful and touch the most people. 

Everything has been done before, but everyone already brings something unique to the table and that's their voice. Their personal views of the world based on their personal experience colours a story and is what makes that story unique to them. 

Not every chef needs to be a gourmet chef. Not every meal needs to be a gourmet meal. Sometime all I want is a sloppy Big Mac, not steak and frites.


----------



## Chessie2 (Jun 28, 2018)

My duty to genre is to please readers by writing a story that feeds their need and what they are looking for in that type of story. I honor tropes and the emotional rides readers are seeking and the reason why they read historical romance in the first place.

As Penpilot said, your voice is the unique thing that you bring to the table. It's good to challenge yourself but trying to bust genre never really works...if you want to sell books. Now, not every writer wants to sell books so to each their own.


----------



## Ban (Jun 28, 2018)

The only duty you have, is the duty you lay out for yourself. If you write to entertain, better make sure it's entertaining to your target audience. If you write to educate, than make sure your work is educational. If you write to motivate, if you write to call to action, if you write to make others think...yada yada yada, you get my point.


----------



## Heliotrope (Jun 28, 2018)

Penpilot said:


> All that matters is that it's the author's story and that they tell it in a truthful manner.



Yep. This.

Goodkind did not bring us "the chosen one". The Bible did, and arguably the trope had been around in storytelling for thousands of years before then. There is nothing "new" to bring to a genre, other than your own voice and perspective.


----------



## Demesnedenoir (Jun 28, 2018)

Sanderson, proper magic systems? Hell, just further ripoffs of house ruled RPG games, LOL. Don't get me wrong, Sanderson is fine, but the idea these people brought us these three things is amusing.


----------



## Heliotrope (Jun 28, 2018)

Demesnedenoir said:


> Sanderson, proper magic systems? Hell, just further ripoffs of house ruled RPG games, LOL. Don't get me wrong, Sanderson is fine, but the idea these people brought us these three things is amusing.



Yep. I have a guilty admiration for Terry Goodkind because my 14 year old self had the hots for Richard Cypher, and at that time I was a budding libertarian.... but he didn't bring us "the chosen one."


----------



## DragonOfTheAerie (Jun 28, 2018)

Skybreaker Sin K'al said:


> Whichever genre you are writing in, I want to share this thought with you.
> 
> _You have a duty to change your genre; to expand its horizons and most importantly *bring something new to the table.
> *_
> ...



I don't think everyone feels this calling. I definitely do, though. To bring not necessarily something new, but something different and something very, very good.


----------



## skip.knox (Jun 28, 2018)

I'm another who doesn't see much point in genre-busting, mainly because I regard genres as the invention of literary critics and agents, supplemented by the practical needs of bookstores and libraries. Genres aren't real; they are abstractions. Only the stories themselves are real, and while one can see similarities and so invent genre categories in which to group them, one can just as readily see what is unique in each and point out that A doesn't really belong on the same shelf as B. 

I also wonder about that gerundive "busting". Given that the genre is an abstraction, what does it take to bust one? Is it sufficient to introduce a single novelty? Do any of us really think we've got something utterly unprecedented? Does busting mean one has written something so new that it spawns a new genre or sub-genre? I'm thinking here of something like Gibson's _Necromancer_. How is one to know if one's story has busted a genre?

And finally, I believe there is merit in putting new wine in old bottles. I would very much admire any story that genuinely gets me excited about the farm boy of destiny, or warms my heart with an wise, old wizard. Indeed, I'd argue that writing such a story is every bit as difficult as busting a genre (I keep thinking of untamed horses...).

In short, I wish all good fortune to anyone who wants to blaze a new trail. I wish the same good fortune to anyone who wishes to put new pavement on old roads. To that I would add commiseration and sympathy to the rest of us poor sods who only want to get the wretched thing written and let others figure out where to shelve it!


----------



## Devor (Jun 28, 2018)

Look, I'm a huge fan of original ideas, of learning to be creative on every page, and of pushing at the quality of your concepts.

But, I don't think everyone needs to push the genre all that hard.  There are people who bring us something entirely new, and then there are people who "follow" that new idea and spend their time applying it to other areas of the genre.  Somebody gave us steampunk, and somebody else gave us tinkering goblins and gnomes, or Midgar from Final Fantasy VII, and other uses of fantasy steam tech.  Finally there are people who offer even less by way of creativity, just a solid story.  I think that's fine.

By the way, what GRRM gave us wasn't "realism."  (It's not particularly unique in that regard, and it isn't actually all that realistic.)  What GRRM did that's unique was offer a story that balances what's getting close to a thousand political power players (I looked it up, and it's reached over 2,000 named characters).


----------



## Mythopoet (Jun 28, 2018)

Skybreaker Sin K'al said:


> I write in fantasy. Goodkind brought us the chosen one. Martin brought us realism. Sanderson brought us proper magic systems.



You're kidding, right? Please tell me you're kidding. You really need to read more.


----------



## Chessie2 (Jun 28, 2018)

A lot of writers want to bend genre but what they don't yet understand is that genre is the way we communicate with readers, that and tropes. What I see plenty of (on this site and others like it) are writers who want to be different by busting this and adding in that. How are readers supposed to understand your work if it doesn't have parameters? 

Genre= expectations. It's totally okay to mix genres (like fantasy romance, or military sci fi, or historical fantasy) but these stories will still technically be fantasy or science fiction. Genre also= plot. Romance genre= a romance plot. A fantasy romance is a romance (genre and plot) with a fantastical setting and occurrences. But it is still romance. 

I just don't get why newer writers try to be so different in drastic ways that readers can't then connect with their work. We differ ourselves by our voice and tastes, the same way we do in real life. There needs to be a serious amount of confidence built up inside a writer. They need to be able to love their genre and respect the expectations that readers have for it. I'm not going to try and kill one of the heroes in my historical romances because I'm trying to flex my genre muscles. Readers would cream me with bad reviews. What I am going to do, however, is continue honing my voice and improving in my craft, so that when they pick up one of my books they are drawn in by the way I tell a story. It will be different than other authors in my genre. And that's totally the point, not breaking genre.


----------



## Heliotrope (Jun 28, 2018)

Chessie2 said:


> A lot of writers want to bend genre but what they don't yet understand is that genre is the way we communicate with readers, that and tropes. What I see plenty of (on this site and others like it) are writers who want to be different by busting this and adding in that. How are readers supposed to understand your work if it doesn't have parameters?
> 
> Genre= expectations. It's totally okay to mix genres (like fantasy romance, or military sci fi, or historical fantasy) but these stories will still technically be fantasy or science fiction. Genre also= plot. Romance genre= a romance plot. A fantasy romance is a romance (genre and plot) with a fantastical setting and occurrences. But it is still romance.
> 
> I just don't get why newer writers try to be so different in drastic ways that readers can't then connect with their work. We differ ourselves by our voice and tastes, the same way we do in real life. There needs to be a serious amount of confidence built up inside a writer. They need to be able to love their genre and respect the expectations that readers have for it. I'm not going to try and kill one of the heroes in my historical romances because I'm trying to flex my genre muscles. Readers would cream me with bad reviews. What I am going to do, however, is continue honing my voice and improving in my craft, so that when they pick up one of my books they are drawn in by the way I tell a story. It will be different than other authors in my genre. And that's totally the point, not breaking genre.



I notice this as well... I can't answer for everyone, obviously, but my theory is that new writers think that if they can come up with a flashy "gimmick" then their story will be "cool" and therefor, "popular." (So many corny quotations, lol).

 I've noticed this as a general trend. It takes a few years and a few failures and some major growing into your own voice before you start to understand that a good story comes from being able to write a true, authentic, and well written story. Good stories, quality stories, do not need gimmicks. They don't need fancy new monsters, or a twist on theme, or the biggest most badass setting _ever. _Good stories are about authentic emotions. Events that _feel _true and real, written in such a way that is clear and free of distractions. But it takes some time and development of chops to get to that point.


----------



## WooHooMan (Jun 28, 2018)

On principle, I _*hate*_ the idea that people have any kind of inherent duty to change anything just because they are involved in the thing.
Me underlining, emboldening and italicizing the word "hate" is insufficient in expressing my hatred for that position.

I also *hate* when people who are into a genre of art deify that genre.  Like people who think rock music is a mystical, spiritual thing and act like Chuck Berry or Jimi Hendrix are saints to the religion of rock.
My hatred for that idea is not as severe hence why I only emboldened the word.
(as a sidenote: this mindset caused me to ditch playing guitar in favor of getting into hip hop and electronic music production.  I've been much happier with that than when I was playing in rock bands)

As an artist of any format, I don't have any duty to anyone or anything.  I do my art because I enjoy doing it.  Not out of responsibility.
I don't like people telling me I have some kind of responsibility that I didn't sign-up to have.  I have too much in my life to be responsible for already.  I just want to enjoy fantasy.


----------



## Heliotrope (Jun 28, 2018)

WooHooMan said:


> On principle, I _*hate*_ the idea that people have any kind of inherent duty to change anything just because they are involved in the thing.
> Me underlining, emboldening and italicizing the word "hate" is insufficient in expressing my hatred for that position.
> 
> I also *hate* when people who are into a genre of art deify that genre.  Like people who think rock music is a mystical, spiritual thing and act like Chuck Berry or Jimi Hendrix are saints to the religion of rock.
> ...



I really have to respond to this because I LOVE it. My grandmother paints water colour. She likes to paint. It is a creative outlet for her. She participates in a lot of local events and art shows. She has had a few pieces shown in local galleries and she has made a bit of money off of them. She loves what she does.

Would you ever see what she paints in a major gallery? No. Will she ever make enough to support herself? No. She paints standard water colour scenes of the northern lights and Arizona deserts and sometimes a fish or two. Her stuff is lovely and colourful and makes nice thank-you cards, sold for $2.99 at a craft show.

Does she have a responsibility to change her genre? To change the way we feel about landscapes? To push the boundaries of water colour? I think not. That is asinine. She has a responsibility to herself only. To do what she loves. To creates what she feels. To sell her note cards at craft markets and sometimes sell an original in a gallery for a few hundred bucks. She has a responsibility to find the path and balance that makes her happy.

As a writer, that is what I hope for. The thing I'm responsible for is myself.


----------



## Devor (Jun 28, 2018)

I think maybe questions about having a "responsibility" in your work is more of an issue for people who are at the top of the industry and have gained a lot from their work in the genre, and who are actually in a position to have an impact on the industry with their work moving forward.  At least then it makes sense to ask the question.  For example, if I was heading up Wizards of the Coast, makers of D&D and MTG, it might be fair to ask, "Is our work holding back the genre?  Can we find ways to push it farther within what we're doing?"  I don't mean to imply an answer, just that the question is fair to ask at that point.

For most of us, though, it seems like a lot to push some sort of social responsibility onto people who are still trying to get a handle on what they're even doing.

That said, even just a different angle can make a world of difference.  For example, "Pushing the genre is a good way to develop work that stands out from the slush pile..."


----------



## Skybreaker Sin K'al (Jun 29, 2018)

Mythopoet said:


> You're kidding, right? Please tell me you're kidding. You really need to read more.



Yeah, of course I read more, but these are just some examples I came up with.


----------



## Skybreaker Sin K'al (Jun 29, 2018)

Penpilot said:


> Sorry, but I'm going to respectfully diasagree.
> 
> Now, it's always, IMHO, a good thing to push the boundaries and push your skills, but I don't think anyone must do anything but write an honest story.
> 
> ...


Yeah!


----------



## Skybreaker Sin K'al (Jun 29, 2018)

I've heard a lot of people mentioning "voice" as their thing to bring to the table. I agree! You don't have to change the way your genre works to change the genre! The simple use of first person in Patrick Rothfuss sets "The Name of the Wind" apart!


----------



## Skybreaker Sin K'al (Jun 29, 2018)

Demesnedenoir said:


> Sanderson, proper magic systems? Hell, just further ripoffs of house ruled RPG games, LOL. Don't get me wrong, Sanderson is fine, but the idea these people brought us these three things is amusing.


I guess what I'm saying is that these people brought their own take on these things, and that's how they changed the genre.


----------



## FifthView (Jun 29, 2018)

Almost everyone has a desire for something new and a desire for something old--both simultaneously. 

Personally, I think of this as a part of the human condition. We want both, old and new.

But how these are divided and defined and accomplished may be very particular for any given individual.

I do suspect that putting the whole burden on genre (however defined) may be where the OP goes astray. Newness can be achieved in other ways than bending or bursting genre.


----------



## Svrtnsse (Jun 29, 2018)

FifthView said:


> Almost everyone has a desire for something new and a desire for something old--both simultaneously.


Human condition indeed.
It's got to be a little bit new or we'll get bored, but it can't be too different or we'll get uncomfortable.


----------



## Dark Squiggle (Jun 29, 2018)

I bring with me BS, the noblest and most difficult of the arts of words. My genre shall love and remember me forever.


----------



## Chessie2 (Jun 29, 2018)

Svrtnsse said:


> Human condition indeed.
> It's got to be a little bit new or we'll get bored, but it can't be too different or we'll get uncomfortable.


Which is why it confuses me when writers get anxious about something being cliche. It strikes me that many writers don't really know the difference between a trope and a cliche. Tropes are a necessary means of communication with readers--it's how they understand our ideas. Cliches are lazy. 

Trope: orphan hero who goes from nothing to saving the world.
Cliche: orphan hero who saves the world by using a sword & being a Mary Sue.

Totally okay to use a sword, but an individual spin on the orphan trope would be:

-orphan hero who uses a sword AND wields magic that is unusual
-orphan hero who is a werewolf 
-orphan hero who is a vampire
-orphan hero who lives in a medieval setting who uses magic, a sword, AND does xyz

When writers want to bust genre and bring something new to the table, they are usually lacking in understanding how powerful genre and tropes really are. Use them to your advantage. No one can write a story the way you can, so already it is unique. Genre provides boundaries that give your story a purpose, that give it structure. Bend at your own risk.


----------



## Corwynn (Jun 30, 2018)

Much like the late C.S. Lewis, I write the sorts of stories I would like to have read when I was younger (and still would). If I can accomplish this by stepping outside of established genre conventions, I will. If I wish to tread familiar ground to do so, I will. I agree that a certain amount of originality is the obligation of the author, but it is really no more than is necessary to avoid plagiarism. 

Some people want great art that will challenge and stimulate them. Others just want a nice piece of kitsch to brighten up the living room. One can and should be free to cater to either taste, but your own should come first and foremost.


----------



## Laurence (Jun 30, 2018)

I think the current genres likely cover everything and most stories likely cross at least three genres.

That being said, the idea that if you’re writing fantasy you should stick to existing tropes is pretty questionable.

For me, the whole beauty of fantasy is that you can invent new environments, objects, cultures and creatures, so why wouldn’t you?

I’m not looking to do anything gimmicky for the sake of a trending book, but if I can create my own large destructive monster rather than a dragon then I will definitely do so. I prefer writing a creature that the reader has to picture in their own head rather than imagining, say, Smaug.

Opportunities for creativity should be taken in my opinion and that’s what will help the genre. 

You do need a sweet plot and characters but I’d assume that’s a given.


----------



## TheKillerBs (Jun 30, 2018)

Laurence said:


> For me, the whole beauty of fantasy is that you can invent new environments, objects, cultures and creatures, so why wouldn’t you?
> 
> I’m not looking to do anything gimmicky for the sake of a trending book, but if I can create my own large destructive monster rather than a dragon then I will definitely do so. I prefer writing a creature that the reader has to picture in their own head rather than imagining, say, Smaug.
> 
> Opportunities for creativity should be taken in my opinion and that’s what will help the genre.


I have a problem with the attitude that just because you can do it that means you should. What would you gain from designing a large, destructive monster instead of using an existing one? Is it just the sake of "creativity"? If so, that seems like a waste of time and page space. To me, creating a new monster (or other story element) should be done for the sake of the story, because the new monster brings something to the story than just to be different.


----------



## Skybreaker Sin K'al (Jun 30, 2018)

TheKillerBs said:


> I have a problem with the attitude that just because you can do it that means you should. What would you gain from designing a large, destructive monster instead of using an existing one? Is it just the sake of "creativity"? If so, that seems like a waste of time and page space. To me, creating a new monster (or other story element) should be done for the sake of the story, because the new monster brings something to the story than just to be different.


Yeah, Exactly. In fantasy, you _can _write new things, but you can put twists on old things, too. They often have the same effect.


----------



## skip.knox (Jun 30, 2018)

>What are you bringing to the table?
There is no table. There is only the reader, and they vary wildly in taste and background. All I can do is to write the best story I know how to write. Once I click Publish, the matter is out of my hands.


----------



## Malik (Jun 30, 2018)

Skybreaker Sin K'al said:


> Martin brought us realism.



No, he didn't. He brought us a painstakingly detailed world that clings to its own internal logic. There is a massive difference.



Skybreaker Sin K'al said:


> What are you bringing to the table?



Actual realism.

My goal was to do for knights in armor what Tom Clancy did for the nuclear submarine. During the time I was learning to write, I also spent well over a decade learning to do a lot of the things in my fantasy world myself, albeit it sometimes at risk to life and limb: swordsmanship, martial arts, stunts on horseback, blacksmithing, traveling to Europe to pace off castles and ruins, building a conlang and teaching myself to speak and write it, and so on.

Later in life I joined the military and ended up in a quiet, weird corner of Special Operations that, among other things, trained with foreign militaries, including militaries in developing nations. This gave me access to a whole world of arcane knowledge: austere medicine, human tracking, how to stage a camel caravan. I've had the good fortune to live with people whose worlds were made by hand and lit only by fire, and stand shoulder to shoulder with soldiers who still believe in magic.

I took all this, and undertook to write experientially about the fantasy world I've built instead of just explaining it. The result is a reading experience that I'm told crosses the line from suspension of disbelief into plausible deniability. Reviewers use words like "authentic" and "believable," and I have readers who have contacted me to ask if it's all real.


----------



## Malik (Jun 30, 2018)

Skybreaker Sin K'al said:


> I've heard a lot of people mentioning "voice" as their thing to bring to the table. I agree! You don't have to change the way your genre works to change the genre! The simple use of first person in Patrick Rothfuss sets "The Name of the Wind" apart!



_The Name of the Wind _is written in framed narrative, which is omniscient third person with encapsulations in first. _Frankenstein_ is the granddaddy of framed narrative, if you would like more reading in that particular voice.


----------



## Demesnedenoir (Jun 30, 2018)

And Name of the Wind sucked... just saying. Name of the Rose... much better... More power to Rothfuss having success and people loving his stuff, but I just can't read it. I went out and bought a paperback copy just so I could throw the thing without breaking my ipad... okay, just kidding.



Malik said:


> _The Name of the Wind _is written in framed narrative, which is omniscient third person with encapsulations in first. _Frankenstein_ is the granddaddy of framed narrative, if you would like more reading in that particular voice.


----------



## Malik (Jun 30, 2018)

I loved _The Name of the Wind_. I haven't ruled out doing the final book of this first series in framed narrative just to shake things up.


----------



## Demesnedenoir (Jun 30, 2018)

Too funny, I can't make it past page 150-200 area and I've tried on several occasions just to see if I can find what people like. It has nothing to do with the framed narrative so much... I think he writes better in 1st than 3rd, frankly. His 3rd is pedestrian at best. The story and characters just don't interest me one blip. In fact, they go to the negative interest for me, to the point I just don't like them, and don't care.

But that's the beauty of varied tastes. I mean I'm sure there're some nutcases out there who don't like the Name of the Rose, who can dislike William of Baskerville? I mean, come on...



Malik said:


> I loved _The Name of the Wind_. I haven't ruled out doing the final book of this first series in framed narrative just to shake things up.


----------



## Hallen (Jun 30, 2018)

Genre is just a label. It's a label used to categorize, usually in very general terms, what your story is from a marketing standpoint. "Urban Fantasy" didn't exist when I was first reading fantasy. Neither did Steam Punk. Those labels came into being once enough authors had success with stories of that type.

Write your story using the elements that you want.


----------



## Skybreaker Sin K'al (Jul 1, 2018)

Malik said:


> No, he didn't. He brought us a painstakingly detailed world that clings to its own internal logic. There is a massive difference.



Well, actually, isn't that realistic? Is not our world painstakingly detailed?


----------



## Chessie2 (Jul 1, 2018)

Hallen said:


> Genre is just a label. It's a label used to categorize, usually in very general terms, what your story is from a marketing standpoint. "Urban Fantasy" didn't exist when I was first reading fantasy. Neither did Steam Punk. Those labels came into being once enough authors had success with stories of that type.
> 
> Write your story using the elements that you want.


Genre is way more than a label. It's a promise to the reader, mostly.


----------



## Skybreaker Sin K'al (Jul 1, 2018)

Actual realism.

My goal was to do for knights in armor what Tom Clancy did for the nuclear submarine. During the time I was learning to write said:


> I wish you luck!


----------



## Malik (Jul 1, 2018)

Skybreaker Sin K'al said:


> Well, actually, isn't that realistic? Is not our world painstakingly detailed?



Detail and logical function are separate concepts.

The absolute, fundamental concept driving the entire series--this whole idea that they have no idea how long any given winter is going to last--is batshit insane. Besides the orbital mechanics involved (work it out; I'll wait), society would collapse every winter. There would be no way to plan for the next growing season, and no way to know how much food to store; you'd be basically gambling every few years whether you were going to live. (I'm not even certain how life would evolve in such a world, frankly; it would likely be a rock hurtling through space with flourishing bacteria and moss for a few months between winters.)  If humans could somehow have evolved in (or portaled into) such a world, they'd be nomadic bands driven by the edge of winter. Which is what the Wildlings more or less are, so there's that. There shouldn't be any civilization at all to speak of, much less should every country have a thriving capital city.

And don't even get me started on the fight scenes. Just, Oh, God.

They're fantastic books, and spectacularly written and detailed, but realistic is just about the last word that comes to mind.


----------



## Hallen (Jul 1, 2018)

Chessie2 said:


> Genre is way more than a label. It's a promise to the reader, mostly.


I would think that it depends on what you are promising.
Are you saying that there will be swords and elves and dragons and sorcery in all fantasy novels? 

I did say that it was for marketing purposes. That is a way of categorizing, or labeling, a story for easier display and organizing. It does help customers narrow down their search. Start with the label "Fantasy" and then start sorting. But there is a lot of sorting after that. 

How many forms of Fantasy are there? Dozens now? It's a really broad category. The only promise is speculative fiction that generally contains fantastical elements. What those elements are and how you put them together is totally up to you. That is the promise. So, my point was that there is no responsibility to expand the category since it really is just a general label and your story is what your story is.

Just a few more thoughts to try to illustrate my thinking:
Are you breaking a promise if you have revolvers in your story like Sanderson does in the Mistborn series? Is the Belgariad even remotely in the same space as ASoIF? How about the Dresden Files compared to The Golden Compass? Is Twilight fantasy, romance, paranormal romance, or what? Do you see what I mean? These things are just labels.


----------



## Malik (Jul 1, 2018)

Skybreaker Sin K'al said:


> I wish you luck!



Thank you. I've been very blessed. Book I succeeded far beyond any hopes I could have had. Book II drops in September and the initial reviews have been exceptional. It's a long time between now and Book III, though, so we'll see what happens.


----------



## Skybreaker Sin K'al (Jul 1, 2018)

Malik said:


> Detail and logical function are separate concepts.
> 
> The absolute, fundamental concept driving the entire series--this whole idea that they have no idea how long any given winter is going to last--is batshit insane. Besides the orbital mechanics involved (work it out; I'll wait), society would collapse every winter. There would be no way to plan for the next growing season, and no way to know how much food to store; you'd be basically gambling every few years whether you were going to live. (I'm not even certain how life would evolve in such a world, frankly; it would likely be a rock hurtling through space with flourishing bacteria and moss for a few months between winters.)  If humans could somehow have evolved in (or portaled into) such a world, they'd be nomadic bands driven by the edge of winter. Which is what the Wildlings more or less are, so there's that. There shouldn't be any civilization at all to speak of, much less should every country have a thriving capital city.
> 
> ...


What I meant was that a sense of detail is in itself realistic, even if what it is being applied to is not. But yeah, I agree.


----------



## Svrtnsse (Jul 1, 2018)

Skybreaker Sin K'al said:


> What I meant was that a sense of detail is in itself realistic, even if what it is being applied to is not. But yeah, I agree.


Could it be you think of believability rather than realism. The details and the way they combine and match up might make the world seem real and believable even though at a deeper level it may not be at all.


----------



## Skybreaker Sin K'al (Jul 1, 2018)

Svrtnsse said:


> Could it be you think of believability rather than realism. The details and the way they combine and match up might make the world seem real and believable even though at a deeper level it may not be at all.


Yeah, exactly. Most things have a level of nuance to them, and to reflect this in unrealistic concepts makes it come off as realistic, does it not? Besides, applying believability to a concept can add realism to it, for example, consequences of magic use, even if magic itself is an unrealistic concept.


----------



## Malik (Jul 1, 2018)

Skybreaker Sin K'al said:


> Yeah, exactly. Most things have a level of nuance to them, and to reflect this in unrealistic concepts makes it come off as realistic, does it not? Besides, applying believability to a concept can add realism to it, for example, consequences of magic use, even if magic itself is an unrealistic concept.



Yes and no. The problem here is that magic only goes so far. Unless your entire world was literally shat into existence teeming with midichlorian gut flora from the colon of a benevolent god, you have to get the details right. I can sell a realism-focused reader on flying horses and gryphon fights because the saddles make sense.

Of course, individual mileage may vary. If you're writing YA or MG, you can get away with considerable handwavium, but my experience has been that adult readers of fantasy love to call authors on their bullshit. We hear again and again that people read fantasy to escape, and that nobody who reads fantasy really cares about realism. I heard this line for fifteen years from major publishing houses, and heard it again from my first editor before I sent him packing. There are far many more fantasy readers who scrutinize the whys and hows--and rightfully, because they've been at this longer than we have, and they know a thing or two--than many authors want to admit. I would even go so far as to say that such readers are the rule and not the exception (EDIT: among adult readers of adult fantasy).

Go to a con sometime and just hang out and eavesdrop; listen to the fans argue about how Ser What's His Nuts couldn't have stabbed that guy through his coat of plates outside the Tower of Joy, Valeryian Steel or no. I've witnessed shouting matches over the existence of a global trading economy vis a vis the nonexistence of rule of law in ASOIAF. It happened on a panel about how to use celestial navigation on alien planets. It devolved quickly; one dude had the costs of each major battle calculated and memorized, FFS. People with that kind of time and attention to detail read a ****ton of books.


----------



## skip.knox (Jul 1, 2018)

Malik describes one cadre of reader, and that cadre has many members, without a doubt. There are others, quite adult, who let much of that slide. Otherwise, how to explain the popularity of Peter S. Beagle or Philip Pullman? One of my favorite recent reads has been Josiah Bancroft's _Babel_ series, which is utterly unbelievable in terms of physics or sociology. Indeed, the lack of realism is its own reward there because I just don't know what he's going to pull out of the hat next, and that's delightful.

What I do know, from each of these authors, is that they are going to write well. I come to a book looking for a story first. Verisimilitude is a distant second, and I don't worry much about realism (though I have to confess that I could never get past the core assumptions of _The Hunger Games_). But for those who long for realism, it's a deal-breaker. I present my stories as alternate history, so I know that many of my readers are going to have a keen eye for historical mistakes.

Every story is, in part, a promise to the reader. Know the promises you are making, and be sure not to break them.


----------



## Svrtnsse (Jul 1, 2018)

While we're off topic anyway, I'd like to state that believability and realism aren't as closely related as perhaps it might first seem.

Believability is how readily the reader accepts what the writer is telling them. This may or may not have anything to do with realism, but will have a whole lot to do with the internal consistency of the story. Another way of putting it is that Realism is about not breaking the laws of nature, while Believability is about not breaking the rules of the story.

...sort of.


----------



## Chessie2 (Jul 2, 2018)

Hallen said:


> I would think that it depends on what you are promising.
> Are you saying that there will be swords and elves and dragons and sorcery in all fantasy novels?
> 
> I did say that it was for marketing purposes. That is a way of categorizing, or labeling, a story for easier display and organizing. It does help customers narrow down their search. Start with the label "Fantasy" and then start sorting. But there is a lot of sorting after that.
> ...


Yeah, I totally agree with your post. I was adding, not contradicting.


----------



## Skybreaker Sin K'al (Jul 2, 2018)

Chessie2 said:


> Yeah, I totally agree with your post. I was adding, not contradicting.


Given as fantasy already has sub-genres, one could try to expand those sub-genres. I totally agree that fantasy is basically an umbrella term.

Also, I'd just like to clear something up, because in my original post I think I may have come off like: "oH mY g0d yU hAveE to eXpanD yoUr GenRE beCause If y0u d0Nut yoU are A tRashA uth0r aNd yOu wiLl nEvER bE RemMebred". This is not what I meant.

I just mean that sometimes we do need people to try new things occasionally, or the various sub-genres of fantasy start to feel stale. This isn't all of us.

Oh, and one more thing: the whole "what are you bringing to the table" thing is basically just "what is your story about and what's cool about it?"

Also, I recognize that my claims of "Martin brought us realism" have been torn to shreds, and I agree with everyone who did so. You guys changed my mind.


----------



## Svrtnsse (Jul 2, 2018)

Skybreaker Sin K'al said:


> "what is your story about and what's cool about it?"


My stories try to focus on the characters and their personal problems. The fantastic aspects of the setting are largely secondary to the plot.

For example, it's not "the hero must break the curse in order to live free" but rather "the hero must make up his mind in order to live free" - if that makes sense?


----------



## Skybreaker Sin K'al (Jul 2, 2018)

Svrtnsse said:


> My stories try to focus on the characters and their personal problems. The fantastic aspects of the setting are largely secondary to the plot.
> 
> For example, it's not "the hero must break the curse in order to live free" but rather "the hero must make up his mind in order to live free" - if that makes sense?


Hey, that's really cool! I recently rewatched "good will hunting", and I've always loved it. Very character driven movie.


----------



## Hallen (Jul 2, 2018)

Skybreaker Sin K'al said:


> I just mean that sometimes we do need people to try new things occasionally, or the various sub-genres of fantasy start to feel stale. This isn't all of us.



I think we all should strive to be fresh and engaging. I have no disagreement with that concept at all. It is challenging. And, in order to do so, yeah, you may want to stretch the bounds of your genre beyond what people would normally expect.


----------



## Devor (Jul 2, 2018)

Hallen said:


> I think we all should strive to be fresh and engaging. I have no disagreement with that concept at all. It is challenging. And, in order to do so, yeah, you may want to stretch the bounds of your genre beyond what people would normally expect.



I can agree that we should all strive to be fresh and engaging and push the boundaries of the genre.... but I would do so in the same way that I think everyone should learn a second language, read Shakespeare, and watch Avatar: The Last Airbender. I know that it's not realistic. I know that people have a great many other priorities. I know that I can't really fault someone for living their life in a way that's askew from what I would want for them (especially when I barely know them). And yet I can't help but believe learning how to push your creative potential would be a good thing, not just for the writer or the work, but for readers and the rest of us looking on over your shoulder.

So sure, advocate that we push..... just don't overstep it because we all have our own lives and our own careers and our own goals with our work.


----------



## Skybreaker Sin K'al (Jul 3, 2018)

Devor said:


> I can agree that we should all strive to be fresh and engaging and push the boundaries of the genre.... but I would do so in the same way that I think everyone should learn a second language, read Shakespeare, and watch Avatar: The Last Airbender. I know that it's not realistic. I know that people have a great many other priorities. I know that I can't really fault someone for living their life in a way that's askew from what I would want for them (especially when I barely know them). And yet I can't help but believe learning how to push your creative potential would be a good thing, not just for the writer or the work, but for readers and the rest of us looking on over your shoulder.
> 
> So sure, advocate that we push..... just don't overstep it because we all have our own lives and our own careers and our own goals with our work.


Yeah, exactly. Its not for everyone, and of course I have no say in how someone else I don't even know lives their life: that would be incredibly arrogant of me.


----------



## Annoyingkid (Jul 4, 2018)

Well I noticed the big high fantasy stories were all in prose. Very few if any were specifically written for the graphic novel format. So I thought I'd bring that to the genre.


----------



## Skybreaker Sin K'al (Jul 4, 2018)

Annoyingkid said:


> Well I noticed the big high fantasy stories were all in prose. Very few if any were specifically written for the graphic novel format. So I thought I'd bring that to the genre.


That's a cool idea, actually! Yeah! I'd love to read that.


----------

