# Which recent fantasy novels will be remembered as classics?



## Black Dragon

If we limit ourselves to the last decade, were there any novels published during that time which will one day be regarded as classics of the genre?

As you may guess, my vote goes to the Name of the Wind.  It has a certain magic to it that sets it apart from anything else out there.


----------



## Stewpot

Thanks to the movies which has got many people interested in the books, Harry Potter will be remembered for a long time.


----------



## Black Dragon

Yes, I agree.  The Harry Potter series will be regarded as a classic.  It took me a while to arrive at this conclusion, though.

When the books first came out, they didn't strike me as particularly deep or meaningful.  Sure, they were magical and entertaining, but I didn't see any lasting substance.  But as the series progressed, so did the depth of storytelling.  By the time that I read the Deathly Hallows, I was converted.


----------



## kjjcarpenter

I agree with you, Antonio. "The Name of the Wind" by Patrick Rothfuss. An absolutely wonderful novel, written extremely well. Gripping. Descriptive. Entailing. Although not for everyone and it can be very long between any action at times, the way in which the main character develops is nothing short of spectacular. A must read for fantasy lovers.
Once the trilogy is complete, I'm confident it will attain a much higher readership. It deserves it.


----------



## Black Dragon

Strangely, there have been some strong negative reactions to Name of the Wind.  Some reviewers called it "a journey to nowhere."

I think that a certain segment of readers prefer a story that is a little tighter, and has a more clear-cut conclusion.  Personally, I relished the book's leisurely pace.  It made me feel more present in the world, if you know what I mean.  It felt like *I* was traveling with the red haired gypsy troupe.  It seemed as if I was living on the streets scraping for pennies.  And most importantly, I felt the the exhilaration of starting training at the university.

If the book moved at a faster pace, I may have felt more removed from the story.  As it was, I felt totally engaged.


----------



## Legerdemain

Let me offer a counter to "Name of the Wind" before this becomes a "Name of the Wind" forum... hee hee...

"American Gods" by Neil "The Great and Uberpowerful" Gaiman to me is the best fantasy novel of the past decade.  Yes, it came at the very beginning of the decade, but I think of all of his work it has the ability to stand the test of time.  There are far too few books that tackle modern faith versus ancient belief, and this book does so in a very brilliant manner.  Also of note is Gaiman's "The Graveyard Book"

Secondly, to make a point, I must say that Harry Potter will be seen as a Young Adult/Children's classic, much like the Narnia Cycle, but not in the same school as Lord of the Rings or the Alvin Maker series to give more high level examples.  

Potter books read well, and though I am a convert from the "I dislike Potter for the sake of the English Language" I still only give hesitant approval for books 4-6, with my praise being saved for the first three and the last almost exclusively.  The books are descriptive, but altogether non-engaging in my view during the middle of the series, being more on "auto-pilot until climax" that many authors working toward a goal suffer from.  That said it ended with a satisfying bang and started with a hearty hello, and that's enough to make it read it to my future children.  It will be read for many years to come.

As long as I'm talking young adult works, I found Percy Jackson and the Olympians to be amazingly dark and well written for children growing in single parent homes.  Though it's a bit to "pop lit" for the most part, the series does relate many concerns children face with parents that are distant in responsibility, physically, and emotionally.  I wouldn't be surprised if this storyline resonates strongly with disenfranchised youth and sticks around as a child's classic.

What other works are people seeing as classic out there?


----------



## kjjcarpenter

Excellent take on Harry Potter there. I concur, for I stopped reading the series at the fourth book. Maybe it was a matter of me being young and the book looking like a behemoth before my stressed little eyes, I don't know, but from all accounts the pace went uphill at that point. I never got around to reading them, in fact, I never got to read any more books aimed at children. I had read "The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe" when I was young, and only now—now as in while we speak—am I reading the rest of the Narnia series. After Harry Potter, I didn't read for three or four years and moved onto "Jaws" and then somehow tackled "The Stand", the fourteen-hundred page monster. From then on reading was second-nature, but I read adult books and never had a chance to savour child favourite. Better late than never, right?

On topic though, I cannot go without recognising a novel not well known to many readers. Although this series spanned four decades, the final three books were released within the last ten years and deserve a mention. Stephen King's "The Dark Tower". I still have yet to find a novel that captivated me like the "The Dark Tower" books. It was magnetic. Many readers will disagree, and even many of King's fans will disagree, but the last book of the series had me in tears as I began to grow closer and closer to the Tower. I knew the ending was coming. It truly was a series of epic proportions, leading across both space and time to a final destination. The whole time you feel as if you are there alongside Roland, watching him grow and learn and, eventually, redeem. With all in mind, the ending stands as a true testament to the opinions of the series—it splits the readership down the middle. Either it was a ride worth taking, or a complete waste of time. I was in the former category, and I await the day I meet another book so spellbinding that I down it in 18 hours straight without rest, only pausing for food.

I can only hope this tale will last across the ages. However, something tells me with the lack of attention it has seen thus far, there is little hope.


----------



## Black Dragon

Stephen King is a major household name.  In many ways he is a brand unto himself.  Yet the least attention has been given to what many call his best books.  Why is that?


----------



## Legerdemain

*Maybe you just answered yourself?*

King has written TOO many books for people to know which the good ones are.  He's written like 6-7 dozen novels... hard not to miss some of the gems... 

The Stand is his best work in my humble opinion, though I like the Dark Tower series (except when he writes himself in, that's kinda... odd).

Oh, the other side of things is that he's written some bad books as well, and if you read too many of those before the good ones, you'll never keep reading...



Black Dragon said:


> Stephen King is a major household name.  In many ways he is a brand unto himself.  Yet the least attention has been given to what many call his best books.  Why is that?


----------



## kjjcarpenter

Leg, I agree, some of his books are absolutely horrendous and he truly have gone above himself by writing over fifty stories, I think it's stretching over 60 now—perhaps almost at 70? I'm not sure. That doesn't include all his unreleased material, short stories and screenplays. There comes a time when you have to stop and say "I think I have to call it a day", and King has gone well beyond that. At one point he said he was concluding writing with the end of "The Dark Tower", but since this statement and the final book's release in 2004, he has released at least five more books from memory and a short story collection.

Apart from the fact he builds up many circumstances that have lousy payoffs, and finishes most of his novels in very Deus ex Machina fashions, "The Dark Tower" series, "The Eye of the Dragon", "The Stand" and his autobiography "On Writing" (the first part at least) are worth checking out if they are the only stories you read. My opinion, nothing more.

I think it is a matter of people get the feeling he is only a horror writer. No one pays much attention to him for other genres, though two of the four books I mentioned above are fantasy, one is a post-apocalyptic novel and the other is a non-fiction tale about his rise to writing. I think he writes fantasy much better than stories about killer clowns, or killer cars. If he had applied himself to "The Dark Tower" series more thoroughly, I think his magnum opus could have reached a height much like "Lord of the Rings", but alas, he chose a more terrestrial direction filled with continuity gaffs and, once again, killer clowns. 

I still cherish it—despite that clown.


----------



## Black Dragon

I absolutely love Eye of the Dragon.  It's one of his most obscure books, yet one of my favorites.  If my memory serves correctly, it's connected to the Stand, right?

Also, have you read On Writing?  King has some interesting biographical tidbits in there.  He went through an extended period of substance abuse.  He was so wasted that he can barely remember writing some of his novels.

Also, did you guys see his cameo on Sons of Anarchy this season?  It was classic.


----------



## kjjcarpenter

"The Eyes of the Dragon" is a beautiful piece of writing, another example of his least-known works being much superior. Yes, that's right, it is connected to both "The Stand" and "The Dark Tower". The main antagonist, Flagg, is present in all three of these stories—who was, if I may say, one of the greatest villains ever conceived with the poorest payoff that could have been presented on paper. I don't know what King was thinking, but Flagg's tale did not come to a fulfilling conclusion for me, with many others agreeing.


----------



## Legerdemain

Though I did not read the work "On Writing" Tony, that does not surprise me.  Poe was actually quite the alcoholic, and struggled to maintain his job, much less write for much of his life.  Authors who live in other worlds often can't find their way back to this one.

Oh, and I agree Kev, Flagg was indeed well conceived, if not executed.


----------



## Aqua Buddha

Flagg was formidable in the Dark Tower.  But the actor who portrayed him in the Stand Miniseries was miscast.  He acted like a hick.


----------



## kjjcarpenter

I believe that was Jamey Sheridan who portrayed him. All in all, the whole miniseries of "The Stand" was under par for my tastes. The acting was not anything to be proud of to start. I can excuse the graphics for it not being a recently created adaption, but the whole scenarios where Flagg morphed into the daemon were terrible by every standard. It made the character laughable.

Many authors of poetry and literature have had a severe case of substance abuse or immoral fetishes. We of course know King's story, and Poe, but there were others. Lewis Carole was allegedly a pedophile; and a poet, whose name escapes me, was taking some sort of hallucinogen and experiencing a vivid vision. He wrote down what he saw and just as he was reaching the climax of this lucid story, there was a knock on his front door and he was cast out of his thoughts. He never finished the story because he believed the only way he could write it effectively was by seeing it in a vision; it never came to him though.

I guess if we want to succeed as writers we should all go down to our local drug dealer and pick up some cocaine.


----------



## Black Dragon

I found the Stand miniseries to be a disappointment as well.  The graphics were laughable, although Gary Sinise gave a great performance.  I also agree that Flagg, as portrayed in the miniseries, was anything but threatening.  In the books he comes across as threatening and mysterious.


----------



## Chaz24

I think the biggest fantasy stories come from the liberal media.


----------



## Legerdemain

Chaz24 said:


> I think the biggest fantasy stories come from the liberal media.


 
Come on now, don't make this a political forum...   Keep Olbermanns and O'Reillys at the door if you would in my humble opinion.

Orson Scott Card and I discussed this topic once (yeah, not because he and I are buds, but because I met him at an event on campus and I talked a while as I tend to do with people), and he was adamant about the popular writers of today like Stephan King were getting shafted academically, as most "Great authors" were simply popular in their time, and of the popular ones the "great" ones didn't disappear over time.  Like Harry Potter, like it or hate it, will be around for a long time, as it is already read by enough people to be a "classic" in my opinion.  That said, popular but not necessarily the greatest, like Terry Brooks, may not be remembered while Neil Gaiman may.


----------



## Ravana

Though the initial novels appeared more than ten years ago, Glen Cook's "Black Company" series (which now appears to be concluded) and Steven Brust's "Taltos" series (which may go on for quite some time yet) are both very well-written and very entertaining.


----------



## Juiceman

As a moderator, I agree with Legerdmain on this.

We are a forum dedicated to the discussion and sharing of ideas with regard to actual fantasy writing, whether it be through literature or the screen.  It was designed as such, and we absolutely want to keep it as such.

Political opinions are not to be part of this forum.  Everyone has their own views, and they need to stay personal in nature.

Please refrain from posting such text on Mythic Scribes in the future.


----------



## Vita Numinous

I love Harry Potter but I have trouble with its consistancy, and I think that would keep them from becoming the almost-mythic, capital "C" classics.  You can't use certain curses or else, and then Harry is tossing them with absolutely no repercussion, personal or societal.  *sniffle*  It's a shame, though, because these are the books that got my son to really start reading chapter books.


----------



## At Dusk I Reign

I think George R.R. Martin's _A Song of Ice and Fire_ will definitely be regarded as a classic in decades to come. They're the best fantasy books I've read in a very long time, and might even topple LotR from its position in my Top Five of All Time. I just wish Martin would pull his finger out and actually finish what he started. There's nothing more frustrating than watching someone with such obvious talent waste his time on lesser projects while his masterwork is confined to the backburner.


----------



## Vita Numinous

At Dusk I Reign said:


> I think George R.R. Martin's _A Song of Ice and Fire_ will definitely be regarded as a classic in decades to come. They're the best fantasy books I've read in a very long time...



Agreed!  But I'm not having fun waiting on the next book.  ; x


----------



## At Dusk I Reign

Vita Numinous said:


> I'm not having fun waiting on the next book.  ; x


As time I goes by I have a horrible feeling Martin will do a Robert Jordan and topple off his perch before he finishes. That would be an event more tragic than I could possibly convey in words.


----------



## Legerdemain

Vita Numinous said:


> I love Harry Potter but I have trouble with its consistancy, and I think that would keep them from becoming the almost-mythic, capital "C" classics.  You can't use certain curses or else, and then Harry is tossing them with absolutely no repercussion, personal or societal.



And an absolutely impossible to escape prison that everyone of any import escapes from, demonic soul eating beasts that can be bested by a spell you see EVERY kid master during the series (making prison that much less scary), and I HIGHLY agree with the Societal repercussions... not all rules are creativity stifling bureaucracy; some rules should be followed, otherwise your Harry Potter is a better of two evils.  Just this one has the "might makes right" down to a popularity contest science.

That's interesting, I just thought... what if Harry Potter was battling another wizard who was equally loved by good people over a cause with no clear cut answer?  Then where where would the hero be?  Poor Tom Riddle just needed some lovin' and he'd be back in the battle again...


----------



## Philip Overby

I agree with others to say that George R.R. Martin's "A Song of Fire and Ice" is a must read if you like (buzzword) grittier fantasy.  I have never been much of a fan of the general fantasy fare, but Martin's series dwarfs just about anything else in style, story, and characterization.  It is a shame that he is prolific in things most of his fans don't care for (see:  Wild Card series) and seems to take an eternity to finish the books everyone is waiting for with bated breath.  Granted, they are absolutely brilliant books, so I say give the man his time.  

I have to agree about Harry Potter also, even though I'm not the biggest fan of the series, it is undeniably entertaining.  This coming from someone who hasn't read any of the books but has seen all the movies.  

And Brandon Sanderson is one to look out for.  He's a beast.  And with talent to boot!


----------



## Donny Bruso

I think at least half the problem with A Song of Ice and Fire is that it's so popular. It's spawned so many things, calendars, RPGs, board games, comics, TV series, swords, sculptures, minifigures, etc. And of course to maintain the integrity of these things, George is spending his time checking up on them, making sure they are a quality product, worthy of the rights he licenses to them. Unfortunately between that and his insane travel schedule, it seems like he writes maybe one day out of three.


----------



## Kelise

I think Robin Hobb series - I don't know which, whether Farseer or Liveship Traders.. - will become a classic. I hope that Rothfuss does too, and I wish there were more talk of Scott Lynch's Gentleman Bastard series.

I haven't yet read Tad Williams or Joe Abercrombie, but they seem to have the following?


----------



## Philip Overby

What I've read of Tad Williams I liked.  His Memory, Sorrow, and Thorn series seems to be praised a lot.  I have the first book, but other books have kept me away from it.  Abercrombie has quite a following for a new-ish writer.  His style of writing tends toward violent fights, black humor, and unique characters.  I recommend his books to anyone who wants more punch to their fantasy.  

I'm currently awaiting his new book The Heroes in the mail.  Can't wait!


----------



## Ophiucha

It's sort of hard to guess what will be a classic, given the seemingly random nature of longevity. _Harry Potter_ and _Twilight_ will likely have some lasting appeal, not because they are necessarily any good (particularly the latter), but instead because they were cultural phenomena beyond any realistic expectation. Neil Gaiman and Terry Pratchett, to name a couple, are excellent writers with great libraries of literature and exceeding popularity in the fantasy community, but have a somewhat minimal mainstream appeal. Everyone knows who Edward Cullen is, but not many people even know who Neil Gaiman is, let alone the names of any of his books or characters.

I mean, look at what is considered classic fantasy novels. Tolkien? He's certainly not the best writer in the genre, and he didn't even start the genre, but he is nonetheless the best remembered in the genre.


----------



## Behelit

Ophiucha said:


> Everyone knows who Edward Cullen is, but not many people even know who Neil Gaiman is, let alone the names of any of his books or characters.



I went a couple of volumes deep into The Sandman, I thought it was good but I haven't given any of his novels a chance. I suppose it might be because I have this wild preconception that he writes like Stephen King; characters are human in a modern day world, supernatural element involved, great build up, but weak pay off. Perhaps it has to do with his titles, the covers of his books? I don't know. Then again I've never read Twilight, problem there is I actually know more than I want to know about it.


----------



## Legerdemain

Ophiucha said:


> Everyone knows who Edward Cullen is, but not many people even know who Neil Gaiman is, let alone the names of any of his books or characters.


 
I hope this changes with Neil Gaiman due to his winning of the Hugo, Newbery, Carnegie and who knows what other awards with "The Graveyard Book".  Not well known by many people, unless you are parents who buy books for children ages 9-12, or buy those books for yourself.  Very good book, many awards, and has the chance to make him a more commonplace name... oh, and the fact they are making a movie from it will most likely help.

Sadly though, many good writers will disappear with time, but many good ones survive...


----------



## Mdnight Falling

Lord of the Rings is already a classic.... Harry Potter is following close behind... I think anything Drizzt Do'Urden will be a classic as well. R.A. Salvatore out did himself with the Legend of Drizzt saga... There are video games with Drizzt in it... and Drizzt was initially merely just another Dungeons and Dragons charactor... Salvatore brought him to life... I hear they are even talking about a movie.. Not to mention the newer series with Drizzt Salvatore started with his son Geno for younger readers is great. my four year old loves hearing about that Drow's adventures. So yes in my opinion, The Legend of drizzt saga will be a classic if it already isn't one


----------



## Ravana

I hate to disappoint, Midnight Falling, but nothing based on D&D will ever be a "classic"–regardless of its merit, sad to say. The mere fact that it _is_ derivative of a game, let alone of a "shared world," will forestall it from being regarded as such.

I'm not saying this is a good thing, much less that it's fair. But that's inevitably the case with such works… and Salvatore knew it going in. That he was sufficiently enamored of the setting and characters to continue working on it anyway, and bring it to life as well as you seem to think he did, is commendable (probably: I'm sure there are detractors who'd say he was just milking a guaranteed paycheck). Salvatore may end up writing other things completely divorced from any D&D setting that will become "classic"; if so, good for him… this will never change the perception of the works he wrote within that setting.

Similarly, there will never be a _Star Trek_ novel regarded as "classic"… nor a _Star Wars_ one, nor _Doctor Who_, nor any other media franchise. Robert E. Howard's original three Conan books are regarded as fantasy classics; _none_ of the other Conan books, "completed" (read: written in their entirety) by others, are, and no future ones by anyone else ever will be. No new "classic" set in Middle-Earth will arise–the only ones that ever will be considered classic have already been written. Et many cetera. In fact, the closest (and only) derivative works I can think of that _might_ achieve anything resembling "classic" status–and that in a very limited field–are a few of the "Mythos" stories inspired primarily by Lovecraft… and only a very, very few: most are appalling, and have been properly consigned to the festering, pullulating miasma of literary triviality.

That's just the way it goes. And it works, and has worked, both ways: no established author, regardless of reputation, could write a "classic" in a world other than his or her own. J. K. Rowling is as incapable of writing a "classic" set in a D&D world as anyone else is. The list of authors who've written _Star Trek_ novels includes James Blish, Joe Haldeman, Gordon Eklund, David Gerrold (who also wrote a _Planet of the Apes_ novel), Vonda McIntyre, Greg Bear (who, along with Gregory Benford and David Brin, also wrote a prequel trilogy to Asimov's _Foundation_ trilogy), Theodore Sturgeon… and those are just the big names, and even then those are just the ones who set works in the original "generation." Eklund has won a Nebula Award, Blish a Hugo; all the rest have won both, most of them multiple times: Haldeman, for example, has won five of each–among many others. None of their media-derived works will ever be regarded as "classics," even though most, arguably all, of the authors have written other stories that are–classics of SF, at least, and maybe some day as classics, period, without regard to genre. (I keep hoping. Doris Lessing managed to pull in the 2007 Nobel Prize in spite of having written _some_ science fiction.…  ) In fact, the only _Star Trek_ work that is likely to ever have the slightest chance of being regarded as a "classic" (of literature, as opposed to of television or movies) was written by Harlan Ellison (whose list of awards is roughly as lengthy as those of all the aforementioned combined); the episode won a Hugo… for Best Dramatic Presentation, not for "writing" per se. (His original screenplay–_not_ the one that was finally filmed–also won a Writers Guild of America award.) Alan Dean Foster is probably doomed to literature's second team for no other reason than because he's written so many novelizations of screenplays; this alone has so badly colored perceptions of him that his original works simply aren't taken seriously.

Nor is having a movie or a video game any kind of endorsement (particularly the latter: a game based on a character based on a game?); all that means is the stuff is marketable. Or at least that someone believes it is: let's face it, the majority of movies, if they make money at all, do it as a result of overseas video sales to people willing to buy anything with an English soundtrack. _LotR_ was recognized as "classic" long before any attempt was made to film it–and its status survived in spite of the first such attempt. The Harry Potter books were filmed _because_ they were recognized as legitimate children's classics; the films did not make them classics. Most of Stephen King's earlier works are considered horror classics in spite of, rather than as a result of, the movies based on them.

Bottom line: the first requirement for something to be a "classic" is for it to be original. Or at least original for that language–as mentioned elsewhere, Shakespeare "lifted" most of his material from previous works in other languages, most notably Italian. It hasn't been held against him. Much.


----------



## Ophiucha

To be entirely fair, the probability of near any fantasy save those few that started the genre and impacted culture in some way is rather slim. Literature has a way of pretending the mystical does not exist. _Lord of the Rings_ will live on for generations because it solidified what fantasy meant to most people. Like the books or not, they are what most consider fantasy to _be_. In terms of our history, fantasy has had little to no impact on culture save for when it was mythology. We keep around Homer and Sophocles because (a) they are the staples of Western literature, and (b) Greek mythology still has an impact on how things are. We've had a discussion about this somewhere on the forum, in regards to calendars. But _The Faerie Queene_? Few even know it exists, and the only impact it may have had was introducing us to the old "roses are red, violets are blue" bit, which some dispute. We have some fantasy from Shakespeare, but I reckon we only kept that around for the name.

_Harry Potter_ is going to stick around. People who have never seen a single film or opened a page of the books can likely name at least five characters. It is a cultural phenomena. We have a theme park based on _Harry Potter_. Perhaps future generations will regard fantasy more highly, but it will likely look back further than our generation for the classics. Mervyn Peake may be brought up. Perhaps Eddison or Dunsany. Those are the 'big' names that have been forgotten by many. In this generation, it is hard to say. Who has influenced the most people? Who has changed fantasy in some way? I don't think anyone is going to say R.A. Salvatore or Paolini. I could see Terry Pratchett. I would think the standards of literature would erase the entire impact of Stephenie Meyer for the betterment of 'fantasy' in the public eye, but let's be honest, she's more likely to be remembered in a few decades than half of the really great authors working today.


----------



## The Realm Wanderer

I believe the Painted Man/Warded Man, once it gets out and more people hear about it will become a classic. It is being optioned for film at the moment and is expected to be the new Lord of the Rings if it gets the green light. If it gets picked up, the book will get a lot more readers. I think the series so far is amazing and the author has created a great world and brilliant characters. I see no reason why it shouldn't become a classic, other than people just not picking it up and giving it a chance.


----------



## At Dusk I Reign

Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell by Susanna Clarke is certainly a classic. Whether it will be remembered as such is a moot point. It doesn't contain orcs or dragons so has probably passed a lot of 'fantasy' fans by. That's a shame. Clarke shows wit and imagination, something sadly lacking in most fiction.


----------



## Phaelin

I think The Stand will be one of the classics. It's the best book I've read and there are quit a few. Also contemporary with the engineered virus going awry. It's one of those books where you think except for the paranormal stuff it could actally happen someday. Loved the 5 hr miniseries as well but the (unabridged) copy is way better. I'm still hoping to get an autographed copy if is someday but since I live in Europe my best best for that is ebay.

Sent from my iPhone using Forum Runner


----------



## Kriegskanzler

Harry Potter is definitely on the list.

How about Paolini's work? The Eragon series was good. So was Riordan's Percy Jackson.


----------



## Artless

I think that, without any doubt, GRRM song of Ice and Fire will be considered a classic. (But hopefully not the horrible TV show)
The Wheel of Time series MUST be as well (And yes, I harp on about this series, but it's seriously frigging AWESOME!)
I would like to think Hobb's work will be considered classics, but it's questionable. 
I think the Dark tower series will go the same way as the Thomas Covenant series, Pretentious over worded books that serve no purpose (Unless your a literature student) yet some people just love them.
I also think that Lian Hern will definitely last the distance, simply because it's an asian world, and not your standard European cloned world.

Obviously, I already consider Feist's earlier works, the Janny Wurt's trilogy that accompanies it, the Eddings series and Katherine Kerr's series as Classics, given they weren't written in the last decade 
(Oh, and maybe Sara Douglas' first trilogy)
Yes, Potter will last.
Paolini won't.


----------



## Helbrecht

Not the Inheritance Cycle. Hopefully. xD I'm not fond of Potter, but so many people _are_, so I can see that series surviving the test of time as beloved childrens' books.

As for what I personally _hope_ will be remembered as classics, I can only recommend much of the back catalogues of writers like Neil Gaiman and China MiÃ©ville. I think the key to producing a classic is getting the right mix of originality and storytelling. Both those fine gentlemen have proved consistently capable (in my eyes, at least) of getting this mix right.


----------



## Aravelle

I believe Harry Potter will be. Most likely Stephen King will be remembered in one form or another, and it's almost guaranteed A Song of Ice and Fire and Name of the Wind will make the cut as well.

I just hope Gaiman and The Last Unicorn do too... whether it be Stardust or American Gods, he is a literary titan.


----------



## CTStanley

Not particularly recent but I think Wilbur Smiths Egypt series SHOULD be a classic. His books were the reason I got into epic fantasy adventures. 
The Farseer Trilogy by Robin Hobb is another I would love to see with more credit


----------



## mpkirby

So I'll ask a different question.  What makes a "classic"?  

LoTR -- It was one of the first epic fantasy books -- incredibly detailed.
RR Martin's -- Song of fire and Ice -- I think this will be a classic because of how he deals with power and the relationship between women and men.  Specifically powerful women in a world that is unbelievably cruel to women.  It's quite unique among most fantasy. Usually you have the powerful woman that everyone accepts, or the meek women in a feudalistic servant role.

What else?  I can see Neil Gaiman's work possibly -- It offers a unique perspective on mythic storytelling (but is it just unique?  Or does it establish a new Genre?)

For example, (it's not fantasy...but), William Gibson's work largely popularized cyberpunk, and I think ranks as classic SF in that you can examine an entire genre looking at his initial work.

If popularity is the definition of a classic, then certainly harry potter.

But I think being "just good" is insufficient.  There is a lot of very good (even great) fiction that fall short of the classic definition.

Don't just answer "what" is a classic.  But "Why?"

Mike


----------



## thedarknessrising

I really think The Inheritance Cycle will become a classic. Maybe not so much The Percy Jackson Series, but DEFINITELY Paolini's series.


----------



## FireBird

> I really think The Inheritance Cycle will become a classic. Maybe not so much The Percy Jackson Series, but DEFINITELY Paolini's series.



If Paolini is ever considered classic in the future something is seriously wrong. He is a fun read for some people but nothing makes them classic. The four Inheritance books are as derivative as you can get. I forced myself to read the last book because I read the first three and all I could think of was "Where did the editor go?" I haven't read Percy Jackson so I can't speak for it.

Even though Martin didn't, I think he is known as the one who really started the dark/gritty epic fantasy trend. That is why his works will be considered classics. 

The only two authors that come to mind when I think of instant classics are Mieville and Guy Gavriel Kay. I really need to read Gaiman.


----------



## Ireth

FireBird said:


> I really need to read Gaiman.



Yes you do. XD I recommend starting with _Stardust_.


----------



## Konrad

Another Gaiman fan here. 

His short stories would be enough for me, but whatever you want to say about books like Neverwhere, Stardust or The Graveyard Book, they are simply appealing. But some of his short stories are really sharp and original, which is not a combo you often find anywhere. 

K


----------



## ThinkerX

LeGuin's 'EarthSea' trilogy counts as a classic (written back in the 1960's).


----------



## Konrad

Maybe I'm in the total minority, but although I love the concept, and I really enjoy (is this not politically correct) some of the movies, I just could not get into the books. For example, for the same readership I'd go with Jonathan Stroud's work, as his writing is quite tight. 

Actually, I'm curious about this--how do you guys rate Stroud anyway?


----------



## Benjamin Clayborne

Predicting the future's a sucker's game 

That said, the only series from the past decade (well, mostly from the past decade) that I feel reasonably certain will end up a classic is Harry Potter. As much as I love A Song of Ice and Fire, I think it's too rooted in the cultural "gritty reboot" (and also GRRM is dragging it out too long) for it to end up as a permanent classic. But it will be beloved for a long time, I just don't think the popularity will persist.


----------



## Konrad

Gritty reboot... 

I think you hit the nail on the head there--I do like his writing though. Very tight. Descriptive, but fast-paced. Hard to knock him only that sometimes it's so polished that it doesn't seem "classic" if that makes any sense. 

K


----------



## Sheriff Woody

Benjamin Clayborne said:


> As much as I love A Song of Ice and Fire, I think it's too rooted in the cultural "gritty reboot" (and also GRRM is dragging it out too long) for it to end up as a permanent classic. But it will be beloved for a long time, I just don't think the popularity will persist.



I think you're correct in saying its popularity has much to do with the fact that it was among the first of its gritty/brutal style - something that wasn't popular or seen often in years prior. I'm not sure if that is enough to maintain through the years to come, but even taking that trailblazing status away and judging the series in and of itself, I still think it's a solid story that is very well-written. 

If anything, I hope it draws more people to the genre for them to discover some other great fantasy novels. It has certainly renewed my interest.


----------



## Benjamin Clayborne

Sheriff Woody said:


> I think you're correct in saying its popularity has much to do with the fact that it was among the first of its gritty/brutal style - something that wasn't popular or seen often in years prior. I'm not sure if that is enough to maintain through the years to come, but even taking that trailblazing status away and judging the series in and of itself, I still think it's a solid story that is very well-written.
> 
> If anything, I hope it draws more people to the genre for them to discover some other great fantasy novels. It has certainly renewed my interest.



Oh, I agree that it's a solid story and well-written, and that the characters are phenomenal; just that it doesn't quite have that near-universal magic something that (e.g.) Harry Potter had. Eventually we may swing away from liking the extremely grim and ASOIAF may reduce in popularity.

I mean, don't get me wrong, I don't mind characters going through adversity; it makes for interesting stories. But unrelenting grimness and death and unpleasantness eventually gets tiresome. You can count on one hand the number of times something good happens to a POV character in ASOIAF.


----------

