• Welcome to the Fantasy Writing Forums. Register Now to join us!

Variablity in Depiction of Fantasy Races

Being the model of modesty that I am, I did not want to bestow upon this website my brilliant handle of necromancy with so few paradigm changing posts and figured this is a suitable location for my inquiry.

So, as the title states, I am having a bit of a conundrum regarding fantasy races, and it does not consist of me finding them trite, and that is I am unsure if I should consider them such , more specifically, elves. I have a species that lives longer than humans, is tall and slender, and predates them; they also possess the haughtiness to boot. Okay, they are like elves. What is the problem? I am elated you asked.

They are not in possession of glorious silvery manes, do not originate from the same planet as humans, and cannot interbreed together, and they lack the pointy ears and stunning human faces (imagine a serpentine visage). They also are not inherently more magical than humans, granted they have a different approach to magic, yet the other aforementioned qualities are identical to typical elves.

Another reason why I am hesitant to call them elves is their interactions with humans. If I desired publishing a book, my first trilogy (big thoughts, thoughts on giant mode) would not heavily involve them, but I like conceptualizing them nonetheless as I can contemplate how different sapient species might interact. To give an example of their interactions, this species has captured humans and rivals Unit 731 in their handle of them – testing the physical durability of humans of varying ages, studying parental attachment by depriving them of their young of varying ages, learning which organs they can live without, etc – and more importantly, they resist the notion humans are sapient, viewing their constructs, varied clothing, and increasingly pestering ability to adapt to their tactics within the context of a bee colony.

There are members of this species who detest the treatment of humans but still view them as little more than animals, refusing to see them as sapient on account of their differences in lifespans, believing a human could never rival their understanding. At best, they keep humans as pets. I am also considering having them responsible for creating a stronger, more aggressive group born of corrupted humans, who would happen to have human pigment variations.

Should I still consider them elves at this point and possibly – possibly – add to the mythos of traditional fantasy, or should I leave elves and their pointy ears alone?
 

Ban

Troglodytic Trouvère
Article Team
Simple answer? Call them what you want. An elf does not need to exhibit all qualities that Tolkien gave his elves. They don't need to exhibit any of their qualities for that matter. If you'd want a race of short, warrior people to be called elves, then go for it.
But here we arrive at the problem of naming them. This problem in my opinion, comes solely from the reader's expectations. We all have pre-conceived notions to what an elf is and therefore expect the writer's elves to conform to those notions.

Your elves (let's call them elves for convenience) have multiple traits that people associate with standard fantasy elves, so in my opinion you can certainly call them elves if you wish. However you seem to put heavy emphasis on how alien they are compared to humans. My personal advice is to rename them if you want them to feel distant and emotionless, otherwise just call them elves.
 

Velka

Sage
Readers bring a lot of preconceived notions into a story with them, so if I was reading about elves, and there were very little similarities between your elves and the elves that make up my schema I would experience a disconnect. Not saying I wouldn't get over it, but it could act as one of those little things that make a reader stop and have a problem with immersion.

If you want to invoke the idea of elves, but show they are very different in significant ways, perhaps you can add a modifier to the word elves. There's Dark Elves, High Elves, Wood Elves, Half Elves, Night Elves, Left-Handed Elves.... yours can be Research Elves or Overlord Elves or something that sounds a lot better than my two suggestions. This way you can address the "yes, but..." issue.
 

Ben

Troubadour
Have to agree with Banten - your book, your world, you are boss - call them whatever you want.

From your description, it sounds like your emphasis is more on what sets them apart from the traditional concept of "elf", which may be a good reason to go with a different name.

Tad Williams had a race that were elves in all but name in the Dragonbone Chair, I got over it pretty quickly.
 

Ireth

Myth Weaver
Tad Williams had a race that were elves in all but name in the Dragonbone Chair, I got over it pretty quickly.

Actually, they pretty much were elves even in name. The name "Sithi" is derived from "Sith" (pronounced shee), the Scottish Gaelic equivalent of the Irish "Sidhe" (also pronounced shee), possibly one of the most well-known kind of Fae.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ben

skip.knox

toujours gai, archie
Moderator
Moreover, there's some percentage in overturning paradigms. Sure, you say, these are called elves, but they're *my* elves and see how they differ from your expectations!
 
They don't sound very elven. More like your typical perfect-humanoid alien. I think if anyone has one shared expectation of elves, it's pointy ears.
 

AndrewLowe

Troubadour
I've resigned myself to the cynical belief that creativity doesn't stem from races. Tolkien's hobbits and elves were memorable, but what was more memorable was the story of the rings. Everything lies in the characters and the stories. Don't kill yourself worrying over races... I also tend to believe that the fewer you have, the better!
 
The comments are aligned with my thoughts. I had the mind to call them something else but was worried if readers I do not have would impose their idea of elves on them. I decided to call them something else as they are similar only in being like an Elder Race, and it might be more trouble to widen the aesthetics of elves without the pointy ears and glorious silver manes.

I also tend to believe that the fewer you have, the better!

I agree. As a rule, I limit my races to three, relating to the properties of elves, orcs, and dwarves as I find them fitting for my contemplation mentioned in my first post.

I like to question why/how an older, more advanced species would interact with us and how we might try to demonstrate our intelligence (recall Voyager), and the notion of intelligence at all. Humans are swift to proclaim or denounce the intelligence of another, but it is usually done without the context of sapience. Can anyone capable of recognizing other minds and innately communicating abstractions truly be deemed stupid?

My elven species is trying to maintain the belief that sapience depends on longevity (a bias that mirrors our measurement of sapience by how much they are similar to us) in the face of a shorter live species showing an alarming ability to anticipate their behaviour. As for the why, look at what we do to other animals and the lengths we go to do it, and to even are own. Curiosity need not be pragmatic.

My orcesque race allows me to question human belligerence. Humans need not be reminded of their capacity for violence, but they could be reminded of how dire the circumstances need be for most. I see the length people go to dehumanize and to rationalize war, and to resist dissonance, as an indication of how averse to war humans can be, and funny enough, the belligerence of the enemy is a common, if most common, aspect of such propaganda. Now, what if humans encountered a species that is stronger and more aggressive, and far more slow to forgive (playing on the orc urge to trollishly demolish humans)?

These orcs were betrayed by their human counterparts during the rebellion against the elves, and see even humans continents away as responsible. Humans tend not to condemn an entire population, and even then it took generations of failed diplomacy to reach that level of disdain; their origins and similar appearances to humans, and ability to interbreed with, lead many human scholars to question what it means to be human, and if that should grant the orcs a greater effort of diplomacy instead of bloodshed.

I like the usual dwarven materialism, traditionalism, and pragmatism clashing with the mess of ideology, equivocation, and variation that are humans, and my dwarves (more reptilian than anything) represent that. They clash with human as they assert humans will find something to revere to the absence of sense, whether a god, love, or star-stuff. It is not that dwarves are loveless, quite the opposite. To dwarves, they need not revere love as they are love. They are their ancestors with whom they smelt and grow their crops. It is not that they lack gods. The planets are their gods and they are of their planet, and the planet they. And being born in the fierce bowels of a star? Absurdity. When has anyone seen a body float to the sky upon death? No. They return to the planet.

Humans want to honour their ancestors whilst showing more than a penchant to stray from their ways. Humans are no less earthbound than they yet humans find a way to defy their environment (a play on the human brain appearing quite malleable by environment) whilst finding a way to live within it. Humans demand a separation of flesh and spirit yet use the flesh to judge the spirit. Dwarves are not sure if humans are chaotic or are so pragmatic as to be unaware of their dissonance so that may have a modicum of stability.

In short, my races are an attempt to analyze humans, although the fantasy urge to have more than humans is strong with this one.
 

Ben

Troubadour
Actually, they pretty much were elves even in name. The name "Sithi" is derived from "Sith" (pronounced shee), the Scottish Gaelic equivalent of the Irish "Sidhe" (also pronounced shee), possibly one of the most well-known kind of Fae.

That's very interesting, I had no idea.

Thanks!
 
Top