Tropes to avoid

[Azul-din]

And now I am in total understanding of your previous points and understand why you view tropes and such the way you do, there's a trope about this...A rose by any other name, right? I like these discussions because we get to see how and why other writers, who are also readers, see or do things the way they do. It also shows the fault in our languages and how things could get miscommunicated if this discussion were held elsewhere, or in a different way.

you are so right. I discovered 'Mythic Scribes' after having belonged to a conventional 'Writers Group' for several years. Manna in the desert.

Query: what distinguishes a trope from a chiche' ?

 

[Prince of Spires]

While we can laugh at them the lists do point to a problem within the fantasy genre. Too many fantasy writers look up to Tolkien and put his writings on a pedestal. It is by the standards that he set in his works by which all fantasy writing is judged. At least, that's how it seems to me at times.

The weird thing about fantasy is that it's one of the few genres that allows a huge diversity of storylines, characters and worldbuilding but most writers default to either feudal northeast Asia or Europe between the fall of the Roman Empire and the Reformation for their settings. The gods are modelled on those found in Scandinavian or Ancient Greek legends. The heroes are overwhelmingly white heterosexual people and come from some sort of magical, noble or warrior background. Their destiny is either to save the world or the kingdom - or to take over the kingdom.

This isn't the case anymore though. Maybe even 10 years ago you might have had a point. However, if you look at all the big fantasy novels that have come out in the last 15 or so years, there is a lot more diversity in them than you claim. Sanderson alone has already given us half a million novels set in wildly different worlds. But I've read anything from African inspired to renaissance to Roman settings to steampunk. And anything from heists to orc run tea rooms. Destinies rarely play a role in the stories.

As for being heterosexual, most figures gives about 90% of people in a random population being heterosexual, so would it be a surprise that 90% of heroes is heterosexual too?

 

[Prince of Spires]

Query: what distinguishes a trope from a chiche' ?

The quality of the writing...

 

[Finchbearer]

While we can laugh at them the lists do point to a problem within the fantasy genre. Too many fantasy writers look up to Tolkien and put his writings on a pedestal. It is by the standards that he set in his works by which all fantasy writing is judged. At least, that's how it seems to me at times.

The weird thing about fantasy is that it's one of the few genres that allows a huge diversity of storylines, characters and worldbuilding but most writers default to either feudal northeast Asia or Europe between the fall of the Roman Empire and the Reformation for their settings. The gods are modelled on those found in Scandinavian or Ancient Greek legends. The heroes are overwhelmingly white heterosexual people and come from some sort of magical, noble or warrior background. Their destiny is either to save the world or the kingdom - or to take over the kingdom.

I think that when you consider this sort of thing you are really considering the origin of popular tropes. Tolkienian tropes such as the use of orcs, elves and dwarves, in a vast quasi-medieval landscape, with its own European inspired mythology - come from older sources, found in chivalric romance, eddas and sagas. Tolkien wasn’t reinventing the wheel with his own tropes I don’t think but did give a fresh twist on something that has always been part of our culture. Of course in this post-modern age, more contemporary writers of fantasy look at his work as a source of inspiration. I think that just shows that in taking the fact that Tolkien was a scholar and was incredibly well-read, that’s what all writers should be doing if they want to avoid their work being too derivative.

 

[Azul-din]

I think that when you consider this sort of thing you are really considering the origin of popular tropes. Tolkienian tropes such as the use of orcs, elves and dwarves, in a vast quasi-medieval landscape, with its own European inspired mythology - come from older sources, found in chivalric romance, eddas and sagas. Tolkien wasn’t reinventing the wheel with his own tropes I don’t think but did give a fresh twist on something that has always been part of our culture. Of course in this post-modern age, more contemporary writers of fantasy look at his work as a source of inspiration. I think that just shows that in taking the fact that Tolkien was a scholar and was incredibly well-read, that’s what all writers should be doing if they want to avoid their work being too derivative.

I don't believe there is any classical, in the sense of original, source of Fantasy. Granted many story tellers have traditionally built on recognized tales, stock heroes and heroines, but it's not a requirement of the craft. 'We are the music makers and we are the dreamers of dreams...' O'Shaughnessy had it about right, I think. As did Lawrence Block whose book, 'Telling Lies for Fun and Profit' is still worth a read.

 

[Finchbearer]

I don't believe there is any classical, in the sense of original, source of Fantasy.

I heartily disagree - when researching for fantasy writing I think it well worth seeking early writing to understand the origins of storytelling - much of which contain magical or fantastical elements.

So many examples it’s hard to know where to start, but close to (my) home, Arthurian legend is one solid example of this. Geoffrey of Monmouth created a fantastical story that would go on to capture people imaginations, and probably be foundational for future fantasy storytellers.

 

[pmmg]

Original sources may be elusive, as we can only start with when things were written down, and the stories that inspired them probably come for earlier man, who did not write them down, but....we do have some pretty old sources, and from which, their influence can be traced in cultures and stories long after the fact. The earliest written work, Gilgamesh, is a fantasy story.

And I think it is wise to know the legends of and histories of the fantasies of places you are trying to write about. It would make little sense to write fantasy story in England without knowing its tales and legends and history. Likewise, to the effect that stories tend to capture universal truths, it would be wise to know the things fantasy has been eluding too over eons. I am not sure one can entirely make something up...so much of who we are and what we write about is already baked in to us from those tales.

 

[Mad Swede]

>too many writers just follow the usual conventions
Miles Lacey said much the same. In both cases it made me wonder what constitutes "too many". Is it possible for there to be exactly enough who follow the usual conventions? Or for there to be not enough? My feeling (a thing that falls well short of actual thought) is that "too many" means "I've seen it too often for my taste." More of an expression of annoyance than an actual criticism.

Somewhat related, if I consciously refer to or am inspired by something, what distinguishes between a trope and a model? Again being a bit cheeky here, maybe a trope is when you admire what I've done, while a trope is when you dislike it. Putting it yet another way, if I don't like what an author has done, I say they've copied a trope. If I like what they've done, then they've been inspired by a model.

*shrug* I'm confident all agree that above all and despite all, it comes down to good writing and poor writing.

Oh come on skip.knox What I wrote was that "too many writers just follow the usual conventions (whatever they might be) without thinking too much about the quality of what they produce". And I meant the whole sentence, not just bits of it.

That doesn't mean that you can't write a good story even though you follow and use all the conventions. A case in point would be the late David (and Leigh) Eddings, who in The Belgariad produced a fantastically well-written and very entertaining story whilst using every fantasy convention you can think of. They did think about what they were doing, and the story is entertaining because their characterisation and dialogue is so very good.

But there are other fantasy writers out there who produce very conventional stores with very conventional characters and dialogue. To me that's writing by rote, there's no real thought goes into it, and to me as an author (and as a reader) that is just a bit of an insult. I hated the Shannara series for exactly that reason, there was nothing especially original or creative about it and it wasn't very well written.

 

[Azul-din]

I heartily disagree - when researching for fantasy writing I think it well worth seeking early writing to understand the origins of storytelling - much of which contain magical or fantastical elements.

So many examples it’s hard to know where to start, but close to (my) home, Arthurian legend is one solid example of this. Geoffrey of Monmouth created a fantastical story that would go on to capture people imaginations, and probably be foundational for future fantasy storytellers.

Research is one thing- but somewhere, sometime, was the storyteller who made it all up in the first place. What can one say but 'Go thou and do likewise.'?

 

[Finchbearer]

Research is one thing- but somewhere, sometime, was the storyteller who made it all up in the first place. What can one say but 'Go thou and do likewise.'?

As far as oral storytelling traditions go, yes. They would have been memorised and passed down.

 

[skip.knox]

>And I meant the whole sentence, not just bits of it.
I was guilty of lazy quoting. I contend my question about too many still applies, even with the rest of the sentence intact. When someone says there are too many stories set in medieval Europe, or too many stories with elves, or too many stories with vampires, or ... too many of anything, I contend what they're really saying is that it's too many *for them*. Another person comes to a story with dragons in it and maybe it's their first fantasy story with dragons and they think it's brilliant.

All of which is obvious to the point of being superficial, except for this. As writers, we shouldn't take statements about too many of this or that too (there's that word again) seriously. Go out and do as the Swede says. Write it good.

I try to catch myself calling any particular writing lazy, even when I believe it is, at least on the basis of it being too conventional, for exactly the reason stated above. What's conventional to me is brand new to another reader. Many and many a year ago, that was called hack writing or pulp writing, but I've seen any number of such writers have their reputations rehabilitated by later generations. So maybe "write it good" (I quote myself, not the Swede, who knows grammar gooder than that), maybe that's not the real goal. The real goal is to write as well as I can at this particular juncture, for it is to be hoped I evolve as a writer and so what constitutes writing well will likewise evolve for me. And not worry a whit about what is conventional or trope-y or hackneyed.

I do have to add an addendum to that, though. If I'm trying to write to market, then toss out most of this. There, knowing the conventions is very much part of the work, and best of luck to ya, mate.

 

[pmmg]

Research is one thing- but somewhere, sometime, was the storyteller who made it all up in the first place. What can one say but 'Go thou and do likewise.'?

I think this implies too much. I don't think made it all up was really the path by which it happened. Like some dude wearing animal hides thought...Hey, I have some great story ideas, and just started writing out serials. I think more likely there was a period of trying to understand what seemed to be true around them, and in many iterations, stories began to form to explain them. So, to go and do likewise would require the iterative process. For us, so much further from those original stories, and living and experiencing so much in their shadows, it would be very hard to create something that did not owe in someway to them. To go on as if ignorance of them means you can claim originality, feels false to me. You are more likely treading on ground already trod.

Understanding where it has all come from, would seem to me to be a boon, and not a hindrance. I think the greater value is in having a workable sense of them.

 

[Miles Lacey]

This isn't the case anymore though. Maybe even 10 years ago you might have had a point. However, if you look at all the big fantasy novels that have come out in the last 15 or so years, there is a lot more diversity in them than you claim. Sanderson alone has already given us half a million novels set in wildly different worlds. But I've read anything from African inspired to renaissance to Roman settings to steampunk. And anything from heists to orc run tea rooms. Destinies rarely play a role in the stories.

As for being heterosexual, most figures gives about 90% of people in a random population being heterosexual, so would it be a surprise that 90% of heroes is heterosexual too?

You are right about the greater diversity in the more recent fantasy novels but it is important to keep in mind that what's available in smaller, remoter countries isn't as great as what is available in Europe and North America. I've seen and read steampunk and similar genres but they tend to be few and far between. The Middle East and Africa are also becoming increasingly common as settings but, again, they are still relatively few. With luck, such diversity in fantasy will become more common and become more readily available outside of Europe and North America.

I'm aware the vast majority of people are heterosexual so it makes sense they make up the vast majority of heroes.

 

[Penpilot]

You are right about the greater diversity in the more recent fantasy novels but it is important to keep in mind that what's available in smaller, remoter countries isn't as great as what is available in Europe and North America. I've seen and read steampunk and similar genres but they tend to be few and far between. The Middle East and Africa are also becoming increasingly common as settings but, again, they are still relatively few. With luck, such diversity in fantasy will become more common and become more readily available outside of Europe and North America.

I think one thing to consider is this is from a Western perspective. Go to an African, Asian, or etc. country, I'm sure they each have their own literature set in their own cultures. Is it harder to get in Western countries, probably. But does it exist, and is there a lot of it, probably, too. Maybe one of the things to consider is instead of looking for someone from the West who writes in diverse settings derived from other cultures, we should try and look for writers from those cultures writing with in them, African writers, Asian writers, etc. and support their works.

This reminds me of the movie Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon, a hit with Western audiences, but a bomb with Chinese ones. What was fresh for Western audiences were filled things that were ho-hum to Chinese audiences. In trying to cater to a Western audience that film failed to meet expectations of what wuxia movie should be to a Chinese audience.

On that line, in a sort of reversal of that, I've also notice some "terrible" movies, according my Western tastes, do gangbusters in the the Chinese market.

 

[Azul-din]

I think this implies too much. I don't think made it all up was really the path by which it happened. Like some dude wearing animal hides thought...Hey, I have some great story ideas, and just started writing out serials. I think more likely there was a period of trying to understand what seemed to be true around them, and in many iterations, stories began to form to explain them. So, to go and do likewise would require the iterative process. For us, so much further from those original stories, and living and experiencing so much in their shadows, it would be very hard to create something that did not owe in someway to them. To go on as if ignorance of them means you can claim originality, feels false to me. You are more likely treading on ground already trod.

Understanding where it has all come from, would seem to me to be a boon, and not a hindrance. I think the greater value is in having a workable sense of them.

You might say that what the World Trade Center and the Parthenon have in common is that they are both buildings.

 

[Prince of Spires]

Original sources may be elusive, as we can only start with when things were written down, and the stories that inspired them probably come for earlier man, who did not write them down, but....we do have some pretty old sources, and from which, their influence can be traced in cultures and stories long after the fact.

We still have stories that were passed down as oral tales. The Iliad and Odyssey are such an example. The Kallevala is another one.

In general, some story types, like the Hero's Journey, are considered universal story types. You find them across the globe, and across cultures. I've seen it argued that one of the reasons people are drawn to the Hero's Journey is that it imitates growing up and moving out into the world. It's a fictionalized rite of passage which feels familiar to people. I wouldn't be surprised this is the origin of many types of tales. People like fantasizing about getting together with that out of reach girl or boy, so you get Romance. People like dreaming about capturing that huge mammoth and being the hero of the tribe. So you get adventure stories. It's part of what makes us human.

 

[Finchbearer]

Question to all: how many of us have written The Chosen One, and how does your story challenge or subvert that trope?

 

[Azul-din]

We still have stories that were passed down as oral tales. The Iliad and Odyssey are such an example. The Kallevala is another one.

In general, some story types, like the Hero's Journey, are considered universal story types. You find them across the globe, and across cultures. I've seen it argued that one of the reasons people are drawn to the Hero's Journey is that it imitates growing up and moving out into the world. It's a fictionalized rite of passage which feels familiar to people. I wouldn't be surprised this is the origin of many types of tales. People like fantasizing about getting together with that out of reach girl or boy, so you get Romance. People like dreaming about capturing that huge mammoth and being the hero of the tribe. So you get adventure stories. It's part of what makes us human.

I would never advise trying to change the human condition! Only to observe that we are only beginning to understand what a wonderful, magical and diverse species we really are.

 

[pmmg]

You might say that what the World Trade Center and the Parthenon have in common is that they are both buildings.

I might, but I don't think I would.

Was this an argument for or against the proposition? One cannot begin to build the WTC without the long history of construction iterations, that would have included buildings like the Parthenon. I bet the WTC borrowed more from the Parthenon than simply its label of building. Many shoulders were stood on before we get to that. The same is true for the Parthenon. It is an improved iteration of many things that came before.

 

[Mad Swede]

I think one thing to consider is this is from a Western perspective. Go to an African, Asian, or etc. country, I'm sure they each have their own literature set in their own cultures. Is it harder to get in Western countries, probably. But does it exist, and is there a lot of it, probably, too. Maybe one of the things to consider is instead of looking for someone from the West who writes in diverse settings derived from other cultures, we should try and look for writers from those cultures writing with in them, African writers, Asian writers, etc. and support their works.

I'm going to suggest that what you really mean is that this is from a US and British perspective. Writing this as a Swede (albeit a mad one) I can assure you that there are a number of story telling conventions here in Sweden whch arise directly from our culture and history, and they're not the same as some of those you find in the US or UK. It's not just a difference in style, it's a difference in structures, arcs and characterisation. It makes for a number of challenges when trying to translate (interpret, really) stories from Swedish to English as I and my editor have found.