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

Why all the elves?

What kind of (sentient) species do you write about besides humanoids?

  • I only include human-like species

    Votes: 12 29.3%
  • Mythological "beasts", orcs, elves, pixies, vampires etc.

    Votes: 19 46.3%
  • Gods, deities, ghosts, genies

    Votes: 18 43.9%
  • Sentient animals (other than humans)

    Votes: 15 36.6%
  • Self-imagined sentient species/races

    Votes: 19 46.3%
  • Sentient plants

    Votes: 6 14.6%
  • Other

    Votes: 9 22.0%

  • Total voters
    41

Ophiucha

Auror
One thing I've noticed in a lot of more recent fantasy featuring elves is that they can be, and are, used to sort of have a minority race while still keeping the setting predominantly European. Like, back in Medieval Europe, most kingdoms had wars between one another and rivalries and territory wars that just aren't as common in the West any more. It's harder for us, particularly in America, to empathize with the 'France vs. England' mentality since to us it's all just a generic blend of European. But we certainly can understand racial tensions, so by making France elves and England humans, you can keep the setting 'medieval Europe' but bring in dialogue and conflicts that relate more to our own conflicts. That's a more recent trend, though.

In the broader sense, yeah, I agree with most of the others. Even though I don't particularly like elves or even medieval fantasy, I grew up reading books with elven archers and their dying civilizations and half-elf healer girl love interests and long descriptions of awe-inspiring spires in elven cities of gold and their cute pointed ears. If a thousand writers read those same books that I did, it seems likely that at least a few of them would want to write about elves themselves. Although, my generation did also grow up with Harry Potter; we might be tainted with too many memories of Dobby to keep the tradition alive.
 

Alva

Scribe
I honestly can't say I'm writing about elves and orcs in my WIP, but I'm going to put myself in those shoes for the moment. About a year ago, I had a "brilliant" idea to create all these new races rather than sticking to the "overused" elves, orcs, and such. I asked my friend what she thought of it, and she said that she probably wouldn't read it if it was too out of the ordinary.

That being said, I did tame down my ideas a lot compared to what they started out to be. Creating species of your own is a risk because you don't know if it will work for the reader or your own WIP for that matter. Too many new ideas stuffed into one package could be difficult to handle. There's nothing wrong with writing about these stock races because they're easier. As a beginning writer, I would write about them because I could use the works of others as a reference to guide me in writing my own.

True. I admit that beginners may find it easier to familiarize themselves with fantasy by using stock characters. And I guess every genre has its own set of stock characters, too, so it's not only fantasy-related. Plus, it seems that great many people start writing by creating fanfiction.

Though I must say I'm one of those readers who would have been instantly intrigued by non-stock fantasy request. :D Plus, in my opinion non-stock fantasy usually doesn't mean heavy or difficult fantasy. It can be as light as any literature, the characters would only be out of the ordinary and maybe even the surroundings a bit foreign. : )

Though I admit it, I love complicated, multi-layered stories with complicated, multi-layered characters.

I suppose I might also use them because so many of these races are either good/light or bad/dark. It's something that is not so easily defined in reality, and through this approach, the characters can be simplified and easily distinguished as protagonists or antagonists. Of course, some people don't write about them for the same reason. I also acknowledge that authors have put their own spin on the races, making them appear more like "gray" characters. On the other hand, there's some sort of a unity that is created when readers (and the writer) can pinpoint the races they want to root for as opposed to the races they want to vent their anger on.

I'm a bit vary towards black & white -dichotomy. I don't like it in real life and I tend to not to like it in literature. Though this is again my personal opinion. I just tend to feel sorry over the "Born Bad" -characters. Thus, I'm definitely more on the gray-scale. I like that I can both hate and love my characters at once. It gives some spice to writing, plus that ethically complicated characters serce their writers with some really strange plot-twists and character relationships at times.
 

Svrtnsse

Staff
Article Team
But still, I'd like to turn the music example around a bit and ask: "How did you feel about playing the same music night after night?" Especially when part of your audience was displeased although you tried your very best to serve good music and suit everyone's tastes. The problem - even with target marketing - seems to be that you can't please everybody. Thus I'm wondering, that surely there must be also some inner motivator for a writer to write so called "generic" fantasy. At least I don't count money as inner motivator. Money is only a tool, an easy external goal, whereas writing in itself can (and should?) have intrinsic value.

This is a good and valid question. At first it annoyed me - a lot - that people didn't have the ability to appreciate what I was giving them. I did my best to provide good quality music entertainment and the sheep didn't have the brains to appreciate it. I was disappointed.
Over time it changed though. I eventually came to realise that my role as a DJ wasn't to educate the crowd on cutting edge dance music, but to make sure everyone had a good time. What matters isn't the music but the dancing. It doesn't matter how cool the music is if no one is dancing to it. It doesn't matter if a song has been played to death as long as the smiles on the faces of the dancers are genuine.
Over time I changed from playing the music to playing the crowd and over time I grew to enjoy that a lot more. It's more fun to have a heaving party than to have an empty dance floor - even if I play the music I love.
It's not all about selling out though. Once you get the floor going, you can fit in the occasional weird song. I had a few tracks none of the other DJs played that would work wonders for me if I played them at the right time (Covenant - Dead Stars) so there was still a personal touch to it, it was just more subtle than it had originally been.

I think the same may apply in my writing. I've got elves and dwarves and hobbits (anfylk). I've got gods and dragons and magic. I've got all of the standard fantasy tropes designed to seem like your bog standard high-fantasy setting. It's to get the reader that sense of familiarity, to easily give them a first impression.
Once they've got the basics and start finding out more they'll realise there are things that deviate from the norm and which should (in theory) pique their curiosity and give the world a greater sense of depth.
I don't know how well it actually works, but at least I'm having fun with it.
 

Lord Ben

Minstrel
True. I admit that beginners may find it easier to familiarize themselves with fantasy by using stock characters. And I guess every genre has its own set of stock characters, too, so it's not only fantasy-related. Plus, it seems that great many people start writing by creating fanfiction.

Though I must say I'm one of those readers who would have been instantly intrigued by non-stock fantasy request. :D Plus, in my opinion non-stock fantasy usually doesn't mean heavy or difficult fantasy. It can be as light as any literature, the characters would only be out of the ordinary and maybe even the surroundings a bit foreign. : )

Though I admit it, I love complicated, multi-layered stories with complicated, multi-layered characters.

Standard fantasy races don't have to be standard fantasy characters. Characters can be different and all have their own voice without having to be entirely separate races. To use a GoT reference Tywin Lannister and Ned Stark are both humans yet each very unique. There isn't a need to make them unique races.
 
Also if a person is going to create an species that walks like an elf and talks like an elf, why call it something else just to be different?

That's the one thing I've never gotten. Old-school "fair folk" are relatively inhuman, but most modern elves walk like humans and talk like humans. I have a hard time understanding why they're not just called humans. (Then again, my perceptions might be a little unusual in this--I think a lot of dragons are just scaly humans, too.)
 

Ankari

Hero Breaker
Moderator
Why elves? Because elves are fantasy. Not directly, but parallelly. Why read fantasy when it has been said over and over again that there are only so many plots an author can use? Why not read fictional history? The stories will be exactly the same, but with different terminology and scope.

Elves represent what humans (us) want to be. They are typically represented as beautiful, wise, long living (an important aspiration, by the way), powerful, possessing heightened physical and mental abilities, but, aesthetically, very similar to us. Like a person living through their child, we can live through them. Or, at best, observe them through the tales we weave.

Every race is a symbol of real life. An orc, for example, is the easily identifiable enemy. "Look at the green skin and tusk! An enemy!"

Watch the news, listen to the leaders of the world, and you'll see this pursuit of identifying the enemy. We label people that hold different ideas from us as the other, we take a segment of a population and subconsciously apply it to the entire people.

We, as authors and humans belonging to an ethnicity or nationality, want to simplify the concept of "enemy" to our heroes. If all we used were humans, then the reader will not understand why a hero can run through a camp of an enemy that looks just like the hero and slay them without a second thought.

Why the trope races? It depends on how much you want to spend of your book investing into fleshing out your world. But, at the end, will your readers just shrug there shoulders and say "huh, those guys are like elves, but with wings and gold skin." Was it worth all your writing for them to come to that conclusion?
 
Hi,

I think it comes back to the old axiom - write what you know. For me I write a lot of elves, but then I've read a lot of books based on them, watched the movies, played D and D etc. I know them. And probably more important I spend a greater proportion of my time thinking about them / imagining them than I do thinking about and imagining most other fantasy creatures / people.

But equally as an idea they are one that grabs the imagination. As sadly are vampires hunting for teenage girls to woo! I suppose as well as writing what you know you will also end up writing what you love.

Cheers, Greg.
 
This is largely off-topic, but Ankari's post made me realize something I didn't previously put together: I find orcs more admirable than elves. Elves are often described as wise, but I don't think I've ever read a story where they were actually wiser than the human characters--they were simply confident that they were wiser than humans, which is a trait a lot of misanthropic humans have. In addition, they don't seem to do much, at best staying out of the heroes' way and at worst making a nuisance of themselves. Orcs, meanwhile, are totally straightforward--they have their tribe, and they fight for it, attacking humans to claim land and resources for the tribe's benefit. They're remarkably persistent, fighting even when the hero is guaranteed to defeat them, and I've never read a story where they failed to be loyal to each other. For lack of a better word, they seem to have more virtues than elves do.

I sometimes say I want more originality in fantasy. But really, I don't have a problem with orcs, or dwarves, or pixies for that matter. I just don't like elves.
 

Amanita

Maester
I dislike the idea that elves and orcs are necessary for fantasy as well. For some reason, I'm less annoyed by werewolves or more animal-like beings such as unicorns and similar.
I usually fail to see anything that makes Elves and Orcs really different from humans. Elves are more perfect in various ways and are "immortal" but still die in battles and disasters which are the most common plot-relevant causes of death in fantasy stories. This makes the difference relatively irrelevant and they usually don't seem to be very affected by it either.
And Orcs simply have all the negative traits "savage" human groups are accused of having coupled with ugliness and that's it. The idea that killing enemies and winning their territory is heroic by itself isn't really embraced by many people in western countries anymore after the two World Wars. Civilian casualties and cruelty cause a public outcry. But if the enemies are Orcs and truly purely evil in the first place, this kind of thing can be written without a bad conscience. Orcs allow to have "purely good" characters who still engage in large scale violence.
I do think that deeply ingrained ideas of superior and inferior races play a part as well. Considering sexual relations between two different human groups disgusting is not accepted anymore for good reason but elves and orcs? Anytime. Elves are superior while Orcs are evil and everything's alright.
I don't think anyone's doing this consciously but I still believe it's one of the reasons why this kind of setting is so popular. The other aspects mentioned above are important too.
 

Sam James

Dreamer
I think you need to expand your horizons a little with reading a bigger variety of books. There are tons of books without orcs and elves in them. The problem of using stock fantasy races is more apparent in video games than books. Read some Martin, Abercombie, Erikson, 3 of the biggest names in Secondary World fantasy, no orcs or elves there.

(And even if you were to draw similarities for example with Elves and Steven Erikson's Tiste races (Light/dark and shadow types). You will find lots of personality and differences between the two; for example the Tiste Edur draw upon Native American and Inuit cultures heavily.)

It's a misconception like saying you're sick of all fantasy books being about a "small farm boy destined for great things". Most are not.

If you want to read books with a great selection of unique races I suggest the aforementioned Erikson's Malazan book of the fallen (That ranges from Undead Neanderthals to Hive Lizards) or China Mieville's Perdido Street Station. (With scarab headed people, cactus people and more.)

:)
 

skip.knox

toujours gai, archie
Moderator
I agree with the comment about humans. There is endless variety in human characters; so, too, can there be among elvish or dwarvish or whateverish characters. The race isn't the character.

To make the point in a different way, there's no end to the private detective who drinks too much, or the cop five days from retirement, or the angst-ridden young man seeking answer, or the troubled man of dark passions, or the feisty woman of independent spirit. Every genre has its tropes. It means nothing at all, really. Any of them can be written well or written badly.

Go write your own and don't trouble yourself over perceptions. That job belongs to agents and reviewers.
 

yachtcaptcolby

Minstrel
Traditional fantasy races are useful in that readers already know what to expect from them. Elves are slender humanoids with pointed ears who live in the woods. Dwarves are short, stocky, bearded, and live underground. That built-in knowledge can make it easier for the reader to generate a picture of what you're doing and it can also provide stereotypes for a clever writer to contradict.
 

Ankari

Hero Breaker
Moderator
Just a clarification on Erikson. He used a lot of stock fantasy races. He had dragons, giants, ogiers and elves. The point has been made that the were called different names, and were given different cultural backgrounds, but Erikson used the whole Light, Dark and Shadow thing.

Also, he used the insect race. While not considered a stock fantasy race, it has been used enough to be considered common.
 
C

Chessie

Guest
I definitely prefer my fantasy tales without Orcs and Elves. Though mostly play Elves in Skyrim and I love the cookie cutter dwarves. But when it comes to my own work, its all human with some mythological creatures in there. Fantasy is about the fantastical. It doesn't matter what you choose to write about so long as it creates a sense of wonder.

Interesting enough, in browsing through Amazon's selections for fantasy books, I remember seeing only one which featured an elf protagonist.
 

Gurkhal

Auror
I've got to say that I'm in the "only humans" group. I have yet to come across a situation or story idea where I think that a non-human race would be of better use than normal humans.
 

SeverinR

Vala
I think having known beings in a book helps establish the world without reinventing the wheel.

Pointy eared humanoids with intelligence, that study the finer things in life, in fantasy that is an elf, in SF that is a Vulcan.

You don't have to make them a carbon copy of other elves, but they will be similar.

If I called a pointy eared humanoid with intelligence, enjoying the finer things in life, and called them Jenkins, people would just figure out they are a type of elf and be annoyed that the author didn't just call them elves to start with.

An author must build the world from what the reader knows to what he must know to understand your world. Without any known links, they will not be able to graps an understanding of the world they are reading and will grow bored.
 

dhrichards

Dreamer
I think using Non-human characters, in my case, has been a way to explore social issues without getting bogged won in racial or ethnic issues. By making a non-human race one gets to talk about things that, had it been other humans, would be tricky. For example, having a Latino character means you open yourself up potential attacks that you don't get Hispanic issues... while few would argue if you did the same with say Elves. Maybe it is lazy on my part but I also find non human characters fun to write.
Dave

PS- love the poll, have to try and wedge in a sentient plant into my story now...
 

teacup

Auror
In my story I have only humans and human like beings. Those being Werewolves and a race I created - Spiritwolves.
There are mythical beasts, Elves, Dwarves, ect in my world, but not in the particular country I am writing.

I am definitely more interested in humans than anything else, and that's why the only other mythical things I've used are human based. Eg, Werewolves, and my Spiritwolves. (Okay, I have a dragon later on, but they're too awesome not to have ;P No, I do have it for plot reasons, but mostly I write humans.)
 

Sam James

Dreamer
Just a clarification on Erikson. He used a lot of stock fantasy races. He had dragons, giants, ogiers and elves. The point has been made that the were called different names, and were given different cultural backgrounds, but Erikson used the whole Light, Dark and Shadow thing.

Also, he used the insect race. While not considered a stock fantasy race, it has been used enough to be considered common.

I think some of the links are very tenuous. Giants? Toblakai? Perhaps, they are only about 10 feet tall right? Karsa Orlong is more a play on the Conan/barbarian archetype and Erikson has already spoken on such.

Ogres? Jaghut? Apart from green skin and tusks, I see no other similarities. The relationship with Ice magic, the love of solitary towers and cats. The high intelligence.

I do think the Tiste have enough differences to the elves. The only real similarities are the longetivity, sloped eyes, and relationship with elements (or aspects of light)

Dragons is the only thing I'll grant you. If this thread was called "Why all the Dragons?" I would have much more sympathy. But again, perhaps that is like saying "Why all the undead?" Both are things all cultures have incorporated into their cultural identity.
 

Ankari

Hero Breaker
Moderator
Races and their cultural background are two different things. If you recall the first book where Karsa is introduced, he refers to all humans as "children". He is to humans what an adult is to children. Besides their large size, what makes a giant a giant?

Erikson specifically uses the word "ogier" to describe Mappo. Why use that word if not to have your audience understand him to be an ogier?

This discussion is about using stock races, not how the author puts his twist on them. With that in mind, why give Erikson excuses for using them?

Disclaimer: I am a giant fan of Erikson. I'm not trying to pigeon hole him. But let's be honest about what he did.
 
Top