Some thoughts on the direction Fantasy seems to be heading -- present and future.

[j d worthington]

Actually, JD, I too am convinced that the general trend of the human race is away from brutality and toward ethical behavior, and I've had (still do to a certain extent) little patience with people who over-dramatized the ills of the present as though we were living in some sort of dark age, when even a cursory knowledge of history should tell us we are not.

But I feel that in the last five or ten years Western society has regressed. Not in any grandiose way, but still in ways that trouble me, not because I feel that any long term damage is being done -- the more humane trend will resume it's course sooner or later -- but we have to live now, and our children and grandchildren have to live with the legacy we create for them now, and if it all comes right again in another fifty years -- that's of little comfort to me, and far less, I am sure, to the people being subjected now to the everyday cruelties I mentioned before.

But for the upward trend to resume it's course, people have to believe in it. And just at the moment it seems like too many don't and that saddens me. Above, all young people seem not to believe or care, and that's even sadder. You and I remember well how angry so many members of our own generation were back in the 60's and early 70's; and some of it was misplaced and some of it based on ignorance and some of it was entirely justified; but it was an anger that had much in it of compassion, and a belief that it was possible, and indeed imperative, for groups and individuals to become a force for positive change. And you don't see so much of that kind of anger anymore; instead, the anger seems to be growing increasingly fatalistic. (Except for Al Gore. Yay, Al! But he's one of ours.)

And I look back on all the psychedelic posters and the tie-dye shirts and the unicorns and glitter and all the rest of it -- and yes, it does seem rather silly and naïve, but somehow it all did seem to energize people, didn't it? It was overworked and it was overdone and it eventually became trite and lost its power, but for a while the power was there. And I would like to think that there might be some way -- some way more appropriate to our times -- ideally, some way more sophisticated and more enduring -- that we could tap into that power again and direct it more wisely and keep it longer.

But if the most imaginative part of the creative community (which I modestly assume to be SFF readers and writers and artists, of course), if they can't see their way clear to discovering that power, then who will?

First, I'd rather thought that was your approach from many things you've said. I was speaking in the general sense of our current society seems to have this perception of things; and this, I do think, is part of the "growing up" or disillusion in the true sense of outgrowing illusions of the past but not yet having accepted and come to terms with realities as valid and emotionally fulfilling... and not finding them to be so yet simply because they are different than what we've always been taught to expect reality to be. So this seems to me the sort of overreaction with which such a transitional period is rife.

As for the idea of writers contributing to such changes as you speak of -- I agree here, as well; in fact, this also is one of the major themes of Moorcock's work of the past two decades: that we create these myths because they are important symbols for us, and then we try to create a world that makes the best (and sometimes the worst) of these myths reality -- but that we (as a species or as a society) are constantly searching for the ennobling myths because they are more satisfying and richer in the long haul. And, of course, in books like Blood, Fabulous Harbours, The War Amongst the Angels, etc., he stresses the popular myths created by writers and taken as part of popular culture which help to remodel that culture's psyche. And these books, dark as they are at times, are among the most life-affirming pieces I can think of.

And what you say about the various aspects of the 60's is, I think, what I've argued with people about for years (usually those who weren't there to see it): that yes, some of this stuff really did get silly, but there was a commitment to make a better world then, and a joy in life that we've been lacking, in the main -- here in the States -- since Watergate. It's true that our government hasn't done a hell of a lot to rebuild that feeling of confidence and hope for the future; if anything, the venality, lies, and shadow-plays they've been staging for the past 40 years have done more than perhaps anything else to leech such out of the people. Yet I, too, would say that there's still a way to have a more sophisticated version of that sort of optimism, if we are willing to work at it... and perhaps to take more of the realities into account so that we don't become disillusioned (in the more negative sense) so easily, but can adjust to the realities without losing our goal of making positive changes.

And on this one... I think we do need a more balanced view in fantasy; not starry-eyed optimism or Pollyannish views of the world, but to recapture that awareness that we're seeing in the sciences right now of the incredible complexity and richness of existence; except that fantasy, being the sort of beastie it is, really would prove able to help us, as Tolkien said (albeit I'm using my own words), see the world through new eyes -- to be once more captured by the wonder of a bud bursting and becoming leaves, or petals... or the immese golden depths in the eye of the humble toad. To quote from The 7 Faces of Dr. Lao: "The whole world is a circus if you look at it the right way. Every time you pick up a handful of dust, and see not the dust, but a mystery, a marvel, there in your hand. Every time you stop and think, 'I'm alive, and being alive is fantastic.' Every time such a thing happens, you, too, are a part of the Circus of Dr. Lao."

 

[Giovanna Clairval]

Still wondering what the definition of a novel is...

And also... in the 60s, before the arrival of new writers like Roger Zelazny (and Moorcok, and many others), SFF literature was stuck with well-worn icons; this topic has already been explored here. But with the new authors, the accent was put on renewal as personal growth and belief in the possibility of a deep change in society--all revolving about spiritual advancement seen as a quality intrinsic to Humanity.

After the Watergate scandal in the US, and the concomitant reaction against the students' (and workers') tentative revolution in Europe, the genre has mirrored the general loss of hope, reverting to either comfortable clichés or dark post-modern pseudo-nihilistic streaks.

It is a phase the genre is traversing, a mirror of the sentiments of what has been called "the lost generation". But I think that something is stirring...

 

[iansales]

Still wondering what the definition of a novel is...

The Huga Award defines a novel is anything over 40,000 words.

And also... in the 60s, before the arrival of new writers like Roger Zelazny (and Moorcok, and many others), SFF literature was stuck with well-worn icons; this topic has already been explored here. But with the new authors, the accent was put on renewal as personal growth and belief in the possibility of a deep change in society--all revolving about spiritual advancement seen as a quality intrinsic to Humanity.

The New Wave stressed "inner space" over outer space, but I'm fairly sure spiritual advancement wasn't on the agenda. They were a pretty secualr bunch.

After the Watergate scandal in the US, and the concomitant reaction against the students' (and workers') tentative revolution in Europe, the genre has mirrored the general loss of hope, reverting to either comfortable clichés or dark post-modern pseudo-nihilistic streaks.

And yet there is no comparable event in British history - the Winter of Discontent, perhaps; although that was the late 1970s. Certainly the Brits had plenty to be miserable about, and it showed in their fiction.

And now, it seems the situation has reversed - the Brits have the optimism, and the americans don't. There was a panel devoted to the subject at Novacon. Charles Stross suggested that this is because the US confidence is at an all-time low - an unpopular government, embroiled in pointless wars, the realisation that they're no longer liked abroad...

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

It is a phase the genre is traversing, a mirror of the sentiments of what has been called "the lost generation". But I think that something is stirring...

I hope you are right; not only because of all the reasons I've stated before, but because it would provide something in the way of variety.

As for what constitutes a novel (Wasn't that question asked in another thread? I'm confused), I suspect the ultra-literary establishment would reject any definitions put forward by the Hugo Award committee because they're all genre writers. However, my husband's desk dictionary (I'm not going out to my office to look at mine) is on the side of the Hugo. It describes a novel simply as "a fictitious prose narrative of considerable length."

 

[j d worthington]

On the definition of novel, the American Heritage Dictionary has something very similar, though with a bit more detail:

1. A fictional prose narrative of considerable length, typically having a plot that is unfolded by the actions, speech, and thoughts of the characters. 2. The literary genre represented by novels.

while Skeat's Etymological Dictionary of the English Language goes with its original meaning (new, strange), and how that relates to the modern usage, deriving from what was originally called "innovator", as novel as a form of literature originally meant "news":

novel, sb., a late word in the mod. sense, but the pl. novels (= news) occurs in the Towneley Mysteries (see Trench, Select Glossary); novel-ist, formerly an innovator (Trench)

As for the following:

And also... in the 60s, before the arrival of new writers like Roger Zelazny (and Moorcok, and many others), SFF literature was stuck with well-worn icons; this topic has already been explored here. But with the new authors, the accent was put on renewal as personal growth and belief in the possibility of a deep change in society--all revolving about spiritual advancement seen as a quality intrinsic to Humanity.

while there is some justice to this, it is by no means the whole picture. For one thing, we had innovators like Bradbury, Kuttner, Moore, Bester, Dick, (Oscar) Lewis, Farmer, etc. working through the 50s (and some through the 1930s and 1940s, as well). Even many of the more traditional writers would step outside the more accepted motifs now and again, from Heinlein to Asimov to Clarke to Aldiss.

Still, as a general statement, it's a useful distinction (though I think I'd date it to the birth of The Magazine of Fantasy and Science Fiction and Galaxy, both of which began in the 1950s....) And, while Ian's right in that they were largely a secular bunch, there was a certain amount of mysticism involved in the work of some, as well....

Again, however, this is dealing with sf, rather than fantasy, which also had a fair amount of leeway -- look at such writers as Gerald Kersh (who wrote some excellent fantasy tales), Charles Beaumont, Richard Matheson, Kuttner and Moore (again), Clark Ashton Smith, H. P. Lovecraft, James Branch Cabell, Lord Dunsany, Arthur Machen, etc., etc., etc....

 

[Giovanna Clairval]

Sorry for the thread-concertinaing, Teresa.

But thanks for the definitions, J.D.W.
We see here the difference in the history of our languages and literatures--"novel" as opposed to the French roman, the Italian romanzo, and the German Roman, but novela in Spanish, while "short story" becomes nouvelle in French, Novelle in German, racconto in Italian, and cuento in Spanish.
So, my mostly Italian and French vision of what a novel is directly stems from what I've learned when I was warming up my chair in school, covertly reading the Orlando Furioso by good old Ludovico Ariosto. I kept the book hidden under the "official" text of the day, and I was interested in those passages that were never picked by the prof for commentary.

And, J.D.W., I wasn't referring to mysticism in SF/F... I was talking about the protagonist's personal growth more or less developed in both story and character-building... a sort of Adult novel of learning, an Erwachsenenbildung, if I may say so, as opposed to the full-fledged austronaut coming out of the Author's head. This happened--to make a long story short--with Zelazny bringing structures of literary fiction into Science Fiction (well, especially SF).

 

[j d worthington]

Not to take away from Zelazny -- whom I respect greatly -- but this is something he brought his own slant to, rather than bringing it to the genre. Other writers had been doing that at least as far back as Stapledon, Sloane, etc. Even some of the pulp writers brought some of that in. It was, however, in the 1960s that it became one of the more predominant aspects of the genre.

As for fantasy (rather than science fiction), it has a long history of including such things in its parameters; in part because fantasy (until -- again -- the Tolkien boom) has traditionally been an enormously broad genre that encompassed such things as the Gormenghast books, Charles Williams' or George MacDonald's allegorical novels, the almost unclassifiable novels such as E. H. Visiak's Medusa, the delicate fabulism of Lord Dunsany (or, before him, Poe and Wilde), the unabashedly archaic novels of E. R. Eddison, and tales of modern urban life as seen through the lens of the fantastic (Charles Beaumont, Harlan Ellison, Kuttner and Moore, etc.)....

Oh, and it's very nice to see a reference to Ariosto's Orlando Furioso... an absolutely marvelous (no pun intended) tale, indeed.... (Incidentally, you may be interested in Fletcher Pratt and L. Sprague de Camp's original stories of Harold Shea, a fantasy series whose modern-day character ends up in such settings as that of the Norse myths -- just before Ragnarok, of course!; Spenser's Faerie Queene, Ariosto's Orlando Furioso, the Irish myths and legends, and the Kalevala....)

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

Charles Williams' or George MacDonald's allegorical novels

Are you saying that Charles Williams wrote allegorical novels, JD, or am I reading that sentence wrong? I haven't read everything by Williams, but the books I have read don't seem to fit neatly into allegory. They're certainly deeply spiritual and symbolic, and you can see the influence of MacDonald, but I don't find the kind of direct correspondence in terms of the metaphors that I associate with allegory.

And as far as Eddison goes, along with the archaism there is the abstruse philosophy running through all of his novels (though less obvious in The Worm Ouroboros than in the others).

 

[GOLLUM]

I don't know much about Charles Williams I have to admit but I do know that there's an old work that examined the allegorical nature of his works entitled Some aspects of allegory in the novels of Charles Williams The reason I know this title so well is because a friend of mine who knows a lot more about this author than I ever will has been trying to obtain a copy of it, so perhaps there's something in what Mr Worthington is alluding to.

I'm sure he'll arrive soon enough and provide an explanation in his trademark articulate style...

Then again it could be a matter of interpretation like you said?

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

Well, Gollum, my thinking on this is that there is a difference between stories which contain elements that may be regarded as allegorical, and that work as allegory, and novels that are themselves allegorical, in terms of the plot and characters.

Tolkien, as we know, resisted all such interpretations of The Lord of the Rings, and even went on to say that he hated allegories. But if Leaf by Niggle and Smith of Wooton Major aren't allegories, then what are they? They seem to me to contain, or even consist of, extended metaphors in the same way as MacDonald's "The Day Boy and the Night Girl." But what Williams was doing in terms of meaning and symbolism and applicability (you may remember what Tolkien said about confusing this last with allegory) seems closer to LOTR than to any of these others I have just mentioned.

In my opinion (and there's no doubt there are many who would be aghast by this heresy) novel length works do not easily or gracefully lend themselves to allegory. Invariably, there is a strain, as the characters continue to act like personifications of whatever it is they are supposed to represent instead of interacting with believable human motivations. I don't see this strain in anything I have read by Charles Williams.

But to pull this message back on topic ... I do see in Williams that sense of wonder that is missing so often in recent fantasy. In his stories there are always powers or entities or objects that defy human comprehension, that are beyond human control, which his characters try to control or tamper with or possess at their peril. There are always encounters with the numinous and the sublime, and individuals within the story who are either transformed or destroyed or translated by these encounters. (But there are also characters who are simply too blind to see what is happening and insist on interpreting events in the most mundane way possible. These are the characters who come the closest to being allegorical, as they steadfastly insist on playing their given roles: as the skeptic, the sensualist, the man of business, or whatever it might be. But the main characters are too three-dimensional and unpredictable to fit in with my idea of allegory.)

 

[GOLLUM]

Well, Gollum, my thinking on this is that there is a difference between stories which contain elements that may be regarded as allegorical, and that work as allegory, and novels that are themselves allegorical, in terms of the plot and characters.

That may be what that work is alluding to as well w.r.t. Williams.

It sounds as if Williams was a fairly major player in the early formation of the Fantasy Genre as we know it today. I think I'll need to go back and revisit this author to better understand this discussion. Anyone care to suggest a reading list?

 

[j d worthington]

To clarify: No, Williams did not write what is often called "simple allegory" -- that is, a point-for-point allegory; rather, he wrote stories that were heavily allegorical on a multitude of layers, yet worked very well as story... much like the best of Hawthorne, Melville, Poe, etc. This (to me, at any rate) goes far beyond having allegorical elements and much more like your categorization of things that work as allegory, except that (from what I understand) Williams was quite consciously intending allegorical readings of his works as well. (I could be mistaken on this, as I've not read the pieces on Williams in about 3 decades, but I recall this striking me at the time.)

As for his sense of wonder, I'd agree with that; this is something that seems to have run strongly in that generation of fantaisistes. Oddly, I'd say that the sense of disillusionment and tragedy was at least as great with those who saw the horrors of the first World War as it is with today's generation of writers, but somehow they seem to have (by and large) avoided the despairing sense of cynicism so prevalent today....

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

It sounds as if Williams was a fairly major player in the early formation of the Fantasy Genre as we know it today. I think I'll need to go back and revisit this author to better understand this discussion. Anyone care to suggest a reading list?

I wouldn't say that he was a major player, but I think he had some influence. Maybe it would be a different genre today if he had had more.

My favorites are The Greater Trumps and War in Heaven, so I would suggest them. I would not recommend All Hallows Eve, simply because I didn't find the story or the characters very engaging. On the other hand, JD may come back and give us some good reasons why it's a very significant work.

 

[Lith]

Where has this wonderful thread been hiding?

Above, all young people seem not to believe or care, and that's even sadder. You and I remember well how angry so many members of our own generation were back in the 60's and early 70's; and some of it was misplaced and some of it based on ignorance and some of it was entirely justified; but it was an anger that had much in it of compassion, and a belief that it was possible, and indeed imperative, for groups and individuals to become a force for positive change.

I think this is a fairly inescapable result of the sixties. As much as that generation had hope in creating a new world, it tore down a lot of cultural institutions and assumptions, and as it failed, it left our world half torn up. The political assassinations, the growing problems with drugs, the unending and confusing Vietnam war, the Cold War... by the time I graduated from high school, 2/3 of the students came from divorced families, making broken promises the norm rather than the exception. We grew up in a completely different world, socially if not materially. There's also an element of a rebellion against rebellion; the sixties generation rebelled against the order of their parents, and so the younger generation rebelled against the only thing their parents' generation had left; a hollowed-out sense of hope. Furthermore, I think this country (and a lot of the world, really) has been on a high since WW2, and we've been gradually coming down off of it.

I do get a little frustrated with the cynicism, because a lot of it rings a little hollow. I notice it more in the music than in fantasy, but that's probably because I stick mostly to dead authors. It's almost like a discussion among the young as to how we would handle such trials and tribulations, were they to happen again. But after a while, you just want to grab them and shake them out of their self-pity and tell them to get on with it; that life isn't that bad, that their life isn't that bad. (Fanfiction is particularly bad- 2/3 of it is self-indulgent angst and trauma for its own sake-blech!)

The above's hardly all-inclusive of what's been happening in society, but then all-inclusive is pretty much impossible; there's so much happening at any given time. As has been said, these things are somewhat cyclical.

If I ever get published, I will most certainly be helping it to pass.

 

[Enchantedfire7]

I really don't know where I stand. I used to be optimistic, yet now I'm more of a pessimist. I have alot of psychological problems, severe OCD, and depression (which I believe is brought on because of OCD). This winter has been the hardest winter of my life. I lost will and feeling for awhile and never told anyone, which was frightening me, the fact that I told no one. But I got through it. Though I still see many things in a negative light. What keeps me going is my God, my wife Melissa, even our animals (I love dogs) and my family. Normally I'm a very submissive person, to everyone, friends and all. Even to strangers. That is until I got sick, becoming agressive and slow to patience among those who lash out at me or are just plain A**H****.

As far as my novel goes, well I'm not sure how to catorgize it. The story is Dark with lots of violence and blood shed reflecting reality. Yet there is also hope, faith, love, courage and uplifting moments. Sacrifice, compassion and forgiveness. The story also reflects Faith, doing what is right and what must be done in order to survive, no matter how hard or terrible the conflict may be.

Like an absolute moron (the pessimist in me is now talking) I use to dream of becoming published, yet I know it most likely won't happen. Unless I publish it myself, which I am. Though that doesn't matter neither because I doubt anyone would enjoy my story: "The Guardian of the Seventh Realm." I'm a nobody writer, not even a writer, just a guy who wrote (or is writting) a story.

I'm not trying to be original, or create something "different." I'm just writing a story reflecting my feelings/thoughts, demons, trials, hopes and over all, my journey in life. For life is a journey. And at times so hard, however there are many beautiful things worth "fighting" for. So never shall I give up.

I probaly have been going on and on and am totally off this entire subject to begin with. I apologize if i have. Just got caught up in the moment about Optimisim and Pessimism.

Hope I didn't depress anyone

 

[j d worthington]

I really don't know where I stand. I used to be optimistic, yet now I'm more of a pessimist. I have alot of psychological problems, severe OCD, and depression (with I believe it brought on because of OCD). This winter has been the hardest winter of my life. I lost will and feeling for awhile and never told anyone, which was frightening me, the fact that I told no one. But I got through it. Though I still see many things in a negative light. What keeps me going is my God, my wife Melissa, even our animals (I love dogs) and my family. Normally I'm a very submissive person, to everyone, friends and all. Even to strangers. That is until I got sick, becoming agressive and slow to patience among those who lash out at me or are just plain A**H****.

As far as my novel goes, well I'm not sure how to catorgize it. The story is Dark with lots of violence and blood shed reflecting reality. Yet there is also hope, faith, love, courage and uplifting moments. Sacrifice, compassion and forgiveness. The story also reflects Faith, doing what is right and what must be done in order to survive, no matter how hard or terrible the conflict may be.

Like an absolute moron (the pessimist in me is now talking) I use to dream of becoming published, yet I know it most likely won't happen. Unless I publish it myself, which I am. Though that doesn't matter neither because I doubt anyone would enjoy my story: "The Guardian of the Seventh Realm." I'm a nobody writer, not even a writer, just a guy who wrote (or is writting) a story.

I'm not trying to be original, or create something "different." I'm just writing a story reflecting my feelings/thoughts, demons, trials, hopes and over all, my journey in life. For life is a journey. And at times so hard, however there are many beautiful things worth "fighting" for. So never shall I give up.

I probaly have been going on and on and am totally off this entire subject to begin with. I apologize if i have. Just got caught up in the moment about Optimisim and Pessimism.

Hope I didn't depress anyone

Well, you certainly didn't depress me. Quite the opposite. For someone who has been going through this to still hold onto the idea that there are things worth the struggle, and to be willing to put it on paper, and maybe even see that one see the light of day in print, with (if I'm reading your post aright) some hope to maybe instill a little of that determination to see it through in others... I see that as a certain kind of courage....

 

[Enchantedfire7]

Well, you certainly didn't depress me. Quite the opposite. For someone who has been going through this to still hold onto the idea that there are things worth the struggle, and to be willing to put it on paper, and maybe even see that one see the light of day in print, with (if I'm reading your post aright) some hope to maybe instill a little of that determination to see it through in others... I see that as a certain kind of courage....

Thanks man, those were encouraging words.

 

[Lith]

Like an absolute moron (the pessimist in me is now talking) I use to dream of becoming published, yet I know it most likely won't happen. Unless I publish it myself, which I am. Though that doesn't matter neither because I doubt anyone would enjoy my story: "The Guardian of the Seventh Realm." I'm a nobody writer, not even a writer, just a guy who wrote (or is writting) a story.

Now that you KNOW you won't be published, you are free to write whatever you want. It can be a wonderfully freeing thing. And the paradox is that if you write what you want, I mean exactly what you want, what you think, your work starts to become more accessible to others, because you begin to strip off those layers of public expectation. Or at least that's how it works for me.

You wouldn't happen to be a fan of GK Chesterton, would you? If not, give him a whirl. He got me through a lot of rough times. The rough times still come and go, but not as bad as they used to be. And if you can find CS Lewis's book on George MacDonald, he has excerpted a lot of MacDonald's passages on dryness of spirit, which I also found to be a great help.

And it wouldn't be much of a triumph if it wasn't much of a trial, would it?

 

[Enchantedfire7]

You wouldn't happen to be a fan of GK Chesterton, would you? If not, give him a whirl. He got me through a lot of rough times. The rough times still come and go, but not as bad as they used to be. And if you can find CS Lewis's book on George MacDonald, he has excerpted a lot of MacDonald's passages on dryness of spirit, which I also found to be a great help.

And it wouldn't be much of a triumph if it wasn't much of a trial, would it?[/quote]

I love C.S.Lewis, his books on Fantasy, especially "The Horse and His Boy" and "Perelandra," as well as his theology books. But I've never read any G.K.Chesterton. I've heard lots of great things about him though and will check out his writings. Thanks.

 

[The Procrastinator]

Thoughts on "reality" - brought on by the idea that graphic and oft-used violence or cruelty is more "real" in some way than more positive things... Ask somebody about the real world these days and it will probably involve urban life of some sort, money, noise, pollution, etc etc. Answers won't always be negative of course but they will often be centred on human/human concerns. One thing that has changed over time is that more and more of us are living in cities or large urban environments and our lives tend to revolve around exclusively human things - I wonder if this change is related to the change spoken of above.

Most people don't live in the midst of beauty anymore. They find beauty where they can, for sure, but its a different thing not to have to seek out clean air, clear skies, sights and sounds that are pleasing and can be enjoyed without having to make an effort. In every city you have to deliberately ignore aspects of your environment - the feel of the air on your pores - the harsh unyielding feel of concrete - angles that slice up the space around you into neat and restrictive parcels and blockages - the constant sound and smell of traffic - the constant presence of too many other people, none of whom you know. Most people can become accustomed to this and some thrive on it - but for many its just something to be endured or not thought about. We are our own predator and our own prey - most people will never experience that kind of interaction with another kind of animal. We are cut off from the natural world, cocooned in our little manmade shells - a goodly proportion of us even live and work in air-conditioning. Weather is not life, its an inconvenience or something nice out the window, only to be enjoyed on weekends.

I could go on and on forever but its raining gently here on my little tin roof, and that always makes me sleepy, especially in winter, here in my warm cocoon...so I'll just toss out those half-formed thoughts for general digestion.