A place for horse related questions

[elwagner]

The problem is there's two different traps the historically educated fantasy author can fall into, which will ruin their story.

A) Reader expectation - when it come to any specialist area, often the actual facts and general public knowledge are leagues apart, and this is very true of Medieval Europe. Your reader has a perception of what medieval europe was like, and to maintain suspension of disbelief you have to write to that perception, even if it doesn't align with reality. The number of myths and misconceptions that abound about medieval europe is just astonishing.

B) Reader empathy - ultimately you need your reader to feel empathy for your characters, otherwise the entire story falls apart. It won't matter how realistically the setting is realised. The problem is, actual historical people from different periods had quite dramatically different values to us. Reproducing those values authentically may drive a wedge between your characters and your reader. Sexism, racism, and religious bigotry have all been standard for many human cultures. Even the innocent good-natured medieval hero is going to be sexist, racist, ethnocentric, intolerant of other religions, and generally awful to a modern reader.

So in order to maintain empathy we have to fudge social values somewhat.

Well said. Very true.

There's also that underlying assumption that all fantasy stories are set in medieval Europe or than all authors writing in a quasi-medieval environment are trying to faithfully reproduce every aspect of medieval Europe in terms of knowledge, government and social organization. Not every ancient society was feudal, for instance, and there were ancient cultures that had sanitation, infrastructure and social institutions that were much more advanced than what is typical in medieval Europe.

And once you bring magic into the picture, you can tweak a lot of things. It's part of the fun of fantasy. I enjoy taking certain liberties with history, but I do try to do some research to see if a pre-industrial society could ostensibly support something, magic or no magic.

Still, once in a while, someone will "inform me" that such and such didn't exist in medieval Europe, when in fact it did (or could have, given the situation I've presented), and my society is not really "medieval" anyways.

You can't please everyone, though.

[sorry about the two posts; I thought I was editing the first one instead of creating a new one. Silly me]

 

[Gumboot]

Well said. Very true.

There's also that underlying assumption that all fantasy stories are set in medieval Europe or than all authors writing in a quasi-medieval environment are trying to faithfully reproduce every aspect of medieval Europe in terms of knowledge, government and social organization. Not every ancient society was feudal, for instance, and there were ancient cultures that had sanitation, infrastructure and social institutions that were much more advanced than what is typical in medieval Europe.

And once you bring magic into the picture, you can tweak a lot of things. It's part of the fun of fantasy. I enjoy taking certain liberties with history, but I do try to do some research to see if a pre-industrial society could ostensibly support something, magic or no magic.

Still, once in a while, someone will "inform me" that such and such didn't exist in medieval Europe, when in fact it did (or could have, given the situation I've presented), and my society is not really "medieval" anyways.

You can't please everyone, though.

[sorry about the two posts; I thought I was editing the first one instead of creating a new one. Silly me]

Then, of course, writers can fall into the trap of trying to be too faithful with their reproduction, failing to take into account the affect one or two changes would have on society (magic is the obvious example).

I wrote a blog on this just this week, actually. Oddly enough one of the worst offenders I've ever come across is also my favourite series; A Song of Ice and Fire by George RR Martin.

He reproduces an interpretation of medieval europe that gets a lot of praise. The only problem is he decided to have a world with seasons that last years, of irregular and seemingly random length.

An interesting little change, except he mindlessly ploughs ahead with a feudal medieval society, ignoring the fact that such a dramatic change in the seasons would have an unbelievable impact on medieval agrarian society.

 

[Peter Graham]

Hi Gumboot,

I'm conscious that we seem to seek each other out like heat-seeking disagreement missiles......

The problem is there's two different traps the historically educated fantasy author can fall into, which will ruin their story.

The traps don't have to ruin the story, although I agree that they can. But no-one is saying that evey aspect of medieval life has to be faithfully reproduced. What I am saying is that the massive howlers and the tendency to portray pastiche leads to a series of, quite frankly, unbelievable worlds.

Your reader has a perception of what medieval europe was like, and to maintain suspension of disbelief you have to write to that perception, even if it doesn't align with reality.

Yes and no. I agree with the statement, but I think it misses the real issue. Many fantasy writers wonder why so much fantasy is pigeonholed as genre writing and does not seem to appeal to the wider reading public. I'm a good example - I don't read much fantasy at all, largely because so much of it seems to be fairly turgid variations on a theme. Quests, good and evil, destiny, prophecies, blah blah. I can see that the authors are writing for their core group, but there is too often just not enough realism and grit in there to appeal to the current tastes of the modern readership. There are exceptions, of course, but if you preach to the choir, don't be surprised that no-one else is listening.

The number of myths and misconceptions that abound about medieval europe is just astonishing.

Agreed 100%.

Reader empathy - ultimately you need your reader to feel empathy for your characters, otherwise the entire story falls apart. It won't matter how realistically the setting is realised.

This is true, but to use that as an argument for avoiding realism and presenting everyone as 21st century, liberal agnostics is to encourage lazy writing. A good writer could make Hitler an engaging protagonist. Shying away from anything challenging or difficult in favour or serving up lukewarm pastiche will, I'm afraid, keep fantasy on the special interest shelves. If you look at trends in historcial fiction - including the successful Wolf Hall series - you'll see that verisimilitude and good storytelling are closely linked and find a ready and large audience.

The problem is, actual historical people from different periods had quite dramatically different values to us.

No sh*t, Sherlock! But as I have argued above, this is no reason to air brush them.

Sexism, racism, and religious bigotry have all been standard for many human cultures.

And still are. Look at Philip Glenister's character in the TV show Life on Mars (don't know if you get that in NZ). Or Ellroy's characters in the LA Confidential books. That is the triumph of good storytelling in action - we can happily root for the racist and sexist bigots when they are well written.

Regards,

Peter

 

[Gumboot]

Hi Gumboot,

I'm conscious that we seem to seek each other out like heat-seeking disagreement missiles......

Not at all...

The traps don't have to ruin the story, although I agree that they can. But no-one is saying that evey aspect of medieval life has to be faithfully reproduced. What I am saying is that the massive howlers and the tendency to portray pastiche leads to a series of, quite frankly, unbelievable worlds.

Oh of course. I totally agree. There's a reason I increasingly read historic fiction instead of fantasy. I guess I was merely exploring the fine balancing act a writer has to do. That's what makes it so fun!

Yes and no. I agree with the statement, but I think it misses the real issue. Many fantasy writers wonder why so much fantasy is pigeonholed as genre writing and does not seem to appeal to the wider reading public. I'm a good example - I don't read much fantasy at all, largely because so much of it seems to be fairly turgid variations on a theme. Quests, good and evil, destiny, prophecies, blah blah. I can see that the authors are writing for their core group, but there is too often just not enough realism and grit in there to appeal to the current tastes of the modern readership. There are exceptions, of course, but if you preach to the choir, don't be surprised that no-one else is listening.

Once again we're in danger of violent agreement!

This is true, but to use that as an argument for avoiding realism and presenting everyone as 21st century, liberal agnostics is to encourage lazy writing. A good writer could make Hitler an engaging protagonist. Shying away from anything challenging or difficult in favour or serving up lukewarm pastiche will, I'm afraid, keep fantasy on the special interest shelves. If you look at trends in historcial fiction - including the successful Wolf Hall series - you'll see that verisimilitude and good storytelling are closely linked and find a ready and large audience.

Agreement again. It's that fine balance again.

No sh*t, Sherlock! But as I have argued above, this is no reason to air brush them.

Absolutely not. As you allude to, good writers know which characteristics to keep and which to tone down, and more importantly, how to find empathy in a "bad person".

 

[The Judge]

Me again! Still wrestling with this horse problem, but at a slightly earlier stage -- no blindfolds on as yet.

I've got to get something very heavy and bulky from Our Hero's shoulders onto the horse's back when the animal is frightened of the thing being transferred. I had an idea that OH -- who is doing all he can to calm it but is very pressed for time -- could manoeuvre it close to a wall, so it couldn't keep jittering sideways (ie the horse is sandwiched between the wall and OH). But would that actually frighten the horse more, as it's effectively being caged, and make it want to lash out?

And a minor point, is there one word to express when a horse is fully saddled and bridled and ready to ride? That is, I want to say something like it was "still in harness" or "still harnessed" but as I'm understanding it "harness" refers to a draught animal's trappings. Somehow "still tackled up" doesn't feel right. ("Tacked up" is a very modern usage, so I want to avoid if at all possible.)


NB In case anyone is remotely interested, the word "tackle" as a euphemism for... um... er... a gentleman's nether regions... has a distinguished ancestor -- according to the etymology site I'm using "prive [ie privy = private] harness (late 14c) was a Middle English term for 'sex organs'." I'm definitely getting that in somewhere!

 

[Peter Graham]

...and you'll also know where the warm, lovely, Cotswold-cottagey word "quaint" comes from, I imagine.

 

[Abernovo]

Not against a wall. Crowding some horses can really scare them. Tie up at a post and let him (the horse, or possibly her) see the load. Talk calmly. That's how I used to prepare a Clydesdale (without the tying up in my case).

If OH is pressed for time, he needs to slow down. It's the old saw of 'haste makes waste'. If you rush the horse, you spend twice as long getting the job done as you would walking him through his role. Acclimatisation.

Prive harness. One day, in a pub quiz...no, I'm probably never going to have need to use that, but it's good to know.

 

[Cavalry]

Quick reply - Horses do not like confined spaces as a rule, unlikely to move into them and quickly out of them. If its a heros horse baggage etc should not be a problem but a new noise or a smell could be even to a well trained horse. Handling is always calm but firm - horses hate timid people.

Most horses trained properly for mounted combat should be de sensitised to most general stuff.

cav

 

[Cavalry]

Ready to ride = Tacked up. I do not know how old that is but all horse people understand it.

 

[The Judge]

Thanks, both. I feared it would spook the horse more. Back to the drawing board again.


Thank you, Peter! I wonder whether that's a Chaucerian (mis-)spelling (which makes you wonder how it was pronounced) since "quaint" meaning proud/ingenious/clever seems to have arrived when the c-word was already well-established, or whether it evolved from a play on the meaning of cunning which was also used as a synonym.

 

[Brian G Turner]

There's also that underlying assumption that all fantasy stories are set in medieval Europe or than all authors writing in a quasi-medieval environment are trying to faithfully reproduce every aspect of medieval Europe in terms of knowledge, government and social organization.

To be honest, my reading is the reverse - that the norm in fantasy writing is to look at pretty pictures, and try and emulate that. Research as minimal - maybe an episode of Time Team.

What I am saying is that the massive howlers and the tendency to portray pastiche leads to a series of, quite frankly, unbelievable worlds.

Too true - see above.

I don't read much fantasy at all, largely because so much of it seems to be fairly turgid variations on a theme. Quests, good and evil, destiny, prophecies, blah blah.

Thank goodness George R R Martin, Joe Abercrombie, Scott Lynch, and others, are helping modernise the genre. We're not there yet, but there's a clear direction I hope we see more of.

 

[Gumboot]

Ready to ride = Tacked up. I do not know how old that is but all horse people understand it.

That's a 20th Century innovation, derived from "tack" which is itself short for "tackle". However, while historically it wasn't recorded until the 20th Century, given it is a direct abbreviation of "tackle" I think it's totally reasonable to make the assumption that people had, in the past, abbreviated "tackle" to "tack", long before it was written down.

I use "tackle" to describe, well, horse tackle, but when trying to say they are all rigged up with all their gear I just say "saddled". I think most readers will presume that means they are all kitted up ready to ride, with saddle, bridle, reins, etc, not just that they have a saddle on.

 

[Kylara]

Another option if you want to avoid "tacked up" is "saddled", but tacked up is a much broader term...yes don't trap your horse next to a wall! As has been said, show it, let it be sniffed and then you should be fine, rushing horses is a bad idea...

 

[The Judge]

Ta, both. I'd already thought of "saddled" but it was causing difficulties with the sentence (a plethora of words beginning with "s"), so I've decided to ignore the issue and let people guess for themselves whether it's been stripped of all its accoutrements!

 

[Boneman]

Just to revive this thread with a quick, silly question: heron is in a two horse cart/wagon and wants to start moving. No hurry, just a gentle stroll in the park. The horses are very well-trained and I've written "he slapped the horses with the reins" which seems too violent. What alternatives are there? "He shucked the reins?" Do people flick the reins?

 

[Mouse]

I was watching that Martin Clunes horse thing the other day and all he did was a 'kiss' noise and the horses started moving.

 

[Kylara]

If they are trained off a cluck or clicking noise they would walk on like Mouse says. Alternatively many people train their horses to voice commands, so an uplifting "walk on!" should make them move off. Also flicking the reins along their backs would make them move off, but they would probably add a vocal noise or a voice command to it.

 

[Boneman]

Many thanks both. They're not his horses, but I felt slapping the reins might make them move off at too much speed. I just wasn't sure about flicking, but you're right: along with a verbal additive, that should do it nicely!

 

[Kylara]

A well trained horse should respond to voice commands from anyone really, mainly because most people use the same sort of tone for the commands (upwards upbeat quick walk on trot on etc and slow low tone wa-aalk, halt/woah etc). So you should be fine with adding the verbal bit

 

[Boneman]

Thanks Kylara. Do Dragons move off to the same commands? If I can ever get my camera properly integrated with the internet, I must send you some pictures of the dragons I took in China recently...