Are maps necessary in fantasy novels?

[Brian G Turner]

In a video I recently linked to from Youtube (Video: Epic fantasy authors on writing) it was mentioned that Tolkien included maps because they were a part of the story of Middle Earth.

It was suggested that fantasy novels follow this convention for no other reason than Tolkien included maps.

Now, I like referencing the maps in books.

But, from a writing perspective, my problem is that I'm trying hard to provide character POV's of this world - but a map gives an objective view. Therefore, in providing a map, the reader is encouraged to flit out from the relative character POV's to an objective POV. Which, IMO, seems self-defeating to the storytelling.

The question is - are maps ultimately necessary for a reader? Is it so much an expectation that they should be included?

Just that I don't tend to see them included in books outside of the fantasy genre (except historical fiction), which begs the question, if they are not necessary to the story then why include them?

 

[Jo Zebedee]

I can't think of a single one that's added anything to the book for me. They're nice to look at, but make no difference to my reading experience.

 

[Ursa major]

...but a map gives an objective view. Therefore, in providing a map, the reader is encouraged to flit out from the relative character POV's to an objective POV. Which, IMO, seems self-defeating to the storytelling.

Does it? If it's seen as the author's map, that may be true.

But what if it's a map from the perspective of a fictional mapmaker? Or it includes the (disputed) claims of one fictional country amongst many. Or is based, at least in part, on poor research**? The map can be as accurate or inaccurate as you need; if you want the reader to think that it may not be objectively true, indicate that it isn't, e.g. by providing the name of the mapmaker, or the publisher, from your fictional world, or a date (one that's obviously not based on one of the calendar system here on Earth).


** - Just like any other point of view, the map will represent what its maker knows, or assumes, or guesses.

 

[Hex]

I'm with springs on this one. I might glance at the map when I start reading, but I don't often use them. I know people do, though.

Ursa's point is good -- maps, like anything, are subjective. It's a nice idea to have an overtly political/ limited map at the start of the story.

 

[Brian G Turner]

I've toyed with the idea of a subjective map - but fantasy maps are overwhelmingly objective, and I suspect that's what a reader would demand, if they wanted a map at all.

I've yet to finish Umberto Eco's Baudolino, but the once interesting lesson I got from it was how confused a view of the world could be - certainly by modern standards.

I like the idea of trying to tap into that to some degree with character POV's - ie, not having a modern idea of mapping and geography.

But I can't think of many secondary world fantasy novels that do not include a map, except Douglas Hullick's Among Thieves.

I fear that maps are expected, and while once I would have loved to supply them - not least that world building is a big part of the story. However, I would prefer that to stay only in the text, and the reader to remain within character perceptions of the world without applying a modern perspective to it.

I'm just wondering if that's something I could get away with, without annoying too many readers.

 

[Jo Zebedee]

Might I suggest that the decision, ultimately, will be your publishers.

 

[thaddeus6th]

No.

Must say that they can be very useful, not least for the author, to help continuity.

 

[HareBrain]

I tend to like them. But I've always liked maps, of anything. In my teens I based long cycle rides around finding out what weird wiggly-looking roads or exciting sets of contour lines were like in real life. And often names of fantasy cities and countries tend to go in one brain-ear and out the other, so it's nice to have a handy reference of where people are. Without the map in Joe Abercrombie's Half a King, for example, I think it would have needed more explanation to get me to understand that they'd gone in a big circle.

I also like looking at the edges of maps and seeing weird-looking mountains and going "ooooh, I bet they go there". Tad Williams's MST was great for that. Also Donaldson's Thomas Covenant books.

Basically, maps are great!!!

 

[Ray McCarthy]

I think useful for author to work out times to travel, distances, keep story consistent. But it depends on the story if needed for the reader.

 

[Vertigo]

I think you will always find some readers who hardly look at maps and others that actually might not buy a fantasy book if it doesn't have maps. Most of us probably fall somewhere between the two. But the point is that you are unlikely to upset people by including a map but might upset them by not including one. I think this is particularly the case when dealing with warfare where much of the strategy and tactics can be difficult to follow without a map.

 

[JoanDrake]

Yes and no. I just love a Fantasy map where the Great Wasteland, is followed by the Cursed Forest and then the Demon Haunted Plain of Devils. Travelogues must be such fun to write there.


OTOH remember how the MC gets to the Crusade in Kingdom of Heaven. "Go East until the men speak Italian, then keep going until they speak something else." This is probably not what was actually said but it's par for the course as directions went. Medieval maps were, quite often, literally less than useless as they gave the wrong directions. Travelers back then often had to put up with not knowing where at all they were, or were going.

 

[JunkMonkey]

you are unlikely to upset people by including a map

It's a totally irrational and unjustifyable prejudice but I don't like maps in books. The inclusion of a map is more likely to put me off buying a book than not. They're distracting. I can see why the writer would want one to hand just to make sure he doesn't have whole armies march across oceans and people crossing deserts where there had previously been mountains but there's no need to inflict them on the reader.

And, as a writer, what if you later want/need to slap a couple of cities and or bloody big rivers into your world? If you've posted a detailed map in volume one you've rather painted yourself into a corner and can't do it.

 

[Karn Maeshalanadae]

I would say they could be as a tool for the writer's private uses, but for the reader, they don't need to be included. I don't really care about maps in stories I read.

 

[Hex]

When I was in my bored-of-traditional-fantasy mood I felt like JunkMonkey does. If a book had a map at the start (or a character list), I put it back on the shelf.

Probably partly depends on what audience you're aiming for, I suppose.

An associated question: does one include the map when submitting the first 10 pages or whatever to agents/ publishers?

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

I like maps that allow me to see where everything is relative to everything else, although some I have seen did not do that, so I wondered why they were there at all.

For my books, I always proceed from the assumption that the maps were made by mapmakers of the period, and therefore aren't strictly accurate. They'd be terrible for figuring out how long it should take to get from here to there ... but that's sort of irrelevant anyway, since travel conditions in most of the places my characters go (few good roads, natural obstacles) could make a journey of a few miles take anywhere between a few hours and several days.

I've never understood why people complain about things like maps and character lists which are strictly optional for them to look at. Easy enough to ignore. I can understand looking at one and thinking "this looks like the kind of thing you'd find in the kind of book I am tired of reading" but surely the back cover copy or a glance at the first page would tell you that?

 

[martin321]

Nowadays, I mostly read newly published novels on my kindle. The maps bundled with ebooks are often poor quality (low resolution) and sometimes the text (i.e. place names) is unreadable even when zoomed-in. It's also much more trouble to flip back and forth between the text and the map on an e-reader than it is for a paperback.

So, generally, I more or less ignore the maps when reading, and then if I'm interested I'll go to the author's website and look for higher quality maps there. That's what I did when reading The Heroes, which is an interesting example as maps are pretty useful for military fantasy in understanding the dispositions of the armies.

 

[Juliana]

I don't pay much attention to maps, to be honest. They're a sort of bonus which I might glance at if I'm puzzled. But if the book is well-written, I don't really need it.

Definitely useful for the author, though, and not just in fantasy. I'm working on a piece set in the real world at the moment and Google Maps has been the bestest of friends. I wonder sometimes if once the author has worked out a map for her or his own convenience they go "might as well share, now I've gone and drawn one...".

 

[Darkranger85]

I've always found maps to be very helpful while I'm reading fantasy. Especially if your characters are going to be doing a lot of traveling to other towns and kingdoms, or if there are wars going on.

I want to know where these places are and see how far this distant city is or whatever. It helps make the place 'real' to me.

 

[BAYLOR]

I might look at the Map before I start reading the book. But no , I don't think they are necessary .

 

[Grimward]

I'm with Hare and Teresa here, and I also don't think that a map necessarily causes conflicts with a story told from a character's point of view (unless, of course, the character has a unique view of geography that's somehow crucial to the plot). When an author takes a long time describing a particular pilgrimage, journey, or other travel, I've found myself wondering about the "actual" distance on numerous occasions, and am usually glad for a map so that I can establish MY OWN frame of reference for the story.