Has The Fantasy Genre become Stuck in One Place ?

On your modern exceptions point, I'm not well-read, but while it certainly wasn't the case until recent years, current female fantasy authors are certainly closing in on male fantasy authors as a whole. The industry is thankfully no longer male-dominated (though I would imagine there is still a way to go). J.K. Rowling is the biggest selling author of them all. When it comes to YA fantasy, I get the impression female authors are more favoured, which seems possible given a few studies have shown teenage girls are more likely to be fiction readers than teenage boys. Perhaps this will lead to the gap closing even more in general and adult fantasy.

In terms of lead characters, it's a sad fact that male readers are much less likely to read female-led stories than female readers are to read male-led stories. But hopefully this is changing. Perhaps J.K. Rowling was clever in creating a male-lead in Harry Potter with strong female characters alongside him.

For short stories (I don't read many novels), fantasy is more diverse than ever in terms of the authors getting published and everything imaginable in the stories themselves. Female editors and authors are no longer the exception. Whenever I list my favourite short stories, I notice most from the past few years are by female authors, whereas pre-2010 and certainly pre-2000, female authors rarely get a look in.
This is a good point, and a vital one regarding male and female readership. I'm going to be controversial here (perhaps!) and say that it is the case that younger female readers are much more likely to read about male characters than the other way around. This in my opinion is for two reasons. One: men wrongly believe that they have more to lose than to gain if they lose their masculinity and become more human, ie have traditionally "male" and "female" characteristics. Two: the act of reading is an act of empathy, and men are taught not to do that. Imo, this second point is by far the greater factor in men, young and old, not bothering to read. They simply aren't interested in people the way women are.
 
I have more detailed thoughts on this, but they're off-topic, so I'll just say that Stephen has a good point. Simply being interested in the world is often considered effete in men.
 
I've been trying to think of the best way to put this and apologies but there seems to be a significant vein of thought concentrating on fantasy's diversity or lack there of as part of the reason people may think it's stuck in a rut and this is raising an eyebrow for me on a few scores.

1) For fantasy to be the one genre of fiction that's not evolving while all the others do due to diversity, fantasy would have to be the one genre that is significantly less diverse than the others, and I don't think I see that. I'm admittedly nothing like as well-informed on other genres as I am fantasy so this point might be about to get picked apart swiftly, but I don't see fantasy's history as that out of kilter with the society it mirrors, and I don't see any genres that make me think "wow, they're definitely better than the rest of society". You could perhaps make a case that Crime celebrates both genders of authors louder than any other? But it's still not super diverse in every instance. I googled most famous fictional detectives and the first link comes up with a list of 25 of which 6 are women, 1 is non-white, and 2 are non-Anglosphere.

2) While there's certainly an image of fantasy as very white and very male, concentrating on the image seems to be more a case of perpetuating a narrow image/the forgetting of important figures than the representation of the reality. Mirrlees' Lud in the Mist and Moore's Jirel of Joiry are both very important books in the genre, but oft go forgot when they shouldn't be. Likewise we shouldn't forget that Katherine Kurtz was probably the first writer of secondary world historical fiction and the first original publication in the Ballantine Adult series, or that Emma Bull was one of the architects of Urban Fantasy, or any one of a slew of other achievements of female authors. Nor should we forget Tutuola's The Palm Wine Drinkard, or that translations of Borges played a huge part in boosting fantasy's profile in 60s America. Maybe we have forgot these things and that is part of the genre's history, the forgetting, but their existence is also part of the genre. And hell - if we count Magical Realism as fantasy (not without controversy but not without reason either), and if we count Wuxia, then fantasy's history is very diverse. Maybe it's not the history we grew up with, but if we're looking at what has gone into the genre and whether it can evolve, then surely the existence of close relations that we can (and do) draw from is noteworthy.

3) It seems very reductive and self-denying to suggest fantasy's only possible method of growth is through stories other than white/male/western. For one thing, it squashes together large numbers of cultures, many of which have very little representation in fantasy. For another, it ignores potential reflections of reality and myth that are popping up new for us or haven't been much used, such as what Max Gladstone did with corporate culture in the Craft Sequence, or the modest use of the folklore of Northern England. Finally - it suggests that the only way Fantasy can advance or not advance is by subject matter - not by adopting new genres for ideas, or trying new storytelling methods, or moving away from particular plots, and so on. And that it is more radical to write a reimagining of Chinese history in a straight down the wicket western storytelling style than it is to write a fantasy novel using solely letters and translations (often the same text translated poorly and well), simply because it's Chinese rather than South Welsh or Byzantine. Which I simply do not accept.

I do not want to say the genre is some utopian home for all and always has been, or that it doesn't draw significantly from a few particular wells. But then what genre does look rounded and innovative if you concentrate solely on its mainstream? That - along with everything else I've pointed out - does not seem to be fantasy's particular failing, unique to itself, from where I sit.
 
I do not want to say the genre is some utopian home for all and always has been, or that it doesn't draw significantly from a few particular wells. But then what genre does look rounded and innovative if you concentrate solely on its mainstream? That - along with everything else I've pointed out - does not seem to be fantasy's particular failing, unique to itself, from where I sit.

I agree with you pretty much, but my feeling is that we need to do the deliberately positive stuff first - eg. focus on fantasy works by non-male, non-Western authors and settings - before the rest of the good stuff follows. I think without a strong, definite turn away from white, middle-class, Western men too much time will elapse, in which a reaction could occur (eg. online/social media). I think the expansion/sophistication of the genre which you mention would likely happen after the positive "discrimination" (for want of a better word) is allowed to happen. Just my two pence. I wrote an Afropunk novel Muezzinland in 1998 (published in 2002) for which I received a certain amount of flak: how dare you imagine Africans, etc etc. :/
 
I agree with you pretty much, but my feeling is that we need to do the deliberately positive stuff first - eg. focus on fantasy works by non-male, non-Western authors and settings - before the rest of the good stuff follows. I think without a strong, definite turn away from white, middle-class, Western men too much time will elapse, in which a reaction could occur (eg. online/social media). I think the expansion/sophistication of the genre which you mention would likely happen after the positive "discrimination" (for want of a better word) is allowed to happen. Just my two pence. I wrote an Afropunk novel Muezzinland in 1998 (published in 2002) for which I received a certain amount of flak: how dare you imagine Africans, etc etc. :/

If we mean expansion in terms of which cultures we write about and how faithfully, then I think it'd be helpful, aye. Expansion in terms of the genre's range and themes and styles? I am less sold. At least short term. Most Own Voices authors are not pushing the boat out there and a great deal of expansion has been pushed prior to this point.

I would also add that in many ways, if the turn hasn't happened, it's happening. The last five World Fantasy novel awards went to two white women, one black man, two black women, and an East Asian woman - those six winner match the number of white male nominees in that period. The last five Hugo Best Novels include Jemisin's unprecedented three in a row and two white women; only four white male authors. The last five Astounding Best New Authors are one white man, one white woman, one Amerindian-Black woman, and two Eastern Asian women; I think there's maybe three other white male nominees in that time?

Looking at the Goodreads Awards for the past X years; Best Fantasy has gone to white women five years in a row in the Goodreads Choice Awards. The Can't Wait to Read/Highly Anticipated lists are more gender split, skewing male, with only one non-white person that I think I can see. The Best Fantasy Published During X Year lists - 2019, top five are all women, three have at least partially non-white backgrounds, and the highest white male is GRR Martin at 15th with a book that isn't even out there. Goodreads gonna Goodreads I guess. 2018, 4 women in top 5 (Maas got two), 2 at least partially non-white backgrounds, Mark Lawrence highest white male at 18th. 2017, two white men and three white women, with Brandon Sanderson top over all. 2016, two white men and three white women, with Michael J. Sullivan top.

These lists are not the be all and end all of critical and popular opinion, and critical and popular opinion aren't everything compared to pay disparities and difficulties getting published, or that they don't face more backlash than white males when they do wrong. But there is a very obvious swing in who's getting published and loved and I think it's happening often enough that calling them exceptions undersells it.

Incidentally, going through these lists are increases my dislike of lumping in Western whites together because in a global game, we Brits and the Americans are not on the same playing field. Maybe we have a huge influence on the whole shooting match historically but not today. Jen Williams won two British Fantasy Society Best Novels in a row and her books aren't even on the shelves over there. Not to mention how it elides the language distinction - it is far better for a writing career to be any sort of minority with an English first language that it is to be a white European without it.
 
Incidentally, going through these lists are increases my dislike of lumping in Western whites together because in a global game, we Brits and the Americans are not on the same playing field. Maybe we have a huge influence on the whole shooting match historically but not today. Jen Williams won two British Fantasy Society Best Novels in a row and her books aren't even on the shelves over there.

Excellent point, which I agree with. Think how different, for instance, John Crowley's award-winning Little, Big was to "standard" fantasy.
 
Weaveworld by Clive Barker A world woven into a rug. As story connects go, quite different and unique.:)
 
A wonderful book. Been a while since I read it last.
 
A wonderful book. Been a while since I read it last.

I seem to recall that there was Comic or Graphic novel adaptation of it too. There was also a proposed miniseries adaption but it didn't happen. :unsure:
 
I remember thinking the Xanth series by Piers Anthony was a step away from the traditional fantasy mould. Also, The Deed of Paksenarrion by Elizabeth Moon was quite different in the 80s for fantasy.

Xanth doesn't quite fit the Ttaditional fancy mold though it does upend quite a few fantasy tropes .:unsure::)
 

Similar threads


Back
Top