Nova
New Member
Posts: 37
|
Post by Nova on Mar 1, 2009 13:55:14 GMT -5
I was curious as to people thoughts on this. Ive come across people who only like fantasy set in medieval worlds, they dislike books that put fantasy and for example fit it in society more like feudal Asia. Me personally the more creative a fantasy world and story is for me the better. I recently read the first book in Robin Hobbs new trilogy Soldiers Son, which is a fantasy set in a world that resembled the post American civil war.
This is not to say i do not enjoy a fantasy that are not set in medieval worlds, id be missing out on some great stuff if i did. In my own writing i try to make my own distinct cultures some built on a foundation of a real world society that i build on or there made from scratch or a question. Like what would a society be like if they feared and abhorred the ocean, there would be no navy or boats, cities and towns would be inland etc.
I also think important to understand i proper definition of Medieval, if it a period were people used swords then you might need to rethink as the swords existed long before and after the Medieval period and was defined by more then that.
|
|
|
Post by Divides the Waters on Mar 1, 2009 18:51:31 GMT -5
My first thought is that it's almost a form of laziness, but I think it's really not as simple as that. I think that it's more like a stereotype of fantasy...these are the sorts of things that people associate with the genre, and can't deal with things that take them outside that mold. To see fantasy as medieval is more like shorthand for the genre as a whole.
My own fantasy involves spaceships and vampires, though...what do I know?
|
|
|
Post by J Jack on Mar 1, 2009 21:14:56 GMT -5
Sadly, by common (usually unintelligent) definition, fantasy is defined as a "medieval" style. LOTR is fantasy, Eragon, so on. Fuedal and people with swords, but that defines ages reaching from early Asian ages to the Dark Ages to Renaissance, it's like defining sci fi by saying it has space ships. I agree with the more creative fantasy worlds, ones that bend the rules.
|
|
|
Post by knightofhyn on Mar 2, 2009 12:33:43 GMT -5
In the last thread I responded to, someone commented on lack of research by the writer, but this seems like a lack of expansion by the reader in some ways. The ones who can't see something set in fuedal Japan (just as an example) would fit in those with a very Western-centric viewpoint.
Personally, I like the alternate settings.
|
|
|
Post by torainfor on Mar 2, 2009 13:32:04 GMT -5
I suppose it would also depend on your bent as a writer. If you're really into action, you'd probably find it easier to go with a more familiar setting. All those descriptions of original places and unique lifestyles would make the story a bit slower.
|
|
|
Post by knightofhyn on Mar 2, 2009 16:01:07 GMT -5
Not just the bent of the writer, but the direction of the writing. Someone who loves action but is going for a rich environment might make for the environments requiring more descriptions. I hadn't thought of that.
|
|
|
Post by mongoose on Mar 2, 2009 17:51:12 GMT -5
I honestly don't see the connection between the real world template used in crafting the setting, what you name that template, and whether you have a great deal of action or philosophy or whatever else. You can put action or philosophy or whatever else in any setting, and call that setting whatever you want to.
Fantasy, for instance, is a label that can be applied to any of a number of sorts of stories. It is not defined as any story including swords or sorcery, and it is not defined as being based on Feudal Europe. I'm sure you could call any story in any setting, "Fantasy" if you wanted to, and perhaps you could even craft a credible argument for how it was fantasy. As speculative fiction authors and fans we tend to bend the definitions of terms to fit what we want them to, anyway, and there's nothing wrong with that. The only problem arises when you're trying to discuss something with someone who defines their terms differently than you.
At such times it's useful to discuss the definitions first, and agree to them, before continuing to discuss the real subject of interest. For the purpose of this forum, if I understand right, fantasy is understood to be any story based in an imaginary world with less than or different technology than we have today in "The West." It is distinguished from Science Fiction because it usually resembles (more or less) something that we had in "The West" in the past, whereas Sci. Fi. makes use of technology that is not available on the mass market in the time in which it is written. It is distinguished from alternate history fiction by being set, at least for part of the story, in an imaginary world other than the Earth of which we read in history books.
Notice that I put nothing in those definitions about the time period in which a story is set. Notice also my statement that each person can define their terms to their own liking. This is only my understanding based on what I've read in these forums. If you choose to use those definitions you could viably label your story as "fantasy" if the setting is based on any culture, including East Asian cultures, prior to, say, the information age. Or maybe the industrial revolution. You could include a great deal of action, or very little action. You could include a great deal of internal dialog and philosophy and introspection, or very little of any of that.
So, as I find myself concluding more and more often, the setting, like the characters and plot in your story, need to be determined by the theme you're trying to communicate rather than by an effort to fit your story into some kind of template written by others. Let someone else label it once it's published. You just write the story, and make it true to what God has given you.
|
|
|
Post by violan5 on Mar 8, 2009 22:52:39 GMT -5
I have to admit I normally associate fantasy with the medieval era. Swords and such. I recently discovered TheEndoftheMap and I looked at Jeff's booklist. I have not had a chance to read some of the stuff he suggested. But I like the idea of bending the rules.
|
|
|
Post by Divides the Waters on Mar 18, 2009 21:29:13 GMT -5
I think perhaps part of the reason we associate medieval settings with fantasy is that we also associate things like chivalry and high heroics with that era. The notion of lofty ideals (even spiritual, on some levels) appeals to most lovers of fantasy. Why do you suppose people get dressed up in gear for the renfests, etc.? Is it because they relish the idea of living in an era of poverty and squalor? Hardly. I think it's the notion of hearkening back to an age where (ostensibly) certain principles were held in higher honor than they are now. I have been to only a couple of them myself, but while there are quite a few who relish the bawdiness of the era, there are an even greater number who call each other "My lord" and "My lady" with all sincerity, and seem quite at ease with courtly manners and well-defined gender roles. When we think of heroes, we more often think of the St. Georges of the world, going out to save the princesses from the dragon, than we do the Herculeses, etc., who may do great deeds and have great adventures, but have questionable morals and often ignoble ends.
Or maybe it's just that swords are really cool.
|
|
|
Post by JC Lamont on Mar 23, 2009 22:15:49 GMT -5
No, it's the elf ears. Definately. You gotta get a pair.
|
|
|
Post by Divides the Waters on Mar 24, 2009 19:53:03 GMT -5
Maybe when I was a little younger and thinner....
|
|
|
Post by kouter on Mar 27, 2009 23:52:47 GMT -5
I think people associate fantasy with medieval settings due to the influence of LOTR, D&D and so on. We imitate what we see. But there exists lots of rich fantasy outside those realms. One need only looks to Anime and Manga to find very decent fantasy from an Asian perspective. Take Princess Mononke or any Miuzaki film actually, or even more popular contemporary titles like Bleach, ninja Scroll or (dare I say it) Naruto .
|
|
|
Post by mongoose on Mar 28, 2009 12:59:28 GMT -5
But aren't those still medieval, just asian medieval? There could be fantasy based outside that period of social/geo-political/technological/economic development, I'm sure. I just don't know if I've read it. What is the definition of fantasy, as opposed to any other genera, anyway? I thought it was that it took place in a made up world, at least partially, and that it did not take place in space or using futuristic technology, which would make it science fiction.
|
|
|
Post by torainfor on Mar 28, 2009 20:14:55 GMT -5
And what about Anne McCaffrey? The Pern books start as a fairly primitive civilization (no fossil fuels and little metal available), slightly Renaissance-ish, but highly dependent on a telepathic connection to dragons for survival. Before long, you've got an uncovered, solar-powered computer teaching them how to use the original colony ships and create nano-bots to fight their universal enemy.
|
|
|
Post by mongoose on Mar 31, 2009 16:57:20 GMT -5
I'd call that science fiction. Maybe one of those somethingpunk sub-generas. But I'm no authority.
|
|