Fantasy Aficionados discussion

As I slowly dig through my physical bookshelves to plug them into GR, I'm noticing that I have no idea what sub-genre some of my books fall into. :)

One example is The Gunslinger by Stephen King. Based only on the book (not counting the sequels) I would call this one "Sword & Sorcery." Adding in the scope of the later novels I would call it "Epic Fantasy" - but still I see the series on a whole as "Sword & Sorcery."

What would you classify this series as?

I also have the same question about other series:

Kushiel's Dart - the main characters are a swordsman and a spy-trained, god-touched courteasn who save the land. Classic Sword & Sorcery or Epic High Fantasy?

I personally think that the genre epic fantasy should be reserved for only the highest quality, best written fantasy novels that are truly epic in scope. Multiple story lines, broad world building, deep characters, plot twists and excellent actual Writing skills. Martin, Erikson, Jordan, Tolkien etc etc. That's, of course, not the widely accepted definition but I think it should be ;)

The gunslinger would fall into sword an sorcery in my opinion. Even considering the sequels it still better suits the definition of s&s much like Gemmels novels.

I've never read Kushiels dart so I couldnt offer a valid opinion. Worth reading?

I would say that The Dark Tower meets that definition of epic fantasy. It's huge in scope and has all those qualities. Not many swords, and not a whole lot of sorcery. Some yes, but not as much as Jordan or Erikson for sure.

The Gunslinger is just the first glimpse into that world, and only a tip off the iceberg.

I haven't read enough sword and sorcery to comment on that, I just wanted to chime in on Kushiel's Dart and give a big nuh uh regarding whether it's worth reading. I thought it was really boring and tedious.

I loved Kushiel but it really does seem to be a polarizing book you either love it or you hate it. Give it a shot and see what you think Grant.

Personally I think Kushiel would be Epic fantasy. It does a lot of world building and there's lots of epic adventure over the course of the series.

I'd also call The Dark Tower series Sword and Sorcery.

I loved Kushiel! I agree with Amanda, Kushiel seems to be a love it or hate it type of series. I think you should check it out.

Grant, if you would reserve Epic only for authors such as Martin, Erikson, Jordan, Tolkien, etc - where would you slot Eddings, Lackey, MZB, and Norton?

I'd classify most of their works as High fantasy, MrsJoseph. Again I know epic and high are most often considered interchangeable however that's yet again something else I disagree with. I have my own full fantasy classification system that I've fine tuned over the years. I have 4 main genres. Epic, High, Low and Cross Genre. Cross genre has the most sub genres in my filing system as it contains horror fantasy, scifi fantasy, urban fantasy etc. I've considered making Urban fantasy it's own genre as well but there aren't enough examples of it yet IMO to justify it. One of these days, before long, I'll write a nice long explanation of my reasoning/qualifications for my filing system for everyone to argue over ;).

I'll be checking out The Kushiel series sometime in February by the way. I'm curious as to what all the fuss is about ;)

I liked Kushiel's Dart...well except for the wordiness. I thought the author had the unfortunate tendency to use 20 GRE words to get across a concept when 5 concise ones would have done nicely.

It is interesting but my first, knee-jerk reaction is that it isn't and Epic fantasy. Admittedly, it sounds like a text-book Epic Fantasy when you describe it. It is multi volume, it has a complete primary world that doesn't exist in reality and is detailed in it's world building, it has the requisite orphan/everyman hero(ine) in Phaedre who does go on a long journey and makes discoveries and saves the land etc. It takes place over a long period of time, i.e. the books begin when Phaedre is young and the first book ends when she is adult. So it sounds like it hits all the right spots.

Now admittedly, I've only read the first in the series so far. So I can't speak to how the rest of the books read. But it simply doesn't feel epic when you read it. Maybe because it is so focused on Phaedre and there aren't multiple storylines? Maybe because there is so much about the book that is internal? A lot of it is Phaedre processing information that she learns.

When I think of all the different characters, storylines, and motivations, and even the worlds that exist in Martin, Jordan, Erikson,etc. there is a feeling of vastness, the scope of the stories feel like they simply can't be contained in one volume. I didn't feel that in KD. I thought that story could have easily ended there just in that one book. I didn't get that sense of a grand story being played out that affected everyone in her world.

Nicely stated, Tina. I couldn't agree more that true epics have a feel to them.

I'd love to see your classification system, Grant.

BTW, I think that Norton & MZB deserves to be in the same conversation as Jordon.

I don't know what the Kushiel series would be... Not epic.. Something... I just don't know what I would call it. Dark Tower is definitely epic though. Definitely.

Tina wrote: "I liked Kushiel's Dart...well except for the wordiness. I thought the author had the unfortunate tendency to use 20 GRE words to get across a concept when 5 concise ones would have done nicely.

..."

You should read the rest of the series; it gets more "epic" as time goes on, lol.

I agree that Carey can be a little wordy - but if you break down the series that basically, you would knock LotR out as well. While I'm ok with multiple storylines, I don't think they should be necessary. Sometimes they are just...messy and in the way.

Thought about it more, to clarify my stance... Epic to me is the whole end of existence type of story. An epic battle, not necessarily good versus evil, but large scale. Dark Tower definitely fits that bill. What I've read of Kushiel doesn't at all, but maybe it gets there further along in the series.

Dawn wrote: "Thought about it more, to clarify my stance... Epic to me is the whole end of existence type of story. An epic battle, not necessarily good versus evil, but large scale. Dark Tower definitely fits ..."


I see what you mean. It does get more epic as the story continues, but I don't like to be a plot spoiler. :)

I'll knock one out tomorrow evening I imagine :)

Hmm...so now I have to figure out how to explain my classification system. Lol..I think I can manage to explain it though I don't know that I can justify it :) It makes sense to me which I suppose is how some of the stranger classification models came into being :)

So as I stated before I place all fantasy novels into one of four categories. Epic Fantasy, High Fantasy, Low Fantasy and Cross Genre Fantasy and then subcategorize them as needed.

First off, I think the backbone of Epic Fantasy is a highly detailed world with a rich well written background. Generally this means that there will be historical references, an established monetary system if not many, detailed religions and Gods, multiple well defined cultures as well as a social structure within each culture....basically all those things that one must have in order to build a world from the ground up. In addition to the world building you'll also generally find a theme of good vs evil on a grand scale. There may be a single hero, multiple heroes or even an anti-hero or ten. Lately shades of grey has been all the rage but it's not so much the good vs evil that matters so much as it is the battle being on an, for lack of a better word, epic scale. As Tina put it, "there is a feeling of vastness, the scope of the stories feel like they simply can't be contained in one volume". My final qualification to define a novel as Epic is the quality of the writing. This is a touchy subject because we all have different taste in authors and what one finds great another may think awful. Fair enough. However, some authors are simply better Writers. They have a full command of the english language and are able to use it in a more expansive, impressive manner than other authors. Now, if you want to get right down to it, it's very subjective, but I definitely judge authors based on their writing ability and if I feel they're not up to snuff then no matter how popular they may be I'll qualify them as simply High Fantasy or even low for some. See...*grins* that's why this is just my own method of cataloguing...try getting someone to buy that argument. I would give the same examples as earlier for Epic Fantasies. The Song of Ice and Fire, The Wheel of Time, The Malazan Book of the Fallen, The Lord of the Rings. Hmm...on an afterthought another word that comes to mind when describing Epic fantasy is depth. All the authors I've listed have great depth and vision and I think that's something else that makes them stand apart.

I have no subcategories of Epic Fantasy. It simply stands alone.

The next and largest category is High Fantasy. High Fantasy would have similar characteristics to an Epic Fantasy, however not necessarily on as detailed or large a scale. Many prolific authors have written multiple books and built impressive worlds but simply aren't good enough authors in my opinion to be considered Epic. Raymond E. Feist is an excellent example. He's written over twenty novels set on Midkemia and Kelewan but the quality of his novels haven't been consistent enough nor has their been one grand overlying theme. (Quality could be argued in Jordan's case as well however I've given him the benefit of the doubt) David Eddings also comes to mind. The majority of fantasy novels fall into High Fantasy in my opinion and then are further categorized into one of my high fantasy subcategories which consist of :

Dark Fantasy, Mythic Fantasy, Heroic Fantasy

The third category is Low Fantasy which confuses a helluva lot of people :) Low Fantasy by typical definiton describes novels which place less emphasis on Fantasy elements and/or take place in the real world. Most all urban fantasies could be classified as low fantasy, however, what's funny is that sword and sorcery also fall under the low fantasy genre. Imagine that. Urban Fantasy and Sword & Sorcery in the same genre..seems odd doesn't it? That's why we have so many damned subgenre's I suppose :) The main thing to remember in low fantasy is that the stories aren't world wide in scope. Generally, the book is going to center around a character or a group of characters basically intent on saving themselves rather than on saving the world. Good examples of low fantasy books would be The Dragonlance series, The Druss novels, Forgotten Realms etc etc. I further categorize Low Fantasy into:

Sword & Sorcery, Contemporary Fantasy (with a further subsubgenre of Urban Fantasy) and Detective Fantasy

And, finally, the always fun Cross-Genre Fantasy. Cross-genre fantasy is exactly what it says. Fantasy that crosses with another genre. I don't think this really requires much explanation. Great examples of cross-genre would be S.M Stirlings Emberverse Series, tons of novels by Edgar Rice Burroughs, Poul Anderson's The Queen of Air and Darkness, Mercedes Lackey's Five Hundred Kingdoms. My subgenre's of Cross- Genre are:

Science Fantasy (the big one), Historical Fantasy, Horror Fantasy, Romantic Fantasy. There are endless subgenres of each of these..far too many to list or really to even care about. :)

Ultimately, many novels could fall into multiple genres and dozens of subgenres. It's so ridiculously subjective that there's not really a right answer. This has and hopefully will continue to work for me (yay ocd) but it's definitely not going to be for everyone. Lol..for that matter I doubt many people really care enough to bother categorizing. Okay, so I'm concerned that I'm no longer making much sense. It's 4:40 in the morning and I have to be up at 6:00 which means I can hope for a solid hour of sleep tonight. Stupid Firefly marathon *sigh* Nite, yall.

P.S...if you read all of this Ridiculously freaking long post feel free to msg me your address and I'll gladly send you a cookie

I'll be honest, I skimmed a couple parts.. It's like 7am here, I did my best :)

Can I have half a cookie?

Grant wrote: "Hmm...so now I have to figure out how to explain my classification system. Lol..I think I can manage to explain it though I don't know that I can justify it :) It makes sense to me which I suppose ..."

By your classifications I'd call Kushiel a historical fantasy. Why? Well while the world does exist as a separate realm in another place it does essentially lift eras and time and society from historical eras in the real world for it's plot.

Grant wrote: "Hmm...so now I have to figure out how to explain my classification system. Lol..I think I can manage to explain it though I don't know that I can justify it :) It makes sense to me which I suppose ..."

I read the whole thing... I get a cookie! :)

PS - you can rent the entire season of Firefly from Netflix... :)

MrsJoseph wrote: "PS - you can rent the entire season of Firefly from Netflix... :)"

Not only can you rent it, it's available for instant play.

Amanda wrote:By your classifications I'd call Kushiel a historical fantasy. Why? Well while the world does exist as a separate realm in another place it does essentially lift eras and time and society from historical eras in the real world for it's plot."

I would agree with this, except that Carey has/creates:

"historical references, an established monetary system if not many, detailed religions and Gods, multiple well defined cultures as well as a social structure within each culture....basically all those things that one must have in order to build a world from the ground up. In addition to the world building you'll also generally find a theme of good vs evil on a grand scale."

A lot of the first books (and all of the books in my opinion) do seem to have a counter-point in real life historical societies, but she does not allow herself to be constrained by those historical references. She continues on her own path. I would call Norton's Empire of the Eagle a great example of a historical fantasy instead.

IMO the only things that would *might* keep Carey's Kushiel series out of the realm of Epic fantasy would be writing style the whole “a theme of good vs evil on a grand scale." idea. Some like Carey’s writing while others don't. The theme of good vs evil is present but the “evil” is represented by human lack of conscience/morals in two out of the first 3 books. I love her work in the first two series of Kushiel (I haven't read the third series yet) but I hated her writing in Banewreaker.

Wow, you obviously have given this a lot of thought. In your definition of Epic Fantasy, for yourself, you include quality of writing. You are right, it is subjective. I'm just not sure it should be included when you classify books, IMO. I tend to lump Epic and High Fantasy together. Until I came to this group, I had never heard the term "Epic Fantasy" but then again I am a newbie to Fantasy so that shouldn't be too surprising for those of you who have had a lifelong love of the genre. I envy you. So thanks for defining all these different subgenres. It helps!

By the way, you owe me a cookie!

Start baking, Grant. You owe me a cookie, too. I like chocolate chip. I'm not deeply into fantasy enough to worry about sub-genres. I am doing that for horror, though, since that is what I'm mostly into now. With horror, I'm more interested in the topic, such as dystopian, monsters, etc. So Grant, I am OCD about my horror. :o)

By definition, the terms "high fantasy" and "epic fantasy" are generally interchangeable, so you're not far off Christine. When you try to search for "epic fantasy" on wikipedia, you're even directed to "high fantasy" instead. From wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_fan...

High fantasy or epic fantasy is a subgenre of fantasy that is set in invented or parallel worlds.

High fantasy is defined as fantasy fiction set in an alternative, entirely fictional ("secondary") world, rather than the real, or "primary" world. The secondary world is usually internally consistent but its rules differ in some way(s) from those of the primary world. By contrast, low fantasy is characterized by being set in the primary, or "real" world, or a rational and familiar fictional world, with the inclusion of magical elements.

And then as for sword and sorcery...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sword_an...

Sword and sorcery (S&S) is a subgenre of fantasy and historical fantasy, generally characterized by swashbuckling heroes engaged in exciting and violent conflicts. An element of romance is often present, as is an element of magic and the supernatural. Unlike works of high fantasy, the tales, though dramatic, focus mainly on personal battles rather than world-endangering matters.

These definitions are much much much closer to how I think of it, as opposed to Grant's classification system. I don't think perceived quality of writing has any place in the definition...

What surprises me is the fact that no one here besides me seem to read Andre Norton. Andre Norton is a Grand Master of Sci-Fi/Fantasy! I'm really shocked...

If it makes you feel any better, I downloaded a bunch of Andre Norton's work. Haven't read them.

I am learning so much here today. Makes me love this group even more. Thanks everyone. Makes me want to read more.

MrsJoseph wrote: "What surprises me is the fact that no one here besides me seem to read Andre Norton. Andre Norton is a Grand Master of Sci-Fi/Fantasy! I'm really shocked..."

Have done. So long ago - along with McCaffrey, Mary Stewart's Merlin trilogy, R. E, Howard, and Ursula LeGuin's Earthsea, and (I'll link this one, she's so little known) Leigh Brackett

:)

I heart Andre Norton, she single handedly changed the face of Fantasy. Prior to Andre Norton there were no "romantic fantasy," with her Witch World Series being considered the first set of romantic fantasy work.

"Romantic fantasy is a subgenre of fantasy fiction, describing a fantasy story using many of the elements and conventions of the romance genre.

One of the key features of romantic fantasy involves the focus on relationships, social, political, and romantic. Romantic fantasy has been published by both fantasy lines and romance lines.

Some publishers distinguish between "romantic fantasy" where the romance is most important and "fantasy romance" where the fantasy elements are most important.Others say that "the borderline between fantasy romance and romantic fantasy has essentially ceased to exist, or if it's still there, it's moving back and forth constantly."


I would consider works like A Game of Thrones and "The Gunslinger" to be romantic fantasy as well. They both really focus on relationships - in fact with AGoT you can say that relationships are the primary focal point of plot movement.

I think that the definitions that Dawn posted make more sense to me, honestly. But I'm not really a category reader though. I don't think about what I read in that way. I've read the Dark Tower series several times, but I wouldn't have the vaguest idea of what subgenre of fantasy it should be considered. Perhaps Cross-genre, since there are so many different themes and ideas in it, but I would never have thought about it at all except for this thread.

I don't agree with writing quality being included in categorization though. It's not measurable by any standard. What one person thinks is great, someone else will think is wordy or pretentious or just downright bad. I love Tolkien, but I have heard so many people say that they hate his writing.

MrsJoseph wrote: "I would consider works like A Game of Thrones and "The Gunslinger" to be romantic fantasy as well. They both really focus on relationships - in fact with AGoT you can say that relationships are the primary focal point of plot movement."

Relationships AGoT might have... But I think a book might need to have a little "romance" to be considered "romantic fantasy". AGoT is FAR from romantic.

Dawn wrote: "MrsJoseph wrote: "I would consider works like A Game of Thrones and "The Gunslinger" to be romantic fantasy as well. They both really focus on relationships - in fact with AGoT you can say that rel..."

I agree 100% that the book is not "romantic" in the degree of "falling in love romance" but that is not the true definition of romantic work. Romantic work simply means that relationships are basis of the plot. The wife/mother in the Stark family is motivated by her love of her husband, children, family, etc. The same goes for other characters. Without these relationships most of the plot of AGoT would not take place.

In The Scarlett Letter readers are never treated to the romance that Hester has, this is covered prior to the novel taking place. Since the motivation for the novel’s plot is the relationships between the characters, the book is considered a romance.

Becky wrote: "I think that the definitions that Dawn posted make more sense to me, honestly. But I'm not really a category reader though. I don't think about what I read in that way. I've read the Dark Tower ser..."

I like Dawn's definitions, too. I don't really disguish between "epic" and "high" fantasy. I think of them both as (nearly) the same thing.

How would you classify Mercedes Lackey's series Mage Winds Winds of Fate series?

Nicki wrote: "I'm not sure I'd agree that relationships are the focus of A Game of Thrones, any more so than any story needs relationships between the characters in order to have a human element. The books are b..."

I agree with this.

Well I'll get to baking :) I made some pretty darn good peanut brittle yesterday too if anyone would prefer :)

On a more serious note, I would like to reference the fact that way back in message 9 I did stress that "Again I know epic and high are most often considered interchangeable..." I think people are missing my repeatedly stressed point that this is a personal classification system so quality of writing is a perfectly viable qualification For Me. In fact, for me, it's key. If you couldn't tell by the long ass post, I'm well versed in the widely accepted definitions I just don't necessarily agree with them. Again, I can't justify it, nor in my wildest dreams did I expect anyone to adopt nor appreciate it, however I shared it because it was requested. I'm a passionate bastard. It's the spanish in me. :)

Eh. I just deleted a rather large, semi angered explanation of why it's absurd that so many novels are classified as high fantasy. Bottom line is there's a lot of shitty "high fantasy" out there. It personally bothers me to categorize good and great authors with crappy ones so I made up my own category :) yay me. I'm going to make another one up called "Shitty Fantasy" :) It'll catch on. Wait and see.

I got an hours sleep and was attacked by a ridiculously loud, rabid chihuahua this morning. I'm grumpy and bleeding. Forgive me :)

P.S...*sigh* What's sad is I totally own the entire Firefly dvd box set. I'm a freaking glutton for punishment. Oh and Dawn you can totally have a full cookie. Half cookies are such teases.

Grant wrote: "I'm a freaking glutton for punishment...."

I know that feeling....

Lol...fair enough, Nicki. I totally understand where you're coming from and actually apply it myself. The funny thing is that I read all types of novels and use your same reasoning when it comes to any other genre. I just have a bone to pick with the fantasy genre in particular

It all comes down to we like what we like and one person's "shitty" is another's "best book they ever read". Reading is a highly personal experience, it changes all the time and our moods are a big part of how we interpret the words an author gives us. It also gives us lively discussions about the books we read because we don't all get the same message. Its what makes us come to a place like Goodreads.

Grant wrote: "The funny thing is that I read all types of novels and use your same reasoning when it comes to any other genre. I just have a bone to pick with the fantasy genre in particular "

I'm not sure I'm really following you. What makes fantasy so different from any other genre in terms of how you'd categorize it? Why do you have a bone to pick with it?

Fantasy is my favorite genre. It's also a bastard stepchild in literary circles and that bothers me, deeply. I wish that it would receive more respect and acclaim. I'd like to see more novels from the fantasy genre than simply Tolkien and Lewis considered classics or taught widely in schools. Ultimately, I'm harder on the genre because I want bigger and better things from the genre I suppose. *grins* I'm the Tiger Mom of fantasy :)

Grant wrote: "Fantasy is my favorite genre. It's also a bastard stepchild in literary circles and that bothers me, deeply. I wish that it would receive more respect and acclaim. I'd like to see more novels from..."

I agree. So many of my friends won't even consider reading it.

Thank goodness someone is willing to stand up and be a "Tiger Mom" for fantasy. LOL

Ahhh... I see. I know what you mean. I am a King fan, after all. ;)

Grant wrote: "Lol...fair enough, Nicki. I totally understand where you're coming from and actually apply it myself. The funny thing is that I read all types of novels and use your same reasoning when it comes to..."

WHo, you? No way! It's not like you keep a moleskin or anything... ;)

Growing up I was a popular kid. I was a jock and a cut up and traveled so much that I learned to make friends easily. I wasn't hideous to behold and I was well mannered and so life was good. So, it came as a bit of a shock to find out that loving fantasy novels made me a nerd or a loser in some people's eyes. I was so excited to share my love of the books with others and got laughed at more often than not or worse pitying looks as if to say "really...you like..Fantasy. Wow, and we thought you were cool." Now, I was a fighter and had and have a helluva temper and so a few bloody noses and broken bones insured I wouldn't get picked on or publically looked down upon but it didn't change the fact that I now felt ashamed of loving fantasy. I didn't advertise it anymore and I didn't embrace being a nerd the way people do nowadays so fantasy became my guilty pleasure.

Anyways, here comes adulthood and by God it's the same thing. You sit down with your business peers and discuss politics and world news, movies and literature and God forbid you bring up a fantasy novel lest you look like a Comic Con geek or like someone who'd wear a costume and stand in line for a movie premiere for three days. People still look down on fans of fantasy and I just don't get why. I think the genre is equal to any other. Moreso, I think it's superior to many and it just grates my nerves that I can't be respected in the mainstream world for my love of fantasy novels. I've read Tolstoy, Nabokov, Chekhov, Fitzgerald, Steinbeck, Hemingway, Proust, Eliot, Kafka etc etc...I can hang yet I'm still looked at with askance if I dare to discuss Fantasy.

I'm quite vocal and proud of my favorite genre these days but my earlier years still weigh on me a bit and so I would definitely love to see the day when Fantasy is recognized as more than just a juvenile fancy.

Incidentally, I'm not dogging on Comic Con geeks. I'd totally go if I could :) I've got this great roman centurion outfit from last Halloween :)

Lol @ MrsJoseph. I have like 30 well filled moleskins :) You know me too well ;)

Grant, if you think you're a pariah because you read Fantasy, try Horror and Erotica. I'm a Horror and Erotica reader and proud. Actually, getting bored of Erotica, though. Not enough great writing and plots. Oh, and I do have a Literature background, too.