Worldcon panel report: Hard fantasy
Saturday 4:00 pm
Fiona Patton - Canadian author
Karen Anderson, wife of Poul Anderson, edited his works. Big believer in researching
Tim Powers - multipublished fantasy author
Brandon Sanderson - Hugo nominee, writes epic fantasy for Tor.
Phillis Edelstein - author
KA: believes in “putting the rivets in” - read about a staff sling mentioned by David Drake. PA didn’t believe it existed but she researched it in an old edition of the Brittanica and it did! Could sling 1 ounce round lead slugs hard enough to go through shields made of plywood (described as three thin layers of wood, layered cross-wise and glued.) Sling spears had the equivalent release velocity of an 1875 handgun.
BS Isaac Asimov hated fantasy because he thought it was about dumb barbarians killing the wizard who had worked hard to gain knowledge.” Not a fair evaluation of the genre. KA: interjected that that implied Conan the Conqueror was stupid, which was ridiculous.
BS then said Hard fantasy must obey the laws of physics, except the ones you choose to break. (my addon summary: And the ones you break must be consistent and logical within themselves.)
PE Magic needs to be consistant and with underlying rules as per science. Needs to be systematised.
more behind the cut:
TP says doesn’t want to accidentally break the laws of physics. Wants his magic to have limitations but not be so systematised that is becomes technology. It would lose its numinancy (check term - he meant that sense of sick dread and delight which I translated as the sense of wonder)
FP wants the world and magic to be geographically consistent: that the season and weather are predictable within their own terms, that the geography affects the characters and setting.
KA: referred to the book “King of Ys” which she termed more alternate history: PA needed something terrible to happen after the struggling king had built a new city. Could have had magical or god-made disaster, but her research showed her the year in question in Roman history was a “year of interdiction” where the government/ruling powers sent out tax inspectors to reassess land value: the king had just built a new city on farmland, increasing its value, but had no spare funds to pay for the tax….
BS: Four rules for hard fantasy
1. conservation of energy - there must be a cost for the magic
2. don’t lose your sense of wonder
3. follow your own rules
4. he who understands the magic best, wins! (Melinda notes: this is the equivalent to the technology equation: he who has the stirrups, but enemy does not, wins)
PE: It takes a lot of effort and learning for her wizards to learn to handle magic. Study and apprenticeship and note taking and experimenting and scholarship.
Based on DeCamp’s “laws of symmetry and contagion”
You need to understand the system and stick with it, even if the explanation is not in the text or the characters are learning how it works themselves.
Created a system of webmagic with weaving and ability to turn threads and knots against the wearer.
KA: make sure your technology is consistent within itself. Check out what tech people had access to at the our-world-equivalent time you are basing your world on: do they have the ability to make glass for the wine drinking? Or metal sheeting for roofs etc
Recommended “The ancient engineers” by L Sprague DeCamp, and suggested looking for a copy of “the medieval machine”
Look for a timeline of technology on Encyclopedia Brittanica or reliable websources. Research if I can have sheet or colored glass in my appropriate era, or need to stick to clear glass and small panels?
TP You don’t always want to be in default medieval mode.
Recommends “Connections” by James Burke (1970s pub.) for development of tech.
BS wants to see the ramifications of change throughout the society: if the world has magic of a particular sort (eg Dune, with the spice affecting industry and economy and politics and guilds etc), how does it affect the society in terms of changed “technology,” politics, working conditions etc.
FP: What goes wrong in some of the fiction you’ve seen?
KA: Kawasaki horses that don’t need rest or fuel and can go for hours without care.
BS: calls them kick-stand horses. Doesn’t understand or know horses so avoids using them in his novels.
Audience brought up the issue of sociology: class system vs religious democracy
KA: most novel societies would not survive in reality. Not well thought through for how people really are.
BS: starts with “That’s a cool idea,” then figures out how he can make it work.
FP: “Underworld” is a fun movie but stupid. No way would someone in power just give it over to someone else. Powerful people will not give up their power.
BS wants his characters to be sympathetic and interesting and identifiable, but they can’t be 21st century perpectives. Aims for more of a 19th century equivalent in terms of views of the world, because it is still identifiable for readers, but different enough to be clear it’s a different life view.
TP: Before 1800, people were totally different to us, and their views would seem alien to us. So how do you choose between being accurate or modern/sympathetic. Answer: he cheats.
BS also cheats on this issue.
PE says to remember to ask: why are the characters doing what they are doing? Is their motivation understandable?
KA: made a final comment to remember that your characters need a belief system. It is not likely (believable?) that they will live in a cultural void. What we see as “fairy stories,” people in the past believed very firmly.
Fiona Patton - Canadian author
Karen Anderson, wife of Poul Anderson, edited his works. Big believer in researching
Tim Powers - multipublished fantasy author
Brandon Sanderson - Hugo nominee, writes epic fantasy for Tor.
Phillis Edelstein - author
KA: believes in “putting the rivets in” - read about a staff sling mentioned by David Drake. PA didn’t believe it existed but she researched it in an old edition of the Brittanica and it did! Could sling 1 ounce round lead slugs hard enough to go through shields made of plywood (described as three thin layers of wood, layered cross-wise and glued.) Sling spears had the equivalent release velocity of an 1875 handgun.
BS Isaac Asimov hated fantasy because he thought it was about dumb barbarians killing the wizard who had worked hard to gain knowledge.” Not a fair evaluation of the genre. KA: interjected that that implied Conan the Conqueror was stupid, which was ridiculous.
BS then said Hard fantasy must obey the laws of physics, except the ones you choose to break. (my addon summary: And the ones you break must be consistent and logical within themselves.)
PE Magic needs to be consistant and with underlying rules as per science. Needs to be systematised.
more behind the cut:
TP says doesn’t want to accidentally break the laws of physics. Wants his magic to have limitations but not be so systematised that is becomes technology. It would lose its numinancy (check term - he meant that sense of sick dread and delight which I translated as the sense of wonder)
FP wants the world and magic to be geographically consistent: that the season and weather are predictable within their own terms, that the geography affects the characters and setting.
KA: referred to the book “King of Ys” which she termed more alternate history: PA needed something terrible to happen after the struggling king had built a new city. Could have had magical or god-made disaster, but her research showed her the year in question in Roman history was a “year of interdiction” where the government/ruling powers sent out tax inspectors to reassess land value: the king had just built a new city on farmland, increasing its value, but had no spare funds to pay for the tax….
BS: Four rules for hard fantasy
1. conservation of energy - there must be a cost for the magic
2. don’t lose your sense of wonder
3. follow your own rules
4. he who understands the magic best, wins! (Melinda notes: this is the equivalent to the technology equation: he who has the stirrups, but enemy does not, wins)
PE: It takes a lot of effort and learning for her wizards to learn to handle magic. Study and apprenticeship and note taking and experimenting and scholarship.
Based on DeCamp’s “laws of symmetry and contagion”
You need to understand the system and stick with it, even if the explanation is not in the text or the characters are learning how it works themselves.
Created a system of webmagic with weaving and ability to turn threads and knots against the wearer.
KA: make sure your technology is consistent within itself. Check out what tech people had access to at the our-world-equivalent time you are basing your world on: do they have the ability to make glass for the wine drinking? Or metal sheeting for roofs etc
Recommended “The ancient engineers” by L Sprague DeCamp, and suggested looking for a copy of “the medieval machine”
Look for a timeline of technology on Encyclopedia Brittanica or reliable websources. Research if I can have sheet or colored glass in my appropriate era, or need to stick to clear glass and small panels?
TP You don’t always want to be in default medieval mode.
Recommends “Connections” by James Burke (1970s pub.) for development of tech.
BS wants to see the ramifications of change throughout the society: if the world has magic of a particular sort (eg Dune, with the spice affecting industry and economy and politics and guilds etc), how does it affect the society in terms of changed “technology,” politics, working conditions etc.
FP: What goes wrong in some of the fiction you’ve seen?
KA: Kawasaki horses that don’t need rest or fuel and can go for hours without care.
BS: calls them kick-stand horses. Doesn’t understand or know horses so avoids using them in his novels.
Audience brought up the issue of sociology: class system vs religious democracy
KA: most novel societies would not survive in reality. Not well thought through for how people really are.
BS: starts with “That’s a cool idea,” then figures out how he can make it work.
FP: “Underworld” is a fun movie but stupid. No way would someone in power just give it over to someone else. Powerful people will not give up their power.
BS wants his characters to be sympathetic and interesting and identifiable, but they can’t be 21st century perpectives. Aims for more of a 19th century equivalent in terms of views of the world, because it is still identifiable for readers, but different enough to be clear it’s a different life view.
TP: Before 1800, people were totally different to us, and their views would seem alien to us. So how do you choose between being accurate or modern/sympathetic. Answer: he cheats.
BS also cheats on this issue.
PE says to remember to ask: why are the characters doing what they are doing? Is their motivation understandable?
KA: made a final comment to remember that your characters need a belief system. It is not likely (believable?) that they will live in a cultural void. What we see as “fairy stories,” people in the past believed very firmly.