Rant on domestic fantasy

Feb 10, 2007 20:52

This is part rant, part how-to. One reason I think not very much domestic fantasy is written is the sheer lack of models; it’s much easier to walk the paths of, say, the save-the-world plot because there’s so much of it out there to show you how to do it.

But I think there should be more domestic fantasy, because I like it )

subgenre rants, fantasy rants: winter 2007

Leave a comment

Comments 106

deathwokclan February 11 2007, 02:25:11 UTC
Can I just say 'thank you' re: the adoptive family comment? Being adopted myself, I want to throw books at the wall when characters find out about another 'real' family, and they promptly toss their actual family in the trash to go off and discover the alledged 'real' family, with nary a thought as to what their reception will be.

Of course, it's always a 'OH WE LOVE YOU! WE DID NOT MEAN IT!' reaction.

So thank you.

Reply

xianghua February 11 2007, 02:56:25 UTC
Here here!

Reply

limyaael February 11 2007, 17:58:08 UTC
You're welcome! I think I was a bit scarred by reading some YA novels when I was in high school that had that plotline. Somehow, the family that gave up the main character, no matter what reason they had for doing so, was always sainted, and I couldn't imagine ceasing to love the people who actually loved me just because they hadn't been the ones to contribute the egg and the sperm.

Reply

buckfush530 February 18 2007, 06:29:18 UTC
Second that motion!

Reply


(The comment has been removed)

limyaael February 11 2007, 17:58:50 UTC
I think many people believe that dragons somehow make it fantasy. And I'd say that they don't, or it wouldn't be possible to write things like alt-historical fantasy, which often alter personalities and add magic, but don't add other species.

Reply


tumblecoyote February 11 2007, 02:50:09 UTC
Hm. Interesting rant ( ... )

Reply

dialogue February 11 2007, 03:49:34 UTC
Research is actually very important in fantasy, I think, and developing a good world takes a lot of work. You can just whip off a story without doing any research, but that's also the same for writing a story set in a real-world situation you're familiar with. I'm hesitant to say whether it's harder or easier than it is to write in a real world situation, but just for my fantasy works I'm doing a lot of research on Heian Japan, Tang China, and glassmaking.

Sometimes a story demands a non-Earth backdrop - there's nothing in Earth's history that really fits what you want to do with a story. I guess you could work with an alternate history, but at what point does that just become fantasy, anyway?

Reply

x_haphazard_x February 11 2007, 03:52:12 UTC
Well, with the idea of "homesteading fantasy"...

I was under the impression that that was just an example, because it was something that most people had heard of and been forced to read through.

There wasn't really much actual fantastic stuff touched on here, was there?

I remember going to a creative writing class and the teacher said "no rainbows or dogs or wizards" when we first entered. I asked "Why not?" and he was like, "because it's fluff!" He was a great guy otherwise, but still.

I'm sorry, but I have dry humor and an eye for the absurd. It really hurt that we couldn't put anything vaguely ridiculous into that writing.

When I read fantasy, I want to read something where people would actually be comfortable living in. If it's nothing but countryside that the heroine is passing through with the occasional small town in distress, I'm bored to tears.

Reply

(The comment has been removed)


frenchpony February 11 2007, 02:54:06 UTC
I haven't read Tehanu in a while, but my main memory of it was that it just didn't fit well with the other three Earthsea novels. Is it worth picking it up again?

Reply

limyaael February 11 2007, 18:02:14 UTC
That's the thing: I don't think it actually fits that well. The first trilogy is one series, and the stuff that comes later, in the novella "Dragonfly" and the novel The Other Wind (which I adored), is another grouping. I think Tehanu doesn't work as a book in the Earthsea series. But I think it works as domestic fantasy.

Reply


Gender-equal societies? dialogue February 11 2007, 03:05:47 UTC
I love your rants, and the last few have been extremely useful as I've been losing interest in the big sweeping stories and instead wanting to write something on a smaller scale.

Something you just barely mentioned struck a chord with something I've been thinking about - you mentioned gender-equal societies. This is something I've never really seen done well, and I'd rather read a story like A Song of Ice and Fire, where female characters are treated equally by the author than a story where I'm told the sexes are equal, but they aren't treated that way by the author.

Are there any good gender-equal stories out there (other than The Left Hand of Darkness)? Do you have any advice for writing in a gender-equal manner?

Reply

Re: Gender-equal societies? alexmegami February 11 2007, 04:18:36 UTC
I'm not sure I agree with you that A Song of Ice and Fire treats women equally. The author might, but I don't think the societies do... at all.

(Now, that said, I've only read the first two, and maybe things change... But when I think about it, Arya is seen as a bit of a freak by her sister, as is the female knight later on. Women are generally slotted into "mother/wife", "good noblewoman", "whore", or "power behind her son/brother". Dany would be the exception, but even then, her brother certainly didn't see her as an equal, and... I can't remember what her husband's tribe was called, but she was his "wife", and not really accorded much respect outside of that role. Wasn't that what the schism was about? ...argh, it's been a while, my memory is fuzzy.)

Reply

Re: Gender-equal societies? alexmegami February 11 2007, 04:20:11 UTC
...unless that's what you meant (you'd rather a society be unequal but the author understands that vs. an author says they're equal but see the oppression inherent in the system!), and I misread your comment. ._.; If I did misread, I'm sorry.

Reply

archaeologist's two pence saltnester February 11 2007, 10:22:37 UTC
I'd imagine the latter, as the Song is mediaevalist, and done well, so it's taken for granted, as it was in the 10-1400s, that women were weak and inferior creatures, but instead of interposing a modern viewpoint on that (something I hate and gives rise to anchronistic femminists rather than strong women in the patriarchy) Martin lets his women gain power as they would've done in that society, within the rules laid down by men. I recall one Crusades-era noble (I'm ashamed to say I've forgotten her name, possibly one of Elanor of Aquitaine's daughters) who kissed her husband as he was carried in dying from a skirmish with the Moors, stayed up devotedly with him all the time until he died, then married again literally as soon as he was in the ground to a knight she hardly knew, to halt the fragmentation of Outremer. She wasn't forced by a dominating father or anything, it was a move for power open to her and she took it.
I think one might just be able to get away with being a female knight, but one would be seen as an honourary male ( ... )

Reply


Leave a comment

Up