Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mercurius" data-source="post: 8605223" data-attributes="member: 59082">Fantasy literature, at least going back a century or so, has traditionally involved two polarities, what fantasy historian Jamie Williamson described as more "high" and "low" brow in his book <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Evolution-Modern-Fantasy-Antiquarianism-Ballantine/dp/1349704334/" target="_blank">The Evolution of Modern Fantasy</a>, that were integrated in the late 60s and early 70s to form the spectrum that became the modern fantasy genre. Before that point, you had the more literary high fantasy of Cabell, Tolkien, and Eddison, and the pulp adventure low fantasy of Howard, Moore, and Leiber (as well as a third branch that was assigned under children's literature, from Wonderland to Oz to Narnia).The modern fantasy genre was born out of late 60s and 70s--largely catalyzed by the popularity of The Lord of the Rings (which while published in the UK in the mid-50s, didn't catch on in the US until about a decade later - sort of like the Beatles). To some extent, fantasy was part of the larger zeitgeist of cultural revolution, with new ideas seeping into Western culture that were outside the boxes of tradition and modernism. Whether it was Buddhist philosophy, Hindu yoga, psychedelics, or fantasy, people were craving for, to use a term from Carlos Castaneda, "non-ordinary" experiences.By the time Dungeons & Dragons was born in 1974, fantasy literature was beginning to thrive - if still ghetto-ized by the mainstream and, especially, the academic literary establishment. To get a sense of this, you can read Ursula K Le Guin's wonderful 1974 speech-turned-essay, "Why Are Americans Afraid of Dragons?" from her book The Language of the Night, which is essentially both a diagnosis of the lack of imagination of the American mainstream and an advocacy for fantasy literature and the use of the imagination, which Le Guin saw as a possible antidote for the American malaise.Fast-forward almost 50 years, and the landscape has changed greatly. Not only has fantasy continued to explode and expand, it has received mainstream acceptance - largely due to the popularity of big franchises such as JK Rowling's Harry Potter books, the Lord of the Rings films, and Game of Thrones. It has also influenced a wide variety of genres and media forms, from video games to New Age philosophies.Both fantasy literature and role-playing games have diversified immensely. For the latter, it started with TSR offering different genres, such as the Old West Boothill and scifi Star Frontiers, but then expanded to a cottage industry of companies and games that eventually filled out every nook and cranny of the RPG imagination. Today--but really going back to at least the 90s--you can find just about any game you can think of, from games in which you play rodents to games in which you play creator beings.Science fiction historian John Clute has promoted the the term <a href="https://sf-encyclopedia.com/entry/fantastika" target="_blank">Fantastika</a> as an umbrella for all fantastic literature, with three main branches: fantasy, science fiction, and horror. The three mix and match, creating hybrid variations such as steampunk, dark fantasy, supernatural horror, and countless others, but also incorporate elements from the mainstream and history, so that Fantastika can include just about anything outside of strict mimesis. Through it's five decade journey, D&D has explored and experimented, yet still remained based in a relatively traditional model of adventure fantasy that, at it's root, is one part Tolkien's Middle-earth, one part Howard's Conan, and one part Gygaxian seasonings, be they his own or drawn from his eclectic interests. But as soon as others began to participate, it was no longer "Gary's game" - it was ours.In truth, that is how Gygax wanted it: he wanted individual DMs to create their own worlds, to modify the game to their heart's content. TSR, and later WotC--as well as numerous other publishers--offered examples, templates that you could use as-is out of the box, or alter to your liking. But even as original D&D became so much more, it still was a game of adventure fantasy at heart - all the way up to recent years, with the "back to roots" approach of 5E.D&D is also a multi-generational game. Born in 1938, Gary Gygax was actually part of the pre-Boomer Silent Generation, which depending upon which version of generational theory you prefer, was born either from 1928-45 (Mannheim) or 1925-42 (Strauss & Howe). The early designers were either of Gary's cohort or Boomers. Once we get to the late 80s, older Gen-Xers like Jonathan Tweet and Mark Rein-Hagen entered the fray, offering their own cultural sensibilities, which led to the "White Wolf Revolution" of the 90s, as well as the flowering of Indie games. And then by the time we get to the 21st century, Millenials joined in, with Zoomers just now beginning to make their mark.Each generation shared certain traits, both in terms of references but also having grown up within a specific historic-cultural context. Yet also, of course, every individual within a generation is just that - an individual. So you might have Millenials creating Gen-X flavored offerings, as is the case with the Stranger Things TV series. Or you have older designers embracing newer sensibilities.Within this context of generational exchange, you have the emergence of new forms and variations of fantasy and D&D more specifically, and the later (or more recently) within the evolutionary process, the more there is to draw from. Now, in 2022, we have 48 years of D&D, and twice that or more of fantasy literature, depending upon when you want to place the pin of it's inception date, be it the early 20th century fantasy of Lord Dunsany, or the 19th century fantasy of George MacDonald and William Morris, or Medieval epic romances, or even further back with the Iliad, Gilgamesh, or simply tales told by a fire passed on through oral narratives.As a general rule, the fantasy genre--in terms of it's range of aesthetic offerings--expands and never contracts. New genres, styles, forms, and ideas emerge, but the old ones don't die away. Certain cultural traits change or die off, but the genres and idea-complexes themselves, the imaginative Lego pieces of fantasy tradition, remain for the employment and inspiration of all of us who follow.There is the illusion that certain genres die away, or even that fantasy contracts, through the phenomena of various trends that emerge and seem to drown out old forms. For instance, in fantasy literature, for a time it seemed that everything was "Grimdark," but in retrospect it was more that Grimdark was trending, but only apparently drowning out other sub-genres and styles. Other fantasies were still being written, and eventually Grimdark settled into a plateau of continued popularity, but not as loudly as it was a few years ago. Meaning, fantasy expanded to include Grimdark (and truly, what we call "Grimdark" was part of a longer stream within fantasy that goes back a century or more, even to Gothic literature), but nothing was left behind through its inclusion.All of which brings me to the current moment in D&D's evolution. If you scan the last couple years of official D&D books, it can seem like the game is changing towards a lighter and younger approach, one that emphasizes qualities such as whimsy, social interaction, and de-emphasizes darker tones, including violence. Furthermore, various cultural trends have influenced fantasy aesthetics, so that orcs-as-people has been emphasized over orcs-as-monsters.This view can be supported by looking at the upcoming book Journeys through the Radiant Citadel, which almost seems like a whimsical fairyland compared to the very Gen-X, neo-gothic Sigil of Planescape fame (which is about as definitively Gen-X as you can find, even if it's primary creator, Zeb Cook, was a Boomer). Or we can see it with the popularity of Exandria and Critical Role, which emphasizes a more thespian and theatrical approach to D&D, over the tactical pulp action of Gygax's D&D. We have Strixhaven, The Wild Beyond Witchlight and Candlekeep Mysteries. We also have Monsters of the Multiverse revising elements of past offerings towards what WotC perceives to be the dominant sensibilities of its current base. Some claim (or complain) that even the Ravenloft book softened some of the darker elements that made it distinct.While there is no strict line, the tonal shift seems to have come about in late 2020, with Tasha's Cauldron of Everything. Since then, there is a markedly different quality and feel to WotC's output. Where 5E seemed to be a direct appeal to long-time D&D players, many of whom had migrated to Pathfinder and other games, with a "back to classic" feel, now it seems that WotC has shifted again, and understandably so (at least from an economic perspective) as demographical explosion of the last half decade or so has largely been younger player: Millenials and Zoomers, with "Alpha" just around the corner.One quality, among others, of this shift, is the idea that "violence isn't always the answer." I am not interested in litigating this issue as good or bad, problematic or not, but just pointing out that it is a marked tonal shift. Yet to draw from earlier elements of this discussion, the question is whether D&D is now contracting around a new aesthetic and cultural ethos at the expense of older forms, or whether this is simply a gestalt of rising trends that will be incorporated within the larger tradition of D&D. Meaning, has D&D changed direction and configured into a new template of base assumptions of qualities, or has it merely expanded, and the newer elements will become part of a larger and more varied matrix? History in other media forms would suggest the latter--that it is expanding, not contracting. When jazz musicians began incorporating fusion elements in the late 60s, older forms of jazz didn't evaporate, and in fact resurged later on. When dance music in the 70s shifted from funk to disco, funk didn't disappear - it branched off and re-surfaced in different ways, from the "punk-funk" of Primus to acid jazz in the 90s. Not to mention how fads and trends of the past continually resurface, even in a somewhat regular cycle. The point being that within a tradition, no core elements every die or go away. The leading edge shifts and explores new territory, but the entire tradition still exists, and past elements both exist in their own right, but also evolve and adapt. Meaning, we'll always have the original Tomb of Horrors, as well as contemporary adaptations and products that were influenced by it.As far as D&D is concerned, in the near future WotC will unveil a series of classic/legacy settings, as well as new settings shortly thereafter. How will they treat them? What tone between nostalgia and re-vamping will they hit, classic and innovative? And as we see new worlds created and explored, will these worlds be specifically designed under the newer aesthetic, or will we see some variation, perhaps one that embodies newer qualities and one with a more classic feel? Or will they somehow split the difference?Regardless, I think the key is that tradition can and will be preserved and new forms and styles will emerge - these need not be antithetical to each other. The nature of "what is D&D" will continue to evolve, but generally towards greater expansion and diversity. It may seem that, at times, it is contracting, or that some are holding onto the past and fighting change, or that others are ushering in the new without any appreciation for past forms. Everything becomes so polarized, and there is immense pressure to choose one side or the other in just about any context in contemporary discourse. Yet let us not forget that oscillation is part of the process - that we move "forward" in more of a wave than a line, and that we need not see it as either "from bad to good" or "from good to bad," and more about an every-unfolding spiral of exploring new possibilities, new worlds, everything within a larger, organic matrix of imagination and play.I'll end with a couple quotes from the great Le Guin:</blockquote>

Verification