[Rant] Fantasy - beyond the "standard" paradigm

[jdrakeh]

That is not quite true. A lot of writers look at what type of work is selling and then let that guide them as what to write. And this tends to be true of new writers trying to make their first sale.

You have roughly a thousand years of literature that pre-dates the genre classification system (from Homer's epics to Icelandic saga). What of these works? Shall we also blame genre classification for all of history's greatest hits and misses, despite the fact that it didn't exist at the time?

You're right, though, many novice authors or contractual writers do aspire to a predetermined roadmap (but again, this "good" or "bad" of this is deterined, not by genre classification, but by the individual reader). Most authors who write on their own terms do not do this, however, and let the editor sort out such things after the fact.

 

[jdrakeh]

Try telling that to anyone who's writing a sequel

Contractual writers and novice authors are the exception to this rule.

 

[Odhanan]

You're right, though, many novice authors or contractual writers do aspire to a predetermined roadmap (but again, this "good" or "bad" of this is deterined, not by genre classification, but by the individual reader). Most authors who write on their own terms do not do this, however, and let the editor sort out such things after the fact.

I think it is a delusion to believe only novice writers are affected by the opinions of other writers, readers, publishers, media and more. Experienced writers aren't "that" experienced as to cut themselves off their own experiences and opinions (unless they are buddhist masters and reached Nirvana as well, that is). It's actually pretty much contradictory with the fact of being a writer, if you ask me, since when you are a writer, this means you want to write about something within. Unless you are interested in the commercial aspect of writing alone, that is, in which case you are still affected by the opinions of other people: what they buy and don't buy. I mean, either way, people and books have impacts on each other, and you just can't handwave it by saying it's for novice and contracted writers.

 

[jdrakeh]

In my experience, claiming something is personal doesn't negate its impact on the bigger picture.

IIt doesn't, but blaming genre classification (which is what you're doing) for the effects of personal opinion is disowning responsibility for said opions. It's an attempt to avoid accountability - you're saying that it's the genre classification system's fault that fans are picky, unreasonable, s. The truth is, that fans just tend to be picky, unreasonable, s by nature. The genre clssification system didn't make them this way.

Come on. That's not like books are just stand alone and the opinions people have about them don't impact the reading, writing, mediatic impact and commercial success and failure of other books. That's an ongoing cycle. A book is published, people have opinions about it. Then another book is published, people compare to previous materials and experiences, and come up with another opinion, and so on and so forth, until categories and sub-categories start to draw themselves. All this stuff influences each publisher, reader, writer and critics and makes them have opinions, makes them choose for themselves what's good fantasy and whats bad fantasy, opinions that they then put into practice in what they write, what they read or what they criticize.

This is all true to some degree, but it's not the be all end all of writing that you suggest it is - if that were true, authors could plsease everybody all of the time. They'd have the magic formula for success after nearly a thousand years of writing, wouldn't they? I mean, if it was as simple as everybody perceiving all things the same due to the eeeeeeevil[/] of genre classification? Right?

Of course, we all know how feasible that prospect is. What one considers "good" and "bad" is defined by the individual and, what one individual finds good, another may find bad. "Good" and "bad" are not the objective terms that you seem to be suggesting that they are, nor are they a function of genre classification, but of personal taste. Again, you can't lay the blame for divergent personal tastes on genre classification*.


* Well, you can, but only as a way of unburdening consumers of personal responsibility, not as a failing of the genre system in and of itself.

 

[Elf Witch]

You have roughly a thousand years of literature that pre-dates the genre classification system (from Homer's epics to Icelandic saga). What of these works? Shall we also blame genre classification for all of history's greatest hits and misses, despite the fact that it didn't exist at the time?

You're right, though, many novice authors or contractual writers do aspire to a predetermined roadmap (but again, this "good" or "bad" of this is deterined, not by genre classification, but by the individual reader). Most authors who write on their own terms do not do this, however, and let the editor sort out such things after the fact.

Again I have to disagree with you. What happened in Literature in history is not true any longer. All books get put into some kind of classification today so that book sellers know where to put the books in the stores. I have never been in a bookstore that has all its fiction in one section not sorted by genre. Even some public libraries sort their book by mystery or SF our local library books stickers on the spine so you can at a glance what is a western , Sf < Mystery or romance novel.

When you write your novel you have to know what kind of genre it is most like so that you can sell it to the right publishing house. It will do you no good to sell your hard boiled edective novel to Baen books unless it has an element of Sf or fanatsy in it.

As a writer you have to have a working knowlege of the genre and its subtypes to be able to talk to publishers. If an editior ask what kind of fantasy story you have written you have to be ablwe to say well its sword and sorcery and you might hear well we are not publishing sword and sorcery this year its not selling can you change it.

A good example of this is what a friend of mine who writes Regency Novels the market has fallen out and paranormal is in big time. When she wrote her vovel it was pure regency but she could not sell it so she took it changed the lead character to a vampire did a few changes to support that and the novel sold. She had several story ideas for more regency novels that have now been changed to be regency paranormal novels.

So you see genre classifactions can change the way a writer writes and the story he tells.

 

[Odhanan]

IIt doesn't, but blaming genre classification (which is what you're doing) for the effects of personal opinion is disowning responsibility for said opions. It's an attempt to avoid accountability - you're saying that it's the genre classification system's fault that fans are picky, unreasonable, s. The truth is, that fans just tend to be picky, unreasonable, s by nature. The genre clssification system didn't make them this way.

Well, that's actually the same thing, in my opinion. Who creates categories, sub-categories, sides and divisions? The same people who actually abide by these categories, sub-categories, sides and divisions. That's the chicken and the egg equation. So I don't want to make anyone any less responsible of their choices. Quite the contrary, really!

 

[jdrakeh]

I think it is a delusion to believe only novice writers are affected by the opinions of other writers, readers, publishers, media and more.

I never said that authors aren't affected by the opinions of others. Quit putting words in my mouth, please. What I said was that not very many of them sit down with the intention of writing to specific genre tenets (i.e., a tenet checklist). And they don't. It isn't, by any means, normal to sit down with a check list of genre tenets to include in a story and then craft it from the ground up to adhere to that list.

What you originally said was that genre classification was responsible for destroying fantasy, but you've failed to tell me why - you've mentioned the finicky nature of fans, the inability of some writers to produce original works, and so on - but all of that has little (if anything) to do with genre classification. You contend that all of the personal failings of fans and writers are a direct result of genre classification, but you keep beating around the bush as to why.

Honestly? I could be wrong, but this sounds like the attempt of a failed writer to pass off their own failings or the cristicisms of consumers in an effort to avoid addressing those failings or criticisms. Why accept personal responsibility when you can blame the genre classification system? I mean, really - how is that genre classification is wholly responsible for individual consumer criticisims or the failures of an author to produce appealing fiction?

Hint: It's Not

[Edit: Sorry, that came out much more grating than I thought it would. It wasn't meant as a personal attack, but as an observation based upon years of very similar claims made by numerous other bitter authors that I've known (which is why I said that I may be in error). Lacking an actual explantion of why, though, I guess I'll never know.]

 

[Odhanan]

WOW. I'm going to stop discussing right here. This is getting way too aggressive.
Thanks for the discussion, everyone.

 

[jdrakeh]

All books get put into some kind of classification today so that book sellers know where to put the books in the stores. I have never been in a bookstore that has all its fiction in one section not sorted by genre. Even some public libraries sort their book by mystery or SF our local library books stickers on the spine so you can at a glance what is a western , Sf < Mystery or romance novel.

I've already covered this further up the thread. And this is the genre classification system at work - after the work is written (obviously - you won't be buying unwritten works at the Barnes & BNoble or checking out unsold novels at the library).

When you write your novel you have to know what kind of genre it is most like so that you can sell it to the right publishing house. It will do you no good to sell your hard boiled edective novel to Baen books unless it has an element of Sf or fanatsy in it.

All true, but you don't have to sell a novel before it's written. Indeed, most of the authors that I know don't - they shop around their manuscript to multiple publishers after it has been completed. Again, this is usually genre classification at work after the fact.

As a writer you have to have a working knowlege of the genre and its subtypes to be able to talk to publishers. If an editior ask what kind of fantasy story you have written you have to be ablwe to say well its sword and sorcery and you might hear well we are not publishing sword and sorcery this year its not selling can you change it.

Again, all true - but it's largely at work after the fact. Indeed, you yourself acknowledge this kind of exchange usually happens after a novel is written (look at the verbiage that you use above very closely - it's past-tense).

A good example of this is what a friend of mine who writes Regency Novels the market has fallen out and paranormal is in big time. When she wrote her vovel it was pure regency but she could not sell it so she took it changed the lead character to a vampire did a few changes to support that and the novel sold. She had several story ideas for more regency novels that have now been changed to be regency paranormal novels.

That's agreat example, you're right - but it's a great example of changing a novel after the fact (i.e., it was altered after it was written, and other planned novels were changed after their initial conception).

So you see genre classifactions can change the way a writer writes and the story he tells.

Absolutely, and I never said they couldn't. What I said was that most authors don't sit down to write up a genre checklist of a novel - they worry about genre after the fact (as did every author or hypothetical author in the examples that you offered above)

 

[jdrakeh]

That's the chicken and the egg equation.

Your 'equation' is better know as a logic fallacy (circular cause and consequence, specifically). One must take it on faith that the genre classification system forces people to think a certain way and, thus, they created the classification system because of how their creation forced them to think. In other words, it is invalidated by virtue of it very nature.

Fixing this fallacy is easy enough, though - what came first genre classification or consumers? (The answer is "consumers"). Therefore, genre classification cannot be held solely responsible for the opinions that consumers form unless one is to argue that, prior to genre classification, consumers were incapable of forming opinons based on personal tastes.

[Incidentally, proving that last bit is the only way to debunk my argument that personal taste, not genre classification is responsible for what an individual considers good, bad, or entertaining.]