Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Jack7" data-source="post: 4786894" data-attributes="member: 54707">That kinda thing don't bother me at all KT. I make my living, or part of it anyway, as a writer. For every guy who tells me I'm a Cro-Magnon prosifier, or stinking up the joint with my word dump, I got five or six who tell me I'm brilliant or some kinda genius. I'm not really inclined to believe either at any given point in time, but as my old grandpappy once told me, "Son, there are in any particular group of people those who think that God didn't make the universe up to their standards. Why do you care about what some stranger says about what you're up to?" And he was right, and so I don't. No offense taken. C'est la vie. But anytime you're willing to show me how it's really done feel free to give me some instruction. I'm what ya call a life-long learner, and every little bit helps out.Well, that's why I said this: Context sometimes helps. I don't reckon it is wise to say everything that came before was brilliant. Cause it wasn't. Mostly we have what survived, because it was the good that did survive. (Though no doubt much that was good did not survive because of accident or disaster. And some that was not so good did survive because it escaped disaster.) Or that everything that came before was more brilliant than what comes out now. But then again what comes out now ain't exactly Shakespeare or Homer or Dante or even Hemingway, is it? I don't look around and see a lot of Da Vincis, and more to the point of our little discussion I don't see a lot of Tolkiens or Lord Dunsanys right now either. Does that mean that there won't be future men and women who are as good as Tolkien, or better? There is a lot of future left I suspect, and a lot more people than there used to be. Odds are very good when you're talking those kinda numbers that somebody else is gonna come along who does as well as the best men of the past. But let's be honest. You don't see much evidence of that right now, do ya? Just generally speaking. And the reason ain't lack of talent, I'll wager. It's lack of trying. Cause most of the stuff being written today sucks. Plain and simple. Cause there ain't no blood in it. It's dried up, sterile, bloodless, and vapid. And by bloodless I don't mean body count. I mean it's got a pulse of its own, it's got blood in it. Lot of the stuff nowadays doesn't excite and fascinate, it sorta temporarily titillates, and not long at that either, most of the time. Now the day will come, and maybe that ain't far away, when we'll see a new renaissance in fantasy literature (after all some of the stuff I'm reading keeps getting better and better in many respects), people who really get what makes a great thing great, but until that day comes I ain't no more afraid of calling a spade a spade than I am of shooting a copperhead through his copperhead. Several times if necessary. I don't care that people get all riled up and say, "how dare you attack my sacred cow of this or that!" It ain't sacred to me, it's just a puny cow that needs to be grazing on much better feed if it's gonna fatten up some. And truth be told there ain't many people writing that kinda stuff (fantasy) nowadays who seem to be getting that. That don't seem to be getting what fantasy is about, so instead of breeding powerful steers they just make more puny, starving, shaky kneed runts with the dysentery.The point of this thread is not to say that there is no good modern fantasy, it's to say that modern fantasy, generally speaking (in the main) lacks much of what made older fantasy great. And if modern authors figured out what they lack, they wouldn't need to lack it anymore. But you gotta be honest about your faults and your lacks before you can fix em. As for arguing about particular modern fantasy authors I wanted to avoid that kinda thing cause I didn't want this thread to devolve into a my author is better than your author dust-up, instead of a discussion, which I hope it will be, about just what it is that fantasy is, and just what it ain't. (This thread also ain't about fantasy gaming - it is not about fantasy gaming - it's about Fantasy. About what constitutes Fantasy. Sure, fantasy gaming is derived from Fantasy, but fantasy gaming is not Fantasy. So this thread is about the root, not the branches.) Cause if you know what a thing ain't then it's a whole easier to avoid that kinda thing than not, and if you know what a thing is then it's a whole lot easier to do more of that than to waste your time involved with something else.So I'd rather people talk about what they think fantasy is, even if others don't agree with them, and for folks to say what they think fantasy ain't, even if others can't necessarily prove them right. 'Course I can't prevent this thread form becoming what I never intended it to be and sometimes I've found the discussions become a lot more interesting when they wander away from my original intent. That too is life. But I'm not personally interested in scraps over home-town favorites or who is the better boxer. I'm interested in what makes a good boxer good. What qualities make for a good boxer, or the best boxer?So I'd rather avoid particular contemporary author fights cause using my Jedi mind powers I can right now foresee with amazing clairvoyance this thread degenerating into a my-guy/no my-guy (or gal) set of disputes. I have no problem however with folks saying their author is good or another's is bad because said authors demonstrate this or that point about what fantasy really is, or ain't.What I'm getting at is that this thread is about, "what is Fantasy?" Including what it is, and what it ain't. I'm not really interested in the question of, "Is Moorcock a great fantasy writer?" I'm interested in, "Why, or why not, is Moorcock a great fantasy writer?" The first questions is just an opinion wrangle, the second is an opinion wrangle about something that is still basically unprovable, but at least it will bring up actual and real points that can be considered in formulating a theory about, "What is Fantasy?" and by contrast, or extension, "What is Modern Fantasy?"Now, all of that being said I'm gonna tell you folks my opinion on who be the best, and the worst, modern fantasy writer(s) I've ever read.By modern I mean contemporary, not Tolkien or even Moorcock (who is mostly from an earlier time). But I ain't saying this to start an author war - I'm saying this cause I think they represent what actually constitutes fantasy well, or ill. I don't care what your opinion is about my opinion, or mine is about yours for that matter, I'm saying I think these people either get it, or they don't. For all of the reasons I listed above in the original post. Salvatore - Most "not getting it" writer of fantasy ever. Worse yet, reading him is like reading a high school D&D game left out in the sun too long, run over by a pick-up truck, then eaten by a mangy cat who regurgitates it onto a barn wall so that the local stoner thinks he's seen a Jackson Pollock in his dreams. Then that local stoner wakes up the next morning and says, "Wow man, that wasn't nearly as impressive a load of slop as when I was high and unconscious." Rowling - Really got it, though her writing wasn't all that great at times. It became much better as she went along but she got both fantasy and literature from the get-go. More importantly she was literary and literate, if not always articulate. They'll still be reading her a hundred years from now. Salvatore, I'll be surprised if anyone has ever heard of him, except in old paperback book stores.Jim Butcher - The man's books are filled with Blood. He is like a modern day Virgil in that respect. And that's a sight better than the common run of the mill. By the way, there's a difference, of course, between being a great writer and a great Fantasy Writer.Victor Hugo was a great Writer. Moorcock was a great Fantasy Writer, but he wasn't a great Writer.By the way I didn't ignore anybody's response in particular, just wanted to respond to those who could best help me clear up what I had been saying that apparently was being misunderstood. So I tried to respond to everything as best I could.But I gotta go teach now so that's enough of that.Carry on ladies and gentlemen.</blockquote>

Verification