Comments on: The Decline and Fall of the Fantasy Novel http://www.blackgate.com/2011/02/20/the-decline-and-fall-of-the-fantasy-novel/ Adventures in Fantasy Literature Tue, 22 May 2012 04:26:38 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7.1 hourly 1 By: Black Gate » Blog Archive » The SF classics and the human condition http://www.blackgate.com/2011/02/20/the-decline-and-fall-of-the-fantasy-novel/comment-page-2/#comment-9774 Black Gate » Blog Archive » The SF classics and the human condition Sun, 04 Dec 2011 16:16:15 +0000 http://www.blackgate.com/?p=17928#comment-9774 [...] most readers here as a perfectly absurd perspective, especially since many who disagreed with my literary criticism of the ahistorical nihilism that presently infects the fantasy genre did so on the basis of a false assumption that my critique [...] [...] most readers here as a perfectly absurd perspective, especially since many who disagreed with my literary criticism of the ahistorical nihilism that presently infects the fantasy genre did so on the basis of a false assumption that my critique [...]

]]> By: Cheap 3D TVs http://www.blackgate.com/2011/02/20/the-decline-and-fall-of-the-fantasy-novel/comment-page-2/#comment-9179 Cheap 3D TVs Wed, 02 Nov 2011 22:02:02 +0000 http://www.blackgate.com/?p=17928#comment-9179 <strong>Where to find Cheap Electricals...</strong> [...]There are loads of websites out there where you can find cheap deals on all your electricals, here are a few we feel are [...]... Where to find Cheap Electricals…

[...]There are loads of websites out there where you can find cheap deals on all your electricals, here are a few we feel are [...]…

]]> By: health http://www.blackgate.com/2011/02/20/the-decline-and-fall-of-the-fantasy-novel/comment-page-2/#comment-8936 health Mon, 10 Oct 2011 11:58:56 +0000 http://www.blackgate.com/?p=17928#comment-8936 <strong>health...</strong> [...]Black Gate » Blog Archive » The Decline and Fall of the Fantasy Novel[...]... health…

[...]Black Gate » Blog Archive » The Decline and Fall of the Fantasy Novel[...]…

]]> By: Black Gate » Blog Archive » The Crüel World of R. Scött Bâkkër http://www.blackgate.com/2011/02/20/the-decline-and-fall-of-the-fantasy-novel/comment-page-2/#comment-7835 Black Gate » Blog Archive » The Crüel World of R. Scött Bâkkër Sun, 03 Jul 2011 10:49:25 +0000 http://www.blackgate.com/?p=17928#comment-7835 [...] on the New Nihilism of George R.R. Martin, Joe Abercrombie and others subsequent to a post entitled The Decline and Fall of the Fantasy Novel, I found myself interested in the works of my interlocutor, who happened to be the author of The [...] [...] on the New Nihilism of George R.R. Martin, Joe Abercrombie and others subsequent to a post entitled The Decline and Fall of the Fantasy Novel, I found myself interested in the works of my interlocutor, who happened to be the author of The [...]

]]> By: Black Gate » Blog Archive » Epic Fantasy: Notes Toward a Definition http://www.blackgate.com/2011/02/20/the-decline-and-fall-of-the-fantasy-novel/comment-page-2/#comment-6217 Black Gate » Blog Archive » Epic Fantasy: Notes Toward a Definition Mon, 28 Feb 2011 01:32:11 +0000 http://www.blackgate.com/?p=17928#comment-6217 [...] one controversy about morality and fantasy was being thrashed out around these parts last week, another, quieter, [...] [...] one controversy about morality and fantasy was being thrashed out around these parts last week, another, quieter, [...]

]]> By: At Least It’s An Ethos « Everything Is Nice http://www.blackgate.com/2011/02/20/the-decline-and-fall-of-the-fantasy-novel/comment-page-2/#comment-6197 At Least It’s An Ethos « Everything Is Nice Sun, 27 Feb 2011 15:09:21 +0000 http://www.blackgate.com/?p=17928#comment-6197 [...] a couple of essays taking differing views on the merits of Grin’s post. Theo Spark is pro-Grin: Last week, I read with great interest the discussion that began with Leo Grin’s comparison of [...] [...] a couple of essays taking differing views on the merits of Grin’s post. Theo Spark is pro-Grin: Last week, I read with great interest the discussion that began with Leo Grin’s comparison of [...]

]]> By: The decline of civilization reflected in fantasy novels « Jim’s Blog http://www.blackgate.com/2011/02/20/the-decline-and-fall-of-the-fantasy-novel/comment-page-2/#comment-6175 The decline of civilization reflected in fantasy novels « Jim’s Blog Thu, 24 Feb 2011 20:22:58 +0000 http://www.blackgate.com/?p=17928#comment-6175 [...] gate observes the replacement of heroes by anti heroes, and the replacement of morality by anti morality: Thus we can be confident that the murderous, blaspheming anti-hero who rapes and tortures children [...] [...] gate observes the replacement of heroes by anti heroes, and the replacement of morality by anti morality: Thus we can be confident that the murderous, blaspheming anti-hero who rapes and tortures children [...]

]]> By: “Nihilists! I mean, say what you like about the tenets of National Socialism, Dude, at least it’s an ethos.” « J.S. Bangs http://www.blackgate.com/2011/02/20/the-decline-and-fall-of-the-fantasy-novel/comment-page-2/#comment-6165 “Nihilists! I mean, say what you like about the tenets of National Socialism, Dude, at least it’s an ethos.” « J.S. Bangs Thu, 24 Feb 2011 06:07:03 +0000 http://www.blackgate.com/?p=17928#comment-6165 [...] slant that it was easy for his detractors to dismiss him. That’s why I’m glad for Theo’s essay at Black Gate, which expands on the original points and turns the discussion away from gripes and into actual [...] [...] slant that it was easy for his detractors to dismiss him. That’s why I’m glad for Theo’s essay at Black Gate, which expands on the original points and turns the discussion away from gripes and into actual [...]

]]> By: Light in the Black http://www.blackgate.com/2011/02/20/the-decline-and-fall-of-the-fantasy-novel/comment-page-2/#comment-6164 Light in the Black Thu, 24 Feb 2011 04:33:58 +0000 http://www.blackgate.com/?p=17928#comment-6164 I almost forgot. Thank you for you time and I apologize for being so long winded. I almost forgot. Thank you for you time and I apologize for being so long winded.

]]> By: Light in the Black http://www.blackgate.com/2011/02/20/the-decline-and-fall-of-the-fantasy-novel/comment-page-2/#comment-6163 Light in the Black Thu, 24 Feb 2011 04:31:41 +0000 http://www.blackgate.com/?p=17928#comment-6163 I agree with the opening of your post. It has indeed been quite some time between the publication of Tolkien and the emergence of Abercrombie and the world of fantasy literature has changed a great deal on all three counts—historical, literary and philosophical. What I take issue with is that neither you nor Mr. Grin provide actual examples from _The First Law_ or any other of Abercrombie’s books except for one small fragment detailing the motley crew assembled by the author. Instead, you both use broad generalizations, intended to start debate. You also never provide a concrete definition of Nihilism. If you will allow me: By definition it is 1) the rejection of all religious and moral principles, often in the belief that life is meaningless, 2) extreme skepticism maintaining that nothing in the world has a real existence, 3) _historical_ the doctrine of an extreme Russian revolutionary party c. 1900 which found nothing to approve of in the established social order. (Oxford American College Dictionary, Oxford UP, 2002, pg 918.) By its very nature, nihilism falls beyond the purview of morality since it is the absence of morals. Therefore I fail to see how you can have nihilistic morality. I have read all four of Abercrombie’s books (please, save your snark). To be sure, there is an awful lot of cynicism, dark irony and justification (i.e. we have power, therefore we can do X.) But, where, I ask, is all this nihilism that you speak of in Joe Abercrombie’s books? As I stated, I have read them and quite thoroughly enjoyed them myself because the characters were quite well done. And I think that Mr. Grin, in his summation of _The First Law_ leaves out some details. True, at the end there is a sickness that sweeps over the population of the capital. And yes, the king is revealed to be nothing but a puppet for the sorcerer. You know part of the ending. But the whole story? I think not. There is a lot going on in the books and I think to talk about the books as nihilistic is cheapening them. If they were truly nihilistic then I don’t think people would respond to them as positively as they have. John O’Niell puts it best when he said that today’s readers want flawed characters. Abercrombie gives them to us. In spades. Here a just a few. Glotka, in _The First Law_ starts out doing things that are historically anti-social: he tortures people until they tell him the Truth. He wasn’t always like that, though. Prior to the events of the books, he was a dashing you cavalry officer who was captured, imprisoned, tortured and left a cripple by the Gurkish. Upon his return to the Union, he was shunned by his family and wound up working for the Inquisition. He does some pretty horrible things, mostly under the direction of his superiors while at the same time trying to uncover facts about what is going on, only to be thwarted at every turn. He also reiterates through a running internal monologue about how dead he feels inside. However, at the end he saves the king’s mistress’s life after being ordered to kill her. Logen is shown to have a split personality. One is a well-mannered individual who just wants to try and keep on surviving. The other is a bloody, indiscriminate killer who comes out when Logen is in battle. However, throughout the books we learn more and more about his bloody past, and his attempts to change how he is perceived. Ferro, I will say, could be the only true nihilist in _The First Law_. She has no love for anyone and thirsts only for vengeance against the Gurkish. She has some moments of doubt, but always shuts them away by proclaiming her own personal philosophy of trusting no one and expecting nothing. I’m not saying that the three characters above don’t engage in horrible acts, just that nowhere in the books do I recall Logen or Glotka feeling joy in inflicting pain on others. For Glotka it’s just a job. Does that make it right? I don’t think so and as the story proceeds, neither does Glotka. Ferro, well, Ferro marches to her own drummer. The characters who ‘enthusiastically embrace historically anti-social behaviors such as rape, murder and torture’ (Severard, Ladisla are two) get what’s coming to them. Your second point about good and evil being ‘more or less relative’ in modern fantasy doesn’t quite cut the mustard either. Sticking to _The First Law_ for examples, perhaps the problem some people have is that evil is hidden behind smoke and mirrors instead of out in the open. From a historical standpoint, this rings true. Except for a few instances, good and evil depend upon which side you are on. There is an air of mystery permeating the books. Indeed, Abercrombie has stated his affection for noir. Glotka, Logen and company scramble around trying to figure out just who is really the enemy. Sure, they end up fighting a common enemy, but their resolutions at the end are quite different, once the true evil is revealed. The answer is surprising and the ‘twist’ so decried by some at the end of _The First Law_. There is Evil, it just doesn’t hit you over the head or wear a shiny ring. To your third point about a morally confused anti-hero acting conventionally heroic in one instance and then conventionally evil in the next again I ask, where are the examples? I’ll use Glotka because I like him and because he is a major player in _The First Law_. He works for the Inquisition, whose job is to root out traitors to the crown by any means necessary, usually torture. It’s his job. He does it because it’s all he really has left in his life. He tortures people, has them killed and dumped into harbors, that kind of thing. But as the story progresses, and once he’s thrown in the deep end by his superior, he begins to question the validity of his orders because he begins to suspect that all is not as it seems. This goes hand in hand with just how dense the layers of the story get and enlightenment comes to both reader and character once all is revealed at the end, which I won’t give away here. (Again, please save your snark.) The fourth point, which is how modern fantasy is neither ground breaking nor creative is not at all well represented. Do you have an example of ground breaking, creative modern fantasy? I nominate Joe Abercrombie. I say his true attacks are not on the targets of the past now deemed safe by modern sensibilities. Sure, they’re there (it doesn’t take a Ph.D. to figure out that the Gurkish are a fantasy stand in for the Ottoman Turks) and yes they invade but they’re not the total focus of the story. Instead, the true enemy is shown to be something much more sinister: one man’s grand design, the lust for power and the corruption that it breeds from the complacency of a populace more interested in keeping the status quo than in the pursuit of knowledge. Again, it’s not rocket science that Bayaz has much in common with the medieval papacy and also Hitler. Also, I fail to see how you can have nihilistic morality since the two are mutually exclusive. Your critique of Abercrombie’s response left me confused. Are you saying that European Christendom and Western Civilization are one and the same or that the former had great influence on the latter? If the second part is what you are getting at, then I can agree with you. Without European Christendom we would not have a western civilization as we know it. However, if the first part—that European Christendom and Western Civilization are one and the same, then I’m afraid I’ll have to disagree. Here’s why. I would imagine that Western Christendom was not a nice place to live. Sure, you’d have all the cathedrals, castles and grand Gothic architecture serving as a bulwark against the hordes from the East. A lot of them are even still around today, albeit in various states of decay. However, one needs to look beyond the images of splendor to get an accurate picture of Western Christendom. The pope pretty much ruled the populace through the various bishops and monasteries. You couldn’t be a legitimate monarch without being crowned by someone within the Church. Old beliefs were stamped out without mercy. Anyone who didn’t convert was put to the sword or forced to renounce their beliefs lest it shatter the bedrock upon which the Church had built its power. Chivalry was more like a set of guidelines than rules and it didn’t stop the historically anti-social behaviors of rape and torture from going on. There’s a reason people along the eastern end of the Mediterranean called the crusaders the Franj. As much as we want to laud the heroes of the past and dress them in silver and gold, I suspect the actual person would be somewhat less than savory. And I’m quite glad that we have shaken off the superstition of the Middle Ages for the pursuit of knowledge. As for your point that Western civilization is opposed to all the eastern(read, for me at any rate, Asian) doctrines and philosophies; that washes out when you throw fantasy into the mix. Sure, most heroic fantasy is set in a pseudo-medieval European setting. That’s where King Arthur, Beowulf and Roland fought their battles, and where Chaucer’s pilgrims traded bawdy stories. But that doesn’t mean the world has to adhere strictly to the historical facts of the era. After all, this is Fantasy. The author can use as much or as little of history as he or she wants to. (I pointed out in a previous post that I found a lot of analogues to historical events in _The First Law_, such as the sacking of Constantinople and the Turkish invasion of southern Europe. You could even say that the Wars of Beleriand in _The Silmarillion_ were Tolkien’s literary analogue to World War One.) Which leads me to your dislike for eastern philosophies like ‘balance’ being used in fantasy. So what? It’s the author’s world, isn’t it? If he decides to imagine a world where you have grand gothic castles and cathedrals raised to honor some form of Taoism, then let him. When you look at the influx of Eastern (Asian) Thought into the West it seems only logical that such concerns would begin to show up in literature. And Nature seeks to maintain a balance. If you’ll allow a tangent. Suppose we compare Tolkien (and Howard, I suppose) to the castles, cathedrals and grand Gothic architecture. As anyone who’s traveled abroad, or looked at a photo essay book, can see, many of them are still standing and in use today. And in use. Something about it resonates with us even now when as we stand in awe of what people accomplished centuries ago without the benefits of modern construction methods. Last time I checked Tolkien was still in print and so was Howard. He even got definitive text editions of all his stories. I think it’s safe to say that neither of them are going anywhere anytime soon. They are two of the pillars on which all fantasy (from the 1930s onward, anyway) rests. We’re not talking about tearing them (Tolkien and Howard) down and salting the earth from whence they sprang. Without them, there would be no Abercrombie, Erikson, Moorcock, Cook, Martin, and so on. And, this discussion wouldn’t be taking place. To the last point. It seems to me that people who find Abercrombie’s (or whatever other author you want to slag) work guilty of contributing to the decline of western civilization wish to reserve the right of artistic creation (literary or otherwise) for some kind of self-absorbed cultural elite who are only interested in maintaining the status quo. Keep the college educated, middle-class liberal arts majors out of our club before they ruin everything, Grin seems to be saying. Both history and nature show that in order for something to survive, it must adapt to new concerns or die out. I agree with the opening of your post. It has indeed been quite some time between the publication of Tolkien and the emergence of Abercrombie and the world of fantasy literature has changed a great deal on all three counts—historical, literary and philosophical. What I take issue with is that neither you nor Mr. Grin provide actual examples from _The First Law_ or any other of Abercrombie’s books except for one small fragment detailing the motley crew assembled by the author. Instead, you both use broad generalizations, intended to start debate. You also never provide a concrete definition of Nihilism. If you will allow me: By definition it is 1) the rejection of all religious and moral principles, often in the belief that life is meaningless, 2) extreme skepticism maintaining that nothing in the world has a real existence, 3) _historical_ the doctrine of an extreme Russian revolutionary party c. 1900 which found nothing to approve of in the established social order. (Oxford American College Dictionary, Oxford UP, 2002, pg 918.) By its very nature, nihilism falls beyond the purview of morality since it is the absence of morals. Therefore I fail to see how you can have nihilistic morality.
I have read all four of Abercrombie’s books (please, save your snark). To be sure, there is an awful lot of cynicism, dark irony and justification (i.e. we have power, therefore we can do X.) But, where, I ask, is all this nihilism that you speak of in Joe Abercrombie’s books? As I stated, I have read them and quite thoroughly enjoyed them myself because the characters were quite well done. And I think that Mr. Grin, in his summation of _The First Law_ leaves out some details. True, at the end there is a sickness that sweeps over the population of the capital. And yes, the king is revealed to be nothing but a puppet for the sorcerer. You know part of the ending. But the whole story? I think not. There is a lot going on in the books and I think to talk about the books as nihilistic is cheapening them. If they were truly nihilistic then I don’t think people would respond to them as positively as they have. John O’Niell puts it best when he said that today’s readers want flawed characters. Abercrombie gives them to us. In spades. Here a just a few.
Glotka, in _The First Law_ starts out doing things that are historically anti-social: he tortures people until they tell him the Truth. He wasn’t always like that, though. Prior to the events of the books, he was a dashing you cavalry officer who was captured, imprisoned, tortured and left a cripple by the Gurkish. Upon his return to the Union, he was shunned by his family and wound up working for the Inquisition. He does some pretty horrible things, mostly under the direction of his superiors while at the same time trying to uncover facts about what is going on, only to be thwarted at every turn. He also reiterates through a running internal monologue about how dead he feels inside. However, at the end he saves the king’s mistress’s life after being ordered to kill her.
Logen is shown to have a split personality. One is a well-mannered individual who just wants to try and keep on surviving. The other is a bloody, indiscriminate killer who comes out when Logen is in battle. However, throughout the books we learn more and more about his bloody past, and his attempts to change how he is perceived.
Ferro, I will say, could be the only true nihilist in _The First Law_. She has no love for anyone and thirsts only for vengeance against the Gurkish. She has some moments of doubt, but always shuts them away by proclaiming her own personal philosophy of trusting no one and expecting nothing.
I’m not saying that the three characters above don’t engage in horrible acts, just that nowhere in the books do I recall Logen or Glotka feeling joy in inflicting pain on others. For Glotka it’s just a job. Does that make it right? I don’t think so and as the story proceeds, neither does Glotka. Ferro, well, Ferro marches to her own drummer. The characters who ‘enthusiastically embrace historically anti-social behaviors such as rape, murder and torture’ (Severard, Ladisla are two) get what’s coming to them.
Your second point about good and evil being ‘more or less relative’ in modern fantasy doesn’t quite cut the mustard either. Sticking to _The First Law_ for examples, perhaps the problem some people have is that evil is hidden behind smoke and mirrors instead of out in the open. From a historical standpoint, this rings true. Except for a few instances, good and evil depend upon which side you are on. There is an air of mystery permeating the books. Indeed, Abercrombie has stated his affection for noir. Glotka, Logen and company scramble around trying to figure out just who is really the enemy. Sure, they end up fighting a common enemy, but their resolutions at the end are quite different, once the true evil is revealed. The answer is surprising and the ‘twist’ so decried by some at the end of _The First Law_. There is Evil, it just doesn’t hit you over the head or wear a shiny ring.
To your third point about a morally confused anti-hero acting conventionally heroic in one instance and then conventionally evil in the next again I ask, where are the examples? I’ll use Glotka because I like him and because he is a major player in _The First Law_. He works for the Inquisition, whose job is to root out traitors to the crown by any means necessary, usually torture. It’s his job. He does it because it’s all he really has left in his life. He tortures people, has them killed and dumped into harbors, that kind of thing. But as the story progresses, and once he’s thrown in the deep end by his superior, he begins to question the validity of his orders because he begins to suspect that all is not as it seems. This goes hand in hand with just how dense the layers of the story get and enlightenment comes to both reader and character once all is revealed at the end, which I won’t give away here. (Again, please save your snark.)
The fourth point, which is how modern fantasy is neither ground breaking nor creative is not at all well represented. Do you have an example of ground breaking, creative modern fantasy? I nominate Joe Abercrombie. I say his true attacks are not on the targets of the past now deemed safe by modern sensibilities. Sure, they’re there (it doesn’t take a Ph.D. to figure out that the Gurkish are a fantasy stand in for the Ottoman Turks) and yes they invade but they’re not the total focus of the story. Instead, the true enemy is shown to be something much more sinister: one man’s grand design, the lust for power and the corruption that it breeds from the complacency of a populace more interested in keeping the status quo than in the pursuit of knowledge. Again, it’s not rocket science that Bayaz has much in common with the medieval papacy and also Hitler. Also, I fail to see how you can have nihilistic morality since the two are mutually exclusive.
Your critique of Abercrombie’s response left me confused. Are you saying that European Christendom and Western Civilization are one and the same or that the former had great influence on the latter? If the second part is what you are getting at, then I can agree with you. Without European Christendom we would not have a western civilization as we know it. However, if the first part—that European Christendom and Western Civilization are one and the same, then I’m afraid I’ll have to disagree. Here’s why.
I would imagine that Western Christendom was not a nice place to live. Sure, you’d have all the cathedrals, castles and grand Gothic architecture serving as a bulwark against the hordes from the East. A lot of them are even still around today, albeit in various states of decay. However, one needs to look beyond the images of splendor to get an accurate picture of Western Christendom. The pope pretty much ruled the populace through the various bishops and monasteries. You couldn’t be a legitimate monarch without being crowned by someone within the Church. Old beliefs were stamped out without mercy. Anyone who didn’t convert was put to the sword or forced to renounce their beliefs lest it shatter the bedrock upon which the Church had built its power. Chivalry was more like a set of guidelines than rules and it didn’t stop the historically anti-social behaviors of rape and torture from going on. There’s a reason people along the eastern end of the Mediterranean called the crusaders the Franj. As much as we want to laud the heroes of the past and dress them in silver and gold, I suspect the actual person would be somewhat less than savory. And I’m quite glad that we have shaken off the superstition of the Middle Ages for the pursuit of knowledge.
As for your point that Western civilization is opposed to all the eastern(read, for me at any rate, Asian) doctrines and philosophies; that washes out when you throw fantasy into the mix. Sure, most heroic fantasy is set in a pseudo-medieval European setting. That’s where King Arthur, Beowulf and Roland fought their battles, and where Chaucer’s pilgrims traded bawdy stories. But that doesn’t mean the world has to adhere strictly to the historical facts of the era. After all, this is Fantasy. The author can use as much or as little of history as he or she wants to. (I pointed out in a previous post that I found a lot of analogues to historical events in _The First Law_, such as the sacking of Constantinople and the Turkish invasion of southern Europe. You could even say that the Wars of Beleriand in _The Silmarillion_ were Tolkien’s literary analogue to World War One.) Which leads me to your dislike for eastern philosophies like ‘balance’ being used in fantasy. So what? It’s the author’s world, isn’t it? If he decides to imagine a world where you have grand gothic castles and cathedrals raised to honor some form of Taoism, then let him. When you look at the influx of Eastern (Asian) Thought into the West it seems only logical that such concerns would begin to show up in literature. And Nature seeks to maintain a balance.
If you’ll allow a tangent. Suppose we compare Tolkien (and Howard, I suppose) to the castles, cathedrals and grand Gothic architecture. As anyone who’s traveled abroad, or looked at a photo essay book, can see, many of them are still standing and in use today. And in use. Something about it resonates with us even now when as we stand in awe of what people accomplished centuries ago without the benefits of modern construction methods. Last time I checked Tolkien was still in print and so was Howard. He even got definitive text editions of all his stories. I think it’s safe to say that neither of them are going anywhere anytime soon. They are two of the pillars on which all fantasy (from the 1930s onward, anyway) rests. We’re not talking about tearing them (Tolkien and Howard) down and salting the earth from whence they sprang. Without them, there would be no Abercrombie, Erikson, Moorcock, Cook, Martin, and so on. And, this discussion wouldn’t be taking place.
To the last point. It seems to me that people who find Abercrombie’s (or whatever other author you want to slag) work guilty of contributing to the decline of western civilization wish to reserve the right of artistic creation (literary or otherwise) for some kind of self-absorbed cultural elite who are only interested in maintaining the status quo. Keep the college educated, middle-class liberal arts majors out of our club before they ruin everything, Grin seems to be saying. Both history and nature show that in order for something to survive, it must adapt to new concerns or die out.

]]>