[This message has been edited by Netstorm2k (edited January 03, 2005).]
HOWEVER....this is not an intimate book. At least, not in the spirit I believe Mary is speaking of. Vampire romance is, IMO, a sick and twisted subset of fantasy that does not constitute the same thing as true intimacy or real romance. I just found the word I was looking for in my last sentence...fetish. It's a fetish. I'm not saying there's anything wrong with it, I'm just saying that there are a great many of us out there, particularly women, who could get a lot out of true intimacy in fantasy.
Mary, my first recommendation for anyone looking for such in a fantasy is Mercedes Lackey...at least, most of her Valdemar books contain romance and intimacy as a major subplot often more interesting and certainly more memorable than the main plot. I sometimes wonder if the romance is supposed to be more powerful but often the fate of the world or at least the kingdom rides on the other half of the plot so...
I would like to see more romance like that. I attempted to write a short story in that vein recently myself but it needs a lot of work and maybe even a novel to fit it in.
Anyway....would love to hear other suggestions especially if they have nothing to do with vampirs.
I don't know the fantasy genre very well, but I would say that Twain's A Connecticuict Yankee in King Arthur's Court and The Mysterious Stranger are somewhat intimate fantasy novels. Although now that I think of it, Yankee does involve a kingdom and [/i]Stranger[/i] involves an angel names Satan, so perhaps they are not as intimate as you would like.
How about James Hilton's Lost Horizon? I find it a very intimate fantasy story, though others may not. Does Hilton's hint that Shangri-La might be the only civilization to survive the coming war of the 1940s disqualify it as intimate?
Oh well, personally, I think some of the vampire romantic type novels, and I say romantic type because there's no romance per se, can be quite intimate. Anne Rice's Vampire chronicles, for example. (Of course, there is that whole homoeroticsm thing going on between creatures without sex drives.)
Of course, this is a personal opinion. Readers taste vary widely, which is 
why so many of us exist to cater to them.
But, after glancing at your post, you have forced me to do something which I, ahem, did not want to do. I'm getting up from the keyboard, and going into my my library to glance through my titles. I betcha money that I can find three titles, by three different authors, (none of them me) that will make you smile to read.)
Hah. Gauntlet is thrown down.
Okely dokely, neighboreenos...
Title 1: 'When We Were Real' by William Barton.
This is science fiction at it's best, and it is a story with pretty of conflict. But the main story isn't saving the world, or galaxy, etc. It's the relationship between the protagonist, Darius Murphy, who is born immortal, as is most of his priveleged class, and Violet, a genetically-engineered space-pilot.
This is one of the most beautiful, and unusual, love stories that I personally have ever read (even considering that as a kid, if I ran out of library books, I would sift through my mother's romances). The prose is utterly brilliant, making this title one of my most re-read books. (Somewhere around twenty or so) I finally had to put it down, as it was getting memorized, and that's just no fun. I highly recommend it.
Title 2: 'Wolf and Iron' by Gordon Dickson.
This is another at the top of my re-read list. I wore out the pages on my first copy, so when I saw a relatively fresh copy at a local used bookstore, my hand flew to it faster than a rattlesnake.
'Wolf and Iron' is the story of Jeebee Walther, who is making his way across the country after the Collapse of the world economy, his only companion a pure bred wolf, tamed at the hand of a man now dead. Along the way, he falls in with a band of peddlers, and falls in love with the head peddler's (that just sounds funny) daughter. But it is a dangerous world in the remnants of America, and each has to make their own way as best they can. A great read. One of Dickson's best.
Title 3: 'Jumper' by Steven Gould.
This one is more of a young adult, but if you can look past that, there is a great story about a teleport runaway coming to terms with his unusual gift, along with his painful past. While part of the story deals with his relationship with his abusive alcholic father, and the mother that ran off when he was young, (due to the father's penchant for knocking her senseless) there is a sweet romance here, with the interesting shift of the teleport date. (Where do you want to go? Where can we go? Anywhere you want.) It's a great book, and a fun read.
So, haha, there is the gauntlet. I dare thee to take it up, Sers!
[This message has been edited by Netstorm2k (edited January 03, 2005).]
[This message has been edited by Netstorm2k (edited January 03, 2005).]
(I like these smilie thingies)
[This message has been edited by Netstorm2k (edited January 03, 2005).]
The only examples that I've come up with have been either SF or contemporary dark urban fantasy. I was thinking specifically of period fantasy. Doc Brown, you've hit upon my problem. I'll read Lost Horizon, although I suspect that it might be 'disqualified' based on the end of the world aspect.
Now I can come up with lots of SF novels with more intimate plots, but very, very few Fantasy novels. Why is that? What is it about Fantasy that compels writers to raise the stakes that high? Is it a demand of the readers?
(Oh--Netstorm, could I ask you to delete the amazon link? It's not wrapping in my webbrowser and is making the window really wide. While I grant that it's an issue with my browser, I'd still appreciate it. Besides I have a copy of Agyar)
Baaa, Dangit!
But epic fantasy tends to be, you know, epic.
(PS Thanks Netstorm)
[This message has been edited by MaryRobinette (edited January 03, 2005).]
For me I prefer that its hinted at such as was done in the Blood novels by Tanya Huff. That says more to me than it does with LKH.
As a reader thats what I prefer so as an attempting writer if it comes up (no pun intended) then thats what I'll do.
I mean, LOTR as an over the top example, if you just cut it down to the bare bones of the story/plot, how epic would it be? So danged much of it is milieu, and that seems to be typical of most period fantasy. The writer needs (MOSTLY by definition of the genre) to build a world in which to set his story. Since there are no cut and dried systems of belief, you have to spend an awful lot of time telling the reader what they should believe.
Dragons, for instance. There are so many ways that dragons can be presented. Each writer has to spend time helping the reader believe that dragons are friendly/the enemy/extinct/rare/as common as cattle/as stupid as worms/as intelligent as humans/from another planet/living in the drain pipes of the federal prison system/etc,etc,etc,etc.
And this most often needs to be done with EVERYTHING of importance presented in the writer's particular world.
So, unless I'm completely missing your definition of 'epic', that's what I think.
Helpful? Or just the ravings of a lunatic?
Hmmmm....
Can I think of any novels that deviate from the epic form? Well, since that's the only kind of fantasy that I tolerate (that high fantasy rife with milieu tends to bore me)I thought Stardust by Neil Gaiman was pretty good. An excellent adult fairy tale! It's not exactly 'period'. It's set in the 1930's if I remember. But the technology is negligibly important. It really could have been written as a 'period' piece and still have been just as charming.
[This message has been edited by djvdakota (edited January 03, 2005).]
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0671654160/102-4461180-3719315?v=glance
The fantasy I'm working on has no world ending plot, but that's just me. If I were to do a second, well...then there would have to be a larger plot that would have more world effecting elements. I'm not real concerned at this point, since I have to get a first one written. Since the plot involves a definite ending that doesn't require anymore, a second might never happen.
Maybe fantasy lends itself to the "end of the world" concept more than scifi does. I could make a long list of scifi books I've read that were character stories where nothing that happened would end the world(s).
This is an excellent question I was pondering just myself recently. Seems everything fantasy is always "save the world" plots. Nature of the beast, I guess.
however, there are some stories which seem to be more intimate, even if they take place on a larger/grander scale. Some Terry Pratchett books (most recently read MORT) are very personal in spite of the power or control some characters may have. And (and I KNOW I'm going to draw fire for this one, but) I think the HP books are relatively intimate. They really all relate to the fate of a single boy and his friends. That's it. Not the whole world, just Harry.
Sadly, everything I've read is actually, er...epic. So I cannot fairly reccomend anything, but I'm with MaryR...I'd love to hear of some...
Z
). It is a division of Harlequin or something and is geared toward publishing fantasy that has a focus on relationships instead of so much emphasis on world ending epics.Personally, I have't read anything published by them - yet - but perhaps someone who has read some of their books could shed some light on the type of writing.
Oh and Christine: I'm just saying that there are a great many of us out there, particularly women, who could get a lot out of true intimacy in fantasy. [Emphasis mine.] *cough sterotyping cough*
HP's conflict with He Who Must Not Be Named is an epic plot in my mind. LOTR's basic plot is "Ring must be destroyed or the world ends." The book might focus on the character and the milleau, but the plot is still, well, epic.
As I said before, the only ones that I can come up with are set in a more modern milleau like Stardust.
Thanks for the Sheepfarmer's Daughter reference mikemunsil. I'll check that out from the library.
rjzeller wrote:
quote:
Seems everything fantasy is always "save the world" plots. Nature of the beast, I guess.
Beauty, Sunshine, and Deerskin by Robin McKinley come to mind as well. In some of her other titles, the safetly of a kingdom is at stake, but it seems a lesser focus than the protagonist's journey.
I love Brooks' characterization in these books. The Female characters are very strong in Running with the Demon. Probably his best female characters I can think of, in any of his novels.
Another book comes to mind, The Last Dragonlord, by Joanne Bertin. It isn't a great literary example, but I don't remember it having an "end of the world" plot. I may have forgotten, but I think it is just a coming of age or discovery type of fantasy. And it isn't a modern or urban fantasy setting. It has been a few years since I read it, and there was a follow-up to that book, but I wasn't pleased enough with the first one to buy number two.
[This message has been edited by TruHero (edited January 03, 2005).]
I guess that YA fantasy tends to be more intimate than adult epic fantasy. Other authors I thought of were Nancy Springer and Sheri Tepper. Springer in particular goes for the more intimate approach, although it can be a little melodramatic sometimes.
Perhaps a reason why there seems to be a limited selection of close, intimate fantasy, is because authors who write fantasy do so because they like creating grand, sweeping settings as opposed to characters. The character races are fairly established, so you take few elves, a couple of dwarves, several humans and perhaps a wizard or two, throw in a devil-type antagonist and write about the good guy's quest to save the world. With sci-fi, especially sci-fi involving aliens, the author has to put more effort into creating the character races because no one is going to know what a Saleinkrous Profigate is, unless they are told.
Or perhaps the answer is simply 42. (Sorry, I just got The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy for Christmas )
quote:
Several months ago, someone posted information about a publishing house called Luna (I think ). It is a division of Harlequin or something and is geared toward publishing fantasy that has a focus on relationships instead of so much emphasis on world ending epics.
I've never read anything published by them, but an author on another board I read sold a book to them last year.
The blurb on her web site begins:
"Joanne Walker has three days to learn to use her shamanic powers and save the world from the unleashed Wild Hunt."
Yep, it's another world saver.
I haven't read anything by C. J. Cherryh. But from the little I know about her, I'm guessing you might find an "intimate" fantasy somehwere in her work.
But then I could think of very few examples of fantasy literature which didn't involve the fate of the world/kingdom. Why is that? Do fantasies lend themselves to dramas of epic proportions? Is it the magic? When a writer looks at how they can raise the stakes for their characters, does the addition of magic automatically entail the fate of the world? Or is it just that this is the sort of book readers want?
I dunno. I'll write my book and the world will not end, or even be threatened, but it still got me thinking.
Kingdom-or-world-threatening events in fantasy are a way of guaranteeing high stakes.
[This message has been edited by djvdakota (edited January 04, 2005).]
As for why epic tales sell well... It may have something to do with the fact that most people need a large butt-kick before getting into gear. And what could motivate you more than the end of the world?
I mean would you carry a ring into enemy territory unless the stakes were high?
Gandalf: The ring can only be destroyed in the fires of Mount Doom, where it was forged. Taking it there will be a long and difficult task, with many dangers on the road.
Frodo: And if we don't succeed, then Sauron will rule Middle Earth?
Gandalf: Well, no. If the Elves and Mankind fight together, they can turn back Sauron.
Frodo: But if the ring isn't destroyed, then darkness will spread across the face of the land, turning people against each other?
Gandalf: No, the power of the ring is fading. It's rather old, you know. Its recent manifestations have been in the nature of a last gasp before dying.
Frodo: But the legend of the One Ring will continue, and many wars will be fought over it, even though it has no power left?
Gandalf: Not really. As its power fades, so will knowledge of its existence. As it was once forgotten, so it shall be again.
Frodo: So why does it need to be destroyed?
Gandalf: It reminds me of my ex-wife.
Um...doesn't Ged use a disasterous Spell of Summoning bring the shadow beast into Earthsea?
I just ran across this which is Le Guin talking about the SciFi channel miniseries. The title is "A Whitewashed Earthsea: How the Sci Fi Channel wrecked my books."
http://slate.msn.com/id/2111107/
[This message has been edited by Netstorm2k (edited January 05, 2005).]
Interestingly, this is all foreshadowed in the first book, where it is specifically mentioned that this is a tale of Ged before he did all his "great" deeds. LeGuin also explores Ged's life after his great deeds, though her later activist inclinations may have blinded her to the fact that all the later themes had already been effectively (perhaps more so) explored in that first book.
But Eric's earlier point remains valid. There is an entire world of stories about hauntings, deals with the devil, wishes granted by everything from aardvarks to zygotes, and even your good old Conan style quest for booty and...er, booty
quote:
But then I could think of very few examples of fantasy literature which didn't involve the fate of the world/kingdom. Why is that? Do fantasies lend themselves to dramas of epic proportions? Is it the magic? When a writer looks at how they can raise the stakes for their characters, does the addition of magic automatically entail the fate of the world? Or is it just that this is the sort of book readers want?
Some people really like this kind of high-stakes drama. I'll admit to being one of them. And I think, as a group of people, we are attracted towards writing fantasy and SF, rather than something about F&SF provoking its writers to increase the stakes.
The point is, that to write something of this nature, you need freedom. I couldn't write a story set in a present day, realistic Earth where the stakes are that high. Finding a way of raising the stakes so high would be quite hard.
Some political thriller writers manage it, but other than those, speculative fiction is the only group of genres where you can do it effectively, I think.
I'm pretty close to convinced that the desire to write (or read) epics draws people to fantasy, rather than the other way around.
So I guess this just means that since fantasy tends to revolve around exceptional characters, their conflicts tend to become exceptional as well. SF tends to go to the opposite, sometimes, where the situation is exceptional, and the person has to deal with it and getting out of the situation alive is more than enough excitement.
BTW Eric, I LOVED the spoof!
And funny enough, the first book issued by LUNA is "The Fairy Godmother" by Mercedes Lackey! I do plan to read it, after my current tome.
I just finished rereading "Perilous Dreams" by Andre Norton - that and some others she's written might fit the bill.
Really? If other such books exist it doesn't matter because you're not telling THEIR story, you're telling YOUR story. Furthermore, if such books don't exist, then you have an opportunity to do something truly unique.
So do it. Do it in your own way, telling the story as only you can. IF the rudiments of good fiction are still present, it doens't have to be epic to be good. Does it?
I say not. A more intimate story about individuals instead of the fate of the world would actually be refreshing for a change.
I realize your original post had nothing to do with actually WRITING a book as such, but one assumes that is your ultimate aim.
And if it's not, well...you thought of it, so why not try? You seem to know more about writing than at least 1/2 the rest of us...so knock yourself out!!
my 2 pennies...
Or what about Diana Gabaldon's Outlander series? I don't know if she considered fantasy or more mainstream romance, but her plots are intimate as well.
My favorite one is 'The Storyteller' in Tales vol. 2 (titled Kender, Gully Dwarfs and Gnomes.)
Hi, I belong to the Imperial legions that go around stomping on babies to give our boots that nice cordovan polish we would otherwise have to buy better quality boots to get. Hi, I belong to the Imperial legions that protect all the roads so that the people can prosper in trade and free pilgramages without having to worry too much about getting chopped into mincemeat by bandits. Hi, I'm the local druid who takes care of the forest and all the cute animals. Hi, I'm the local druid who sacrifices virgins to the dark gods under the standing stones.
Because everything in the world is unfamiliar, you must describe enough of the context so that there is meaning.
So why does the epic seem to dominate Fantasy while Science Fiction has basically come up with a neat little corner (i.e. space opera?) for sci-fi epics?
So maybe Fantasy--if you're looking at themes you can't deal with any other way--naturally lends itself big themes like Good vs. Evil. Or, maybe its just that if you pull the magic out of Fantasy stories they just become historical novels.
I guess the key then to writing a non-epic fantasy would be to find a story that needs some element of magic to tell, but doesn't deal with good vs. evil.
I'm rambling a bit, does any of that actually make sense?
Of course it could just be that so many fantasy books have main characters that are so exceptional that normal plots would pale to thier abilities. How can you have any suspense when the whole story is a cake walk for the main character.
Maybe that is the answer. To have a intimate fantasy plot, you need a average main character.
Everything I've read so far in this posting is lending itself to one main question for me - if we are asking can it be done, then myself answers back, why not do it then? [The "it" being writing a novel in an intimate setting.] Is it because we lack a template for the exact way to do it right? Do we need a template if we are already questioning it? And the only way to tell if it was done right is to try it and then see if the story works.
On the other hand, one of the other sources for fantasy is myth, which tends to have far loftier concerns. Myths have to explain the creation of the world. But that would not make a good story since stories about gods and goddesses no longer appeal to us nowadays--and there is little suspense in wondering whether the world will end up being created. However, a possible displacement of the problem is towards the other end of the time scale--"will the world end?" holds a far more interesting narrative than the creation myths. So perhaps end-of-the-world stories are one way to take hold of that mythical quality and bring it into the narration.
Maybe what we need is a radical change of fantasy (haven't even dealt with escapism and everything in between )
Just my two cents
[This message has been edited by Silver3 (edited January 12, 2005).]
I just had a thought, and actually on topic: I suppose the best source of 'intimate fantasy' is fairy tales. Little Mermaid, Thumbelina, and on and on and on. But how much meat can be added to these fairly simple tales in order to make them novel length before it ends up spiraling into the typical world-saving epic? I wonder if a subject search at the library might yield some promising results. Subject:Snow White...
I will admit, generally--in fantasy--the largest invented element of the milieu will at least be used to define something that is at risk. That's just saying that in a good fantasy all the novel elements contribute something to the story.
The same is true of good SF, any element introduced contributes something to the story, such that it wouldn't be the same story if you took that element out.
If a story can be told without introducing any fantasy or SF elements, then it is a bad idea to introduce such elements, because they won't be serving any purpose in the story. So if you want a story that is just about a relationship between two normal people, then there is no reason for it to be either fantasy or SF or historical or anything like that.
But if one of them is a wizard (or on a quest to kill one) or a relativistic starship captain, then suddenly you have a fantasy or SF story.
The second, and much better example, is Ladyhawk. While the two main characters are of noble birth, there are no higher stakes than the simple cessation of their personal torment.
Jefficus