For example, I think (and there’s a good chance I’m wrong) that SF fans are much more demanding in terms of world-building than Fantasy fans. However, I also think that that’s because a lot of Fantasy is set in some variant of Tolkein’s Middle Earth.
I was wondering what other reader expectations Hatrack members felt readers of the different sub-genres had, and whether, as writers, we should try to cater to those expectations.
Of course you may not agree with me that the different audiences have different expectations (I for one, as a reader of Fantasy, love a well-constructed, original universe) and I suspect there’s a fair amount of cross-over between the 2 audiences. Anyway, I’d love to hear what other people think.
The truth is, I have very similiar expectations for the two genres:
1. A well-crafted world, even if it's this one. That's right, both scifi and fantasy can be set in modern or near-modern times and even then I expect the world to feel real to me. Hidden magical communities need to be convincing and near-future scientific discoveries need to be incredibly plausible. Far-flung futures, adjacent realities (which can both exist in either genre) need to be rational and obey rules.
2. Strong, sympathetic characters. Both genres often fall short on this point. I've read the shallowest, most pitiful, most story-driven characters in both fantasy and scifi...the hero riding his horse and the star ship captain having sex with lots of women. I want motivation, I want depth, I want humanity (meaning flaws), and I want to get in their heads and know them (that's just a personal preference, but it's why I dislike omniscient POV so much).
3. I expect competent writing. Sounds strange, maybe, but it's amazing how often the writing itself turns me off of a story. Piers Anthony comes to mind (and he writes in both genres so it's a good example on that note). I used to like his stuff, but recently I tried to read something else of his and I found that the language is stilted, choppy, and even childish. (Could just be a style preference.)
4. I expect a compelling story. What is the story about? It has to be about something that I'm interested in. And here's where we start to get into some differentiation between the genres..I'll go into that in a bit.
5. I expect depth and meaning beyond the words and the story. Many will disagree with me on this, but don't hand me a book without a theme, message, or even orientation that helps me broaden my mind and explore the depths of...something!
As to the differential expectations:
Fantasy:
1. I expect magic to come with limitations and a price. I have never found a fantasy novel without this to be anything but childish.
2. I expect internal consistency. You'd be amazed at the number of times I've seen fantasy (novel, movie, tv) break their own rules. You made them up, which is fine, but now you have to live with them!
3. I expect the novel to not resemble Tolkien too much. Here is where I am so often disappointed, but I can still hold the expectation. (BTW, any middle-ages reanaissance wanna be sort of setting is also bad. In fact, I'm stick of fantasies set in old times, whatever those old times may be.)
Science Fiction
1. I expect plausible science based in what we know today. I make exceptions for writers of the past, and in fact have enjoyed many scifi novels that contain outdated science. I would not enjoy that same outdated science written by a modern author, though.
2. I expect that this science does not consume and weigh down the story. I want to know how that science effects people, or at the very least sentient beings.
Oh, and that's one of my biggest expectations for fantasy: I want to be drawn into a world with a new and engaging setting. That's one of the reasons I liked OSC's Enchantment so much. It was set in very early mideval Russia. Very cool.
Personally I think that good speculative fiction is bigger than the stereotypal boundaries of its genres. So how to get ten million adolescent and barely post adolescent readers to demand only good fiction?
[This message has been edited by keldon02 (edited September 29, 2005).]
But also because the entire point of art is to exceed the expected.
Yet, browsing those same shelves for no more than half an hour this evening, I watched as literally armloads of David Eddings and R.A. Salvatore were marched to the checkout counter. I saw money change hands. I wondered again what "success" means -- or should mean -- to me.
My brother had been into reading Dragon something novels. They seemed all the same to me (he admits the same now that we are adults). I couldn't get into a simple quest story. It wasn't until I read Tolkien that I enjoyed a fantasy novel.
Since Tolkien I haven't found too much I like. At least as far as medieval fantasies go.
I do however enjoy other kinds of fantasies that twist our world in different ways.
Which is why putting the two genres together makes sense to me. They are both about twisting things under "what if?" circumstances.
And again I think there are two different versions of each. We often hear "hard" and "soft" scifi, but I think the same applies to fantasy.
(Actually, a laugh when I hear soft sci-fi (e.g. Doctor Who) get classified as fantasy--simply because it was "soft").
Some people want the scifi/fantasy that has plausible explanitions for when it branches away from known reality. Others couldn't care, they just want the story.
I go between them both, and as long as I feel the author's writing well, I'm happy.
I guess that's my only expectation: quality writing. An interesting (or even gripping) story that looks at some aspect of what being human is all about.
John
[This message has been edited by Creativity Rising (edited September 30, 2005).]
In science fiction I want to take part in a forward looking vision.
In both cases, make me care what happens next, and I'm good.
There comes a point where this becomes too stylized. My least favorite mix has consistantly been the Historical Romance / Time Travel Fantasies. They seem to be a female version of Hustler Magazine and nearly pointless otherwise.
(If I recall what I've read correctly, "science fiction" as a term for this kind of literature was first used about 1929, reportedly introduced in a subscription flyer for a new magazine called "Science Wonder Stories." "Speculative fiction," I believe (but am less certain of) came about later, in the late 1940s, put on by those casting about for a more dignified and less technically-associated phrase to apply to their work, but wanting to keep the "SF" initials. Thus endeth my pedantic history lesson for today...unless I think of something else.)