Rules for Writing Fantasy

[robinturner]

I've just finished reading Robin Hobb's Tawny Man trilogy, which is some of the best-written fantasy fiction I've read in years. Of course, this isn't saying much, since most fantasy fiction is dross*, but it got me thinking about how to write a fantasy epic that isn't embarrassingly bad. Here are some rules I thought up for budding fantasy writers.

Go easy on the magic.
If you have no magic at all, then you're not really writing fantasy, you're writing a kind of historical novel with the disadvantage of having no actual history. On the other hand, a surfeit of magic can make the rest of the action impotent. What is the point of brushing up your martial skills when some passing wizard can conjure up a fireball that will lay waste to an entire barbarian horde? A society in which magic was both effective and commonplace would not resemble the quasi-feudal societies of most fantasy fiction, but would be something much, much weirder. One thing which makes Hobb's writing good is that the magic is fairly subtle (most of it is just different forms of telepathy) and it is introduced gradually, with most of the characters not really knowing its full potential. George R.R. Martin goes even further: in A Game of Thrones, there are only hints of long-forgotten magics. In other words, for sword and sorcery, you want nine parts swords to one part sorcery.

Note: if you can come up with a pseudoscientific explanation for the magic (as in Sheri S. Tepper's books) that's a big plus.

Think about economics.
Economics may sound like a dull subject for a fantasy writer to be concerned with - they don't call it "the dismal science" for nothing - but considering the mundane underpinnings of your imaginary society pays off in believability. Most fantasy worlds are, as I just said, quasi-feudal, so they need a feudal economy. If you want to play around with the social structure, you need to change the economy as well. Let's say we want, in contrast to our classic feudal society, an egalitarian, freedom-loving one. How would these fantasy anarchists make a living? Would they have common ownership of land (and if so, why?), or would they have a non-agricultural economy (herding the great Gruntha beasts, for example).

Oh yes, and on the subject of economics, please remember that unless your fantasy planet has a radically different mineral composition to Earth, a gold piece is a hell of a lot of money, and not something an adventurer would blow on a night in a seedy inn.

Brass bikinis do not a feminist novel make
We all like warrior women. Female readers like them because they represent strong women, and male readers like them because chicks in skimpy armour are hot. However, unless you're going for the token warrior woman who can be explained by some social or magical anomaly, you need to think a bit more. If a society offers equal slaying rights to women, what other changes would that require? What kind of economy would it have in order to allow its womenfolk to rush off on quests?

You also need to consider the physical aspect of combat. Women can fight pretty well, but not in the conventional medieval style that is standard in sword and sorcery novels. Those swords were heavy; most men who don't work out at the gym couldn't wield them effectively, let alone the willowy warrior women beloved of fantasy writers (see the opening scene of Red Sonja for a particularly absurd example of skinny girls brandishing swords that would make even Arnie's muscles burn). Look at examples of how women have actually fought in history, such as the Scythian "warrior princesses" or the naginata-wielding samurai women.

Of course you can have powerful women without the brass bikinis. Robin Hobb's Outislanders are quite matriarchal, not because their women go to war, but because the women own and farm the land while the men go fishing or raiding (economics again!). Then of course you can always resort to magic, as in Andre Norton's Witchworld books.

Only plunder two features from any historical culture
Let's say you want a bunch of scary sea-raiders in your story. This automatically says "Vikings" to the reader, so you need to be careful not to bring in all the other cultural baggage as well. Following the two cultural features rule, this leaves you a choice of only one of the following:

• blond hair
• battle axes
• long ships with dragon's heads
• long epic poems
• fjords
• names like Erik Bloodaxe

Similarly, if you want a tribe of desert nomads, don't make them monotheistic and polygamous, make them polytheistic and monogamous.

Don't use silly spelling
One thing that did irritate me about Hobb was her spelling of the dragon's name: Icefyre. What is it with fantasy writers that they need to change I's to Y's (and vice versa)? And anyone who spells "fairy" "faerie" needs to be shot with a faerie dart. You are not Edmund Spenser, and you don't live in the sixteenth century. At the other extreme, don't go so far from traditional English spelling that the reader is left with no idea of how to pronounce the characters' names. Please think about the phonology of your mythical languages, rather than typing consonants and apostrophes at random. If I see more than two weird names on the back of a book, I put it back on the shelf.

Forget that you ever read The Lord of the Rings
Another thing that makes me put a book back on the shelf is when the blurb says "comparable to Tolkien at his best".** If your publisher feels obliged to exaggerate your writerly skill to this extent, it probably means your book is so unoriginal, they can only think of comparing it to The Lord of the Rings because, well, it's got elves and stuff. Elves, orcs, halflings and the other stock characters are fine for Dungeons and Dragons scenarios, but usually spell death for a novel. Either make up your own mythology from scratch, or do as Tolkien did and rewrite folklore, not other people's fantasy worlds.


* There again, most fiction of any variety is dross, and I'd still rather read dross which has sword-fights in it than dross about ordinary people wrestling with the ordinary problems of their ordinary lives.
** This raises the question of who Tolkien was compared to. Fortunately I have the answer: the original blurb for The Lord of the Rings compared it to Spenser's Faerie Queene. This shows how original Tolkien was - the only author they could think of comparing to died several centuries ago.

Comments

interesting

[(Anonymous)]

Interesting, I do believe you have some valid points there. I agree with that bit you have on warrior women because the thought has occured to me about brass bikini stereotype warrior princesses balancing those heavy looking swords. And whenever I come across a book with a reference to JRRT i put it right back too, though in some cases they just say that to make the book sell with no regard to wether the writer could have an ounce of originality (blame the publisher there, they'll do anything to sell the book). Those some very strong points you've got there for anyone starting off on fantasy writing.

[word-herder.livejournal.com]

Robert Jordan needs to take a few lessons from you. His spelling nearly drove me frantic, and his over-use of magic was annoying as hell. The characters were lost behind whatever cool, magical thing he could come up with next. (These are, of course, second and third to his obvious problem: He lost control of his plot. First three books were great; after that, not so much.)

The economic factor was one that I hadn't really given much thought to, but I've an idea kicking around in the back of my mind (it was spawned by a dream--don't you love those kinds?) and had a problem that I couldn't pinpoint. I see now that it's the economy. THANK YOU!

[trochee.livejournal.com]

oh, thank you so much.

Last night I had a beer with a guy who thinks Robert Jordan is the Best Ever.

I couldn't sit htere and listen to that -- I told him I thought the books were derivative crappy (and predictable) soap-operas after the second book, and that whenever I'd pick it up I'd start reading and feel like "didn't I already read this?".

So it makes me happy to read your comments here and solri's whole post -- yay, there are others who agree with me that Wheel of Time is tedious and bad!

[bobjanova.livejournal.com]

That's so true. I read all of them (well, all at the time, up to about number 8 I think) because they were in the school library, and I totally concur about the first-three-books point. I actually think those first few are among the best fantasy I've read, but as you say after that characterisation and 'ordinary' abilities just get lost under a sea of more and more powerful magic.

(here via metaquotes if you get scared by random strangers posting in your comments :P)

[cassielsander.livejournal.com]

Good rules to think about (and possibly break when necessary). GRRM's ASoIaF does do a good job with most, although I get annoyed with silly spelling and silly words (and overused phrases) from time to time. First of all, there's "Ser" instead of "Sir".

Then of course there's the smallfolk running to the holdfast in their smallclothes and drinking half-a-hundred trenchers of moon tea.

An author who I think does a good job with this stuff is Katherine Kurtz. At least once you get past the first trilogy (Deryni X, Deryni Y, Deryni Z).

[solri.livejournal.com]

I have to get past a whole trilogy? Eek. I should also have added the rule "Never write a trilogy when a short story will suffice."

You're right about Martin's irritating linguistic habits. I'd forgotten the "Ser" bit.

[solri.livejournal.com]

Hah - I forgot to put "Don't make your beliefs blindingly obvious." I'm all in favour of fiction with a message (Ursula Le Guin is one of my favourite authors) but I don't want to be hit over the head with it.

Still, I commend your friend for at least trying to write a novel. I just snipe from the sidelines, having never written a work of fiction longer than a short story.

[chr0me-kitten.livejournal.com]

This is really good.

[bram.livejournal.com]

Hm, maybe the genre I would prefer isn't quite "fantasy", but would be called "fairy tale", because I often get annoyed with the "fanboy"/"fangirls" who clamor for "realism" in their fantasy. They'll make lists of dozens of minor inconsistencies in a novel (or movie like Star Wars) without seeming to appreciate whether it's good or not.

I agree with you that the overuse of magic makes every plot twist the author's fiat. A realistic world should smack more of evolution than intelligent design.

How about something like "The Last Unicorn"? Something that doesn't try to be monumental, that flows dreamlike, something with some lightness and humor, with a few winking anachronisms thrown in. (Unfortunately, Tolkein veered away from that path once you got past his "origin of Golf" in The Hobbit.)

My mother wrote a fantasy novel, Time Among the Roussalkas (Roussalkas are river creatures in Russian folk tales--dramatized in Dvorak's opera). But it was never published.

[word-herder.livejournal.com]

You would probably like Orson Scott Card's Enchantment...

You win at the internet.

[ironed_orchid]

If a society offers equal slaying rights to women, what other changes would that require? What kind of economy would it have in order to allow its womenfolk to rush off on quests?

This is precisely the sort of question that needs to be asked more often.

And anyone who spells "fairy" "faerie" needs to be shot with a faerie dart

Definitely, the punishment should always be commensurate with the crime.

P.S.

[ironed_orchid]

I've forgotten whether you're happy to be metaquoted or not. Cos this is very quote worthy.

Re: P.S.

[solri.livejournal.com]

I love being quoted, but what is a metaquote?

[bassist.livejournal.com]

Here from metaquotes.

Great list, but one quick question: Fantasy implies a suspension of belief. If the movement of the characters or other plot points is more important than spending several chapters establishing a world (since establishing one gradually without being forceful in your explanation is suprisingly difficult), shouldn't ignoring several of these rules, mainly about economy and form cultures, be possible and even prudent? If the reader is indeed used to Fantasy novels, even bad ones, and the suspension of belief, should logic play as large a role as it should otherwise?

[bobjanova.livejournal.com]

I think the world is very important, so you shouldn't completely ignore 'setting the scene' (mostly culture, I guess, in the scope of this post). I'm not sure you have to spend several chapters on it without moving on the plot, though; you can introduce important elements gradually as it becomes necessary for the reader to understand them. It is hard, as you say, but every good fantasy book I've read does it right, and most of the bad ones don't!

I agree with you that the first three chapters shouldn't all be background; if I get 50 pages into a book and nothing's happened, I get a bit annoyed! (LotR is a killer for that, actually, and I almost gave up the first time I read it.)

I think a fantasy world should be self-consistent. Belief is much easier to suspend than logic, and if an author can get you into their world then it needs to all work within whatever 'laws of physics' they're using ... otherwise you get 'Wait! That doesn't work!' moments and you lose the connection.

[(Anonymous)]

Here from metaquotes, and Amen to the spelling critique. I reject any fantasy novel out of hand if it looks like the author came up with characters' names by smashing a fist on his/her keyboard.

[bosswolf.livejournal.com]

Here from metaquotes, and please forgive me for being pedantic, but the following quote is false.

Those swords were heavy; most men who don't work out at the gym couldn't wield them effectively, let alone the willowy warrior women beloved of fantasy writers.

Well, if you're talking about two-handed broadswords, the type that reach three-and-half plus feet, only a tall brawny woman could handle that. But a one or one-and-a-half hander? I play with those all the time, and I'm only average height with little upper body strength. What it came down to was training - now, Twiggy wouldn't have a chance at weilding the sucker, but a girl with some meat on her bones and a couple months of training? Quite possibly.

Heh, sorry. Medievalist and reenacting group's historian here :)

[solri.livejournal.com]

I'm going from personal experience too! You're right that it depends on the sword - for example I've used a Chinese sword that was wonderfully light and easy to manipulate, and of course a rapier is no problem for anyone. However, the type of sword you see in most fantasy films is basically just a hunk of metal. I've played with a pretty faithful reproduction of a 16th century sabre, which is not exactly big, and it weighed a ton! Sure, I could lift it, which means the average woman could lift it too, but fighting a whole battle with that weight in my hand? No thanks. You have to remember that after a few minutes, even boxing gloves can wiegh your hands down.

a girl with some meat on her bones and a couple months of training

Well yes, but these "warrior women" don't generally have much meat on their bones. Xena is an exception, in that she has muscles and you can actually see them moving when she's swinging that sword around, indicating that for once it might actually be made of something heavier than plastic.

[germankitty]

Through metaquotes

Very well said.

Two comments: Pinching from certain cultures -- I agree with you on principle, but part of why I enjoy Eddings' books so much is because he has built his peoples so blatantly (and I think deliberately) on Earth equivalents. His Chereks, for example, are pretty much Vikings in everything that counts (looks, habits, language, what have you), but with just a few adjustments that make them still interesting. Same for the desert cultures in the Deryni books; obviously based on Arabs, but not quite a total mirror.

I guess it all lies in how well an author can write ...

Secondly, "silly spellings". Again, I'm prepared to say a big WORD on your comments, but very few authors have Tolkien's linguistic skill to create names and so on for various ethnicities. Changing the spelling of a name/word just slightly can convey "alienness" (especially in a fantasy/sf setting) quite well, IMO, while still making the name/word pronouncable and/or recognizable to one's audience.

Using strange spellings for no other reason than one can, however ... gah.

*goes off to put article into memories*

[azurelunatic]

(Also via metaquotes.)

One of the ladies in my writing group is doing a fantasy piece. She has all sorts of unusual names, but the thing that impresses me is that she only makes up a name when no English word exists for it, and otherwise uses an unusual synonym for the obvious English word. (For example, the building has several tiers instead of several stories.) This creates a feeling of the alien without being so overtly disruptive as a weird spelling.

[matgb]

Also here from metaquotes, and as I'm going to point a friend here as well, I thought I'd repeat my comment on spelling.

Since when could medieval pre-printing press societies spell anyway?

Shakespeare couldn't spell his own name, standardised spelling is a horrid modern abomination. Spell thing phonetically and we're good. grrm
Oh, the friend that needs to read this, on the grounds she has similar opinions to you on most of it? faeriecween

Faerie, incidentally, being perfectly acceptable usage, they are the Fae after all.

[matgb]

Bugger, forgot to close a tag,

[info]grrm uses 'Ser' instead of Sir, and Susanna Clarke is all over the shop, but the language is wonderfully constructed.

But, overall, a good piece. Apart from the spelling bit.

[maggiebloome.livejournal.com]

It's true about the Ys. They really annoy me. Someone was going on about Fayte the other day, and I'm like - WTF? This is exactly the same as Fate. If you're going to use gratuitous Ys, you better have at least changed the nature of the thing with it's name.

I mean c'mon! If it looks like a duck and it quacks like a duck... don't call it a dyck.

[solri.livejournal.com]

Fycke me, you're right!

[solri.livejournal.com]

Oh sure - there's nothing wrong with plundering a lesser-known culture. Just go easy on the well-known ones, like Arabs and Vikings.

Fairies

[(Anonymous)]

At some times, I would disagree with the statement that "faeries" is bullshit. That and magick, I mean, those were the original spellings. It's not like some random person didnt like the spellings we kno them as now. However, you should never use "faeries" or "magick" very often of course, as you should come up with your own names for magical races (I know that can be very difficult- I've been writing a novel for nearly a year now) but i dont think i should be shot with a faerie dart for being okay with the way it was spelled years and years ago, most likely in myths.

Fantasy Writing Tips- A Thankyou.

[(Anonymous)]

Dear Solri,

Enjoyed your fantasy-writing tips a great deal. I found myself chuckling at some of your advisements, since I have fallen into the trap of thinking myself both a latterday Tolkien (ironically, I grew-up where JRR spent his childhood) and using the silly 'y' in some of my character names. (Something I will change in my Final Draft!) Fantasy writers should avoid this habit at all costs! *laughs*

Particularly useful are your tips on researching real warrior woman (I hadn't though of that) and giving one's mythological races a real ecomomy to add believabilty for modern readers.

I havent read any Edmund Spencer, so I'll have to do so. Although, of course, I've often enjoyed the quality nonsense that JRR created. Everyone enjoys a good sword-fight! Thanks for your efforts.

NDB - englishgentleman@hotmail.com

Re: Fantasy Writing Tips- A Thankyou.

[solri.livejournal.com]

Glad you found them useful!

Spelling funny words.

[blackteal.livejournal.com]

"Faerie" is actually the correct spelling of the word in Britain. Like colour verses color, it's not actually wrong unless you are from America/Canada and are doing it to be an idiot.

Re: Spelling funny words.

[solri.livejournal.com]

Well yes and no. "Fairy" is definitely more common than "faery" even in Olde England, and besides, most of these writers are North Americans.

Incidentally, I have an incipient fantasy novel that I've been turning over in my head for several years now. Yesterday I decided that if I ever get round to writing it, I shall model my style on Robert Parker. Hell, if William Gibson can write SF imitating Raymond Chandler, why can't I write a fantasy novel that reads like one of the Spenser books?

Sexual Content in fantasy writing

[khail-82.livejournal.com]

Hello, I am an amateur fantasy writer and I have a question.

I am writing a fantasy/fiction book and have concerns with sexual content. My book is about a 16 year old boy who lives a double life, one with normal everyday experiences, and another with magic/demons/etc. My book is not sexual in nature at all, but does include some minor scenes of a sexual nature. Well, so far in my 'final drafts' the extent of which is 'looking at porn and pleasuring himself' which is only described in as much detail as that, and another scene where another boy (younger) sees the 16 year old naked and makes comment of his genitals. In my later 'unfinished' chapters he is pursuing a relationship with a girl (18) and may lead to some sexual scenes (that i don't intend to make graphic)

My concern is if it is 'legal' to put this in a book given that this 'kid' is only 16 years old. I've searched tirelessly for information on this topic and have found none. I am only using this 'sexual content' to further character development. If need be, any and all sexual reference can be omitted until my character is 18 years old but i'd just assume not if i don't need to.

The setting of my book starts off taking place in North America if that makes any difference at all.

Thanks in advance for any advice that anyone can give me.
If you don't want to post here, you can email me at GuardianEv@aol.com

Re: Sexual Content in fantasy writing

[solri.livejournal.com]

In Britain it certainly wouldn't be illegal; it's perfectly legal for 16-year-olds to have sex, so there's no reason why people shouldn't write about the fact. I can't even imagine it being illegal if he were, say, 14, given that nobody has tried to prosecute the publishers of Romeo and Juliet. The US, on the other hand, has so many weird laws that you can go to prison for pretty much anything if you do it in the wrong state. There again, no one sued over the South Park episode "Mrs Teacher Bangs a Boy," so I reckon you're safe. Besides, this is the kind of thing you should let your publisher worry about.