Trilogy Death and too many wizards and thieves and vampires
After a thorough-going policy meeting with my dear friend Spucko, we are prepared to release our white paper report on what the hell is wrong with the fantasy genre these days. It breaks down into two basic categories:
Character Occupations:
Pick up any fantasy trilogy and fantasy trilogy in the making and they all seem to be about wizards or professional thieves. I realize it's fantasy, but give me a break. Where does all the food in these stories come from? Who digs the ditches? Does it just reflect an assumption on the part of fantasy readers that these are the only "interesting" occupations for characters in fantasy novels? Does that reflect an assumption that most jobs in the real world are too boring to be featured in fiction?
Take a quick perusal through some of the bestselling new fantasy, though, and you'll quickly discover a dearth of farmers, accountants, and wet nurses. Sarah Monette's Melusine Trilogy? Main character is a professional thief/assassin. His brother? A wizard. Scott Lynch's Locke Lamora Trilogy? Main character is a professional thief. Susanna Clark's Jonathan Strange and Mr. Norrell? Main characters are all wizards. Here's the thing: what the eff is the magic for? Mostly it seems like the magic is only used to fight with other wizards, like magic is just some ethereal video game where the wizard-nerds are trying to pwn each other. You might as well write about guys who carry around guns and shoot at each other if that's all the magic is good for. Hell, you might as well write about vampires while I die a slow death from boredom.
I don't claim to be some kind of genius, but at least I'm making an effort, people. My fantasy novel has characters with actual occupations: soldier, priest, midwife, candy maker, seamstress, government bureaucrat. Why aren't these people worthy of having their stories told?
Trilogy Death:
It's become de rigueur in the fantasy genre for everything to develop into a trilogy, even if the writer doesn't have enough material for it. In the publishing industry there are many stories of fantasy writers who upon finally receiving an offer from a publishing house, are asked to turn their novel into a trilogy. That apparently is where many of them go wrong. Instead of writing three separate books with three separate story arcs, the writers tend to turn their one novel into three novels.
Unfortunately, what happens is this: Book One starts off promising, with good character development, a compelling story arc and an active plot. Then, when the ending comes, the author cheats you by shaving off the last chapter or whatever so the book has a bit of a cliff hanger. Book Two answers the cliff hanger and then tries to toddle forward into a continuation of the previous story arc. Oh, sure, sometimes the writer will introduce new developments, new characters, new angles. Often, however, the writer simply kills off the main character's love interest in order to produce a crisis. By the end of Book Two, it's clear the story is played out, but still limping along gamely. Book Three is more tragedy than trilogy, because it's just sad to see how threadbare the plot is, like a good movie turned into a television series, where the same basic story element is replayed over and over. (Think The Fugitive.) The characters aren't developing anymore and after you've read the book, you can't remember what happens.
For examples, just let me turn to the two I mentioned above. Sarah Monette's Melusine Trilogy. By Book Two, main character's love interest has been murdered, the main character and his brother are sort of stuck in their relationship, and there's a revenge sub-plot. I can't remember what happened in Book Three and I only read it two weeks ago. (Except what I do remember is that the one freaky plot twist Monette introduces--brother's sexual attraction to the main character--goes exactly nowhere.)
Scott Lynch's Locke Lamora Trilogy. Now technically it's not a trilogy yet, but I suspect that's only because the third book hasn't been published yet. And I'm trying to be fair here, because the author photo reminds me of my ex-boyfriend Killer Geek. All that aside, guess what happens? Main character's love interest is murdered. There's some revenge-like subplot in Book Two, but the main plot is terribly flimsy. The character relationships stop developing. Am I eager to read Book Three? Not even a little bit.
In short, although things are not looking rosy in the fantasy genre, we have made the first step: diagnosing the problem.
Comments
Re trilogizing, one thing I have heard in the SF/Fantasy genres is that the main booksellers (Borders, B&N) don't want to stock novels above a certain length from a mid-list author, so the publisher is forced to chop single novels into two. I guess from there it may be a short step to, "well, why not a trilogy?"
I love when magic is enfolded into stories with purpose. I'm more of a fantasy TV fan than I am a reader. And I feel the magic must exist in a believable context that fuels the world of the characters or its pointless.
How do you feel about Lois McMaster Bujold? Her last series went to a quintology, but I think she meant to do that--the books were related but each had a separate story arc.
Who's an author you like? Because I'm looking for something new to read, but when I look at the bookstore everything on the shelf looks exactly like what you're writing about here. I'm looking for a new George RR Martin who writes faster.
As for my candy maker, she's still an apprentice. I don't include recipes, but think of exotic, foreign candies that just seem weird--green tea, tomatoes, roses, coriander.
Then there is Robert Jordan's the Wheel of Time series. He died last year, but someone else is finishing the twelth volume of this monument to treekilling. I remember reading the first volume, and feeling excited. Then the second volume came out, and I was mildly intrigued. Then the third volume came out, and was clearly not an ending. I said Uhoh, and stopped reading. I regret having turned a friend on to the books; she was not able to pull herself out of the vortex. By the time the last book is published, close to 10,000 pages will have been wasted turning a good story into a nightmarish trek. Nine times longer, and ten times less interesting than Tolkien's trilogy.
It is his fault, you know. I was a huge fan of Tolkien, but refused to ever pick up the Silmarillion, and won't read the latest venture from his son. Everything I needed was in those three volumes already.
I have forgiven Tolkien, because without his success, I wouldn't have ever read Mervyn Peake, or Ursula Leguin, or Gene Wolfe. And that would have been a shame. But it is a weighty chain, akin to that lugged along by Marley, that his ghost must carry throughout eternity.
You'd be better off reading TH White's The Once and Future King.
Other random thoughts occasioned by this thread: what fantasy books written by an economist would be like, and Joss Whedon's use of the Book of Thoth on narrative structure, but that's completely sending the Topic Train off on a siding.
with my encroaching senility it is terrible buying new books.
They are always going to be continued later, when I won't remember who the author is anymore.
Or I see an interesting book, but it's volume two and volume one is nowhere to be seen.
So I have to remember that I need to find volume one.
See senility,above.
I absolutely love it when I can find someone who writes a story that fits into one book.