Epic Fantasy Revisited

I read A Game of Thrones, and I am in the midst of reading the rest of the series, even though I suppose I should save these 20-hour tomes for my next flights across the Pacific. Still, I wanted to see what all the fuss was about. I get The New York Times, and sometimes when I’m bored of reading the real journalists I find myself on the Arts page, and I see this review (of the new mini-series I didn't know existed) "A Fantasy World of Strange Feuding Kingdoms". It is less than helpful. For a complete run-down of that, see (first) Slate's even less helpful article "Quasi-Medieval, Dragon-Ridden Fantasy Crap" and (then) Salon's rebuttal "Slate, New York Times to fantasy buffs: Grow up". I'm not really interested in arguing with self-elected Literary Types, who are pretty much a straw-man of themselves at this point, but I still think it's important to make sure that the work they're shutting out is, in fact, not full of suck. There's another reason, too, and it's a better one:

Epic Fantasy! (the obligatory picture)

I don't like Epic Fantasy

...but I believe in giving things a fair shot. I'm one of those people who likes The Hobbit but doesn't like Lord of the Rings, and a quick trawl of those whose literary opinions I value told me that "A Game of Thrones" should be a fair shot for giving the genre another try. I was not disappointed, but I still don't gravitate toward epic fantasy personally. This is not a statement of quality, this is a statement of what waves I focus my limited reading time towards in a sea of quality. (Note that the mini-series might still suck, I suppose. I haven't seen it yet.)

So, why don't I like Epic Fantasy? Here's my reasons, in rough order of importance to me, the reader.

Length
They're so long! I mean, a good story is a good story, no matter how long. But sometimes it's too long. I like that little thrill of accomplishment when I finish reading something and can imagine what happens next. A lot of this is tone, as well. There's a big pile of description and general world-building which I'm not really all that interested in slogging through. (I still do, but that's not the point.) I don't have that much time for reading, and in epic fantasy, one book is never enough. To cite my specific primary source, the ending to A Game of Thrones, awesome though it was, was not technically an ending for any of the characters (except the obvious). Which brings me to the next point.

Number of Characters
There's so many characters! Which is not bad in and of itself, but it either dilutes my focus or annoys me. I tend to focus on characters when I read, and so I like strong characterization, but when there are a bunch of strong characters I'll tend to focus on a few...or I'll get annoyed when they're not around. I understand that purpose of having a bunch of strong viewpoint characters to the series (Anyone Can Die), but...well, while reading the first book I found myself waiting for the chapters with Jon or Daenerys or Tyrion at the top, and sometimes slogging through the rest while so waiting. (The second book has been better for me, then.) Anyways, that brings us to the third point.

Scope
I'm getting the feeling, nearing the end of the second book, that I could just read every chapter titled "Jon" and "Daenerys" and I'd have two perfectly enjoyable stand-alone Fantasy books. (Yes, yes, I'm sure it all comes together later. Probably?) I like stories with a couple of characters doing stuff that matters to them. Whenever I see a fantasy map, I immediately look to the places where nothing seems to be happening, and wonder what's happening there, to those guys. I like to call myself an Edge Reader, in this regard for the small picture over the big picture. People are more important than...

History
The final qualm I have is that I'm reading a whole invented history. This may just come from my background in political science, but I don't even have enough time on my hands to read all of actual history...which might actually come in useful one day. I read speculative fiction (Fantasy, Science Fiction et al) for one reason: Great Stories, and those are built on Ideas, not Facts. Characters, not Family Trees. It's all fine and good (and it is quite fine and good, in this case) to read an invented war between a bunch of houses over a kingdom, but I'd be better served to read about The Wars of the Roses if I want facts and families. But for ideas and characters, stories have history beat every time.
 

What I'll Steal
Still, I would be remiss if I didn't take all the good stuff from Epic Fantasy. Strong, but clear, characterization, esp. strict limited viewpoint characterization. One of the best features of A Game of Thrones is that nobody really knows what the hell is going on at any given moment, but they have to do something anyways. It would be cheating if the readers got any more hints than they do. On the flip side, it's important that readers know who the hell the viewpoint character is, starting with their name, so if I ever write a book with a bunch of character, I'll steal A Game of Thrones method (Margaret Atwood does this too, as I recall) of heading each chapter with the name of the viewpoint character.

So, conclusion-wise: A Game of Thrones is Good, and I'll read the whole series, because that's what I do. I'll probably end up writing an epic fantasy at some point, just to say I can do it.

But not today.

Religion & Long Division

So you want to write Religion, do you? Here’s what you have to do first: Ask yourself Why? Is it just because you feel you should? Is it going to actually enhance the story or the characters in some way? Or are you just going to try and see? That last one? Always a good strategy. So be it. I’m going to set out what I’ve gathered from years of actually watching people be religious, i.e. how characters of a religious bent would act. It may all be bullshit, but that can happen to anybody. If you decide to apply it, remember Rule Zero: If you’re afraid of offending somebody, write it down. Why else would you be a writer for? Anyways, the easily offended don’t read that much, and controversy over a blurb is known as ‘free publicity’. I’ve taken the liberty of sprinkling relevant quotes from books I’ve read recently to soften the section headings and to generally disguise my rough wit in well-hewn craft. Carry on.

What have I always believed?

That on the whole, and by and large, if a man lived properly, not according to what any priests said, but according to what seemed decent and honest inside, then it would, at the end, more or less, turn out all right.

-from Small Gods (Terry Pratchett)

Religion or Cult?

First off, eh, you’ve got to decide what purpose religion serves in your narrative or to your characters. Very important question, and an important part of that is to decide whether they’re working with a religion or with a cult. Unlike some definitions, a ‘cult’ is not a ‘religion with few members’, and here’s why: Religions are all the same.

What? Yeah. They’re all based on a general morality that boils down to 1. Don’t Murder and 2. Don’t Steal both of which derives from some form of “Do to Others As You’d Want Done To You”. The ole’ Ethic of Reciprocity. Then each religion dresses it up with fancy outfits or specific restrictions. Your basic cult, on the other hand, leaves that general morality out, and fills the void with crazy. 

You can see from the definition that at some points in human history, some of the great religions have most certainly been cults for some of their worshippers. The important difference, and the reason they’re still around, is, of course, that eventually enough worshippers who weren’t crazy were able to call out that cult-behavior as perversions of a great religion. 

Bringing it into writing: Cults make convenient antagonists, but not well-rounded characters. Crazy thinks in open figures (sometimes literally), anything can get in; Religion is a polygon of virtue.

“I’ll tell you one thing I’ve learned here already.”

“What’s that?”

“When I’m in charge, if someone knocks, they will be able to come in. Making someone who is seeking comfort stand out in the cold is a crock of rancid yak butter.”

-from Lamb (Christopher Moore)

 

Religion Evolves & Creed Accretes

Pardon my Culinary, but the big thing that sets forkin’ religion apart from mere cultlery is Flexibility, and Time in which to be flexible. Defining a ‘Grandfather’ as 40 years, a 100-grandfather religion will not look the same now as it did at the first grandfather, and you can safely bet that even before the 50-grandfather mark, new religions were starting to spin off. Sure, it may seem that religion is sometimes a grandfather behind the times, but that’s sometimes because the grandfathers are still alive. 

That is to say, every generation eventually gets the religion it wants, or it gets a cult. Either the generation adapts the religion to the times, or they go crazy, at which point the next generation picks up the pieces or the religion dies. It’s hard to sustain crazy across generations. That’s one of those sentences that’s both optimistic and depressing at the same time.

Philosophy or Religion?

Character-wise, there’s a big difference between Religion and Philosophy, and it comes down again to flexibility: Philosophy is a buffet, Religion is a set course. A character who has a philosophy will pick and choose whatever works to build a framework around whatever he’s doing. A religious character will stick to the framework he believes in already. Sometimes this will lead the religious to getting Canadian bacon instead of real food, and sometimes this will lead the philosophical to fill up on bread, but they’ll both get fed eventually. Morality all the same going down, it’s just a matter of quality of ingredients, preparation, and, of course, presentation.

A strange feature was that the ordinary ants were not excited by the songs, nor interested by the lectures. They accepted them as matters of course. They were rituals to them, like the Mammy songs or the conversations about their Beloved Leader. They did not look at these things as good or bad, exciting, rational or terrible. They did not look at them at all, but accepted them as Done.

-from The Once and Future King (T.H. White)

Culture is Not Religion

It’s important to remember that in any real question of morality, culture will trump religion. Religion might color the argument a bit, but it all comes down to what people around you do and what that means for you. Every society has had atheists, whether they admit it or whether they admit it, and yet the atheists have been part of the culture, which is the important bit. 

In short, it is not a cynical statement to say that The Crusades were only a Religious War for those who didn’t turn a profit. 

Hierarchy, Decentralized, Independent

Thus, culture will determine the shape that religion takes, and not the other way round, and religion will evolve with the culture. The less said on that, the better, and a quick look at the major sects of the various religions will be enough. Just cross-reference it with a cultural time-line.

Christianity - Catholic, Protestant, Mormon

Islam - Sunni, Shi’ite, Sufi

Buddhism - Theravada, Mahayanna, Tibetan

Judaism - Orthodox, Reform

Bringing it back to writing, there are very different character types that can spring from the different types of religions (which are themselves mere reflections of culture). There’s only one real choice for writing, and that’s what’s most interesting. A hierarchy will spawn those who think of hierarchy, talk of duty and the inevitable corruption of any organization, but also stability and a love for stability. It also helps that presumably everybody’s heard of it. An independent religion will avoid much of the corruption by losing the stability and nobody’s heard of it, but it’s flexible. If you’re making it up anyways, a decentralized religion is the best way to go, because you get all that fun corruption while retaining enough flexibility for your characters to play with.

God As A Character

In the sense of a omniscient, omnipotent entity...just don’t do it. If you don’t understand the motivations of all your characters, it’ll just seem weird. The best you can do is dress it up as an ineffable wonder. Anyways, as a writer, you’re God, so don’t make up competition for yourself. This goes hand-in-hand with the decentralized religion approach above, on account of everybody likes a good pantheon of human-like gods. Easier to keep track of, if you really must. 

In the fine traditions of writing advice, I've already broken the God As a Character Rule. To see how it went, read: "New Sodom Takes Her Chances"

War of the Possible Future

Free on

Smashwords 

Smashwords

Hey, I put up a story on Smashwords, but I accidentally set it "Make my book free". Sure, it's really easy to change, but I decided: Why not? So I'm going to make "War of the Possible Future" free until such time as...well, until such time as it isn't (probably the next time I put stuff on Smashwords). We'll see how it goes.

If you like this, why not try the other three titles I just uploaded?

Smashwords

Smashwords