|
|
|
|
|
| SFReader Forums > SFReader > Ask The Expert > Breaking new ground in S&S | Forum Quick Jump
|
| 
Jordan Lapp
Ebony & Ivory
      
Date Joined Sep 2006
Total Posts : 2953
| Posted 4/1/2008 4:28 PM (GMT -5) |   |
nathan said...
What he described in his post is solid, good advice and smart insight. But mainly it's just the strong use of the Element of Fiction "Character"--its not groundbreaking or trophe busting to write a strong character. Its just good writing--if you see what I mean. Nathan,
Well I mentioned Character, but I could just as easily have said "World building". Truly original worlds are also awesome, but hard to manage in the restrictive word counts in short fiction, nevertheless for good examples of great world building, check out most of the stories in Clarkesworld.
One of the problems with S&S is that often stories are simply a slight variation of Plot with nothing new in the other Elements. Why not try for something new in EVERY element?
Jordan Lapp Managing Editor
| | Back to Top | | |
 |
nathan
Sage
Date Joined Mar 2006
Total Posts : 2178
| Posted 4/1/2008 4:15 PM (GMT -5) | |
Jordan Lapp said...nathan, Now you're getting all sensitive. Don't worry about if you've offended me or not. I don't get offended unless someone gets personal. I never said that genre needs to apologize for being genre, nor does it have to do any transcending. All I'm saying is that there's room in S&S for originality. I mean, how rigid is the definition? From what I've heard, it's just that the protagonist should be an every day person and that magic should be either bad or poorly understood, and that it should have a fantasy setting. I mean, that's a WIDE OPEN definition. Why the heck are we still seeing Howard knockoffs? I mean, he covered that ground an he did it >very< well. I don't mind reading another barbarian piece, but put a new spin on it at least. I read for "sense of wonder", and that's tough to trigger if it's the same old schlock.
No you didn't say that--I am using your thought to get a little meta-post, wrapping in the role of reviews and what exactly it is we're calling for.
For example often when the discussion of this nature starts there are some default positions people reboot to begin the discussion. I often find I'm not arguing/discussing genres and their trophes so much as bad writing.
Also I think there is a difference between innovation and groundbreaking and original as goals. For example a reviewer praising innovation is one thing, but bemoaning a lack of groundbreaking originality in a clear genre story is something else--for example.
To the flip side of tropes being lumped into = bad writing is IMO Gobble's examples of his own writing where good writing = original. What he described in his post is solid, good advice and smart insight. But mainly it's just the strong use of the Element of Fiction "Character"--its not groundbreaking or trophe busting to write a strong character. Its just good writing--if you see what I mean.
Also, perhaps most important I tend to try and look at these things from a reader point. Romance novel after romance novel, western novel after western novel, mystery novel after mystery novel can be eagerly consumed by people spending money to get your work and for the most part the idea of "groundbreaking" = good in any sort of exclusive way never occurs to them.
I think we maybe coming from slightly left of center positions on this. I'm at the root not saying groundbreaking is bad--only that it is unneccessary for a story to be so to be "good" and that if your command of the Elements of Fiction (7 right? I'll check) then your story doesn't even need to be fresh to be "good" or, more importantly, lol, commerically viable.
VIEW IMAGE
"Writing the wet dreams of teenage boys" - Lindsey Llyod, Tangent Reviews
Tarantino himself has been forward and unapologetic about his influences. In a 1994 interview with Empire magazine, he said, "I steal from every single movie ever made. If people don't like that, then tough tills, don't go and see it, all right? I steal from everything. Great artists steal, they don't do homages." | | Back to Top | | |
|
MichaelEhart
Sage
Date Joined Jul 2005
Total Posts : 2352
| Posted 4/1/2008 4:01 PM (GMT -5) | | I am not certain that the story must break new ground, but it most certainly must have some sort of freshness to it--- forex the (title escapes me) wiki history take on assasinating Hitler story that everyone is raving about. A creaky, ancient trope that was given a face lift and a slap on the butt becomes one of the most talked about stories so far this year.
Click here to buy my book!
The Servant of the Manthycore from DEP
Illustrated by Rachel Marks, with an introduction by Michael Moorcock
Read me in 2008!
"Without Napier" Every Day Fiction, TBA
"Night of Shadows, Night of Knives" Magic and Mechanica, Ricasso Press, Spring 2008
"To Destroy All Flesh" Return of the Sword, Flashing Swords Press, Spring 2008
"Only His Name" Every Day Fiction, March 30
"An Exorcism Straight, Hold the Elvis" They Are Not What They Seem, Janrae Frank, ed., TBA
"The First Trial of Jermaish the King" Flashing Swords #10, May 2008
Still in print!
"The Stars by Law Forbidden" Unparalleled Journeys II, Journey Books, 2007
"Six Zombies Doing That Mick Jagger Strut" Damned in Dixie, Tenoka Press, 2007
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Swashbuckler
One-man sword-and-sorcery machine
Date Joined Mar 2006
Total Posts : 1286
| Posted 4/1/2008 4:00 PM (GMT -5) | | I certainly think a dose of originality is a good thing, and the better writers aim for that. That originality might come in the form of a different take on characterization, or in an injection of humor, or a dose of literary insight toward the human condition. Setting and world-building probably is the most fertile mine for originality.
I'm not claiming any great degree of success here, but I do strive to avoid writing the same piece repeatedly. Mostly, I use character in my attempts to achieve that. I try to make my characters vivid enough, and complete enough, that they drive the story. So, for instance, a story in which Calthus finds himself hunted by a giant boogie-thing would turn out vastly different from a story that starts with the same setting and the same monster, but with Spider John or one of the Faceless Sons as a protagonist. (Indeed, it's a standard exercise for me to take a completed story and then imagine how it might shape up with a different protagonist -- now and then I find the new angle worth pursuing, and the new story ends up so incredibly different from the first I doubt anynone but me would see the connection.)
I think another way to make the traditional monster tale more than just a monster tale is to put the emphasis on the reasons for the monster encounter in the first place. Is the protagonist's own personality driving him toward a foolish encounter? Or is she caught up in circumstances beyond her control? Does she learn anything important from the encounter? IS the monster just a big scary thing, or does it derive from something more solid, more illustrative of something Deep and Important? Symbolism counts, I think. And maybe the monster isn't really so monstrous -- maybe the "monster" is the king or the mindset or the circumstances that placed Heroic Guy or Gal within reach of that Dread Thing to begin with.
I think there is lots of room to play with all kinds of ideas within heroic fantasy. I think a number of stories I've seen in slush or crit groups over the years fall flat because they DON'T play with ideas or focus on what leads to the monster encounter. And I also think many a reader coming to heroic fantasy for the first time, or who only rarely reads such a story, misses out the merits of a good story because he or she just dismisses it as "another monster tale."
I'd recommend the "Swords Against Darkness" anthologies edited by Andrew J. Offutt back in the 1970's as pretty good example of how much variety of theme, etc., can be achieved in a book full of monster tales.
Steve Goble
Visit my blog, Swords Against Boredom, for news on published fiction and upcoming stories. | | Back to Top | | |
|
Jordan Lapp
Ebony & Ivory
Date Joined Sep 2006
Total Posts : 2953
| Posted 4/1/2008 3:37 PM (GMT -5) | | | I believe that short fiction is too tight a market to publish the same kind of story over and over.
I mean, "barbarian fights monster"? We've all read that story before. Why do we have to read it again?
The constant repeat of story tropes is part of the reason that S&S has a bad name in the literary community. I mean, we have some great authors--surely they can come up with some original material? I can be done even in very well trod ground (note Mike Turner's werewolf story in EDF).
What do you guys think?
Jordan Lapp Managing Editor
| | Back to Top | | |
| 160 posts in this thread.
Viewing Page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 |
| Forum Information | Currently it is Thursday, January 08, 2009 8:27 PM (GMT -5)
There are a total of 85,855 posts in 7,125 threads.
In the last 3 days there were 17 new threads and 73 reply posts. View Active Threads
| | Who's Online | This forum has 1335 registered members. Please welcome our newest member, rowdyphantom.
9 Guest(s), 0 Registered Member(s) are currently online. Details
|
Forum powered by dotNetBB v2.42EC SP2
dotNetBB © 2000-2009
(c) SFReader |
|
|
|