SFReader Forums

The original version of this page can be found at : http://forum.sfreader.com/default.aspx?f=5&m=30281

Posted By : Supr - 1/16/2007 8:37 AM

My question is: because nowadays the women are buying the most of the books so is this the same with fantasy? I mean: if this is truth, so there is no wonder, that S&S or Heroic Fantasy is not so popular by publishers because of marketing causes. The „male” literature isn’t loved by women and they don’t buy it.

What do you think?

Posted By : erazmus - 1/16/2007 2:48 PM

While generalising by gender is a good way to get bit, I pretty much think you have the brass ring. Though I think its a bit more complicated than that.
Women do buy most of the books today, both in general and in genre. They also hold most of the editorial seats in genre and have a lot more influence in publishing in general than in times past. This is inevitable with the changes to our culture over the last fifty years, as they couldn't very well have _less_ influence than they did before. But this has had some unfortunate side effects in certain areas and fantasy, especially fantasy that appeals to men, is a big one of them.
I've commented extensivly about this in other threads over the last year but I'll give it one more go.
Women buy most of the books therefore, the current non-logic says, you should publish books that appeal to women. More importantly, you better not publish anything that offends women. And there are quite a few women who are very easily offended. Sword and Sorcery has been particularly singled out in a viscous logic chain that goes something like:
John Norman's Gor was S&S
Gor is evil and offensive to women and
it fed unhealth adolescent sex fantasies
therefore;
all S&S is evil and reenforces negative stereotypes about women, and is unwelcome in the marketplace.
So in a very few years most S&S series disappeared (Norman's did, even while it was selling very well). And publishers quit useing the term S&S to describe what they were selling, quit using the props of S&S on their covers and started calling everything that might have been S&S something else (heroic fantasy is a favorite).
Of course, along the way adolescent boys have become the largest demographic which are not targeted, along with the similar taste blue collar men. So no longer are the likes of John Norman and Sharon Green fueling depraved adolescent sex fantasies with their fiction, and the modern, non-rading teenage guy has to settle with fueling his wet-dreams with images from video games like Grand Theft Auto-San Andreas and Doom. Much better, no doubt, than the bondage-and-whipping found in Norman.<append sarcasm here>
Since I meet people all the time who are looking for good S&S to read, along with books that weigh less than a kilo, I know there are large segments of the market that are not being served, but publishers don't really care. Those people can (and do) go watch television for their light entertainment.
Thats all over genralised but not entirely wrong. The wheel keeps turning and what you sew you reap three times over. There have been long periods of no or little S&S before, followed by a resurgance. We are now due that resurgance. But these things always start small, in this case small press. Pitch-Black is in the forefront of the next wave of S&S, along with Carnifex Press, Hole-in-the-wall press, Fantasist Enterprises and others. Some come and go quickly, as is the nature of small press, but more are coming our way every year, and sooner or later I feel the trend will break out in the mass market again.
Yes, women do have a lot of influence in the market and the appeal of old S&S to women is limited. But S&S isn't bound by the works of its earlier practitioners, neither Howard, Smith and Lieber nor Carter, DeCamp or <thank gods> Norman and Green. At its core it is niether pure adolescent fantasy or misoginistic, it can be written and enjoyed by women as well as men, teens as well as old XXXX like me, and has too much potential to be kept on the wayside much longer.
Mike

Michael D. Turner
"Psyched Up" in _Turn the other Chick_-ed. E. Friesner-Baen books
www.baen.com
"Dutchman Rescue"in Continuum SF #6
www.continuumsciencefiction.com/orders.htm

"An Incident at Black Tongue Tavern" in _Bash Down the Door and Slice Open the Badguy_ from Fantasist Enterprises:
www.fantasistent.com/books/anthologies/BASH.php

Posted By : TRtheJ - 1/16/2007 9:41 PM

Supr said...
My question is: because nowadays the women are buying the most of the books so is this the same with fantasy? I mean: if this is truth, so there is no wonder, that S&S or Heroic Fantasy is not so popular by publishers because of marketing causes. The „male” literature isn’t loved by women and they don’t buy it.

What do you think?

I wanted to reply to this earlier, but a forced trip out of town stopped me. Be that as it may...

Mike brings up some good points, though I must say I never heard John Norman's Gor series referred to as Sword & Sorcery before. It was said to be a Burrough's Mars style series, but much sexier. And Mike may be ahead of me on the business end of it, but what...well, killed the Gor series to me and other fans I talked to was Norman's ever expending of the stories with way overdone back stories about such things as in Dancer of Gor, I believe it was, where he got carried away describing a chess-like game's history and strategies as two played said game. It was so overdone the story would literally stop for pages on pages 'cause of it, making it obviously dull to read.

I do remember in the early 80's reading that women started reading Fantasy which led to a boom in the genre, leading to zillions of Tolkien style trilogy tomes wherein there were/are strong women characters. And most of this Fantasy fiction was being written by women. So unless a male fan of Sword & Sorcery hung out in used book shops the genre was hard to find but for a series of mediocre Conan the... books by a stable of writers. Oh, I have read and enjoyed a number of these books, but really, they are a poor representation of not only the genre but Robert E. Howard's Conan. And speaking further of Conan and the disappearance of Sword & Sorcery, let us not forget the horrid b movie Conan the Barbarian which, with its even worse sequel, Conan the Destroyer, hammered a nail or two in the genre's coffin, so to speak.

Then, as Mike mentioned, there was the advent of vid games which drew away much of Sword & Sorcery's fan base -- and, in my eye, earlier there was the Tolkien based Dungeons & Dragons which pulled away even more fans and possible fans. Television and movies as well.

And there's one more thing that helped lead to Sword & Sorcery's downfall. Lack of worthy writers. I mean, in the 60's and early 70's, when Sword & Sorcery hit it big -- Thanks to Robert E. Howard's Conan -- you had writers such as Moorcock, Leiber, Wagner bringing forth worthy Sword & Sorcery tales, but you also had an endless series of "In the tradition of Conan" books pouring out that were far from in the tradion of... and, in my eye, stepped into areas never dreamed of by the genre's creator, such as magic swords wielded by heroes, flying lizards, magical flying ships and the like, which in some ways cheapened the genre. Plus, there was the sudden and oft repeated "hero must have a quest" added -- a touch of Tolkien -- which cheapened it more. Again, I have read many of these and enjoyed them, but even so...

Oh, and when Howard's Conan went out of print... All was lost!

Um... Back to your question: Yes, women's involvement as readers and writers in Fantasy had an effect, but as mentioned above, so did many other factors.

Posted By : erazmus - 1/17/2007 4:37 AM

Look, despite the burroughesque trappings of Tarl Cabot's arrival on Gor, the books themselves are definitly sword and sorcery. In fact the early ones were actually pretty good S&S novellas, padded out with loads of S&M crap and amazingly detailed descriptions of how everything could be worked out. Later Norman cut out the hard work of plotting a descent story to wrap him masturbatory fantasies around and the quality degraded greatly, but the sales never actually sunk to a level of non-profitabilty. I cite as an example of the quality and S&Sness of the stories _The Nomads of Gor_ in which Tarl and a tuchuck warrior are captured and fed to a hideous gelitinous monster-- the "yellow pool". The two chapters in which this happens, if read seperatly from the rest of the bondage laden book, stand alone as a descent short story that compares well to any S&S published in the sixties and seventies.
Of coarse, if you stripped the crap out of the series and left only the stories, they would only add up to about one good paperback. I'm not defending the series as it stands or really bemoaning its demise, just mentioning it at a telling factor in the publishing trends of that time and since.
I missed the eighties in America, spending most of the decade in Japan and out in the Aluetians, so I can't recall fannish reactions to the change in fantasy books of the time. That made the changes all the more apparent when I returned. Not only were books all much, much longer but the heros in general were a bunch of angst ridden panzies. Nobody was clear of purpose and deft of hand anymore, they moped about there relationship problems and were befuddled by their female companions. Except the women heros, of course. They were allowed to be manly. But a male hero kicking the evil wizards butt and celebrating with a jug of rot-gut and a tavern whore? Not anymore! Now they made like a looser no adolescent male would want to emulate, waiting patently while the female characters planned out a proper wedding.
The modern fantasy seems to be typlified by R. Jordan's Wheel of Time series. Women have all the power and all the sense, men haven't got a clue and are afraid of the idea of sex. Plus a story that goes on and on without conclusion. I know there are plenty of contrary examples and I'm over simplifying, and I admit I haven't read a lot of the fantasy series that dominated the market over the last twenty years but I noticed the change in 1989, and just cut back on my fantasy reading then. I bet a lot of men did.
And its not just women writers, or even mostly women writers. Women get a pass on their male heros, a bit. Its men writing for women editors. In publishing more than any industry I know, the fallout from the gender-wars has had its greatest impact. S&S is not the only casaulty, mens adventure series, westerns, and pulp-hero reprints have suffered greatly as well. "Low Brow" writing, appealing to the male has withered across the board while its equivalent for women-- catagory romance, has florished beyond all other genres. I refuse to believe that Joe Sixpack has stopped reading on his own, niether football nor TV have improved that much (or at all) in the last forty years.
Mike

Posted By : BethS - 1/17/2007 1:06 PM

Mike,

I agree on your assessment of Jordan's WoT series (the women having all the power and men (mostly) acting like wimps).

However, I find it interesting that one of the best selling fantasy series today is edgy, gritty, compelling, and describes a world where (largely) men rule.

I speak, of course, of George R.R. Martin's Song of Ice and Fire series. This is NOT feminized fiction. And it is a huge hit, with both sexes.

~Beth

Posted By : erazmus - 1/17/2007 2:21 PM

Well, yes. Its one of the ones I haven't read.
And while I've let myself rant here, I must say the effect isn't total and is no doubt settling out.
It was a phase at best, reflecting larger changes in society no doubt. I've overstated it, probably.
Mike

Posted By : BethS - 1/17/2007 6:01 PM

erazmus said...
Well, yes. Its one of the ones I haven't read.

Gracious, man! This cannot be! Hie thee to a bookstore!

~Beth

Posted By : James Enge - 1/17/2007 6:31 PM

Lots of Elric and Leiber fans are women (not to mention Gor fans; you may think I kid but I do not), and then there's Jirel right at the genre's beginning. I guess I don't see that sword and sorcery is necessarily male fiction, or that the rise of women to prominence in publishing was necessarily bad for it.

The toughest blow S&S had to take was the death of fiction magazines that would publish it (since S&S has typically appeared in shorter lengths). When the old Fantastic went down for the count, there were no prozines that would publish S&S (unless it was an indulgence to an established author). Only a lunatic would write something no one is going to publish. (I raise my hand to be counted.) But since this is the golden age of the little magazine, and since the former prozines are all becoming little magazines, I think the playing field is levelling out some.

Finally, in pragmatic terms, if we're trying to build an audience for S&S I don't think it makes sense to shut the door on half the potential readers (or writers, for that matter).

Stop me if you've heard this one (a story Harold Lamb tells about Genghis Khan). The Mongol emperor was getting older and his sons were on the outs with each other, each planning their power grab after the Khan's death. So he calls his sons together and gives each one an arrow, and tells them to break it. They all do it easily. Then he gives the same number of arrows tied into a bundle and challenges each one of them to break it. None of them can. The lesson is clear: they can survive together or be destroyed separately.

I think we need all the arrows we can get.

James Enge

http://jamesenge.livejournal.com/

"Turn Up This Crooked Way" (selected by Rich Horton for his "Virtual Best" of 2005) in Black Gate 8

"Payment Deferred" in Black Gate 9

"A Covenant with Death" in Flashing Swords 6

"The Red Worm's Way" in Flashing Swords E-Zine Annual

"A Book of Silences" forthcoming in Black Gate 10

Posted By : TRtheJ - 1/18/2007 1:21 PM

Yes, the fading of fiction magazines that would publish Sword & Sorcery had an effect as well.

And there was one other 80's phenomenon that had an effect on Fantasy and the demise of Sword & Sorcery, I think. That is, the creation of "stable writers" brought together to produce zillions of trilogy tomes based on video games, such as Dragonlance and Dungeons & Dragons, which were Tolkienesque. I read a number of the Dragonlance series in the beginning and found them quite enjoyable, but dropped out when the books were coming out weekly. Overkill.

Posted By : erazmus - 1/18/2007 3:01 PM

Well, I've not considered how the game tie-ins might have affected things. And I'm not saying women didn't like any particular offering of the genre. Really, the demise of S&S was probably more due to the big push to get SF and F to be viewed as being more literary, more "mature", than it had been.
This was a real concern as far back as fandom had existed. In the sixties the idea started to make some meaningful headway with writers like Ellison getting some serious consideration on college campuses, and others gaining an impact on society as a whole far exceeding anything genre fiction had ever recieved before. Heinlien's _Stranger in a Strange Land_ nipped infront of the sexual revolution making him a reluctant new-age guru of sorts (a rather befuddled one at that). Tolkien came along with his instant-literary creibility (Oxford Don's carried that automaticly, at least on this side of the pond) and other fantasy writers sort of streatched out their work to draw the same-- Michael Moorcock probably reaping the greatest benifit from that. He tied all his fantasy characters into a huge arc that was supposed to mean something and fantasy fans got to sit around and debate what that was endlessly.
While all this was going on, the standards changed. It got harder to find a market for straigt forward works, editors wanted to be the guys bringing out deep, meaningful, literary SF and F.
Not that the genre ever left its pulpish roots entirely behind. But much of the staples of the genre magazine moved to the exploding mass of the genre paperback. When that expanding field inevitably stabaized, certain things starte to loose ground. S&S was one of them.
It never entirely disappeared and we're doing our best around here to bring it back fully into the fold. It shouldn't be that hard, S&S is fun-- to read, to write-- and there are plenty of folks out there in the world who could use some fun.
Mike

Posted By : nathan - 1/18/2007 3:19 PM

I struggle with this. It is indisputable that women have risen up both in terms of buying power and to obtain not just positions as editors but (perhaps more importantly) as slush readers and agents. This isn't a bad thing in general but it isn't a good thing for 'traditional' S&S. Rightly or wrongly (and often rightly if seen outside of direct context) the trophes of S&S spefic fantasy are seen as mysognistic and not harmless escapism.

But it isn't just females. Young males are coming up through the ranks with a lot of apologistic baggage when it comes to stories and trophes and norms. Gor is acctually the best sample you could find for this point (as a general statement on 'acceptable' if you don't like S&S confused with S&P). That successful series was killed WHILE IT WAS STILL SUCCESSFUL by editors and publishers.( I don't know why, Laura K. Hamilton and Anne Rice showed how a little S&M kink is appealing to girls.) Despite making money no one wanted that series in their name. The first novel was pretty good, IMO, try slipping that through TOR or Baen or DAW, now. Never mind an agent who could get it in with the Big Boys.

Yet change the trophes too much to be 'inclosuive' and you have something else. That something else doesn't have to be bad (may be excellant in fact) but it won't be what I think of as pure S&S as oppossed to Heroic Fantasy.
The outlet for male fantasy reading has morphed into Warhammer and RPG-esque books in the field of fantasy. I used to think it would 'come back around' as all that was old becomes new again but I think the gatekeepers of Bestsellers are against this. Pure S&S as it was written before the deluge that killed it much as horror was killed could be considered 'successful' if it could rise to, say, the level that the western has currently fallen too. Hopefully it won't become extinct. When was the last you say a short novel or story in the Spicy Boxing Tales that used to rules sales from the 20's to the 50's? Some subgenres go and they don't come back.

I think males and young males are still reading but have switched to the action-thriller/action-SF genres which still hold to pace and external conflict in the tradition of REH.

I think you'd like Game of Thrones, btw. I loved it. It just isn't S&S.

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."

Posted By : John Hocking - 1/18/2007 5:30 PM

The brute fact is that genre fiction, so long dominated by men, has come to be dominated by women. The SF, Fantasy, and Mystery genres just don't have anywhere near as much material aimed guys as they used to.

The pendulum had to swing away from the macho paperback era of Spillane/Fleming/Burroughs/Howard, didn't it?

Of course it did.

I only wish it hadn't swung so far as to make old school "manly adventure" pulp almost extinct.

The temptation to cry 'conspiracy' can be seen creeping around in the background here.

And that's just plain absurd.

Anybody who lived and read through the 1970's will remember an era when the paperback stands were literally covered with dozens, maybe hundreds, of "men's action-adventure" series.

All of a sudden they were gone.

They disappeared exactly when the VCR hit big.

The thrills that guys used to read books for can now be obtained by popping in a DVD or flippping on a video game. Plenty of raw action and no need to decipher that egg-headed prose crap.

I've worked in the book industry for more than 20 years and I'm here to tell you that the kind of old school thrilling fiction we love is out of style because far fewer people are interested in reading it.

My company did a survey that I'm not supposed to talk about. Trade secret stuff.

In it we found that 80% of the books we sold were being sold to women.

That's no typo. Eighty Per Cent. 8 out of 10. Four out of Five.

Wanna keep Sword & Sorcery alive?

Give some young guy a book to read.

They're just not doing it themselves.

Posted By : Captain Atlantis - 1/18/2007 7:36 PM

I'm going to vote with Gabby Hayes on this one.

I crept down this thread thinking, "television... television..." I think most men will go with any combination of titillation and convenience they can find. TV is pretty convenient. Since World of Warcraft has now signed 8 million customers, and LotR is on cable rotation like it was Gilligan's Island, I'd say that more people today are informed about the symbols and traditions of S&S than in years past. In spite of that 70's boom, most people I knew back then had no idea what was going on with Conan until Arnold and Marvel repackaged it for them.

The imagery and thematic traditions of this genre are much more prevalent in our culture than during the so-called Golden Age. But their commercial application is robust in visual media, where, possibly, they best belong.

Uh, anyone ever been to this site: www.swordandsorcery.org? I open that page and see 3 rather fetching and self-empowered women, with a couple guys in the background. If the artwork on these covers was chosen to appeal to men, the women would be doing the Frazetta submission thing, on the ground, cowering wantonly behind the Hulking Man. Since they are images of women standing front and center, holding the weapons, and looking in charge, I would say the covers are designed to appeal to women. (and guys like me: who cheer when women start swinging swords.)

In spite of my basic 'ok, the women are the readers, so write for them' point of view, I have to lament, with John, the passing of "manly adventure." "Manly" gives away a lot, old timer. Not a very modern word.

www.kiva.org - loans that change lives

www.edhumpal.com
www.hoboespresso.com

Posted By : Supr - 1/20/2007 5:53 PM

erazmus said...
But a male hero kicking the evil wizards butt and celebrating with a jug of rot-gut and a tavern whore? Not anymore! Now they made like a looser no adolescent male would want to emulate, waiting patently while the female characters planned out a proper wedding.

I couldn't read the posts until now. During I was writing this topic, I thought about why (real?) men don't read Fantasy of today now... Do ya think the cited words above ...ehh... say something about? Do they?

Posted By : erazmus - 1/21/2007 9:49 AM

Supr said...

Supr,
I'm sorry but I just can't make out what you are trying to ask, or say. And I used the above statement before, on a panel about the changing mores in fantasy fiction. They say several things in context.
Mike

Posted By : Supr - 1/21/2007 10:19 AM

It's easy to say, erazmus. I do think that the dominating fantasy of today like the stories about women and "weak" men - so called right now "sensitive men" - are for men just boring. That's why they don't buy it.

And books where there is much blood, whores etc. are - cause of political correctness or a f*ck knows why - not published.

Posted By : John Hocking - 1/21/2007 10:11 PM

Hey Supr, did you read my post?

In short, what I was saying was that the strong feminine element in modern fantasy is there because a hugely disproportionate number of readers are women.

Trust me, publishers are out to make a dollar. They aren't following any mysterious agenda to Politically Correct the reading tastes of the world.

The sick fact is that as soon as men could get their escapist thrills in a more immediate fashion than reading a book, they deserted the bookstores in droves to watch videos and play computer games. Men are simply not buying books the way they used to.

So give a young man a good book, the kind of book they'll have a hell of a hard time putting down. Because chances are that if you don't give him that book, he's never going to pick it up himself.

Posted By : gardnersteve - 1/21/2007 11:00 PM

I agree with John, when I was 13 my aunt gave me "The Complete Robot" by Issac Asimov and that lead me to read hundreds of sci-fi novels over the years.

My question is what type of S&S book can I give to my 10 year old nephew that won't have to much t and a or gore hah.

Favorite Books>>

*Fantasy/Sword and Sorcery*>>

Nine Princes in Amber (Roger Z.) * Hobbit (J.R.R. Tolkien) * Master of the Five Magics (Lyndon Hardy) * Lure of the Basilisk (lace>Lawrencelace> Watt-Evans) * Cyborg and Sorcerers (lace>Lawrencelace> Watt-Evans) * Missenchanted Sword (lace>Lawrencelace> Watt-Evans) * On a Pale Horse (Piers Anthony) * Spell for Chameleon (Piers Anthony) * Dark Company (Glen Cook) * Tarra Khash: Hrossak! (Brian Lumley)>>

> >

*Sci-Fi*>>

Foundation Trilogy (Isaac Asimov) Enders Game * Ringworld (Niven) * Mote in Gods Eye (Niven) * Rama Series (lace>Clarklace>)>>

Posted By : erazmus - 1/22/2007 1:31 AM

Most ten year olds just read right past the T&A, though blood and gore do tend to fascinate.
Its been a while since I was ten. . .
Mike

Posted By : Captain Atlantis - 1/22/2007 8:05 AM

Steve:
We used to read to our kids nightly, many years past the golden book stage, and after they were good readers themselves. They still loved it too. We even read the whole Lord of the Rings aloud. So, for a 10 year old: The Redwall Series by Brian Jacques - entertaining to any adult, and there are quite a few now; anything by Lloyd Alexander; the Alanna books by Tamora Pierce; and don't forget that a 10 year old can understand everything in the Earthsea books and and 100 year old can still be moved by them.

Hmm, OK, this might be a list for 12 year olds. But I think you can get that kid something similar, with a little keyword searching or wandering around a B&N. There are a lot of kid lit supporting organizations that publish recommended lists.

My personal experience is exactly down the lines of this gender "stereotype" we're identifying. My oldest son wouldn't read anything but a comic book until he was 20 and started going out with a girl who read Raymond Feist. He read all of them, suggesting that a reluctant male reader will dive in enthusiasticly if it enhances or improves his sex life. Both of my daughters read voraciously, and both taught themselves to read ahead of their class progress. Then another boy came along. Verbally he is incredibly acute, due to all the stories he listened to at a young age, and by growing up in a conversational household, but reading causes sweat and physical pain. So last fall I gave him an Elmore Leonard book and he read it cover to cover in a few days. He had read his first novel (not skimmed, cheated, or copied for a report) at age 17! So girls are buying books? I guess!

www.kiva.org - loans that change lives

www.edhumpal.com
www.hoboespresso.com

Posted By : nathan - 1/22/2007 12:25 PM

Captain Atlantis said...
anything by Lloyd Alexander

True dat.

VIEW IMAGE
"Writing the wet dreams of teenage boys" - Lindsey Llyod, Tangent Reviews

Posted By : TRtheJ - 1/22/2007 3:46 PM

John Hocking said...
The brute fact is that genre fiction, so long dominated by men, has come to be dominated by women. The SF, Fantasy, and Mystery genres just don't have anywhere near as much material aimed guys as they used to.

The pendulum had to swing away from the macho paperback era of Spillane/Fleming/Burroughs/Howard, didn't it?

Of course it did.

I only wish it hadn't swung so far as to make old school "manly adventure" pulp almost extinct.

The temptation to cry 'conspiracy' can be seen creeping around in the background here.

And that's just plain absurd.

Anybody who lived and read through the 1970's will remember an era when the paperback stands were literally covered with dozens, maybe hundreds, of "men's action-adventure" series.

All of a sudden they were gone.

They disappeared exactly when the VCR hit big.

The thrills that guys used to read books for can now be obtained by popping in a DVD or flippping on a video game. Plenty of raw action and no need to decipher that egg-headed prose crap.

My company did a survey that I'm not supposed to talk about. Trade secret stuff.

In it we found that 80% of the books we sold were being sold to women.

That's no typo. Eighty Per Cent. 8 out of 10. Four out of Five.

Wanna keep Sword & Sorcery alive?

Give some young guy a book to read.

They're just not doing it themselves.

The pendulum is, I think, swinging back a bit. I noticed some time ago that in mystery there is a minor return to the old pot boilers. Hard Case Crime started off with a few titles and now, at least at my local book shop, the mystery section is loaded with them.

Further, the last few times I haunted the Science Fiction/Fantasy section I noticed many men and what was really nice, young boys scarfing up books -- Fantasy books. So maybe the pendulum is swinging back here, too.

Posted By : John Hocking - 1/22/2007 3:59 PM

Sorry TR, as much as I love Hardcase Crime (own every one, write letters to the editor, etc) the sales of that particular series are nothing special.

Man, some of them are of gem-like beauty, too.

But only the Stephen King title made much of a stir.

I hope the pendulum swings back.

But I am not counting on it.

Posted By : John M. Whalen - 1/22/2007 8:17 PM

(I love Hardcase Crime (own every one, write letters to the editor, etc) the sales of that particular series are nothing special.

Man, some of them are of gem-like beauty, too. )

GRIFTER'S GAME by Lawrence Block. A low down, dirty-nasty masterpiece. Nobody today could ever write like that. It was of a time.

Posted By : gardnersteve - 1/22/2007 10:41 PM

Which Hardcase Crime is the best one?

Favorite Books>>

*Fantasy/Sword and Sorcery*>>

> >

*Sci-Fi*>>

Foundation Trilogy (Isaac Asimov) Enders Game * Ringworld (Niven) * Mote in Gods Eye (Niven) * Rama Series (lace>Clarklace>)>>

Posted By : James Enge - 1/23/2007 1:11 AM

Re Hardcase Crime: I don't know if it's the best (not having read them all), but I liked Ed McBain's The Gutter and the Grave.

Posted By : TRtheJ - 1/23/2007 1:11 PM

John Hocking said...

Sorry TR, as much as I love Hardcase Crime (own every one, write letters to the editor, etc) the sales of that particular series are nothing special.

Man, some of them are of gem-like beauty, too.

But only the Stephen King title made much of a stir.

I hope the pendulum swings back.

But I am not counting on it.

So Hard Case Crime isn't doing that well. I must admit I'm surprised, considering it is very unusual for a book shop -- in this case Books-A-Million -- to carry so many of a nonselling item.

Oh, I read the King Hard Case Crime book and David Dodge's The Last Match which were quite enjoyable.

I think we're overlooking one aspect other than the women factor. And that is the book shops of today. What I mean is the fact book shops these days are far from what they were in my youth (the 70's), in that they just don't carry stock the way they used to. Back then, as a teen, I could find complete series on the shelf, such as Tarzan, Gor, Conan, The Executioner and on and on, waiting to be bought. Today it's a rare thing to find even a complete trilogy on the shelf, and in that case you find book 3 or maybe book two. And considering most Fantasy and Science Fiction these days comes in trilogy or series... Plus, the fact with some book shops, as with my local one, they don't carry new releases such as the recent Conan trilogy on the shelf, leaving a possible buyer having to know about it ahead of time.

Posted By : John Hocking - 1/23/2007 1:49 PM

Aw, it's not like Hard Case is dead or anything. They generally do sell, just on the lower end of acceptable for a mass market paperback mystery.

The Janet Evanovich mass market mystery that came out last June sells twice as much, on a daily basis, as the Hard Case Crime book that hit the stands last month.

Let me reveal myself here.

I LOVE HARD CASE CRIME BOOKS WITH ALL MY MANGY HEART.

Look at these covers....

http://www.hardcasecrime.com/books_bios.cgi

Some are so beautiful they make me choke up.

The only one I've read that was less than Very Good was the forthcoming LUCKY AT CARDS.

A "best" one can't be selected, because they come at the hardboiled genre from so many directions.

For old-fashioned hardboiled pulp melodrama go for Wade Miller's BRANDED WOMAN

(mysterious criminal mastermind, dangerous female lead, outrageous jerk-the-rug out from under your feet conclusion)

For Hard Drinkin', Down and Out Macho Noir go for Day Keene's HOME IS THE SAILOR

(Hapless doomed he-man hero, ultra-duplicitous female, dumb cops, gallons of booze)

For Crisp, Terse, Hardhitting, Hemingwayesque Noir go for Richard Stark's (Donald Westlake) 361.

(Nice guy goes revenge-mad, brutal scenes of painful clarity)

For top notch tough-guy kicks the bad-guy's ass into next week thrills, try Max Allan Collins THE LAST QUARRY .

(Honest old school machismo with sleazy thugs, gorgeous dames and a narrator who's a "retired" hitman)

I could go on.

Haven't found one yet that wasn't worth reading.

But it should be obvious by now that I love this kinda stuff.

Posted By : erazmus - 1/23/2007 1:51 PM

Guys,
Nothing special isn't the same as dismal. Hard Case Crime is a different format, a return to short novels, and I expect it might take a while to catch on. Or it might not catch on, the value = weight idea seems pretty well entreanched in the public at large.
Mike

Posted By : TRtheJ - 1/23/2007 4:22 PM

erazmus said...
Guys,
Nothing special isn't the same as dismal. Hard Case Crime is a different format, a return to short novels, and I expect it might take a while to catch on. Or it might not catch on, the value = weight idea seems pretty well entreanched in the public at large.
Mike

By "value = weight", I take it you are referring to the phenomenon of as book prices have gone up page numbers have as well. That someone is less likely to be a $6.99 paper back that's 195 pages than one over 300 pages. I have always found this an interesting occurance and have found it sad to read a 300 plus page book that would've been a good 195 page book if you cut out the padding, so to speak. Quite like a number of two hour plus movies I've seen.

Anyway, I've often wondered why both books cost the same.

Posted By : erazmus - 1/23/2007 4:25 PM

Books are like steak. Sometimes a higher price for a lower weight is a good deal.
Mike

Posted By : Supr - 2/4/2007 12:39 PM

John Hocking said...
Hey Supr, did you read my post?

Yes John. I'm broken: 80 % are women !

But I do think, that S&S is a very difficult genre to write. It must be realistic, one mistake and the story is screwed up... you can't write a good S&S book in a month! It takes much more time and writers forget it, let's make it clear.

And on the other hand: S&S is a one of the most fast action packed genres! And you said, that videogames and dvd are in, but... the books with action also...

Posted By : Melkor - 3/11/2007 3:45 PM

Id like to say something about this, not concerning the reader, but the writer.

I think its important to go beyong gender issues in a given piece of literature. For example, too often a female main charcater has the male counterpart, and the male main charcater has a female counterpart. i often see this as a very boring gender thing I dont care for, as if giving the reader an expectation for either romance, or gender tension in whatever form it comes up in the story. I personally got tired of it.

Maybe this tendency is universal, but I think it tries to sort of be friendly to both men and women.

As a guy, I guess I like violence. I like skull splitting battles and such. Maybe why I like heavy Metal. But I wouldnt categorize myself as somebody who goes out looking for "masculine" fiction. For the moment, most S&S I have read is either from Flashing Swords, or the Solomon Kane anthology Ive yet to finish, but I think the primal masculinity in S&S derives from an element of the genre, as opposed to being an element itself. I see S&S as a violent adventure, that doesnt stop with action, but has an interesting setting that heightens the sense of danger, and creates a world reminiscent to living by "jungle law". The big warrior with the slender half naked princess thats clutching his big muscular arm is derived from the whats permissible in S&S, and not the defining element. Still, its undeniable the manly appeal.

I read Red Shadows, by REH, and the mixture of exploring dangerous, wild and savage territory, and the quest for vengeance appealing to my masculinity, but its not limited to that. Theres a human element there, independent to sex, where you are facing the unknown, traveling to the dark corners of the world and finding a place where the convictions of the "civilized" man crumble, and you are there, trying to survive in that.

As for the games part, being only 22, being of the video game generation, I dont think I find myself indulging my masculinity in games. Not in the fantasy games. I admit it: I often create female characters. Im just fascinated with female heroes. I think theres a certain femeninity in a woman thats ready to cleave your head in two. Not that Id want a wife that could do that :) At least not to me.

"By the toll of a billion deaths man has bought his birthright of the earth, and it is his against all comers:.... For neither do men live nor die in vain" - H.G.Wells - The War of the Worlds

Posted By : TRtheJ - 3/12/2007 7:27 PM

Some interesting point, Melkor.

But in thinking it over, I think we have left out one important reason women read more books than men. Games? Television? Movies? Maybe. Yet I think the other big reason is comic books. They're quick reads, exciting and the really big thing going for them, they got pictures.

Posted By : Melkor - 3/12/2007 7:35 PM

How do you mean, TR? That men today prefer to have their media shown to them in a tangible way, like the pictures of comics, or the obvious visual element movies have?

"By the toll of a billion deaths man has bought his birthright of the earth, and it is his against all comers:.... For neither do men live nor die in vain" - H.G.Wells - The War of the Worlds

Posted By : Supr - 3/14/2007 12:16 PM

Melkor said...
I see S&S as a violent adventure, that doesnt stop with action, but has an interesting setting that heightens the sense of danger, and creates a world reminiscent to living by "jungle law".

But don't you think, Melkor, that this is typically manly way of life? Just to do it

Without "female" innersolutions...

Posted By : crystalwizard - 3/14/2007 12:25 PM

Supr said...

But don't you think, Melkor, that this is typically manly way of life? Just to do it

Without "female" innersolutions...

Sounds more like a typically hollywood way of life than anything. We're living in a world where just about everything is video in some way. Animated or live action, computer generated or on film.

If you're going to sit down and play an online game, do you want one with pretty pictures and lots of blood guts and gore, or do you want one where you have to read the descriptions of what you see and type in your commands?

Now go a step further. Which is more common in the gaming and movie industry today - violent action-packed pieces, or Walt Disney cartoons

Never meddle in the affairs of a wizard unless you are soggy and hard to light!

Visit my art gallery on art wanted at
http://artwanted.com/crystalwizard

All my books in print:
http://sojourn.omnitech.net

Posted By : erazmus - 3/14/2007 1:29 PM

Well, I want to disclaim any attempts to have my gender shoulder complete responcibility for Hollywood and the video game industry's output. Violent = male isn't telling the whole story. Its like the persons who argue that women never go to war, all wars are started by men. Not entirely true-- Maggie Thatcher, Golda Meyier and Indira Ghandi all started wars.

The game industry and Hollywood all push a product that appeals to a simplistic mindset, but even the most wretchedly mindless, explosive ridden product brings in buyers of both genders. Lord Knows I've had to sit through enough evenings with my wife playing Doom and other video games of that ilk. My son's girlfriends bring over movies like "Bad Boys II".

It is just easier to make a product with explosions and monsters than dramatic tensions and compelling storytelling.
Mike

Posted By : crystalwizard - 3/14/2007 1:47 PM

erazmus said...

It is just easier to make a product with explosions and monsters than dramatic tensions and compelling storytelling.
Mike

which was basically my point. That's what is coming out of hollywood as entertainment and that's what's being reflected in books, magazines and other media.

I don't think it has anything to do with gender. The schools are full of violent girls and boys. Homes are filled with violent husbands and wives and video games are filled with violent heros of both sexes.

I think it has a lot more to do with what is being marketed.

I remember reading an interview with the head of a company which produced especially violent and bloody comercials. I can't remember the product. He was bluntly asked 'why so much violence. Your product isn't even about violence' (it was something like luggage or something). He said that they had to grab the attention of people who were just channel surfing and get them to stick around long enough to watch the comercial. They didnt' care what the content was, they just wanted something that would visually shock a viewer into pausing the channel surf.

That seems to be how most of the entertainment mindset is these days.

Posted By : erazmus - 3/14/2007 3:15 PM

crystalwizard said...

That seems to be how most of the entertainment mindset is these days.

Truethfully, that has been the mindset pretty much forever, with only temporary lapses into taste. Mass entertainment didn't start with television or even motion pictures. Both of those media got their start during a fairly purienical time and place.
Mike

Posted By : Jordan Lapp - 3/14/2007 3:21 PM

I can't tell you how long I've been cursing the Puppet Show for killing books!!!

Jordan Lapp

Posted By : crystalwizard - 3/14/2007 4:08 PM

Jordan Lapp said...
I can't tell you how long I've been cursing the Puppet Show for killing books!!!

and video killed the radio star.

Posted By : TRtheJ - 3/15/2007 2:06 PM

Melkor said...
How do you mean, TR? That men today prefer to have their media shown to them in a tangible way, like the pictures of comics, or the obvious visual element movies have?

I think that it is less men "prefer to have their media shown to them in a tangible way, like pictures in comics" as it is some men lack the imagination to visualize written word descriptions so they need comic books to visualize it for them, while others have just gotten lazy and don't want to put the mental effort to read a book when they can get it all in a 22 page comic book with pictures. I have met a number of the former and the latter.

Posted By : erazmus - 3/15/2007 4:25 PM

I think its an over-generalization, either way.

I also think there are other things influencing men, particularly young men, away from reading in general. Probably I have adequetly addressed this in another thread.

Mike

Posted By : Melkor - 3/17/2007 7:16 PM

I dont like over generalizations either, which was my point in this thread. but I have indeed noticed men have gotten...well, lets just say the stereotypes are beginning to become reality. Men are tasteless pigs while women are artistic. It is a generalization, but you can definitely tell theres a tendency to that in the male population. Maybe as women are becoming more important figures in all aspects of society, men are becoming spoiled lol I mean, everytime a woman sees I am a reader, she is definitely impressed. But, even that is based on a common generalization of men. Humans do think in categories: any individual man is still in the category "man". Then, the person gets to know you and appreciates your inner self and all that crap.

I can accept these tendencies in movies, but when it comes to video games...thats another story. I think movies like Bad Boys have a video game equivalent in racing games, which are so ridiculously simplistic its mind numbing. But, even the action RPG is not mindless hacking and button mashing. Even if you have to fight in such games using reflexes, it is still how you have managed your skills and attributes that determines your victory or defeat. Even games like God of War and Halo need someone with a little artistic sensitivity to fully appreciate. Maybe Im alone here, but I think the story in Halo is amazing. Very confusing and obviously not rigorously thought out, but the image, the idea, is very interesting.

I sometimes dont understand how some guys can read comic books, interpret the drawings with detail and know exactly whats going on, but fiction is too much for them. I sometimes have to stare at a comic book panel for five minutes until I realize: "Oh, he got up and went up the stairs". Couldnt come up with a better example, but telling so much in four comic book panels is something that takes a lot of talent, and a good eye, I think, to tell exactly everything thats happening.

"By the toll of a billion deaths man has bought his birthright of the earth, and it is his against all comers:.... For neither do men live nor die in vain" - H.G.Wells - The War of the Worlds

Posted By : crystalwizard - 3/17/2007 7:31 PM

Melkor said...
I dont like over generalizations either, which was my point in this thread. but I have indeed noticed men have gotten...well, lets just say the stereotypes are beginning to become reality. Men are tasteless pigs while women are artistic.

Melkor said...

I sometimes dont understand how some guys can read comic books, interpret the drawings with detail and know exactly whats going on, but fiction is too much for them.

It's visual, so less to interpret. Text requires the mind to create a visual picture first, then interpret it.

Posted By : erazmus - 3/17/2007 10:46 PM

Well the last bastion for catching the reading bug is probably gone. Servicemen living in tents in the desert now play games on their hand held devices to pass away the hours . . . .
I guess there is still prison, not where I was looking to recruit an audience.
Mike

Posted By : tchernabyelo - 3/19/2007 6:54 AM

Even if you wanted to get a readership in prison, you might find it tricky.

I recall Jason Sizemore recently saying that he sent an issue of Apex Digest, on request, to a prisoner, but it was intercepted and returned as "material unsuitable".

Cycles come and go. At some point, it's not impossible that reading could become "cool" again. Certainly in the UK, Harry Potter revitalised books sales to children in general, and those who start reading early are more likely to stay with it.

On the more general point of this thread - business is business, and tends to find ways of making money. If there were an untapped market out there for "manly" fiction, then somebody should have hit it by now. However, it is possible that it is there and no-one's noticed; in which case, if you really believe the market is out there, set up a POD press and go for it.

For my part, I think it's a touch harsh to blame the changing tastes of the readership simply on women. In fact, fantasy as a genre has mushroomed significantly precisely because of women readers.

"The Box Of Beautiful Things" - IGMS#3

"The Man Who Was Never Afraid" - Abyss and Apex #19

Posted By : glutton - 3/19/2007 8:54 AM

I seem to enjoy writing "manly" fiction with female characters. Not that my stuff necessarily fits well into the traditional sword-and-sorcery mold (maybe a bit too tongue-in-cheek for that), but it's definitely heroic fantasy with lots of adventure and violence. In my experience I've had equally good responses from women as men, so maybe more usage of female protagonists might be good for the genre's appeal for women? Hey, chicks can smash big guys and giant monsters too! Well, if they're burly and brutish enough (jk)

I'd point to Steven Pressfield's Last of the Amazons and Matthew Stover's Barra series as good "manly" fiction with strong feminine presences as well. Also Troy Denning's Cormyr series, even if it is DnD (Alusair ROCKS!)

Posted By : crystalwizard - 3/19/2007 10:52 AM

glutton said...
Hey, chicks can smash big guys and giant monsters too! Well, if they're burly and brutish enough (jk)

They don't have to be burly and brutish to accomplish that smashing just fine, any more than a male character is required to look like Connan in order to accomplish it.

Posted By : glutton - 3/19/2007 10:58 AM

Hey, I did say jk! lol

Though, with regard specifically to actual strength-based smashing... *agrees with the poster below* (well, unless you have superhuman powers that is - then you can be skinny and smash just fine)

Posted By : nathan - 3/19/2007 10:59 AM

Kelly, I'm going to disagree in the specific but agree in the general.

As a general rule the more burly and even brutish you are the more deft one would be at smashing. Blunt force trauma coming from force or speed-strength power.

Now. Skewer? Enviserate? Stab. Cut. Shoot. Absolutely. I mean there's a reason Hulk said "Hulk SMASH!" and not "Hulk PENETRATE PROFUSELLY WITH SHARP OBJECT!"

VIEW IMAGE
"Writing the wet dreams of teenage boys" - Lindsey Llyod, Tangent Reviews

Posted By : erazmus - 3/19/2007 3:38 PM

::gasp--choke--wheeze:: ROTFLMAO!
Mike

Posted By : erazmus - 3/19/2007 3:43 PM

And since my main character in my (soon to finished oh God I hope) novel is female, not particularly brutish or hulking, but manages to smash adequetly when appropriate (even of she does prefer to slice, stab, or even shoot), I suppose I should say that its all a matter of perspective. To a two hundred pound man, a hundred pound woman may lack smashing potential, but to a six year old . . .? Or from the POV of a sprite, we're all huge apes capable of pulling apart whole dandelions!

Mike

Posted By : crystalwizard - 3/19/2007 4:06 PM

erazmus said...
And since my main character in my (soon to finished oh God I hope) novel is female, not particularly brutish or hulking, but manages to smash adequetly when appropriate (even of she does prefer to slice, stab, or even shoot), I suppose I should say that its all a matter of perspective. To a two hundred pound man, a hundred pound woman may lack smashing potential, but to a six year old . . .? Or from the POV of a sprite, we're all huge apes capable of pulling apart whole dandelions!

Mike

And given the right equipment, say a nice wrecking ball, even a very small delicate lady can smash quite effectively.

Posted By : erazmus - 3/20/2007 2:49 AM

Exactly.
Mike

Posted By : cussedness - 3/20/2007 4:13 PM

It does not take as much strength as you might expect to crack a skull. Adrenaline is addictive.

I read and loved the early gor books. Judging from fan mail, most of the people reading my novels are male.

The reason that DAW books cancelled the Gor series had nothing to do with sales. When Don Wolheim died, his daughter Betsy took over the business and she hated the Gor novels. So she canceled them.

I know a lot of women who read S&S. I've always enjoyed it. However, part of what killed the S&S market was women readers. Jessica Amanda Salmonson has a very good article on her website about it. A lot of the trouble started when romance readers shifted over to fantasy.

There is some good, solid writing being done by both male and female writers out there. I like GRRM and I like Lynn Flewelling. I also like Anne Bishop's Blood series.

While the overlap from the romance readers has done a lot of harm to fantasy, it has not extinguished good gorey smash in the head fiction. There's still some out there.

Janrae Frank
I have no skeletons in my closet, they are all hanging from the yardarm.

Once there were three brothers, Brandrahoon the vampire, Isranon called the Dawnhand, speaker to spirits, and Waejonan the Accursed, first of sa’necari. Isranon defied his brothers and was destroyed, his descendants forced into the darkness.

Blood Rites
www.fictionwise.com/ebooks/eBook29989.htm
website
www.janraefrank.com
Darkzone
www.janraefrank.com/Vanilla.1.0.1/

Posted By : crystalwizard - 3/20/2007 4:27 PM

cussedness said...

The reason that DAW books cancelled the Gor series had nothing to do with sales. When Don Wolheim died, his daughter Betsy took over the business and she hated the Gor novels. So she canceled them.

I liked the first couple Gor books, but when Norman destroyed (at least in my opinion) Tarl's character, I stopped reading them.

Posted By : cussedness - 3/20/2007 4:44 PM

I can fully agree with you there. I liked him best when he still had modern sensibilities.

Posted By : tchernabyelo - 3/21/2007 7:16 AM

Hmm. Lots of discussion on smashing, and whether women can do it too, and thus whether smashing stories can appeal to women by having women doing the smashing.

Many women don't see smashing as the immediate solution to a problem, and won't identify with female characters who do. There are certainly exceptions, but trying to pretend that S&S will appeal to women simply by featuring toned Amazons rather than hulking barbarians seems to be missing the point somewhat.

I mostly write female MCs. Most of them can fight, to one degree or another. But they also tend to look for other solutions first. I think it's a predominantly male mindset to assume that the simplest solution to a problem is to beat something to a bloody pulp (although historically, there is a case that there have been no few women whose solution to a problem is to get a man to beat something to a bloody pulp - go check out some of the Norse sagas).

"The Box Of Beautiful Things" - IGMS#3

"The Man Who Was Never Afraid" - Abyss and Apex #19

Posted By : cussedness - 3/21/2007 7:55 AM

Historically, there have been a large number of women who did the smashing also. The weight differential between a nice big sword and the farming implements used by women of the times is not much.

However, that still doesn't alter the fact that the readership changed for fantasy at a certain point that corresponds with two factors: the rise of the New Age readership (many of them read fantasy) and the cross over point between women who bought harlequin novels and also read fantasy.

In 1980 the S&S anthology Amazons won the World Fantasy Award and votes on that came from both genders. There was a brief flourishing of amazonian S&S. At one time there were a great many women readers and writers who enjoyed Howard, Wagner, et al. But they seem to have fallen into the minority at this point.

In my opinion, there are a lot of factors involved and this is not just women readers (although I think that is a component of it) I fully agree with the effect that the movement toward "literary" quality has adversely affected things also. But that is as much a trend from male writers and editors as it is the female ones. For instance, take a look at some of the interviews with Terry Goodkind that are available on the web. I think that his quest for literary quality has adversely affected the readability of his work.

The simple joys of telling a rousing adventure story have been lost.

I have no problem with having a strong theme so long as it does not overwhelm the adventure/plot aspects.

Maybe there is a component of puritan thought here also "if it's fun, it must be bad."

Posted By : glutton - 3/21/2007 11:04 AM

Bah, "literary quality" - in many 800-page fantasies nowadays, this amounts as often as not to the "quality" of being long-winded and boring.

As for the lovely Beauty Brutes (hehe), no one said they can't prefer another solution first over smashing - but when it comes down to it and there's no recourse but to smash... smash away!

Posted By : cussedness - 3/21/2007 11:18 AM

I prefer smashed asses to smashed heads ... but ....

Posted By : glutton - 3/21/2007 11:36 AM

I also think that the appeal of a character (for men as well as women, actually) has a lot to do with the motivations for that character's actions, perhaps moreso than whether or not they "smash". A lot of the traditional S&S protagonists have tended towards rather simple motivations, and I'm not saying this as a slight towards S&S. I love Conan, and have enjoyed many of his stories a lot (both the original Howard's and later pastiches), but when it comes down to it a lot of his actions are motivated by things like money and pure survival. A lot of time, an S&S hero is simply riding the storm of life, reacting and trying to keep his head above water in a harsh world. Think also about the classic revenge tale, where the hero's goal is simply to pay his enemy back for some past sin... Or the outcast warrior wanders into town and is recruited to defeat the local evil monster... I think many readers with modern sensibilities, would not relate as readily to these kinds of characters.

Now, I'm not saying these kinds of motives don't have their place in fiction, but could other motivations be perhaps more sympathetic for readers who are not diehard fans of the genre? Think a retired war hero, who happens to be a woman and a single mother, who has lost her husband and must take on the challenge of raising her two kids alone. An evil wizard visits her and tries to persuade her to go back to war for him - she refuses, but he threatens her kids' lives and she is forced to fight for him, yet knows in her soul that once her children are safe, nothing in the world will prevent her from tearing out his black heart... Done well, would this not be a character to root for, big smashing brute or not?

Posted By : cussedness - 3/21/2007 2:04 PM

There is actually a lot more variety in contemporary sword and sorcery than the traditional back in the late 70s and early 80s I had a large number of shorts published that featured an exiled amazon passing for male in a culture that didn't really want her type. She was also a single mother raising two children in the coarse of the stories. More than one person told me at the time "lose the kids." But I didn't.

I currently have a story in submission about a courier who rides into town only to find that his favorite whorehouse has been shut down and he investigates. At five foot four, he's definitely not Conan. But the tale is still sword and sorcery.

I'm not the only one out there writing a different kind of tale that still fits under the umbrella of sword and sorcery. There are more of us out there than you might realize. Have a look at the following story. It came out in 1979 in a DAW anthology and you'll see what I mean.
www.janraefrank.com/index.php?id=5

Posted By : erazmus - 3/21/2007 3:54 PM

Janrae,
That whorehouse story sounds like a real interesting one.

I think the contention is that women have had a disproportional effect on the change in fantasy, which is pretty much inevitable as the effect of women readers on the fantasy genre pre 1960's was pretty disproportionate the other way. Its probably disingenuous to say "Women killed the Gor series in the seventies" when what really happened is "Betsy W. Killed the Gor series, as soon as she took over."

I've seen that cited as an example of how women set right in to change things when they get in position to do so, reguardless of the immeadiate financial consequences (Gor was still making money). I don't think the point is as valid as some make it to be, The series was winding down and had developed a seriously bad reputation that was impacting DAW's reputation as a publisher. Very few arguments about it have extended to how the series effected things like DAW's slush-pile-- can you imagine wading through dozens of Gor wanna-be's looking for some real fantasy/science fiction?

I myself feel the desire of writers, editors and publishers to bring "literary" quality to fantasy (and SF ingneral) is an outgrowth of the isolation and ridicule the early members of fandom encountered in the 30's and 40's. The John Cambell/Astounding school of science fiction which did bring stories filled with ideas rating literary consideration, and eventually authors of literary merit, conpletely displaced the older, broader school of high-impact science fantasies. When SF managed to move from magazines to books, the move was made by those writers first, and the others never really caught up.

Likewise, fantasy publications didn't grow out of an appreciation of Farnsworth Wright's Weird Tales, but rather from the scribblings of an Oxford Don who carried an instant credibility over on this side of the pound. Lieber, Howard, Smith, Moore and DeCamp sort of hitched onto Tolkien's wagon, tied on with the rope of Lin Carters editing and salesmanship skills. The public wanted something, anything, that resembled the professors sweeping epic, and the old pulp sorcerers were tapped to fill the gap.

But just temporarily. As Tolkien's s popularity continued to soar through the seventies, the rest of fantasy trailed along, and writers capable of producing door stop size volumes of psuedo epic fantasy soon came to dominate the market. They still dominate the market. I'm not sure I could tolerate a huge, multitome series of tens of thousands of pags done in the sparce, brutally elegant style of a REH. I know I have little trouble wading through the epics that come out today, many of who's plots could be handled in a much lighter volume.

Fantasy and Romance are the two catagories that come to mind when I think of huge paperback books. The packaging isn't that different, except that Romances seldom have dragons on the cover, and never dwarves. I can see why a marketing weenie would try to sell the two as one. That isn't any gender's fault, as marketing weenies aren't known for literary tastes of any sort, but for spotting and exploiting macro-trends.

I do think the literary shift is the fault of the fans who would not stand up for what they loved to read in the first place. I like action oriented science fantasies, and I'm enough of a rugged individualist (read aging crank) that I don't feel the need to apologise for doing so. I never have, but I've often found myself alone in that opinion in fandom, where people only talked about how much they loved Brackett and Ray Cummings when safely enscounced in hotel lobbies surrounded by like-minded folk. I never felt shame at the ridcule I would get as a young man for my choice of reading material, as anyone who would ridicule someone for what they read probably hadn't read a book since the tenth grade anyways.

But an awful lot of fandom went to college, where some people do read books occasionally, and they carried the shame of not being literary home with them, never figuring out that what the college set was reading was pretty much an affectation of campus life and that damn few people of any sort continued to read much of it after they left campus and got a real life, unless they lived in New York.

I personally do not crave literary acclaimation for what I prefer to read, or for what I write. But an awful lot of writers and fans do. They seek affirmation through irrelevant authority-- something that seems to be happening a lot in all aspects of our society. Along the way they've lost the readers who just want a good read, something fun and fast that doesn't take analysis to enjoy. They lost the teenage boys, and mostly the middle-class men they grow up to be.

Mike

Posted By : cussedness - 3/21/2007 4:19 PM

I think that you've nailed it on the head, Mike.

But then a lot of what we now consider "literature" was considered simplistic adventure in it's own time frame.

I'm a strong believer in the pendulum swing theory, especially as it applies to publishing. As such, I think that it will swing back to the enjoyment of pure adventure fiction again. The interest in space opera demonstrates a craving for something more.

It will never be exactly the same as it was, because modern readers are not the same people who were reading sword and sorcery at the time of its birth. Always something comes along and re-interprets and re-creates, but it is never precisely the same.

I am of the opinion that if the majors began to embrace more adventure style fantasy, we might bring the young male readers back to the fold. But I also think that a lot of women readers are still out there who want the same thing to one degree or another.

Posted By : erazmus - 3/21/2007 4:28 PM

Well, the one advantage having an entire generation of adult males who don't read is the next generation of males can rebel against their fathers by reading!
Mike

Posted By : Dan Nelson - 3/21/2007 6:06 PM

LOL

Posted By : Melkor - 3/21/2007 11:24 PM

The pendulum theory is true. Is all about the times, and times change. Because of this, trying to find certain objectiveness is somewhat possible. I think REH is as literary as any other "literary" author. The term literary applied that way, to mean "real" literature as opposed to pure "adventure, adrenaline drivel", is a term we should modify, because, like I said, the themes in the REH stories Ive read are so universal! If you are a history buff, or like things like anthropology or comparative religion, these stories are incredibly interesting, and probably more universal than the themes touched in some classics and modern "literary" fiction. The thing is that people are so complacent in the modern world, being an age in time when people somehow think we have solved everything and people before us were a bunch of idiots, you miss the sensibility to appreaciate tales that talk about magic, and heroes, and exploring some distant land, whatever the cause. But to be fair, I also think many authors treat things like magic in such a vague and superficial way, the wonder wears off before its even started. Though I guess thats just me and my reading needs.

I have noticed fantasy to be a little New Age, or postmodern, mostly. I can definitely see female influence, and the modern sensibilities. But these sensibilities can sometimes close our eyes, making us look at the world through our own little peep hole, and because of that, it affects what people read.

The story I call my masterpiece (even if it ends up to be a huge flop, Ill still call it that) has a female co-protagonist, who comes from a culture highly inspired by germanic cultures. Because of the harsh life they lead, she is a product of her culture: a harsh warrior, dedicated to smash anything and anyone to protect what she has sworn to protect. Yet, she also has the sensibilities of the female existence, like the resistence women have, and her dealing with having to endure a real lot. Maybe not as much as the male protagonist, who is basically screwed, but since they are linked in the story, they sort of have to fight for each other. A thing Ill swear to do, not try, but do, is never, ever, in any way or form link them romantically, in any way. It wouldnt be even something people could interpret anywhere!

"By the toll of a billion deaths man has bought his birthright of the earth, and it is his against all comers:.... For neither do men live nor die in vain" - H.G.Wells - The War of the Worlds

Posted By : cussedness - 3/22/2007 1:44 PM

Most things happen because of an accumulation of causes with each one contributing to greater or lesser degree. Then along comes a really big cause and tips the genre over. 'The Straw that Broke the Camel's Back' effect.

Need Support? | Forum Help Manual