The original version of this page can be found at : http://forum.sfreader.com/default.aspx?f=5&m=6836
| Posted By : trey - 7/28/2005 2:59 PM | Hi, I'm new to the forum, so forgive me if this topic has been broached before.
I have been thinking of late about the boundaries of certain types (or subgenres) of genre fiction. There have been some interesting works in fantasy, in general, that have challenged traditional settings and/or tropes.
China Mieville's Bas-Lag series for instance, is a self-desrcibed corrective to the influence of Tolkein on high fantasy. The stories take place in a work as fantastic (in the sense of abundance of magic) secondary world with a culture/technology level roughly equivalent to the Victorian Age. The unique thing is that it is not a fantasy in a historical setting, but a secondary world (to use the Encylopedia of Fantasy's term) with unique nonhuman races, its own cosmology, etc.
Stephen King's Dark Tower series (particular the flashback sequences) also give us a heroic fantasy world with some elements of nineteenth century technology. Some would argue this is a post-apocalyptic world, which is true to some degree, but it is a post-apocalyptic alternate world, at least.
So to the point, then: can sword and sorcery take place in a fundamentally non-swordwielding setting? I realize the name would need changing, but you get my drift.
I have read Howard's essay on S&S and seen the examples he gives, which include a gunslinger--but would most of the readers here view such a story set in a ahistorical seconday world setting with such technology as S&S? What about a story set in science fantasy millieu a la Star Wars, or the comic book Dreadstar, with S&S tropes as an S&S story?
|
| Posted By : erazmus - 7/28/2005 3:57 PM | Trey,
It's important, I think, not to focus too narrowly on the terms making up the phraze "Sword and Sorcery". It would be ridiculous to say "That story isn't S&S, it's "Tomahawk's and Alchemy". Gritty realism and the posibility of the fantastic are the root of the genre, not impliments. For most of recorded history the sword was the prefered close quarters combat weapon on the planet, thats why it's sword. Sorcery was taken for onomonopea, it goes with sword. It has a generic meaning, used here, and several specific meanings in occult circles most of which seldom apply to the fiction. S&S is to Fantasy what Noir is to Crime Novels, kind of.
There's no need to try to exclude as much as we can, only to define the core of what we're talking about. Post apocalypse Sword but no Sorcery has been done and done well (horseclans, anyone?) and some of us love them too. I've never seen a ninteenth century setting used in a tale I'd call Sword and Sorcery but I imagine you could do it. I don't know if _I_ could do it. I'm sure someone could though. I don't think set in London, maybe Karachi though. _The Fires of Ashabunipai(sp?)_ by REH is pretty close to that. A rifle is one to ten shots and a spear/club combination weapon at best in any pre world war two setting. Remember sword use didn't die out entirely, ever. Several U.S. soldiers I know of used one in the first Gulf War and many countries still have some in the arsernal, as it were. A variety of sword like weapons are routinly used in the massacres you hear about in sub-saharan and central africa. A guy beheaded a burgalar, nearly anyway, in Denver just a couple of years ago. But the sword isn't the thing, a revolver wouldn't automaticly exclude a story in my mind. A suburban setting would.
Mike
Michael D. Turner
"Psyched Up" in _Turn the other Chick_-ed. E. Friesner-Baen books
www.baen.com |
| Posted By : nikolai - 7/28/2005 4:09 PM | <i>So to the point, then: can sword and sorcery take place in a fundamentally non-swordwielding setting?</i>
So called "Sword and Planet" stories are the "equivalent" of S&S in a science fiction environment.
As to whether sword and sorcery take place in a fundamentally non-swordwielding setting, my answer would be no. I think there's something basic in sword and sorcery which requires it being set in a pseudo-historical era. You can do something similar in a science-fiction setting, but it isn't S&S. If you look at the original definition by Leiber, the sword in S&S was used to identify a level of technology. I think this is fundamental to the genre.
I know the question "What is S&S" is intensely debated. But I think basically it requires: (a) historical technology, (b) elements of fantasy and, (c) and for it to be an adventure story.
If you lose the adventure you don't get the drive of S&S, and have something like "The Company of Wolves" or Dunsany's or Clark Ashton Smith's atmosphere pieces. If you lose the fantasy you get a straight forward historical adventure, like Scaramouche. It's harder to put your finger on what you lose when you get rid of the "historic" setting, I think you get rid of some of the mythic sense, perhaps, or that technology would change something about the themes behind these sort of stories. |
| Posted By : trey - 7/28/2005 4:21 PM | Thanks, guys. This is what I'm trying to get at. Two posts and two fairly divergent opinions. That's the contraversy I was looking for [:)]
Nikolai: I would ask, though. Could a S&S story take place in a pre-sword (say, stone age timeframe or Native American-esque locale). It seems to me they would have what you term the "mythic elements" without the swords. If you don't think so, what do you find them lacking? |
| Posted By : PaulMc - 7/28/2005 5:05 PM | quote:
Originally posted by trey
Thanks, guys. This is what I'm trying to get at. Two posts and two fairly divergent opinions. That's the contraversy I was looking for [:)]
Nikolai: I would ask, though. Could a S&S story take place in a pre-sword (say, stone age timeframe or Native American-esque locale). It seems to me they would have what you term the "mythic elements" without the swords. If you don't think so, what do you find them lacking?
Absolutely. Manly Wade Wellman's Hok (which I happen to be reading now) is, for lack of a better term, a caveman. The story might be a little more pulp adventure, but I haven't read deeply enough to know if there is also mysticism.
You might want to check out this thread, too, where we discussed using different cultures apart from the "white medieval" norm ..
http://www.sfreader.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=1209&whichpage=3
-- Paul McNamee
http://writer.paulmcnamee.net
http://www.dorancoyle.net |
| Posted By : nikolai - 7/28/2005 5:19 PM | trey;
I've no problem with pre-sword S&S. I think there are very good examples of this: "The Valley of the Worm" springs to mind, I don't think there was steel in that and it's an absolute classic. The sword was intended by Leiber just to specify a very general type of (historical) culture level. I'd say anything that isn't too modern in terms of technology isn't a problem. Erazmus is absolutely right when he says that we shouldn't get too myopic about what the individual terms in the name mean. |
| Posted By : erazmus - 7/28/2005 6:26 PM | Nikolai,
So if you set it in an exotic location, say 1860's Uzbekistan, you could pull off a "Victorian S&S"? The hero and outsider (English)the settings exotic, magic? Yes, that would be doable too. So what if he uses a pistol with his Yatanghan? Central Asia was unknown territory and uncanny things were accepted as being able to happen in such places. Sort of a Sir. Richard F. Burton as a S&S hero? If the writer struck the right tone anyway, it seems doable to me.
Mike
Michael D. Turner
"Psyched Up" in _Turn the other Chick_-ed. E. Friesner-Baen books
www.baen.com |
| Posted By : Jay Stevol - 7/28/2005 7:15 PM | Ah, this thread came up at the perfect time!
Perfect, because I was about to make a very similar thread myself, to clarify some issues I've been having, and also because of a comment erazmus made. For a few weeks now I have been writing said musket-based S&S tale, in the event that my current FS story is rejected. It's set during the late 18th/early 19th century, has a disgraced English Lord embarking upon an expedition into the Sudanese jungle to lift a curse imposed upon him by a mysterious shaman.
Now, aside from the use and referral of flintlocks and other relatively modern weapons and equipment, this story is about as S&S as any I've done. It has man-to-man brawls, ancient temples, a healthy dash of sorcery, otherworldly creatures, and a primitive setting. Yet despite all this, I can't shake off the feeling that I'm writing historical adventure. I know logically that if I were simply to replace the setting with a ficticious one of my own choosing and swap the flintlocks for crossbows I'd have a typical S&S adventure on my hands. Is the very presence of guns - even primitive guns that could barely fire off a couple of shots a minute without the risk of blowing your face off - somehow anathema to S&S? I don't know.
One thing I have found out, though, is that a sword wielding barbarian/knight/whathaveyou definitely does not necessarily have to be a vital ingredient to a S&S tale. In fact, the assumption that it does is IMO a large contributing factor to the stagnance of modern S&S. Attitudes and characteristics defined old S&S, back before the term was ever coined. Leiber could have easily called it 'Axes and Alchemy' or 'Clubs and Conjury' and we'd be arguing about that, but 'Sword and Sorcery' it was. The primitive versus the advanced. The natural versus the unnatural These, I think, are at the heart of S&S.
Oh, and a rollicking good tale in the bargain. :) |
| Posted By : erazmus - 7/28/2005 7:24 PM | That's it! From now on I'm writing Maces and Magery! M&M. Plain, Peanut and Almond. All six or seven colors.
So that you can all get it, the Sword is a Hero's weapon and the evil Villans use a Mace! Thus Maces and Magery is similar to your garden variety Sword and Sorcery only the protagonist is evil, overcoming the forces of white magic with the aid of his weapon, the mace. I'm offically coining the phraze now, though I'll decide exactly what it means later, when its convienent to win some pointless arguement or I need editorial content of my own.
MIke
Michael D. Turner
"Psyched Up" in _Turn the other Chick_-ed. E. Friesner-Baen books
www.baen.com |
| Posted By : William King - 7/29/2005 12:09 AM | Lets face it Sword and Sorcery just plain sounds good and it tells you immediately what you are getting. My definition of S&S is like the judge's definition of pornography; I cant exactly define it but I know it when I see it.
I am currently writing a book that features a mercenary company of musketeers in a world that's a sort of combination of Moorcock and HP Lovecraft and I would happily claim that its S&S even though the standard close combat weapon of my heroes is the bayonet. If you asked me to say why, I would answer that its partially because of the moral atmosphere of the world- there is no clear cut division of good and evil, light and darkness. Partially because of the attitude of the heroes which is pretty footloose and mercenary. And partially because of the nature of some of the antagonists who are sort of Lovecraftian cosmic horrors, not Dark Lords. Don't get me wrong, I am not trying to define the genre here, I am just giving some reasons why I think this book fits into it, and not, say, epic fantasy.
All the best,
Bill |
| Posted By : CharlesR - 7/29/2005 2:01 AM | "Is the very presence of guns - even primitive guns that could barely fire off a couple of shots a minute without the risk of blowing your face off - somehow anathema to S&S? I don't know."
The introduction of firearms to a story certainly doesn't keep the tale from being Sword & Sorcery. The most obvious example would of course be everyone's favorite Puritan, Solomon Kane. I'm not sure at what point technology would rule out S&S. Location has a lot to do with it. A story set in the Victorian age that took place in India or Africa could easily move into S&S territory. Much of H. Rider Haggard borders on that anyway.
Hmmm, here's another question. Does using a contemporary hero keep something from being Sword & Sorcery? If you send a 21st century protagonist to the past or to an alternate reality can his adventures be Sword & Sorcery? It's not exactly sword & planet if he's still on Earth. I always wondered where Mike Grell's Warlord comic fit in. Technically Travis Morgan is still on Earth though most of his Adventures are very Conan like. Yeah he's in a world kind of like Burroughs' Pellucidar, but the technology level is much like the Hyborian age. Opinions?
Charles R |
| Posted By : William King - 7/29/2005 3:13 AM | Warlord was a great comic book. From the similarity to Pellucidar I would tend to put it inside the Sword and Planet genre myself but that would be quibbling.
Another example of technology in S&S are Karl Edward Wagner's Kane stories. These feature everything from lost alien races to what look pretty convincingly like submarines. I've never heard anybody suggest these were not S&S.
All the best,
Bill |
| Posted By : Jay Stevol - 7/29/2005 3:14 AM | CharlesR
I totally agree that firearms can be made to work in S&S, so long as their use is limited to the degree that the hero is still using their own wits and cunning to overcome their foe. Solomon Kane is vintage S&S because most of the time he was alone in strange and hostile settings, with little to fall back on but his own grim determination to see a wrong righted. He certainly didn't just whip out the flintlocks at the first sign of an otherworldly terror and blast them back to kingdom come. Were a similar story to revolve around the firearms themselves, at the expense of the hero, I think that it would evolve out of S&S territory and into straight action adventure, and probably not very good action adventure at that. I think the level of technology starts to intrude when it begins shaping the story in ways that take the tale out of an S&S context. A protagonist running around with a repeater rifle, mowing down badguys and supernatural beasties alike, would completely reverse the situation that most S&S is based on. It would be like the cunning barbarian picking up the wizard's magical staff, and blasting his way to freedom. Technology is overcoming the obstacles that would previously be fought by man. A good dosage of hand-to-hand combat is always important to S&S, no matter the setting.
Jay |
| Posted By : trey - 7/29/2005 3:18 AM | I think quite a few of Travis Morgan's adventure's in Skartaris are S&S in style and tone, though the comic varies quite a bit and I don't know if all of them would qualify,
"Tower of the Beast" I believe it is called which I believe is an uncredited rip-off of an Imaro story is definitely S&S. A couple of other issues come to mind too, though I can't recall the titles. Grell and others did a good job of combining Howard and Burroughs, something Lin Carter aimed for with Thongor but I never felt he pulled off (which is too bad because I feel its a laudable goal).
Thinking overnight, I think Leigh Brackett's Stark stories kind of pull of S&S in a science fictionish setting. I suppose some would call them "sword and planet", but if what you means by that term is whats usually called "planetary romance" the Stark stories are closer to Howard in plot and tone than to Burroughs' Barsoom or even Brackett's own Sword of Rhiannon. True, there is no sorcery in those stories, so maybe there missing the essential ingredients, but the ancient superscience in the stories often acts like magic. |
| Posted By : nikolai - 7/29/2005 3:57 AM | quote:
So if you set it in an exotic location, say 1860's Uzbekistan, you could pull off a "Victorian S&S"? ... If the writer struck the right tone anyway, it seems doable to me.
I've no problem with this either. If seems very much like Solomon Kane, but with revolvers and rifles. Perhaps the fact that the mundane scientific world is winning, and the sorcery is just a holdout, may change the theme of the story. But see below...
quote:
Hmmm, here's another question. Does using a contemporary hero keep something from being Sword & Sorcery? If you send a 21st century protagonist to the past or to an alternate reality can his adventures be Sword & Sorcery?
I've been reading a lot of Clark Ashton Smith's non-S&S work. He has a line in stories where a contemporary hero is plunged into a fantastic world. Or for that matter, much of Lovecraft is about a contemporary person coming face to face with the unknown - and there's direct, violent, physical conflict in some stories. But these just doesn't feel like S&S.
As well as losing something by giving the hero technological support. I suppose it might come down to the attitude of the hero. Realistic contemporary characters just don't think or behave in the same way that Conan, or Elric, or Jirel, or the Gray Mouser do. I think it may be an issue of culture. I some of what makes S&S disappears when it's inhabited by the sort of modern people that we all are.
Perhaps this isn't just a contemporary thing. Some of what makes S&S also disappears when it's based around the sort of blessed, invulnerable person that inhabits fairy tales. If you think about Sleeping Beauty: it's got sorcery, heroes, swords, dragons - but is it S&S?
I don't think it's technology per se that does it. Some of the Vance's Dying Earth stories are very high-tech, but the technology is presented in a mysterious manner - and works more like magic. |
| Posted By : jonesha - 7/29/2005 4:06 AM | Hi Trey, nice to see you here. This is a great thread you've started.
These are all related genres, which is why I am open to all of them at Flashing Swords. So long as they have a driving pace and a sense of wonder, they are quite similar.
As for martial obstacles, I tried to draft pretty open and inclusive definitions of sword and sorcery at the bottom of the home page of the site. Broad enough to include Solomon Kane and Kane and Conan and Elric. Not quite broad enough to include Stark, but I have comments there about Sword and Planet as well. I'll go ahead and paste the definitions here. Right or wrong, these are my feelings about the definitions. I figure as long as they're related and we're having fun reading them, why quibble over where the dividing line is? As Hocking and King and are were discussing in the editorial for issue 3, however, driving pace, sense of wonder, etcetera...
What Is Sword and Sorcery?
Some people use “sword and sorcery” to mean any kind of fantasy fiction. While sword and sorcery is certainly a type of fantasy fiction (as a sports car is a type of automobile), the label "sword and sorcery" was proposed by award-winning speculative fiction author Fritz Leiber to distinguish the genre from other fantasy.
What makes sword and sorcery different from other fantasy?
The environment, the protagonists, the obstacles, and story structure.
* The Environment: Sword and sorcery is fiction set in a land different from our own, where technology is relatively primitive, allowing the protagonists to overcome their martial obstacles face-to-face. Magic works, but seldom at the behest of the genre's heroes. More often sorcery is just one more obstacle used against them and is usually wielded by villains or monsters. The landscape is exotic; either a different world, or far corners of our own.
* The Protagonists: The heroes live by their cunning or brawn, frequently both. They are strangers or outcasts, rebels imposing their own justice on the wilds or the strange and decadent civilizations which they encounter. They are usually commoners or barbarians; should they hail from the higher ranks of society then they are discredited, disinherited, or come from the lower ranks of nobility (the lowest of the high).
* Obstacles: Sword and sorcery’s protagonists must best fantastic dangers, monstrous horrors, and dark sorcery to earn riches, astonishing treasure, the love of dazzling members of the opposite sex, or the right to live another day.
* Structure: Sword and sorcery is crafted with traditional structure, meaning that it isn't stream of consciousness, slice of life, or any sort of experimental flavor--it has a beginning, middle, and end; a problem and solution; a climax and resolution. Most important of all, sword and sorcery moves at a headlong pace and overflows with action and thrilling adventure.
What is Sword and Planet?
The structure of sword and planet is absolutely identical to the structure of sword and sorcery; the other elements are very similar. In place of magic, sword and planet has telepathy and scarce technological leftovers from a remote, absent, dead, or dying race of advanced beings—so advanced that their technology might as well be magic. The protagonists of sword and planet, like those of sword and sorcery, are outcasts and foreigners, dropped in to strange lands (often by accident). They might be explorers from advanced civilizations, but all they are likely to carry are a beam weapon with a few shots and a handful of survival gismos. More often a sword and planet protagonist has to make do with his wits and the sword he wrested from the planet’s primitive culture. He or she faces obstacles very similar to those faced by sword and sorcery heroes.
Managing Editor
www.swordandsorcery.org
Flashing Swords E-Zine |
| Posted By : PaulMc - 7/29/2005 4:26 AM | quote:
Originally posted by nikolai
I've no problem with pre-sword S&S. I think there are very good examples of this: "The Valley of the Worm" springs to mind, I don't think there was steel in that and it's an absolute classic.
And there is also "Garden of Fear". The winged creature in the tower might not be supernatural, but it certainly is preternatural.
-- Paul McNamee
http://writer.paulmcnamee.net
http://www.dorancoyle.net |
| Posted By : trey - 7/29/2005 4:59 AM | Thanks for the welcome, Howard.
I agree its not important to quibble over definitions--its just sometimes enjoyable, particularly to here others views on the topic.
I certainly agree that in some ways a "big tent" approach is best overall--in that all of these genres/subgenres/sub-sub-genres have been "ghetto-ized" by a proscripted stance by mainstream literature and unfortunately mainstream fantasy, I think those of us that love them shouldn't be guilt of the same faults.
On the "Sword and Planet" vs. "S&S" thing I certainly see your point and think its a very reasonable stance. I would say, though that while the similarities you point out are there I think there are definite tonal or maybe "tropic" differences.
I think a lot of it comes down to the the handling of "weirdness." S&S often revels in weirdness in a lurid way. I see these elements in Clark Aston Smith, and Howard, of course, but also in the Kane stories and in Shea's Nifft the Lean. Outre things are often equal parts horrible and fascinating. Whatever genre you class her stories as, Brackett's Stark partakes of this in some ways--the nonhuman decadence of the People of the Lens, the effects of the de-evolving shanga (IIRC). So does CL Moore's Northwest Smith.
Burroughs, Carter, Moorcock and even Norman, have plenty of weird occurrences where they could evoke an "eldritch" tone, but in my opinion, my don't. The synthetic men of Mars don't have the feel of Ubblo-Satha, or the Vampire Queen in Nifft the Lean (though they vey easily could have been written that way). The only time Burroughs gets close to this is in the Valley of Dor and his plant-men, but even there falls short. Brackett who has shown herself capable of it (Shandakor, the Stark elements mentioned) but doesn't do it in her Sword of Rhiannon.
Anyway, just some thoughts. Maybe I'm picking and choosing works/authors that support this my point while ignoring others. |
| Posted By : Supr - 7/29/2005 6:16 AM | quote:
Originally posted by Jay Stevol
I know logically that if I were simply to replace the setting with a ficticious one of my own choosing and swap the flintlocks for crossbows I'd have a typical S&S adventure on my hands. Is the very presence of guns - even primitive guns that could barely fire off a couple of shots a minute without the risk of blowing your face off - somehow anathema to S&S? I don't know.
Well it's an oversimplication just to say:
Adding swords = S&S
The story must be believable. You are saying 18. century... Yes, but look how many more things people have invented than gunpowder!
People knew about planettes, people already knew that earth isn't so important to the universe etc.
People who are living in the 18. century do have totally different mentality then i. e. people of medieval age.
You should read not just books about historical weapons but also about culture. Or just watch the Name of the Rose - the art of thinking was totally different than today or that of 18. or 19. century!
Sorry Jay but the idea that just changing muskets into crossbows does make S&S is very naive.
|
| Posted By : jonesha - 7/29/2005 6:45 AM | Trey, you raise some interesting points about tone and they are definitely worthy of discussion.
I certainly don't mean to shut down this worthwhile exchange of ideas. I do hope that other threads will continue to flourish as well. To my mind there are a number of stories in the recent issue of Flashing Swords 3 that still haven't been discussed. Trey also raises an issue in his first post about where Mieville and others fall in the scale. While I found the first half of Mieville's novel fascinating it didn't have the same feel as s and s, probably because it didn't have that driving pace and action. On the other hand, it was quite compelling (although, as I mention above, I found myself losing interest at the halfway point). Pace and compelling narrative are similar in some ways. Anyone want to take a stab at those?
As to tone, weirdness and eldritch--Trey may be on the money here. I think that a lot of the sword and planet authors DO steer away from the macabre. Likely, though, there are some sword and planet writers who DO infuse their work with the macabre. I'm admittedly not as well read in sword and planet as I am s and s.
Supr, I sometimes think that our language differences create some challenges to communication. I'm sure you didn't mean to sound insulting to Jay with the comment about naivete. You too raise an excellent point about where the boundary line occurs between alt-history with supernatural flair and sword and sorcery. I don't know where I'd draw a line. Certainly if a snappy tale of the sort Jay mentions crossed my desk I'd be likely to take it, even if I wasn't sure if it was historical fiction or sword and sorcery. Sometimes those lines blur. Blurring of lines can be invigorating to a genre.
That being said, as I mentioned in the editorial to issue 3, I don't think I'll ever take a story that doesn't have the strength of a driving pace. That's not a line I'm interested in blurring, although I'm sure many other editors are. That's fine--there seem to be plenty of places wiling to take fiction plotted like that.
Lastly, Trey wrote:
"in that all of these genres/subgenres/sub-sub-genres have been "ghetto-ized" by a proscripted stance by mainstream literature and unfortunately mainstream fantasy, I think those of us that love them shouldn't be guilt of the same faults."
Amen to that. As always, if we want to succeed we need to stand together. To my mind a number of the larger print magazines have abandoned publishing stories that actually excite readers--they seem more interested in pleasing their writing circles and critics. I'm sure that has something to do with shrinking circulation numbers.
Okay, man, that was a long post. I need to go earn some money or read some submissions or something...
best,
Howard
Managing Editor
www.swordandsorcery.org
Flashing Swords E-Zine |
| Posted By : PaulMc - 7/29/2005 7:01 AM | quote:
Originally posted by jonesha
To my mind there are a number of stories in the recent issue of Flashing Swords 3 that still haven't been discussed.
Well, allow me to dovetail ...
How would you sub-classify The White Wyrm?
To my mind it was a swashbuckling historical ... up until he actually found the serpent. Now, the serpent wasn't magical, but when I think historical I think "humans vs. humans" or "humans vs. known creatures". So, the serpent wasn't "sorcery", but, as with "Garden of Fear" there was something preternatural about it which removes it from the 'historical' classification.
And, the damsel-in-distress being buried alive with maggots was certainly macabre.
Additional thoughts or observations?
-- Paul McNamee
http://writer.paulmcnamee.net
http://www.dorancoyle.net |
| Posted By : erazmus - 7/29/2005 7:22 AM | I'm not prepared to comment on The White Wyrm as I haven't read it since I was a kid. I do have an example of a situation depicted in a movie which would, if used as a story-plot, result in S&S set in the 20thCentury. In the orgin part of the movie The Shadow we see the future title character, a european of uncertain orgin, leading a band of brigands in the himalayas. Such a man, having left the civilization of his orgin and embraced the violent and wild world of that place and encountering appropriate supernatural or even possibly scientific perils (remembering that a technology sufficiently advanced is no different than magic) such a tale could indeed be straight out S&S. If the hero simply is of the S&S mold and the story written with the appropriate action driven pace, the plot resolved within the acceptable spectrum of the overa, then it'd be S&S.
Or so I think.
Mike
Michael D. Turner
"Psyched Up" in _Turn the other Chick_-ed. E. Friesner-Baen books
www.baen.com |
| Posted By : PaulMc - 7/29/2005 7:59 AM | quote:
Originally posted by erazmus
I'm not prepared to comment on The White Wyrm as I haven't read it since I was a kid.
I think you've got the wrong Wyrm. [;)] The White Wyrm by C. L. Werner was in the current issue of Flashing Swords. Not to be confused with Lair of the White Worm or any other white wyrms you might have read about in the past.
[:D]
I tend to think of The Shadow as just pulp adventure, though there certainly is a mystic slant to his abilities. Maybe it has to do with that tone thing - "not sure what it is, but know it when I read it"
-- Paul McNamee
http://writer.paulmcnamee.net
http://www.dorancoyle.net |
| Posted By : erazmus - 7/29/2005 8:16 AM | Paul,
You're right! The White Worm is tonight's read! I've been rationing them a bit. And the Shadow was definatly pulp adventure though I'm not sure I'd say just pulp adventure, there's nothing disparaging about pulp adventure in this crowd, but just?
That's why I specified the Hollywood movie and not the stories from the magazine, much as I love those they in no way illustrate my point.
Which is much the same as Howard's earlier. Plot, Pace, Action, Grit.
'nuff said.
Mike
Michael D. Turner
"Psyched Up" in _Turn the other Chick_-ed. E. Friesner-Baen books
www.baen.com |
| Posted By : PaulMc - 7/29/2005 8:42 AM | quote:
Originally posted by erazmus
Paul,
You're right! The White Worm is tonight's read! I've been rationing them a bit. And the Shadow was definatly pulp adventure though I'm not sure I'd say just pulp adventure, there's nothing disparaging about pulp adventure in this crowd, but just?
I withdraw my "just". [8D]
I see The Shadow as pulp adventure, not necessarily s-and-s.
-- Paul McNamee
http://writer.paulmcnamee.net
http://www.dorancoyle.net |
| Posted By : erazmus - 7/29/2005 8:58 AM | Paul,
The Shadow is pulp adventure, my comment is directed only at the movies version of his orgin.
Mike
Michael D. Turner
"Psyched Up" in _Turn the other Chick_-ed. E. Friesner-Baen books
www.baen.com |
| Posted By : MichaelEhart - 7/29/2005 10:14 AM | quote:
It's set during the late 18th/early 19th century, has a disgraced English Lord embarking upon an expedition into the Sudanese jungle to lift a curse imposed upon him by a mysterious shaman.
Now, aside from the use and referral of flintlocks and other relatively modern weapons and equipment
Careful here with your technology---- by that time there were very few flintlocks around. Maybe a few odds and ends in the corners, but an English Lord would be packing something considerabley more modern.
Faust-- How comes it then that thou art out of hell? Mephistophilis-- Why this is hell, nor am I out of it. |
| Posted By : erazmus - 7/29/2005 10:25 AM | And I think Sudan is a desert and veldt country, not jungle. I'd check, if I were writing it.
Mike
Michael D. Turner
"Psyched Up" in _Turn the other Chick_-ed. E. Friesner-Baen books
www.baen.com |
| Posted By : PaulMc - 7/29/2005 10:25 AM | quote:
Originally posted by MichaelEhart
quote:
It's set during the late 18th/early 19th century, has a disgraced English Lord embarking upon an expedition into the Sudanese jungle to lift a curse imposed upon him by a mysterious shaman.
Now, aside from the use and referral of flintlocks and other relatively modern weapons and equipment
[quote]
Careful here with your technology---- by that time there were very few flintlocks around. Maybe a few odds and ends in the corners, but an English Lord would be packing something considerabley more modern.
When did percussion caps start?
You're safe on flintlocks if it's 18th century (1700s). The American Revolution was fought with flintlocks. The American Civil War (19th century, 1860s) was Minné slugs and percussion caps. I don't know what years the transition took place.
For a few moments I thought Solomon Kane was anachronistic, I would have thought matchlocks in the 1500s, but there were flintlocks by that time, too.
-- Paul McNamee
http://writer.paulmcnamee.net
http://www.dorancoyle.net |
| Posted By : erazmus - 7/29/2005 10:43 AM | Paul,
And Wheel Locks as well, my favorite. Schnappenhousen. Lots of fun, if somewhat fragile.
Mike
Michael D. Turner
"Psyched Up" in _Turn the other Chick_-ed. E. Friesner-Baen books
www.baen.com |
| Posted By : erazmus - 7/29/2005 12:11 PM | Well, I have now read _The White Wyrm_. I'd started it before and I didn't like the begining with the vikings. Once past that it got flying. While it had some weaknesses that I won't get into here, it kicked ass in general.
Mike
Michael D. Turner
"Psyched Up" in _Turn the other Chick_-ed. E. Friesner-Baen books
www.baen.com |
| Posted By : MichaelEhart - 7/29/2005 12:25 PM | Okay, so I suffered a temporary IQ reduction.
I read 18/19 century as 1800's-1900's.
The transition to percussion started in the early 1800's.
Like most technology changes, the commoditization took a few years, so you should be okay.
Server issues today at work---- so less attention available for the really important things.[:)]
Faust-- How comes it then that thou art out of hell? Mephistophilis-- Why this is hell, nor am I out of it. |
| Posted By : Jay Stevol - 7/29/2005 2:05 PM | quote:
Originally posted by MichaelEhart
Okay, so I suffered a temporary IQ reduction.
I read 18/19 century as 1800's-1900's.
The transition to percussion started in the early 1800's.
Like most technology changes, the commoditization took a few years, so you should be okay.
Woah, nearly had a major moment there!
I agree, now that I think about it, that firearms can make a successful appearance in S&S, but with caution. I deliberatly chose flintlocks because they were awkward enough to still allow swords, daggers, and other close combat weapons to remain viable weapons of war. If I were to have used, say, a breech loading carbine rifle, I think that would have jolted my tale out of S&S mode. Flintlocks, matchlocks, arquebuses and the like are primitive enough for a protagonist to remain a man of action, and not a slave to 'advanced technology'.
Regarding Supr's post, of course were I to have literally swapped the word 'flintlock' for 'crossbow' and voila, I automatically have an S&S tale on my hands, well that would have been naive. That's not what I meant. My main point was that my tale had all the stereotypical elements of an S&S tale, but with the added appearance of guns in place of bows, throwing spears or whatnot. I know S&S fans can be picky about such things, and after a rather harsh post in another thread to a certain Flashing Swords story, let's say I got cold feet.
Anyway, I agree that it's pointless to get caught up in the minutiae. As Howard said, as long as it has driving pace, exotic locations, and a touch of weirdness, it's A-OK. |
| Posted By : Buxom Slayer - 7/29/2005 6:59 PM | quote:
Originally posted by PaulMc
quote:
Originally posted by jonesha
To my mind there are a number of stories in the recent issue of Flashing Swords 3 that still haven't been discussed.
Well, allow me to dovetail ...
How would you sub-classify The White Wyrm[by Werner]?
To my mind it was a swashbuckling historical..up until he actually found the serpent..
i classified it as being..
"historical fantastic". [ i enjoyed it. its good 7 /10 ][8D]
if the 'huge 100ft fantastical serpent-monster of legend' had been absent, then it would've been just good 'historical fiction'.
--
i prefer my S+S to have..
..sword + bow tech level [ or more primitive /ancient. teeth + nails make great bloody weapons! ]
..some kind of ancient supernatural evil/power/magic/sorcery/monster/entity..
..a great atmosphere of suspense/macabre/horror + great original creations/ideas/surprises.
i'm a big horror fan aswell so i like my S+S grim, bloody, dark, vicious + scarey. + i dont want any 'happy right-lets-get-wed-now endings', especially in a short story.
to me, the quality of the story/plot + evil enemies [ humanoids, monsters, or magic] is much more interesting + important than the main characters/heros. the characters are usually just 'fodder' for my entertainment, + its rare that i am impressed by any 'new heros' these days, esp' in short tales. good character development is only really possible in a series or a novel.
--
thanks for all your varied views. very interesting. cheers.[:)]
|
| Posted By : erazmus - 7/29/2005 7:10 PM | Buxom,
The shortness of the format does lend itself to a certain informal relation between the hero and the reader. Rather than cutting action I think most writers are triming away at those little sign-posts of introspection and reflection that normally ease the way in a story. Heck, a good one-on-one sword fight can take me over a thousand words when I'm humming. Sometimes, anyway.
Mike
Michael D. Turner
"Psyched Up" in _Turn the other Chick_-ed. E. Friesner-Baen books
www.baen.com |
| Posted By : Buxom Slayer - 7/29/2005 7:57 PM | quote:
Originally posted by erazmus
..Heck, a good one-on-one sword fight can take me over a thousand words when I'm humming. Sometimes, anyway. Mike
i often hum or sing while i'm doing many things.
but during sword-fights or other sweaty exertions i am more of a feral grunter + growler..[;)]
so what noises do your heros emit?!?
.."En garde!...Grrrr.." ? *** [:D]
|
| Posted By : Rob Mancebo - 7/29/2005 8:54 PM | quote:
Originally posted by MichaelEhart
Careful here with your technology---- by that time there were very few flintlocks around. Maybe a few odds and ends in the corners, but an English Lord would be packing something considerabley more modern.
- Side note. The flintlock was one of the greatest pieces of firearms technology ever. Flintlocks were still being used in Afghanistan into the 1980's when the USSR invaded. The Sudan might very well had ol' flinch-locks into the 1900s.
- One of the great strengths of the flintlock is that you can replace the flint from any similar local stone. There's never anything to buy outside your own culture. You can make your own powder, cast your own lead (or shoot rocks), and knap your own flint. This was always a great plus in isolated areas.
- An English Lord might have something better but ammo is always a tough thing to supply. He might have to fall back on local arms.
Rob
Adventure-History-Fantasy-Folklore
www.geocities.com/robmancebo/ |
| Posted By : Rob Mancebo - 7/29/2005 9:14 PM | quote:
Originally posted by PaulMc
The American Civil War (19th century, 1860s) was Minné slugs and percussion caps. I don't know what years the transition took place.
- Minné Ball It was actually more of what we would consider a 'slug' but they weren't called that.
- Civil war weapons were a mess of confusion. in the beginning flintlocks and civilian shotguns mixed with other garbage weapons sold to the US & CSA by Europe. The American military went from something like 20,000 to somewhere over a million (throughout the period of the war not all at once.) Euro-trash weapons were soon traded for Springfields & Enfields at the same time whole units were purchasing Sharps, Star and Burnside breech-loading rifles. Even while this was happening, other troopers were purchasing even more modern Spencer and Henry(Winchester) repeaters.
- Inhibited by the iron-clad Smith & Wesson patent upon the 'Bore-through cylender', revolvers remained pretty much the same throughout. Colt, Remington, Star, and Savage being the big players (or Confederate copies of them.)
- Even with repeating rifles and multiple revolvers, Cavalry units often met with sabers.
- I had the honor of working with an old retired soldier who'd turned in his horse for a halftrack in the US army in 1938. When I asked him 'which the troopers preferred, their Springfield rifles or their Colt Automatic pistols', he replied, "Rifles? Pistols? Nooo, the saber. From the back of a horse- always the saber!"
- Plenty of room even in the 1900s for sword work. Lots of examples in Mexico and Central America. Swords died hard!
Rob
Adventure-History-Fantasy-Folklore
www.geocities.com/robmancebo/ |
| Posted By : Rob Mancebo - 7/30/2005 2:09 AM | - For those who might want to use early or fantasy firearms in an S&S story:
- I’ve used and studied firearms for 40 years, but you don’t have to. Looking at a couple of these sites will probably be all any writer will ever need to know about the use, terms, drills, and mechanisms of antique firearms. Using just a couple of well-placed, period terms or commands in a story will sound exotic to the ignorant and will sound like you’re an expert to the educated.
Know a Serpentine from a Sear-
Everything you never knew you wanted to know about early firearms- .
http://homepages.ihug.com.au/~dispater/handgonnes.htm
(It has great links for a little or a lot of info)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Know a Petronel from a Bandukh Torador
A two minute guide:
http://www.geocities.com/Yosemite/Campground/8551/firearms.html
Happy hunting,
Rob
Adventure-History-Fantasy-Folklore
www.geocities.com/robmancebo/ |
| Posted By : William King - 7/30/2005 2:16 AM | Rob: Re: flintlocks. I saw something that looked very much like them in the jungle in the far north of Thailand in the early 90's. I can still remember a bunch of guys walking beside the river. They were hunters from one of the local villages. Some were carrying what looked like muskets, others had what looked like a big pig dangling from a pole. It was misty. It was early in the morning and I had heard some very weird sounding shots earlier. For once in my life I felt like I was actually in an adventure story.
All the best,
Bill |
| Posted By : Rob Mancebo - 7/30/2005 3:02 AM | quote:
Originally posted by William King
Rob: Re: flintlocks. I saw something that looked very much like them in the jungle in the far north of Thailand in the early 90's. I can still remember a bunch of guys walking beside the river. They were hunters from one of the local villages. Some were carrying what looked like muskets, others had what looked like a big pig dangling from a pole. It was misty. It was early in the morning and I had heard some very weird sounding shots earlier. For once in my life I felt like I was actually in an adventure story.
All the best,
Bill
Bill,
- Very cool.
- Yep. They're a solid, low-maintenance tool. The rain is what really makes them a problem. Other than that they're still a good idea. I was out last winter shooting one of mine. They're a lot of fun. They're a nice reason to get togeather with friends in the mountains for a little laid-back hiking and shootin'.
- With all the sparks, smoke, and flame they're a little like 'modern magic'.
Rob
Adventure-History-Fantasy-Folklore
www.geocities.com/robmancebo/ |
| Posted By : Jay Stevol - 7/30/2005 3:22 AM | | Thanks for the info and the links, Rob. |
| Posted By : PaulMc - 7/30/2005 6:07 AM | quote:
Originally posted by Rob Mancebo
quote:
Originally posted by PaulMc
The American Civil War (19th century, 1860s) was Minné slugs and percussion caps. I don't know what years the transition took place.
- Minné Ball It was actually more of what we would consider a 'slug' but they weren't called that.
I did know that but I didn't want people thinking musket balls, because Minnés were radically different. Serves me right for trying to rewrite historical terminology [;)]
-- Paul McNamee
http://writer.paulmcnamee.net
http://www.dorancoyle.net |
| Posted By : jonesha - 7/30/2005 6:10 AM | Great links--thanks, Rob!
best,
Howard
Managing Editor
www.swordandsorcery.org
Flashing Swords E-Zine |
| Posted By : baritsu6 - 7/30/2005 7:32 AM | Gents,Trey, Interesting, pick up any of Poul Anderson's stories from Planet Stories[ Witch of the Demon Seas,Swordsman of Lost Terra, the Virgin of Valkarion] all of these take place on another planet in a different time period. They are sword and sorcery!Sword fights, magic, barbarians, good blood and thunder---Now this is sword and planet and sword and sorcery--Ralph
ralph grasso |
| Posted By : trey - 7/30/2005 12:47 PM | | I have witch of the demon seas in planet stories but I have yet to read it. I'll check it out. |
| Posted By : MichaelEhart - 7/30/2005 5:54 PM | quote:
Poul Anderson's stories from Planet Stories[ Witch of the Demon Seas,Swordsman of Lost Terra, the Virgin of Valkarion]
My favorite is still Three Hearts and Three Lions. A just about perfect little novel.
BTW I got to visit a great deal with Karen Anderson at the Seattle Nebulas last year. She mentioned Gardner Fox, and I was able to lay hands on my copy of one of the Llarn books, which I dragged back with me the next day. Most fun was trying to remember all of the authors advertised in the little quarter-page blurbs in the back. For me, most of them were just names on some books I remembered, or mostly didn't. For her, of course they were faces recalled and stories about each.
Faust-- How comes it then that thou art out of hell? Mephistophilis-- Why this is hell, nor am I out of it. |
| Posted By : erazmus - 8/7/2005 5:28 AM | Michael,
I agree, _Three Hearts and Three Lions_ was an awsome book. But its not really out of the main stream of S&S in its setting or details, to my mind.
Mike
Michael D. Turner
"Psyched Up" in _Turn the other Chick_-ed. E. Friesner-Baen books
www.baen.com
"Two Ravens" in Amazing Journeys Magazine coming Sept. 05 |
|