Irritating fantasy

Remove all ads!

I was idly wondering what irritates all the fantasy buffs on SP when it comes to fantasy literature?


One of my pet peeves is Robert Jordan resurrecting Forsaken - obviously realised that there wouldn't be enough of them to last thirty odd books if he killed them off at a rate of one or two per novel.

 

The general dullness of the genre - what I tend to call 'standard fantasy' - it has all the elements of fantasy but completely lacks the wonder of good fantasy. Generally comes with an assortment of pointless elves, dwarves, dragons, etc. and is not written by Tolkien (who had all this but is certainly not standard).

Fantasy that tries too hard to be different - like having frolicking dwarves or somesuch.

 

Fantasy "trilogys" that end in the middle of a story line. The latest was the Hunters Blade series by Salvatore. He is abviously leading into more books which is fine, but then he shouldn't have called it a trilogy. I am not sure how much more mileage he can get out of Drizzt anyways.

 

Anything by Terry Brooks that is just a ripoff of Lord of the Rings.

 

I hate books that has someone from our world dragged, somehow, into a fantasy world. As much as it'd be nice if it was true, I read fantasy to escape our world, I don't want any mention of it tainting the fantasy worlds the authors create. But that's just me.

Also, I can't get on very well with books that use magic as a way of creating modern technology. Salvatore's Canticle is an example of this. Cadderly makes a torch out of a glowing crystal and a tube. Feasible, but pointless. Fiery torches are more atmospheric

[ December 29, 2005, 21:32: Message edited by: Sir Farivald ]

 

I personally disliked how an author would detail the inanimate objects or belongings of a character, especially his/her weapons, over characterization.

Another thing that bothered me (but this could apply anywhere) is that fantasy novels sometimes seem to have the quick, easy solution to a problem - invading hordes of zombies? Turn undead! Angry dragon? No problem, because McStabby the Fighter can cut anything to shreds! Feeling the meaningless void and emptiness that is modern life chip away at your sanity? Magic spell!

And, finally, just making someone a dwarf or an elf or a gnome for no good reason.

 

Space Ships in otherwise medieval-fantasy settings. I've just come across this (I think) in Honoured Enemy by R. Feist. Unless ocean borne vessels can crash into hills now...

The book also speaks of Alien Invasions. It's taking a lot for me to keep reading after this... someone dispell my hopefully-unnecessary disdains!

 

There is a Dragonlance book I read once that has a spaceship in it, built my gnomes no less, that visited the moon. It was completely ridiculous.

 

They mention minor details to start with; say, unlocking a door, then don't bother to state whether the person(s) open the door or not.

Writing with several different perspectives.

 

Kenders should be wiped out from the face of any planet they habit... and so should their creators.

 

Anything to do with modern technology such as machines or guns, time travel of modern day people into a fantasy world, comedy overdone, relentless dialogue and a story that crawls along at a miniscule pace(see Robert Jordan), any obvious borrowing of Earth cultures (Scottish Highlanders, Norse mythos, Roman empires, French Revolution: it's become way too cliche.)

Fantasy should be escapism at it's best with little to do with our world. I was not much for political intrigue either until I read Erikson and Keyes, but they make it grim and brutal with assassinations and disturbed, power hungry megalomaniacs not the slow, manipulation crap.

[ January 13, 2006, 23:04: Message edited by: Newfie ]

 

And George R. R. Martin!

 

Haven't started him yet Harbourboy, but that is soon being remedied with my next trip to the library.

 

Ditto here.

Reading the first few pages of a book and then suddenly we have a flash-back that continues for the rest of the story. Or jumping back and forth between NOW and flash-back.

For me an author should start at the beginning and continue on to the end. A character may remember something but please let's not re-live it.

Dream stories. You read the story only to find out it was all a dream...maybe.

 

While I am a firm believer in Orwell's assertion that all writing has a political component to it, when that political component is heavy handed and overdone, I lose interest quickly. I am, of course, talking about my good friend Terry Goodkind. His whole Sword of Truth series has some really excellent ideas and some really disgusting sexual content, all of which I like. However, the "too cute" parallels between modern American politics and all the enemies of his stunningly unrealistic right winger Richard Rahl are just too much for me.

Some fantasy that aims to trick you by telling you later that this is really our world in the far-future is OK, but that trick has been done so often that unless it's REALLY well done, it seems hokey and stale.

 

Ah, first tmie I have seen a right-winger being annoyed at Goodkind's blatant political propaganda in his "novels". They are nothing but political pamphlets in my opinion and seeing as I find the ideas proposed to be quite repulsive I caught up on it and found it quite low but people on the other side of the political spectrum either dont catch up on it or find it refreshing.

 

What annoys me is the including of 15 century onward technology and detailed sexual encounters. Sure sex is nautral, but do we have to devote good sections of the novel to quasi-pornography (Whoever wrote that Clash of Swords really did way to much of this)?

Also the feminist or abolitionist in a medieval setting. I know you want your hero to be moral by today's standards, but really, it's more appropriate for the average human protagonist to take his culture for granted. If the protagonist is a natural rebel, it is also fine, but I'm sick and tired of the likes of knights and such who have a burning passion against unequal treatment of women.

I've done a lot of fantasy writing when I was younger because I wanted flawed (tragic) heros or anti-heros instead of morally perfect characters. Doesn't mean the characters are evil if they aren't moral pillars, one of my favorite characters to write was a young knight who strived to be of a force of good, but his pride, honor and firm belief in the feudal social structure always got in his way. I always found characters like this easier to relate to, I could never relate to the neutral good, 18 points of wisdom heros I've encountered in so many fantasy stories.

I also tend to be annoyed by truly evil main characters as wholely evil characters are rare. I can't say I've ever made even an anti-hero who is purely evil, they have to have some piece you can relate to other "I simply want to follow a character who kills alot of people.". It also makes then unfun from a purely writing standpoint. A character who cares only of themselves has no real weakness and destroys plot twists, even my anti-heros have a few others that they'd give their life to protect.

In otherwords non-realistic characters as main characters bother me, a character isn't an ideology.

 

Goodkind's novels are political? Was that true of Wizard's First Rule? I remember disliking it on the (lack of) strength of Goodkind's character and world building, but I don't recall noticing any political messages within the novel.

 

It didnt start to be exceedingly blatant until the fourth or fifth book, the first few were quite entertaining generic fantasy which maybe stole a bit too brashly from other authors but not much worse than many others.

 

Dragon Lance, and other "childish" fantasy (Terry Brooks "Shannara" series as a good example)

I have to admit, I would never have associated the sword of truth series with current American politics. Rahl is a good guy for starters!