'Fantasy' can absolutely possess literary merit. Unfortunately, popular fantasy writing is mostly trite pap. Le Guin, Wolfe, Butler simply aren't representative of what sells to the masses.
@carolinem55152 сағат бұрын
I've also noticed that there are no middle-aged or older female booktubers. Apparently people will watch you if you're a middle-aged bloke like Mike but not if you're female. Booktube is dominated by youth and particularly white females. Gen Z reckon reckon they are so woke but they actually won't watch booktubers that are black, Asian or older than 30.
@cMaslow4 сағат бұрын
“I also believe there is a movie out there” - which rock does this clown live under? The exorcist is pretty much the greatest horror movie of all time
@hermanphunter_theloreforge5 сағат бұрын
Most literary fiction is preachy and boring as stale snot on the sidewalk. The good stuff provides escapism AND teaches you something.
@bexencr6 сағат бұрын
I think a big reason for people looking down on Fantasy is that the vast majority of Fantasy books and, what is worse, the most popular ones, are simply very badly written, Le Guin & Wolfe not being very broadly known, the only really popular exception being Tolkien. Instead people get recommended Harry Potter which, we have to admit is not a literary jewel, or Sanderson, who I don't even know how someone accepted to publish in the first place and they think that if that's what people like then yes, the genre is not worth it. Popular has never been the same as quality.
@clarkkentnaruto43228 сағат бұрын
Hi there. Fantasy like Harry Potter and Naruto, helped me to keep on trying to overcome obstacles that, as a partially blind teenager, was facing and how to not give up. One of the dilemmas that I came across in the Lord of the Rings is Tolkien's criticism of technology, since he preferred nature, whereas for me, technology makes life easier and more accessible. Also, gaining a vivid imagination allows you to get more creative in solving problems too.
@veronicamaine38138 сағат бұрын
Tolkien didn’t write a fantasy he wrote a mythology for the English people (whose myths were lost with Norman conquest). He would not have agreed it is fantasy, so bad comparison- maybe David Eddings would work better.
@sillyblackfox9 сағат бұрын
I just can't stand Sanderson's writing style.
@jscast399 сағат бұрын
Genuine question though: why is there a need for more acclaim and recognition? The genre is already winning big in terms of readership and sales -- in a way the demand and its ubiquity makes it already essential as a genre of literature.
@ArtSnob1019 сағат бұрын
I might buy the dude's books now even more lol
@ArtSnob1019 сағат бұрын
$1000 -$1500 is crap money if your book is going to sell like crazy. That will hardly get an artist through a month of rent and living expenses where i live. You've got to invest in your book and hes right imo. You might save a little in money but in the current climate it will probably hurt your career. Your aver6 joe might not check for this but they have friends that read too and artist friends hopefully keeping them in the know and i for one hope ai works on learning to fold my clothes and do things i dont want to do instead of taking that away from sn artist.
@ArtSnob1019 сағат бұрын
$1000 -$1500 is crap money if your book is going to sell like crazy. Thag will hardly get an artist through a month of rent and living expenses where i live. You've got to invest in your book and hes right imo. You might save a little in money but in the current climate it will probably hurt your career. Your aver6 joe might not check for this but they have friends that read too and artist friends hopefully keeping them in the know and i for one hope ai works on learning to fold my clothes and do things i dont want to do instead of taking that away from sn artist.
@heatherharrison2649 сағат бұрын
This is an interesting topic. I have a degree in English, and in addition to creative writing, I concentrated on modernist and post-modern literature - in other words, the weird and difficult stuff. The weird and difficult stuff is also what I like to write, but I see no problem with using fantasy or science fiction themes in literature that messes with the underlying structures and conventions of language and stories. It is true that the academic community tends to look down upon genre fiction. It's not just fantasy - romance, science fiction, action/adventure, westerns, and the nebulous category of "young adult novels" also attract academic disdain. This is widespread, but it isn't universal. I think genre fiction should be taken more seriously, and it is a worthy subject of academic study. It can tell us a lot about the conventions and assumptions upon which the structure of literature is built, and it can be interesting to study within its broader cultural context. Academics have found a way to make fantasy acceptable. If fantasy elements are included in a work that they approve of, they simply call it "magical realism" and then it is cleansed of the negative connotations of fantasy. Also, ancient, medieval, and non-western literature get a pass. I guess if I ever bother to finish the fantasy project I've been working on for a long time, all I need to do is label it as "magical realism" and it might be acceptable as literary fiction. It is too weird to work as genre fiction - I like to mess with page structure and sentence structure, come up with custom designed points of view, and use confusing and garbled stream of consciousness narration. (Stream of consciousness with magic is really fun to write, especially when magic goes awry.) I think I've been influenced a little too much by James Joyce and Virginia Woolf, but I'll never be anywhere near as talented as they were. A major distinction between genre fiction and the weirder side of literary fiction is that genre fiction tries to be structurally transparent. It uses conventional small scale and large scale structures that readers learn from an early age. The sentence structures, grammar conventions, page layouts, points of view, story arcs, and overall packaging draw from a narrow range of familiar styles. To academic and literary types, this can seem boring. However, it serves a purpose. It allows the story to pass to the reader effortlessly, provided that the reader has been well trained by the culture to accept these structures as defaults. A talented genre fiction writer makes these structures as invisible as possible to allow the story to shine on its own. Readers of genre fiction aren't looking for a linguistic and interpretive puzzle to solve. They are looking for an engaging story, and the complexity they seek is found within the world building, the lore, the characters, and the progression of the narrative. I don't read a lot of conventional fantasy because I am usually looking for difficult books that give me obtuse puzzles to make my brain hurt. (I do, however, play a lot of fantasy video games - I think that medium is ideal for fantasy.) Sometimes, however, I just want a good story and don't want to have to work hard to drag it out of the book. One of my "guilty pleasures" here is obscure pulp science fiction novels from the middle of the 20th century. They are quick, easy reads, and they are a lot of fun. As a general rule, genre fiction writers may not be masters of the finer details of language, but at their best, they are master story tellers, and I think those who are more academically inclined could learn a thing or two from them.
@elivenya-theautisticbookwy963810 сағат бұрын
i think epic fantasy also digged a little bit it's own grave with stucking in the same subgenres with barely any change...meanwhile the new fast food fantasy experiments with a lot of new stuff but sadly executes all the ideas just superficial or well as something with additional softporn, because tik tok is rotting our brains and the reading competence is at a creepy downfall...
@caewing8510 сағат бұрын
My 6th grade teacher did the same as your teacher. He chose a word or phrase to describe each of his students on the last day of school. He told me “Crystal, when I see you, I see Star Wars.” Because I ALWAYS carried a Star Wars book with me. Instead of playing at recess, I read Star Wars books.
@krle2411 сағат бұрын
I cannot believe anyone is using popularity of Sanderson's books to justify their quality. Sales does not equal quality. If your argument is that it does equal numbers, then are we to accept the fact that Twilight series is better than all of Sanderson's work because Twilight series is more popular and sold 4 times as much as Sanderson's books (Twilight series sold 160M copies to Sanderson's entire work 40M copies sold)? Is Stephenie Meyer modern Jane Austen because she has popularity and sales numbers behind her? You had legitimate argument in Steven Erikson's Malazan series which can easily be considered going on par with many literary classics that stand test to hundreds (if not thousands since Malazan is most similar to Homer's Iliad) of years of time, but instead you had to choose probably the weakest fantasy author, just because he is popular.
@teddited968211 сағат бұрын
Let’s include science fiction
@Sharpclaw200011 сағат бұрын
1: The word "genius" is very loaded, it is probably best to avoid using it and instead describe how someone is so good at something, without saying "genius". Why? Because it is usually used to put men, and only men, on a pedestal, giving them a disproportionate amount of attention. Just don't talk about geniouses please. Use a different word. 2: Fantasy has, from its inception (after tolkien, as literary scholars started theorising the genre) been refered to as popculture. And that is true of most fantasy - but some authors focus on different things, social issues and/or political or philosophical things. But then they compete with all other books that also strive to do the same right? And then yeah, not that many fantasy authors remain as heavy hitters within social sciences or philosophy etc. etc. 3: Sci-fi has a longer history of creating what people refer to as "classics" - that are not popculture. Them being classics doesn't mean that they are fun to read.... I read "the female man" and I was kinda bored. But I get the point it is making yada yada. But I prefer Pratchett for sure. But like, pratchett and Joanna Russ doesn't really write for the same reasons, and this is probably why academics are interested in researching Russ more than Pratchett. (Unless their field is popular culture, which some do research in.) 4: I think a lot of fantasy exist, with large ideas and very complex thinking and amazing language - but they are manuscripts on a shelf somewhere. They don't get published because that's not what the market wants. So the reason why there is no fantasy "genius" is twofold, the hegemony thinks of fantasy as pop- which it is, most of the time. So they will not sponsor difficult scripts with culture fund money. And the audience doesn't want books whose aim is not to entertain, so these books won't be produced. So there is no avenue in which these books can exist.
@bryson266212 сағат бұрын
Why would a fan of the genre claim their genre of choice "isn't literature" or isn't even capable of being literature.
@celestialhylos702812 сағат бұрын
John Updike lamented that "the category of 'literary fiction' has sprung up recently to torment people like me who just set out to write books, and if anybody wanted to read them, terrific, the more the merrier ... I'm a genre writer of a sort. I write literary fiction, which is like spy fiction or chick lit." Likewise, on The Charlie Rose Show, Updike argued that this term, when applied to his work, greatly limited him and his expectations of what might come of his writing, so he does not really like it. He suggested that all his works are literary, simply because "they are written in words."
@JRCSalter12 сағат бұрын
I've read a hefty amount of fantasy books, and some 'classic' literature, and what I've found is that the 'classic' literature has often been analysed to death where people have forgotten why it exists in the first place. A great example is Shakespeare. He was quite clearly a populist author, writing for the masses, with rude jokes, bloody violence, etc (part of the reason I believe Baz Luhrman's Romeo + Juliet is a great adaptation, is because it leans into this, and translates the popular of the 15th century into the popular of the 20th). The type of author I think literary snobs would sneer at if he were writing today. We tell stories, first and foremost, to entertain. If the story does that, it can be considered a success. If we can learn something from it, then it can attain greatness. But that education can come in many forms. Most of the time though, it is about the interaction of various characters who have different points of view, clashing with others. Fantasy allows us to envision a world that is different from our own and put thought exercises into practice by way of the characters. It opens up so many possibilities. Ultimately though, I don't feel I've gotten anything more from reading 'classic' literature than I have with reading fantasy. I've read good and bad stuff from both.
@joebo777712 сағат бұрын
Why do critics always disrespect authors/books whose works they have never read. I’ve read Dickens, Poe, James Joyce, Oscar Wilde to name a few but while I recognise their place as literary giants everything they published is not uniformly excellent. Terry Pratchett is wonderful at bringing the absurdities to life (to borrow your phrase) to the attention of his readers in a witty and entertaining way. Are all his books great, no but many are amazing. I remember reading It in 1987 and a colleague at work stated I was reading rubbish. On questioning her motives it wasn’t Stephen King she was criticising but the horror/fantasy genre itself. When I pointed out the number of literary giants who wrote in the genre there was complete silence, she had no answer to my reply. Literary snobbery at its most blatant. Great video!
@Aigra12 сағат бұрын
Honestly, a statement like "Terry Pratchett isn't a literary genius ... I have never read anything by Terry Pratchett ..." - which tells us nothing about Terry Pratchett but way too much about the person who made it - is such a desperate attempt to get a reaction out of the reader. I have a hard time taking that seriously because in today's media landscape all that matters is engagement and negative attention is measured in the same way positive attention is. A click is a click. A comment is a comment. Doesn't matter why you clicked the article. I feel that journalism used to be more nuanced and a lot smarter than it is these days.
@PrinceMeNb113 сағат бұрын
"I've never read anything by Pratchett and I'm not going to" is basically saying "I have no idea what I'm talking about, so my opinion has no merit" I'd be kinda angry at people like this but I can't help but pity anyone that won't ever try Pratchett. Not every reader will love his writing, but I don't think I've heard people say "I read it and hated it, it's just not good at all"
@JRCSalter12 сағат бұрын
And it's not like it's even hard work. An avid reader could get through a Discworld novel in a couple days without even trying. They could have spent a week reading the three highest rated books and they'd at least have something to talk about.
@steveneardley754113 сағат бұрын
The claims of this tweet are so hyperbolic, and so obviously false, that I'm not even interested. There are a million issues that are more important.
@Uesurii_San13 сағат бұрын
Terry Pratchett is a literary genius! Why would someone say he isn't without reading his work?
@LuxVi714 сағат бұрын
Sorry but no one can tell me professor Tolkien’s works aren’t “real” literature.
@acapacapa14 сағат бұрын
As an artist by trade who also writes, I agree with Bryce's tweets. However, I think we are shooting ourselves in the foot by not talking about ethical use of AI in publishing because there is a place for it and it is already used by writers in general. Grammarly and ProWritingAid are hugely popular editing platforms and they employ AI to help edit and reword sections for legibility. The situations I'm thinking of are: - What if I accidentally write a chapter in the wrong tense and need to edit it? AI is a great tool for that. - What if I'm a graphic designer who found the perfect stock photo for the cover I'm making, but I need to smoothly transition from one stock image to the other for the wrap-around cover? Should I be canceled for the inch of space that AI-generated, even if it was generated by Adobe? - What if I'm an author who needs an idiom that has "X" general meaning, that is appropriate for a 1950's time period? Situations where the AI takes the back seat to the creative, rather than driving. Situations where the artists/writer is going to be doing the work anyway, but AI streamlines the process.
@SuperPuddingcat14 сағат бұрын
I think many people equate fantasy with pulp fiction, they are under the impression that fantasy cannot have complex themes or deep characters.
@PoorPersonsBookReviewer14 сағат бұрын
Great video everything you said is so true. That being said we’re out numbered!! 😫
@orangemc935814 сағат бұрын
Say it with me class! PIE! RUH! SEE! What does that sound out? PIRACY!
@WritingAdviceUA15 сағат бұрын
"Fairy tales are more than true: not because they tell us that dragons exist, but because they tell us that dragons can be beaten." - Neil Gaiman, Coraline
@WritingAdviceUA15 сағат бұрын
Who said? Close them in one room with a Chasemfiend
@exceedcharge115 сағат бұрын
As someone who only got into books because of Terry Pratchett and is in the middle of rereading the witches series i find that article very disturbing. Sit Pratchett is quoted as saying “i never had a university education but i have sympathy for those who did” and im staring to see what he meant. In his books several people believe what they think instead of what they see.
@safinan800815 сағат бұрын
Interesting video 🎥🎥🎥
@PhilipChaseTheBestofFantasy16 сағат бұрын
Wonderful video, Johan! I love that you are speaking out on what fantasy has given you and can give others who engage with it. Thank you for including me as well!
@libraryofaviking16 сағат бұрын
Thank you for inspiring me to explore this genre and for everything you've taught me!
@Flammewar16 сағат бұрын
I think two different questions collide here. Is fanatsy literature and is fantasy less respectable. The latter is the issue you actually address in your video. Fantasy is unjustly disregarded, even though it is just as respectable and valid as ‘literature’ for the reasons you mentioned. I think the first question is a bit more complex. If you look at the Cambrige definition, it defines literature as ‘written artistic works, especially those with high and lasting artistic value’, and honestly I don't think most fantasy works fall under that definition. There are of course examples that fulfil this definition, such as Le Guin's, Tolkien's and even GRRM's fantasy novels, but it doesn't apply to the broad field. We could of course try to broaden the definition, but I think it's much healthier to accept that fantasy doesn't have to be literature under the current definitions, and that we should work towards breaking the false superiority people have about literature.
@denee134416 сағат бұрын
All fiction is fantasy. The writer creates characters that don’t exist in reality. Then that character and story become ‘real’ when someone reads the book. I’m assuming literary fiction still includes characters.
@joshuam221216 сағат бұрын
I never understood why fantasy was looked down on but Steven King's horror books were talked about in such high regards C.S Lewis changed the world with his Narnia books when i was writing my portal fantasy one of the points i made was God will never leave even if you go to a place were he wasn't invited because were you go he goes too i heard someone make the point that mid summers night my Shakespeare was really a fantasy but i never read it so i don't know
@TheSuperrespect1316 сағат бұрын
People who look down on other genres....makes you wonder what else they look down on. Just read, what you want, what you love, just don't stop reading. And do not let anyone kill your love of reading, because nowadays we need a little more love in this world.
@yenneferalvarez712216 сағат бұрын
Fantasy is just for entertainment. Literary fiction is real literature. Nothing wrong with either, just different.
@Eluarelon17 сағат бұрын
I think we need to be honest though: Part of the definition of (high) literature in academic circles has to do with the mastery of words and language and the way language is used to achieve and artistic effect. And if that is what you want to see in the books you read, an awful lot of fantasy (especially the most popular ones) fall flat in that respect. Brandon Sanderson might be a great storyteller, a great writer he isn't (and he admitted that he's not even trying to be one). And I would say the same about a lot of other very successfull fantasy writers. Of course there are exceptions to that and always have been, but they are generally not the ones that get talked about. And the rise of Romantasy made things even worse. That article about Pratchett still was complete rubbish, of course. First, Pratchett is absolutely one of those exceptions. Second, that writer even went on to say that he never read a single book written by TP, so they don't even know what they are talking about. And third, what they fail to understand that our lives actually are way too short to waste it only on non-fun things instead of enjoying the time we got. Which is why I read, in the end. For enjoyment, mostly. And while I can also read and enjoy "high" literature, interestingly enough, most of those I really enjoy have also fantastical elements in their works (Shakespeare, Goethe, Paul Auster, the latin-american proponents of "magical realism" like Borges and Garcia-Marquez, Salman Rushdie, Toni Morisson, the list goes on and on). And all those examples show that the claim that fantasy can't be literature (even if you base that claim on a narrow academic definition of literature as "high" literature) is still complete rubbish.
@Daneypastry17 сағат бұрын
To me, the issue is simple. Using AI art for your cover does not show solidarity towards your fellow creators (in this case artists). This lack of solidarity feels hypocritical when writers are simultaneously complaining about AI potentially taking their jobs. It makes me wonder if they care about AI taking jobs in general, or if they only care when it's taking theirs specifically. Plus, if we have creatives devaluing the work of other creatives, what's to stop those who don't understand the hours of hard work that goes into creating a work of art from devaluing it too? And to be fair, the arts are already facing lots of questions regarding their importance and validity, so if anything we, as creatives, should have each other's backs
@lorifrederick236717 сағат бұрын
Ok, i am almost 65, and i have been an avid reader as long as i can remember. I never read any fantasy at all. Yup, i was in that narrowed mindset. Thanks to KZread channels like yours, i have been reading mostly fantasy since last year. I am LOVING it! I have a huge TBR pile, i needed another bookcase juse to house all the fantasy i picked up. Absolutely loving Brandon Sanderson. I am now on Oathbringer. Thank you for your wonderful channel. I am a PROUD nerd! I also own that Nerd Poetry magnet kit (from B&N) and having a blast with making up my own epic nerd poetry!!
@lorifrederick236717 сағат бұрын
And last summer, my Mom had knee replacement, and a lot of stuff going on with her recovery (she is all good now). I spent a lot of time at the hospital and rehab center. I carried with me "Fourth Wing." Being new to fantasy, I was able to escape mentally, it was wonderful. Yes, reading fantasy has expanded my mental gymnastics, I love all these new worlds embedded in my imagination!
@MP-wg8pd18 сағат бұрын
Some readers and artists are more interested in dragging people than letting them use AI as just another tool. It's just something to make themselves sound more erudite. I'm an artist and I have had tremors in my hands preventing me from drawing for many years. But I can make my children's books with AI.
@daviancyandreina18 сағат бұрын
The thing with that is that is the only physical books that bookstores have in my country and even people don't buy it either,
@Majesticon18 сағат бұрын
I sound like a hater, but sff is my favorite genre but i hate all of your arguments for it.
@Majesticon18 сағат бұрын
The Way of Kings is juvenile. Are you seriously going to compare it to like, "invisible man" for instance? And i mean, he answers his own question! Also, id wildly diaagree that fantasy does any kind of commentary on prejudice. The fans of fantssy are some of the most prejudiced, bigoted people ive ever encountered!
@SI-vb7hd16 сағат бұрын
That is a lot of sweeping generalisations you are making
@alejandropiedra935010 сағат бұрын
El camino de los reyes no es juvenil, aunque sea popular entre el público joven. Tiene violencia explícita, tramas políticas y religiosas, y protagonistas de moral cuestionable. Todo eso es incompatible con la literatura juvenil, y además diría que la cantidad de páginas también lo aleja de esa categoría. No hace falta que salga un enano con el pene erecto para ser adulto.
@Majesticon18 сағат бұрын
Most modern fantasy is difficult to read. It's like reading Danielle Steele or YA or something. NK Jemisin is obviously a literary master, but how many fantasy "booktubers" talk about her work? Or Rebecca Roans, marlon James, nnedi okorafor, Samuel delany?
@stephennootens91618 сағат бұрын
To be fair most genres have if not still been look down on in so call literature cicrles. Horror, romance, science fiction and even mysteries have been looked down at one point or another. Sobbery is still a big thing in literature.
Пікірлер
'Fantasy' can absolutely possess literary merit. Unfortunately, popular fantasy writing is mostly trite pap. Le Guin, Wolfe, Butler simply aren't representative of what sells to the masses.
I've also noticed that there are no middle-aged or older female booktubers. Apparently people will watch you if you're a middle-aged bloke like Mike but not if you're female. Booktube is dominated by youth and particularly white females. Gen Z reckon reckon they are so woke but they actually won't watch booktubers that are black, Asian or older than 30.
“I also believe there is a movie out there” - which rock does this clown live under? The exorcist is pretty much the greatest horror movie of all time
Most literary fiction is preachy and boring as stale snot on the sidewalk. The good stuff provides escapism AND teaches you something.
I think a big reason for people looking down on Fantasy is that the vast majority of Fantasy books and, what is worse, the most popular ones, are simply very badly written, Le Guin & Wolfe not being very broadly known, the only really popular exception being Tolkien. Instead people get recommended Harry Potter which, we have to admit is not a literary jewel, or Sanderson, who I don't even know how someone accepted to publish in the first place and they think that if that's what people like then yes, the genre is not worth it. Popular has never been the same as quality.
Hi there. Fantasy like Harry Potter and Naruto, helped me to keep on trying to overcome obstacles that, as a partially blind teenager, was facing and how to not give up. One of the dilemmas that I came across in the Lord of the Rings is Tolkien's criticism of technology, since he preferred nature, whereas for me, technology makes life easier and more accessible. Also, gaining a vivid imagination allows you to get more creative in solving problems too.
Tolkien didn’t write a fantasy he wrote a mythology for the English people (whose myths were lost with Norman conquest). He would not have agreed it is fantasy, so bad comparison- maybe David Eddings would work better.
I just can't stand Sanderson's writing style.
Genuine question though: why is there a need for more acclaim and recognition? The genre is already winning big in terms of readership and sales -- in a way the demand and its ubiquity makes it already essential as a genre of literature.
I might buy the dude's books now even more lol
$1000 -$1500 is crap money if your book is going to sell like crazy. That will hardly get an artist through a month of rent and living expenses where i live. You've got to invest in your book and hes right imo. You might save a little in money but in the current climate it will probably hurt your career. Your aver6 joe might not check for this but they have friends that read too and artist friends hopefully keeping them in the know and i for one hope ai works on learning to fold my clothes and do things i dont want to do instead of taking that away from sn artist.
$1000 -$1500 is crap money if your book is going to sell like crazy. Thag will hardly get an artist through a month of rent and living expenses where i live. You've got to invest in your book and hes right imo. You might save a little in money but in the current climate it will probably hurt your career. Your aver6 joe might not check for this but they have friends that read too and artist friends hopefully keeping them in the know and i for one hope ai works on learning to fold my clothes and do things i dont want to do instead of taking that away from sn artist.
This is an interesting topic. I have a degree in English, and in addition to creative writing, I concentrated on modernist and post-modern literature - in other words, the weird and difficult stuff. The weird and difficult stuff is also what I like to write, but I see no problem with using fantasy or science fiction themes in literature that messes with the underlying structures and conventions of language and stories. It is true that the academic community tends to look down upon genre fiction. It's not just fantasy - romance, science fiction, action/adventure, westerns, and the nebulous category of "young adult novels" also attract academic disdain. This is widespread, but it isn't universal. I think genre fiction should be taken more seriously, and it is a worthy subject of academic study. It can tell us a lot about the conventions and assumptions upon which the structure of literature is built, and it can be interesting to study within its broader cultural context. Academics have found a way to make fantasy acceptable. If fantasy elements are included in a work that they approve of, they simply call it "magical realism" and then it is cleansed of the negative connotations of fantasy. Also, ancient, medieval, and non-western literature get a pass. I guess if I ever bother to finish the fantasy project I've been working on for a long time, all I need to do is label it as "magical realism" and it might be acceptable as literary fiction. It is too weird to work as genre fiction - I like to mess with page structure and sentence structure, come up with custom designed points of view, and use confusing and garbled stream of consciousness narration. (Stream of consciousness with magic is really fun to write, especially when magic goes awry.) I think I've been influenced a little too much by James Joyce and Virginia Woolf, but I'll never be anywhere near as talented as they were. A major distinction between genre fiction and the weirder side of literary fiction is that genre fiction tries to be structurally transparent. It uses conventional small scale and large scale structures that readers learn from an early age. The sentence structures, grammar conventions, page layouts, points of view, story arcs, and overall packaging draw from a narrow range of familiar styles. To academic and literary types, this can seem boring. However, it serves a purpose. It allows the story to pass to the reader effortlessly, provided that the reader has been well trained by the culture to accept these structures as defaults. A talented genre fiction writer makes these structures as invisible as possible to allow the story to shine on its own. Readers of genre fiction aren't looking for a linguistic and interpretive puzzle to solve. They are looking for an engaging story, and the complexity they seek is found within the world building, the lore, the characters, and the progression of the narrative. I don't read a lot of conventional fantasy because I am usually looking for difficult books that give me obtuse puzzles to make my brain hurt. (I do, however, play a lot of fantasy video games - I think that medium is ideal for fantasy.) Sometimes, however, I just want a good story and don't want to have to work hard to drag it out of the book. One of my "guilty pleasures" here is obscure pulp science fiction novels from the middle of the 20th century. They are quick, easy reads, and they are a lot of fun. As a general rule, genre fiction writers may not be masters of the finer details of language, but at their best, they are master story tellers, and I think those who are more academically inclined could learn a thing or two from them.
i think epic fantasy also digged a little bit it's own grave with stucking in the same subgenres with barely any change...meanwhile the new fast food fantasy experiments with a lot of new stuff but sadly executes all the ideas just superficial or well as something with additional softporn, because tik tok is rotting our brains and the reading competence is at a creepy downfall...
My 6th grade teacher did the same as your teacher. He chose a word or phrase to describe each of his students on the last day of school. He told me “Crystal, when I see you, I see Star Wars.” Because I ALWAYS carried a Star Wars book with me. Instead of playing at recess, I read Star Wars books.
I cannot believe anyone is using popularity of Sanderson's books to justify their quality. Sales does not equal quality. If your argument is that it does equal numbers, then are we to accept the fact that Twilight series is better than all of Sanderson's work because Twilight series is more popular and sold 4 times as much as Sanderson's books (Twilight series sold 160M copies to Sanderson's entire work 40M copies sold)? Is Stephenie Meyer modern Jane Austen because she has popularity and sales numbers behind her? You had legitimate argument in Steven Erikson's Malazan series which can easily be considered going on par with many literary classics that stand test to hundreds (if not thousands since Malazan is most similar to Homer's Iliad) of years of time, but instead you had to choose probably the weakest fantasy author, just because he is popular.
Let’s include science fiction
1: The word "genius" is very loaded, it is probably best to avoid using it and instead describe how someone is so good at something, without saying "genius". Why? Because it is usually used to put men, and only men, on a pedestal, giving them a disproportionate amount of attention. Just don't talk about geniouses please. Use a different word. 2: Fantasy has, from its inception (after tolkien, as literary scholars started theorising the genre) been refered to as popculture. And that is true of most fantasy - but some authors focus on different things, social issues and/or political or philosophical things. But then they compete with all other books that also strive to do the same right? And then yeah, not that many fantasy authors remain as heavy hitters within social sciences or philosophy etc. etc. 3: Sci-fi has a longer history of creating what people refer to as "classics" - that are not popculture. Them being classics doesn't mean that they are fun to read.... I read "the female man" and I was kinda bored. But I get the point it is making yada yada. But I prefer Pratchett for sure. But like, pratchett and Joanna Russ doesn't really write for the same reasons, and this is probably why academics are interested in researching Russ more than Pratchett. (Unless their field is popular culture, which some do research in.) 4: I think a lot of fantasy exist, with large ideas and very complex thinking and amazing language - but they are manuscripts on a shelf somewhere. They don't get published because that's not what the market wants. So the reason why there is no fantasy "genius" is twofold, the hegemony thinks of fantasy as pop- which it is, most of the time. So they will not sponsor difficult scripts with culture fund money. And the audience doesn't want books whose aim is not to entertain, so these books won't be produced. So there is no avenue in which these books can exist.
Why would a fan of the genre claim their genre of choice "isn't literature" or isn't even capable of being literature.
John Updike lamented that "the category of 'literary fiction' has sprung up recently to torment people like me who just set out to write books, and if anybody wanted to read them, terrific, the more the merrier ... I'm a genre writer of a sort. I write literary fiction, which is like spy fiction or chick lit." Likewise, on The Charlie Rose Show, Updike argued that this term, when applied to his work, greatly limited him and his expectations of what might come of his writing, so he does not really like it. He suggested that all his works are literary, simply because "they are written in words."
I've read a hefty amount of fantasy books, and some 'classic' literature, and what I've found is that the 'classic' literature has often been analysed to death where people have forgotten why it exists in the first place. A great example is Shakespeare. He was quite clearly a populist author, writing for the masses, with rude jokes, bloody violence, etc (part of the reason I believe Baz Luhrman's Romeo + Juliet is a great adaptation, is because it leans into this, and translates the popular of the 15th century into the popular of the 20th). The type of author I think literary snobs would sneer at if he were writing today. We tell stories, first and foremost, to entertain. If the story does that, it can be considered a success. If we can learn something from it, then it can attain greatness. But that education can come in many forms. Most of the time though, it is about the interaction of various characters who have different points of view, clashing with others. Fantasy allows us to envision a world that is different from our own and put thought exercises into practice by way of the characters. It opens up so many possibilities. Ultimately though, I don't feel I've gotten anything more from reading 'classic' literature than I have with reading fantasy. I've read good and bad stuff from both.
Why do critics always disrespect authors/books whose works they have never read. I’ve read Dickens, Poe, James Joyce, Oscar Wilde to name a few but while I recognise their place as literary giants everything they published is not uniformly excellent. Terry Pratchett is wonderful at bringing the absurdities to life (to borrow your phrase) to the attention of his readers in a witty and entertaining way. Are all his books great, no but many are amazing. I remember reading It in 1987 and a colleague at work stated I was reading rubbish. On questioning her motives it wasn’t Stephen King she was criticising but the horror/fantasy genre itself. When I pointed out the number of literary giants who wrote in the genre there was complete silence, she had no answer to my reply. Literary snobbery at its most blatant. Great video!
Honestly, a statement like "Terry Pratchett isn't a literary genius ... I have never read anything by Terry Pratchett ..." - which tells us nothing about Terry Pratchett but way too much about the person who made it - is such a desperate attempt to get a reaction out of the reader. I have a hard time taking that seriously because in today's media landscape all that matters is engagement and negative attention is measured in the same way positive attention is. A click is a click. A comment is a comment. Doesn't matter why you clicked the article. I feel that journalism used to be more nuanced and a lot smarter than it is these days.
"I've never read anything by Pratchett and I'm not going to" is basically saying "I have no idea what I'm talking about, so my opinion has no merit" I'd be kinda angry at people like this but I can't help but pity anyone that won't ever try Pratchett. Not every reader will love his writing, but I don't think I've heard people say "I read it and hated it, it's just not good at all"
And it's not like it's even hard work. An avid reader could get through a Discworld novel in a couple days without even trying. They could have spent a week reading the three highest rated books and they'd at least have something to talk about.
The claims of this tweet are so hyperbolic, and so obviously false, that I'm not even interested. There are a million issues that are more important.
Terry Pratchett is a literary genius! Why would someone say he isn't without reading his work?
Sorry but no one can tell me professor Tolkien’s works aren’t “real” literature.
As an artist by trade who also writes, I agree with Bryce's tweets. However, I think we are shooting ourselves in the foot by not talking about ethical use of AI in publishing because there is a place for it and it is already used by writers in general. Grammarly and ProWritingAid are hugely popular editing platforms and they employ AI to help edit and reword sections for legibility. The situations I'm thinking of are: - What if I accidentally write a chapter in the wrong tense and need to edit it? AI is a great tool for that. - What if I'm a graphic designer who found the perfect stock photo for the cover I'm making, but I need to smoothly transition from one stock image to the other for the wrap-around cover? Should I be canceled for the inch of space that AI-generated, even if it was generated by Adobe? - What if I'm an author who needs an idiom that has "X" general meaning, that is appropriate for a 1950's time period? Situations where the AI takes the back seat to the creative, rather than driving. Situations where the artists/writer is going to be doing the work anyway, but AI streamlines the process.
I think many people equate fantasy with pulp fiction, they are under the impression that fantasy cannot have complex themes or deep characters.
Great video everything you said is so true. That being said we’re out numbered!! 😫
Say it with me class! PIE! RUH! SEE! What does that sound out? PIRACY!
"Fairy tales are more than true: not because they tell us that dragons exist, but because they tell us that dragons can be beaten." - Neil Gaiman, Coraline
Who said? Close them in one room with a Chasemfiend
As someone who only got into books because of Terry Pratchett and is in the middle of rereading the witches series i find that article very disturbing. Sit Pratchett is quoted as saying “i never had a university education but i have sympathy for those who did” and im staring to see what he meant. In his books several people believe what they think instead of what they see.
Interesting video 🎥🎥🎥
Wonderful video, Johan! I love that you are speaking out on what fantasy has given you and can give others who engage with it. Thank you for including me as well!
Thank you for inspiring me to explore this genre and for everything you've taught me!
I think two different questions collide here. Is fanatsy literature and is fantasy less respectable. The latter is the issue you actually address in your video. Fantasy is unjustly disregarded, even though it is just as respectable and valid as ‘literature’ for the reasons you mentioned. I think the first question is a bit more complex. If you look at the Cambrige definition, it defines literature as ‘written artistic works, especially those with high and lasting artistic value’, and honestly I don't think most fantasy works fall under that definition. There are of course examples that fulfil this definition, such as Le Guin's, Tolkien's and even GRRM's fantasy novels, but it doesn't apply to the broad field. We could of course try to broaden the definition, but I think it's much healthier to accept that fantasy doesn't have to be literature under the current definitions, and that we should work towards breaking the false superiority people have about literature.
All fiction is fantasy. The writer creates characters that don’t exist in reality. Then that character and story become ‘real’ when someone reads the book. I’m assuming literary fiction still includes characters.
I never understood why fantasy was looked down on but Steven King's horror books were talked about in such high regards C.S Lewis changed the world with his Narnia books when i was writing my portal fantasy one of the points i made was God will never leave even if you go to a place were he wasn't invited because were you go he goes too i heard someone make the point that mid summers night my Shakespeare was really a fantasy but i never read it so i don't know
People who look down on other genres....makes you wonder what else they look down on. Just read, what you want, what you love, just don't stop reading. And do not let anyone kill your love of reading, because nowadays we need a little more love in this world.
Fantasy is just for entertainment. Literary fiction is real literature. Nothing wrong with either, just different.
I think we need to be honest though: Part of the definition of (high) literature in academic circles has to do with the mastery of words and language and the way language is used to achieve and artistic effect. And if that is what you want to see in the books you read, an awful lot of fantasy (especially the most popular ones) fall flat in that respect. Brandon Sanderson might be a great storyteller, a great writer he isn't (and he admitted that he's not even trying to be one). And I would say the same about a lot of other very successfull fantasy writers. Of course there are exceptions to that and always have been, but they are generally not the ones that get talked about. And the rise of Romantasy made things even worse. That article about Pratchett still was complete rubbish, of course. First, Pratchett is absolutely one of those exceptions. Second, that writer even went on to say that he never read a single book written by TP, so they don't even know what they are talking about. And third, what they fail to understand that our lives actually are way too short to waste it only on non-fun things instead of enjoying the time we got. Which is why I read, in the end. For enjoyment, mostly. And while I can also read and enjoy "high" literature, interestingly enough, most of those I really enjoy have also fantastical elements in their works (Shakespeare, Goethe, Paul Auster, the latin-american proponents of "magical realism" like Borges and Garcia-Marquez, Salman Rushdie, Toni Morisson, the list goes on and on). And all those examples show that the claim that fantasy can't be literature (even if you base that claim on a narrow academic definition of literature as "high" literature) is still complete rubbish.
To me, the issue is simple. Using AI art for your cover does not show solidarity towards your fellow creators (in this case artists). This lack of solidarity feels hypocritical when writers are simultaneously complaining about AI potentially taking their jobs. It makes me wonder if they care about AI taking jobs in general, or if they only care when it's taking theirs specifically. Plus, if we have creatives devaluing the work of other creatives, what's to stop those who don't understand the hours of hard work that goes into creating a work of art from devaluing it too? And to be fair, the arts are already facing lots of questions regarding their importance and validity, so if anything we, as creatives, should have each other's backs
Ok, i am almost 65, and i have been an avid reader as long as i can remember. I never read any fantasy at all. Yup, i was in that narrowed mindset. Thanks to KZread channels like yours, i have been reading mostly fantasy since last year. I am LOVING it! I have a huge TBR pile, i needed another bookcase juse to house all the fantasy i picked up. Absolutely loving Brandon Sanderson. I am now on Oathbringer. Thank you for your wonderful channel. I am a PROUD nerd! I also own that Nerd Poetry magnet kit (from B&N) and having a blast with making up my own epic nerd poetry!!
And last summer, my Mom had knee replacement, and a lot of stuff going on with her recovery (she is all good now). I spent a lot of time at the hospital and rehab center. I carried with me "Fourth Wing." Being new to fantasy, I was able to escape mentally, it was wonderful. Yes, reading fantasy has expanded my mental gymnastics, I love all these new worlds embedded in my imagination!
Some readers and artists are more interested in dragging people than letting them use AI as just another tool. It's just something to make themselves sound more erudite. I'm an artist and I have had tremors in my hands preventing me from drawing for many years. But I can make my children's books with AI.
The thing with that is that is the only physical books that bookstores have in my country and even people don't buy it either,
I sound like a hater, but sff is my favorite genre but i hate all of your arguments for it.
The Way of Kings is juvenile. Are you seriously going to compare it to like, "invisible man" for instance? And i mean, he answers his own question! Also, id wildly diaagree that fantasy does any kind of commentary on prejudice. The fans of fantssy are some of the most prejudiced, bigoted people ive ever encountered!
That is a lot of sweeping generalisations you are making
El camino de los reyes no es juvenil, aunque sea popular entre el público joven. Tiene violencia explícita, tramas políticas y religiosas, y protagonistas de moral cuestionable. Todo eso es incompatible con la literatura juvenil, y además diría que la cantidad de páginas también lo aleja de esa categoría. No hace falta que salga un enano con el pene erecto para ser adulto.
Most modern fantasy is difficult to read. It's like reading Danielle Steele or YA or something. NK Jemisin is obviously a literary master, but how many fantasy "booktubers" talk about her work? Or Rebecca Roans, marlon James, nnedi okorafor, Samuel delany?
To be fair most genres have if not still been look down on in so call literature cicrles. Horror, romance, science fiction and even mysteries have been looked down at one point or another. Sobbery is still a big thing in literature.