Questions for Neil Gaiman at Saratoga Springs

From Alyssa:

1. What would be your advice for a young aspiring writer today?
2. Where do you get your ideas for your stories? Like The Ocean at the End of the Lane for example? What inspired this novel?
3. Your Sandman series is one of my favorites and what actually got me interested in graphic novels, how was it different to write a story that would later have images created to go along with your words as opposed to just writing a standard story in a novel?
4. How is it collaborating with other authors? I just read Good Omens and was thoroughly amused reading the excerpts in the back that say how you and Terry Pratchett would call each other and just yell a lot at the excitement of your collaborative work.  Have you ever had any negative experiences with collaborative writing?

From Elizabeth:

1. What is your favorite part about writing?
2. Who are some authors that inspire you?
3. Readers/critics tend to dump you in the fantasy genre.  What "genre(s)" do you consider your writing to fall into?
4. What is your favorite piece that you have written throughout your career?
5. Do you prefer collaborating on works or do you like flying solo?

Neal on Neil and Neal

Hey folks, sorry for the long absence.  I'm going to be teaching a summer course on Neil Gaiman and Neal Stephenson this summer from May 28 through June 28 at SUNY Fredonia, so expect a lot more activity here soon!

Here's how I've been pitching it on campus.

Summer Session I

Bring on the "Ne(a/i)ls":

Bruce Neal Simon Will Be Teaching Neil Gaiman and Neal Stephenson

ENGL 427 Major Writers: Neil Gaiman and Neal Stephenson

During Summer Session I, we will examine a sample of works from the major fantasy fiction writer and the major science fiction writer of their generation: Neil Gaiman and Neal Stephenson. We will start by pairing some shorter works that made the writers' early reputations (for instance, Gaiman's Sandman: Season of Mists and Stephenson's "Mother Earth, Mother Board" from Some Remarks). We will then pair Gaiman's (and Terry Pratchett's) Good Omens with Stephenson's Snow Crash as hugely popular and influential experiments in narrative, humor, and apocalypse. Finally, we will pair Gaiman's American Gods with Stephenson's Anathem as mature and major novels. If we have the time (and are completely insane), we will also try to pack in their most recent novels, Gaiman's The Ocean at the End of the Lane and Stephenson's Reamde--you know, for fun (these novels will be optional purchases)!

We will consider such questions as what makes a writer "major"? how do these very different writers speak to each other, to their own times, and to us? what connections and contrasts can we find between their characters and settings, characteristic themes and figures, central beliefs and values, writing styles and narrative strategies, and literary and political projects?

This course fulfills the "major author course" requirement for undergraduates majoring in English or English Adolescence Education.

Everything in Our World Is Subjective (Middle-Earth Is Another Story)

Steph Ward explains:

Everyone believes in different things. Some people may say that they believe that eating meat is wrong because it is cruel to animals, and some people may say that they believe ghosts exist because they saw one. Who is the average individual to question the beliefs of others? The concept of fantasy is very fluid and difficult to pin down when one takes into account how truly subjective it is. Depending on the beliefs of an individual a work of fantasy can easily be considered to be a work of speculative fiction. A majority of fantasy is completely subjective, based upon the personal beliefs of the individual, there are some exceptions to this subjectivity, depending on the way that the novel is set up. A novel that takes place in our world is much more difficult to classify as fantasy than a novel that is set in another world.

A belief can come from anywhere. Some sources of beliefs that may affect what we see as fantasy may come from places like our own experiences, our culture or our religion. Since so many fantasy novelists pull ideas from religions (whether it is Paganism, Christianity or otherwise) it only seems natural that beliefs in religion may alter our perception of what fantasy is. Take the novel Good Omens by Neil Gaiman and Terry Pratchett: this novel gives you an eschatological tale in which the AntiChrist has been born and will bring about the end of the world. The concepts of the Apocalypse, angels, demons and the AntiChrist are things that are very real to many groups of people because of their beliefs. So the classification of this novel becomes subjective. One’s religious beliefs may dictate that this is not fantasy at all, merely a speculation, a possible course of events about something that will inevitably occur. On the other side of the coin, if you are an atheist and do not believe in anything religious then this book becomes a work of complete fantasy, as you have no beliefs to ground it. Therefore, whether you consider this book to be fantasy or not is a completely subjective thing. There is no way to do it without disagreement from some groups.

Good Omens is particularly subjective because it deals directly with religion, something that people already have extreme beliefs about. The debate of “Is this fantasy?” does not always have to be this heated. It is hard to find an individual who does not believe that The Hobbit by J.R.R. Tolkien is a fantasy novel. This is not to say that it is not a subjective belief. Certainly, some may claim that Middle-Earth does exist but these beliefs seem much less rational to us than the claim that angels exist. Why is this? This occurs because The Hobbit does not take place in our world. This novel takes place in another world entirely, one that the author admittedly made up. It is much easier, and much more rational, to have subjective beliefs in our world than it is to have subjective beliefs about another world. In Middle-Earth, we have only what we are told by Tolkien to form our beliefs on. In Good Omens, which takes place on our Earth, we have all of our personal experience and beliefs about our world to take into account before we can make a decision.

Much of Good Omens is supported by other tangible things, things that we already know exist. The novel makes mention of the Bible, of the Satanist and Christian faiths, of Nostradamus and other prophecy makers, things that we know actually exist or existed. On top of that it adds things that could exist, things that many people do believe exist such as angels and demons. The novel also takes place in our world. We have enough information, from our own life experiences and from those things the novel makes reference to that we know exist to be able to make a subjective judgment on the things that could exist. When Gaiman and Pratchett say, “Many phenomena--wars, plagues, sudden audits--have been advanced as evidence for the hidden hand of Satan in the affairs of man...” (15), it is easy for me to make a subjective call on whether this statement is fantasy or not. That is because it is based in my world and I have experience with all of those evil things listed. I may have been told by the Bible, or by my parents or a hundred other outside sources that Satan causes evil in the world. Since I already know this it is very easy for me to subjectively say that this is not fantasy at all, this novel is actually taking a set of beliefs from outside sources and building a story out of them. However, if I had been raised to believe that neither God nor Satan exist and that the Apocalypse is a bunch of bologna I would say that this is a fantastical concept that is imaginary only. But, if we look at The Hobbit, which takes place in another world, the classification of the novel is much simpler because we have no influence from outside sources. When Tolkien explains that hobbits are “a little people, about half our height, and smaller than the bearded Dwarves. Hobbits have no beards. There is little or no magic about them, except the ordinary everyday sort...” (2), I do not have to decide whether a hobbit is a fantastical creature or not because this novel does not take place in the world that I live in. I cannot have a rational, subjective belief about a world that I have no experience of. Good Omens references things that I know, and a world that I am familiar with, so I can make a subjective judgment based on my beliefs about the world as to whether I think this novel is fantastic or speculative. The Hobbit does not allow me to do such things. I have been told that Tolkien created Middle-Earth. This is not my world, so this is fantasy.

Whether something is fantasy or not depends on our beliefs. Our beliefs depend on our experiences and influences from our world. A novel that takes place in our world is open to much debate as to whether or not it is fantasy. That is because people have such varying beliefs on our world. Any novels that take place in our world can never definitively be called fantasy, or anything else. There will always be debate because the human experience and beliefs vary so greatly. However, if a novel does not take place in our world it is much easier to simply slap a fantasy label on it and be done with the whole ordeal.

"Serious Discussions of Identity? In a Fantasy Novel?!"

Josh Jerome responds to his titular interlocutor:

Detractors of the fantasy genre are quick to call it escapism, indulgent nostalgia, or any number of terms that amount to it being an insubstantial art with little meaning or value. While it's true that some fantasy is utter pulp fiction, there are many works within the genre that tackle real-world issues in ways that only fantasy can. An excellent example of a substantial fantasy novel is Good Omens by Neil Gaiman and Terry Pratchett. The book is a satirical take on the Apocalypse, with numerous angels and demons all working towards the ultimate battle between Heaven and Hell. The three principal characters--the angel Aziraphale, the demon Crowley, and the Antichrist Adam--are all examples of conflicting identities. According to the Great Plan of which John wrote in Revelations, all three of them are meant to be instrumental in bringing about Armageddon. The only problem is, they happen to like the world, and ending it would just ruin all their days.

The thing about angels and demons is, they were created without free will. Each of them has a job to do in God's Plan, and to contradict it is to go against the very nature of their existence. Of course, over six thousand years living among people, some of that free will starts to rub off. Aziraphale and Crowley reached a working friendship somewhere in history, to the point that one will do the other's job if they happen to be in the neighborhood. The decision to try and avert the Apocalypse is made by Crowley (being easier for him since demons are, by definition, rebels). Crowley then has to persuade Aziraphale to go along with it, pointing out the sheer insipidity of a world in which Heaven wins the Last Battle, but the point that gets him on board isn't a philosophical one. It's the lack of sushi. For an angel to actively attempt to subvert God's order is no small thing--just ask Lucifer. Conversely, Crowley's defiance of Hell's shot at checkmate consigns him to torments that the damned could look at and say "at least I'm not that guy."

Due to a breakdown in communication, the plan to give the new-born Antichrist to Satanist parents fails spectacularly. Because of this, the child is given the name Adam and raised in a pretty vanilla family--he has friends, gets into trouble (like any other boy, just with a bit more style), and ends up with a decidedly human outlook. It's important to note that the main reason Adam rejects his Antichrist tendencies is because of a "what have I done" moment that occurs when he imposes his will on his friends. He later explains to Beelzebub and the Metatron that he's not going to let the world end, since that wouldn't prove anything. He then proceeds to disallow Satan's appearance on Earth. In overcoming his birthright, Adam is able to override the next-best thing to a deity.

By having the main characters overcome their natures through exertion of their free will, Gaiman and Pratchett make a strong point: a person (or even an odd divine being) isn't shunted into certain actions just because "fate" says so.

Though one example is hardly enough to sway the opinions of those that turn up their nose at fantasy fiction, Good Omens is far from the only fantasy novel that deals with substantial issues. The genre, by virtue of being something other than an orgy of verisimilitude, is able to present important issues with just enough contextual baggage to thoroughly examine them.

World and Character Development within Fantasy Fiction

Gabrielle Fletcher considers what good fantasy fiction is:

I remember one Christmas when my younger brother and I were no older than thirteen...it was a time that some important video game was coming out. My brother had been dropping hints to my parents the whole year about it in hopes of it being somewhere under the tree that Christmas. Early Christmas morning he scanned all the colorful presents' shapes looking for one that resembled his game, and there it was wrapped in shining wrapping paper waiting for him. He patiently waited to open the gift with a huge grin of anticipation across his face, clutching the present as if it were the answer to the meaning of his life. When it was his turn he manically ripped it open and then instantly his grin froze in an awkward position. The promising package in his hand was not the game he had been hoping for but one of The Chronicles of Narnia novels. His face dropped in disappointment as he stared at the glossy paperback book. "God damn it, another fantasy book?" he muttered under his breath tossing the book in my direction. Being the bookworm of the family I quickly snatched the rejected present, stashing it with the books my parents had given me. Later that week I finished it and recommended that he read it. "It's probably just like Harry Potter and the rest of those magic books," he responded to me, "and nothing is better than Harry Potter."

The memory of that Christmas and his reaction to Fantasy has always stayed in the back of my mind. Most people I know trash Fantasy comparing it to movie versions of Fantasy books claiming they all must be the same. When reading these books in this genre it was hard not to see the same pattern of theme and storylines. Usually when one thinks of a Fantasy story it has the usual elements of supernatural, magic, romance, heroes overcoming evil, or characters discovering themselves as they are. With all these redundant plot lines, how can you determine what makes a 'good' fantasy fiction story?

It varies with each reader's preferences and what their own personal expectations are for the Fantasy book. While reading some selected works I was able to develop a kind of way to evaluate the novels by comparing the author's fictional world and character development. If the world was unclear to me or characters were weak, I wasn't as intrigued with the books. Without noticing it I was setting up my own personal expectation I usually look for in a good book. Some questions I would ask myself: "Has it been thought out well?" "Are there any connections to reality from this fictional land?" "Can I picture this world?" "Who is this character really?" and "What can I learn from these characters?"

Fictional world development is key to any good fiction story whether it's fantasy or trashy soft-core romance novels; you know the ones that you catch your mom or some older woman secretly engrossed by. A reader can't fully grasp or enjoy a Fantasy novel if the world they are trying to imagine or see isn't fully developed. An author could write about the most realistic characters, draw out epic storylines, or imagine the most brutal battles on paper--but if the world doesn't fit, how can all these elements come together?

In Sheri Tepper's novel King's Blood Four of the True Game trilogy, she successfully paints a new world to readers where characters/players battle in Lands of the True Game. Each player of True Game has a unique power such as healing, shape shifting, necromancy, or magic used for combat. The land is divided by Kings and rulers, each having their own set of special players to fight for them.

The actual landscape of the True Game is vast and spacious marked with canyons, waterways, and lush forests. Tepper uses poetic language to help describe the True Game world and settings. For example, while Peter, the protagonist of the story, finally reaches old Windlow's castle, Tepper shows her knowledge of the land's natural beauty describing just basic nature as "trees loomed like towers, vast as clouds" (61). The trail Peter walks on is "needle-strewn and redolent of resin, sharp and soft in the nostrils. Flowers bloomed in the shade, their secret faces turned down to the mosses" (61-62). Clearly she knows exactly how her world is portrayed, and successfully can draw the reader to her imaginative landscape within the book. While reading the novel you can feel like you're taking a personal tour with Peter as he discovers his own world.

Character development is another important element in the fantasy fiction genre. Usually you see the protagonist discovering their true identity throughout the novel, watching the character grow right before your own eyes. These heroes or villains are able to identify themselves and the world around them, which most of the time is something that all readers can relate to as we try to discover ourselves in life.

In Neil Gaiman and Terry Pratchett's Good Omens the collaboration was ingenious, being able to successfully developed well-rounded characters. Although Good Omens is considered Fantasy fiction, the story is set up in reality during Armageddon. Two unlikely characters, Crowley, a demon from hell and Aziraphale, the archangel from the garden of Eden, band together to help save humanity. Their relationship, although originally based on a mutual agreement, becomes genuine in the story. As they learn to accept each other as they are, Crowley and Aziraphale also become more human-like and develop a taste for ordinary human life. Crowley, who was created without free will, develops it while on earth describing it as almost something contagious: "you couldn't hang around humans for very long without learning a thing or two" (Gaiman and Pratchett 39).

Pratchett and Gaiman use the angel and the demon not only to satirize but symbolize individual passion for salvation of the human race. Their internal transitions throughout the novel makes them more realistic and relatable than most of the non-fantastical characters in the book even though they are supernatural creatures.

It is up to the reader to decide what makes a good fantasy fiction; it's a matter of opinion and preference. Character and world development could prove a good story for some, and others not. Going back to what my brother said to me that one Christmas--"It's probably just like Harry Potter and the rest of those magic books and nothing is better than Harry Potter"--fantasy may seem tiresome and repetitive to some people. If they allow themselves, they could see that it is the opposite--and there are books better than Harry Potter.

Works Cited

Gaiman, Neil, and Terry Pratchett. Good Omens: The Nice and Accurate Prophecies of Agnes Nutter, Witch. Harper Torch, 2006. Print.

Tepper, Sheri. The True Game. Ace Trade, 1996. Print.

Omens That Are Good

Well, I have to write this “essay” for my Fantasy Fiction course at SUNY Fredonia. My professor has allowed us free range over pretty much any topic and any text that has sparked our interest. *activate demonic voice distortion* MUAH HAH HAH. *deactivate demonic voice distortion* So, I love the book Good Omens by Terry Pratchett and Neil Gaiman (or Neil Gaiman and Terry Pratchett...) and so should you. I would like to talk about its ranking on the awesomeness chart that I have installed in my brain, but I don’t think I could transfer the files to all of you (and Dr. Simon said that this needs to be “educational” or something). One of the questions brought up when Dr. Simon asked us what we wanted to take away from this class, at the beginning of the year, was whether or not we were really learning anything relevant by studying fantasy fiction.

So, are we really learning anything relevant by studying fantasy fiction? If you’re actually taking the time to read this, my guess is that you just set down some book with a dragon or wizard or demon or quaragathorp, or some other creature flying around some celestial body of planets or stars in a distant galaxy on the cover to read some nerdy dude’s fantasy blog, and I’m not going to have to do too much convincing in order to prove that, well, yes, yes we are. (Greatest thesis statement of my college career thus far--thank you, taxpayers of New York, for allowing me to do this.)

I’ve been starting to really see the connectivity of the world around us, and all the subjects that I’ve been studying, both in and out of the classroom. After reading (if you can actually call such an experience with such a book “reading”) Good Omens, the gears, or cogs, or hamsters, or whatever, of my brain were whirling. I was thinking mostly about the philosophical statement that Gaiman and Pratchett were making that when it comes down to it good and evil either don’t exist, or don’t really matter due to our ability to morally and logically weigh the implications of our actions. This, my friends, is what you would call “relevant.” It is relevant now, it was relevant when this book was published in 1990, it was relevant as soon as man “bit the apple” and will be relevant ‘til the day we blow ourselves up (or don’t blow ourselves up...). These men (you can substitute geniuses, or in the spirit of Pratchett, conjurers) are trying to convey to us the importance of...get ready for it...actually THINKING before we act. Now the irony in that statement due to the indulgences in their immortal characters could be a whole other essay, but I’ll spare you that. What Pratchett and Gaiman are telling us is that no matter what the extenuating circumstances are, no matter what outside influences may be trying to affect you, the only one responsible for your actions is yourself. Crowley just put the guns in the hands of the businessmen; it was their decision to use them that was evil, not Crowley’s outside influence (in fact his influence, that the bullets didn’t kill, would probably be considered good, *BUM bum BUM!*)

There’s also that whole free will thing. Interestingly enough, in Philosophy class the other month, prior to my Fantasy Fiction class’s discussion of Good Omens, we discussed the concept of “free will,” and discovered that in essence it contains two stipulations: a “will,” or a desire, drive, or motivation to do something, and “freedom,” the ability to act upon your will. Constantly throughout the novel central characters, (Crawley, Aziraphale, Adam) are forced to act against their will. None of them truly want the world to end, yet this is a story of the apocalypse, so for the first 360 or so pages, one starts to doubt that there is such a thing as free will; there will always be barriers, roadblocks, limitations, divine beings controlling your employment statuses threatening you with eternal torture, that will impede or exercise control over your willingness to do things. However at the end we are provided with some hope. Gaiman and Pratchett liberate these characters, suspend doom, and look towards a bright future of eating apples. This goes to show that there is such a thing as “free will,” within our grasp; all you have to do is break some rules, do some hard work, and pray that the Son of Satan is truly a sweetheart deep down inside.

Relevance! I hope that you came away with at least something from this brain diarrhea that has been cleverly disguised as a “response paper,” but if you have not yet, then I offer you this: read Good Omens. If you want a copy, send me an e-mail and you can borrow mine, I only ask one favor from you in return: think.

Writing about Reality Is Boring

Eric Ellison explains:

The reasons fantasy fiction is read depend upon the individual holding the book. The same can be said about the reasons writers choose the genre; it varies upon whose fingers are at the ready to create a story. While we can attribute the more prominent reason of pure enjoyment for readers to pick up that copy of The Lord of the Rings, we can truly ponder why the author would choose to write in this younger vein of literature. The following are some possibilities of why they made the choice they did, and why you may want to try your hand at it as well.

Maybe it's the simple enjoyment of writing fantasy fiction, as is very noticeable in A Spell for Chameleon, by Piers Anthony. This story is about a character searching for his magical talent in a world of pure magic, which can allow for all sorts of fun to be had if approached from the right mind set. Anthony was obviously looking to have some fun and hopefully make people laugh when he started writing about the world of Xanth. Throughout the story he creates all kinds of puns, some bad and some good, which become widely available for him in this world. We've all heard that phrase "to sow your wild oats," but Anthony takes it and creates it in a literal sense for the main character of the book, Bink. The character, at one point in his many moments of reflection, thinks back to when he was 15 and decided to "sow wild oats" in his backyard. Well, as it turns out, in the world of Xanth this is actually a method of creating an oat nymph that can handle a young man's hormonal impulses. In addition to this we read about vicious "nickelpedes," food supplying "breadloaf trees," and "pill bushes" that can help an injured traveler. To flex the muscles of imagination this approach of unbridled creativity--where the "logical" constrictions of our world become unhinged--may be an excellent start for any writer.

On the other hand, some authors go with writing fantasy fiction for the opportunity to just create a whole new, breathing world, such as is the case for J.R.R. Tolkien and his The Lord of the Rings trilogy. The nice thing about a place that is being spawned from the writer's imagination--opposed to non-fiction or other stories based solely within the reality we know--the author has free rein, at least to the extent that the events which occur do so within reason of the world within which they exist. Now, we may think, "But Anthony wrote some ridiculous elements in his stories that hardly seem reasonable"; however, Anthony was still consistent in his ridiculousness in creating a world that didn't contradict itself. While many fantasy fiction writers do create new worlds for their minds to play in, Tolkien was a true master in that he also ended up creating full histories about the world of Middle Earth. What becomes appealing to the reader is that for some this creates an opportunity to explore and/or escape from their own daily lives, among other personal reasons. This approach to writing may seem like a huge task, but it's a great way to build a great habit. The more you create in your mind about the history of a place or character in your story the more they will appear to be alive to your audience. With that backup knowledge about the who's and the what's, as an author, you’ll be more intuitive about interactions that involve those characters and places.

Over the years multiple writers have used literature to make socio/political commentary. With fantasy fiction, an author can reach audiences that might not readily approach the issues they wish to convey if they were presented in another form. One such case is the book by Anne McCaffrey, Dragonsong. This book takes place on a planet that came to be inhabited countless years ago by ancestors that had the technology to accomplish interplanetary travel--technology which has, at this point, been long gone. McCaffrey tells the story of a young woman named Menolly on the planet Pern. In this world there are individuals that are called Harpers, bard-like instructors that hand down collective knowledge to each hold's (like towns) citizens--instructions like history, or how to farm or fish, and so on. Menolly is one such individual who is more than capable of accomplishing this task for the hold that she lives in. The problem is that within her hold this position has always been traditionally held by men. So as a result she gets mistreated in numerous ways to keep her from bringing "shame" to her father, the leader of the community, through breaking this tradition. The way the story is told has the effect of being a feminist statement in support of that movement in the '70s when Dragonsong was written. Instead of writing direct arguments about the inequality woman faced, McCaffrey took a side approach to bring awareness to all kinds of individuals, including younger readers. Today it would seem there are even more issues that need to be contended with, but they might not always get the attention from the masses they deserve. Maybe there is an issue you feel passionate about that isn't quite as recognized as you would wish; why not try using fantasy fiction as a means of clueing in more people about the problem?

Then there are books that take comedy, commentary, and creative freedom and roll them all up together. Good Omens, by Neil Gaiman and Terry Pratchett, aims to be creatively hilarious, which it accomplishes perfectly, and ends up having some interesting things to say about us humans that can momentarily sober up the comedy--mind you, only momentarily. This story is about The Armageddon, the forces of heaven and hell, a devil and an angel joining forces to stop it, and a host of other characters. When the antichrist is supposed to be an 11-year-old child with the power to recreate the world in his image, the world would never expect what he dreams up. Everything from Tibetans digging tunnels through the earth and popping up in people's yards to space aliens that come to deliver "a message of universal peace and cosmic harmony an' suchlike" (205) but not knowing why they were told to bring the message makes for a very entertaining read. The commentaries on humanity and the world, aside from the major one that pokes fun at religious Armageddon, are slipped in almost without notice. After aliens give a "message" to a confused character they then act like intergalactic police and say to the character, after taking a CO2 reading that seems to be too high, "you do know you could find yourself charged with being a dominant species while under the influence of impulse-driven consumerism, don't you?" (205); in this moment some readers might find themselves stopping their laughter and seriously pondering the way we live our lives. There are many spots in the book that have this effect, but it's only a matter of lines before you again find yourself laughing out loud.

For each of these books and authors, the reasons I speculate on why they wrote those stories are only one in what I'm sure were a dozen reasons they chose fantasy fiction as the genre to express their creativity. Whatever their reasons, they obviously enjoyed it. So if you're thinking of taking up the pen, why not give your imagination a good exercise and spin a tale through the lens of fantasy fiction?

Works Cited
Anthony, Piers. A Spell for Chameleon: The First Xanth Novel. New York: Ballantine, 1977. Print.
Gaiman, Neil and Pratchett, Terry. Good Omens. New York: HarperTorch, 1990. Print.
McCaffrey, Anne. Dragonsong. New York: Aladdin Paperbacks, 2003. Print.
Tolkien, J. R. R. The Hobbit, Or, There and Back Again. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1966. Print.

A Different Perspective

Eli explains:

Why do authors choose to write in fantasy, anyways? Why pick a genre that is generally shrugged off by literature professors as they turn their noses to the canon? Talented writers are spending years upon years and sometimes their whole lives wrapped up in imaginary worlds. Are they wasting their time? An even more important question: are we wasting our time when we read fantasy? We could be flipping pages in War and Peace instead, or pondering Wordsworth on a picnic bench by an Adirondack lake, sniffing in the sweet fall air as geese fly in their ardent “V” overhead (no doubt dropping some fragrant gifts from the sky) and honk farewell as they disappear into a hazy dusk. Excuse me, I digress. Why would a fantasy writer waste their time twiddling their thumbs in imaginary worlds when they could have that beautiful scene by the lake? (Maybe because when he was reading poetry by the lake, he realized that there were very intricate carvings in the varnished wood. As he traced these etchings with his forefinger, a faint light seemed to appear deep inside each foreign character. The sound of upset lake water pricked his ears and when he looked up a very large boat was emerging from under the water, with the same carvings all along the stern. A centaur beckoned to him.) We can't precisely address this question without having an interview with the writer himself or herself but can we, and should we, try to pry into the author's choice to write in fantasy? It is hard enough to infer the intention of a single work and much more confusing to find an intent in genre choice. Yet, it is still an interesting endeavor to wonder about the ideas and convictions that give inspiration to fantasy writers. Contemplating this will supply us with insight as readers in the world of fantasy fiction.

Let's take the work of Terry Pratchett and Neil Gaiman. Good Omens is no run-of-the-mill fantasy book by any means. Located in our modern world, we have angels and demons, men and witches, the natural and the supernatural all stuck in the apocalypse. They supply us with all the humor and entertainment we could ever want in this work of genius. Yet, for some reason these authors chose to deliver their impeccable style in fantasy when they could have easily written in another (more respected) genre. They chose this perspective with a specific intention. When working in fantasy, an author can use non-human characters and unrealistic worlds to say certain things about humanity, society, and our current condition. An angel and a demon can casually observe humanity like no human could. For instance Crowley (the demon) thinks, "It may help to understand human affairs to be clear that most of the great triumphs and tragedies of history are caused, not by people being fundamentally good or fundamentally bad, but by people being fundamentally people" (26). This message runs throughout the book, the erasing of the line between good and evil. There is something quite shocking about these ideas coming from angels and demons who are supposed to define the two different sides of the spectrum. One would expect a modern-day contemporary thinker to say something about the disappearance of good and evil. But a demon destroying these boundaries is preposterous, and effective. Crowley asks Aziraphale, "Well, haven't you ever wondered about it all? You know--your people and my people, Heaven and Hell, good and evil, all that sort of thing? I mean, why?" (360). Rules are broken and angels and demons wonder about the same things that humans do. Pratchett and Gaiman demonstrate the same "ineffable" feelings that humans experience from another view.

Another composer of fantasy, Piers Anthony, has a much different take on the genre. He has created the world of Xanth, with its own type of magic and plenty of flora and fauna to accompany it. In this world, Anthony tells us many things about humanity. The character Bink is a philosophizing exile, who in the end discovers some things about himself and other people. His whole journey is filled with him gaining new knowledge, information that he is not necessarily supposed to have. He is on a quest that leads him to truth. Nonetheless, Anthony makes Bink a very stubborn and dogmatic character. The reader can see the truth before Bink does--his stubbornness is often cumbersome. Isn't this how we view ourselves after coming to a sudden realization and point of change? Bink may represent humans in general with his slow-changing views of how the world works. It takes him so long to see the truth about Trent because he was taught that Trent is evil. Is this much different than our own mundanian human nature? We hold onto our own comfortable views of the world and the older we get the less willing we are to change. Our society is full of Bink-like people. It is easy to see this reality of human dogmatism (and other philosophies) that Anthony presents through his fantastical world. We may look on the ignorance of the Xanthians with harsh judgement. We should turn this judgement on ourselves. Anthony is saying these things in a different approach; through fantasy he delivers his message with greater ease.

The intent of fantasy writers is very similar to the intent of writers in any genre. Literature gives us insight into life and fantasy fiction is not left out of this statement. Writers of this genre may have chosen it because of their fascination with the mystical or they may have been tired with reality that they faced day to day. But fantasy fiction should not be viewed as an escape from our everyday life. We should not just want to escape into alternate realities that entertain us and delay our problems for a while. I do not think that is the reason authors choose fantasy. Their statements on the human condition come naturally and powerfully through this genre and take on a new and distinct perspective. These stories carry the essential component of good art (that ever escaping, shifting, always there, always departing human condition) and can hold their own weight against other forms of literature. Fantasy fiction is an important aspect to lives of many people and that will not change. This brings us to the conclusion...long live fantasy!

Works Cited
Anthony, Piers. A Spell for Chameleon. New York: Del Rey, 1977.
Gaiman, Neil, and Terry Pratchett. Good Omens: The Nice and Accurate Prophecies of Agnes Nutter, Witch. New York: Harper, 2007

Writing Styles Do Not Define Fantasy Fiction

Derek Herzog argues:

There seems to be a stigma associated with the fantasy genre which makes people hesitant to pick up a book labeled fantasy. A big part of this has to do with what first comes to someone's head when they think of fantasy. For many, the term fantasy brings to mind a long, tedious work of escapism which is weird and unapproachable. They might think this because they associate fantasy with a particular style of writing, one that is slow, straight-forward, and not innovative. To think like that though is a misconception, and it could be what has given fantasy a bad rap for so long.

The truth is, fantasy is not limited to one particular style of writing; if this was the case, it really would have no hope. I've read fantasy works from six different authors recently, and one of the coolest things I've learned is how varied fantasy authors are in their approaches to their work. Fantasy is by no means limited to one style of writing, and coming to this realization not only removes the stigma associated with the genre but it reveals the potential for how many new and innovative things could be done with it, as well.

To begin my recent fantasy escapade, I started with two authors whose books could be considered the roots of fantasy: J.R.R. Tolkien's The Hobbit, and C.S. Lewis's The Magician's Nephew. They both tell their stories as if they were Grandpas dictating an old tale to their Grandsons; this is why I have deemed this style the "Old Man Narrative." Consider how The Magician's Nephew begins: "This is a story about something that happened long ago when your grandfather was a child" (Lewis 1). The whole book goes along with this sort of feel. While I'm reading it, I actually even read in my head in the voice of an old Grandpa. The Hobbit is told in a similar way. Consider this line, for example: "The Mother of our particular hobbit--what is a hobbit? I suppose hobbits need some description nowadays, since they have become rare and shy of the Big People, as they call us" (Tolkien 12). Both of these novels are written in these distinctive narrative styles, which are quite different from other authors in our class. Could you imagine if every fantasy novel were written like this? Sure, both books are good reads, but after being exposed to a style for too long it quickly goes stale. The "Old Man Narrative" helped pave the way for future fantasy fiction, but fortunately other authors moved beyond this--or regressed from it.

Speaking of regressed, this brings me to the next two authors: Piers Anthony and Anne McCaffrey. Both authors have a writing style which is fairly simplistic. The stories also move along quite slowly. I think the novels by these two would be better received by younger readers, not only because of their coming-of-age themes, but also because of their slow and steady writing styles which probably make the books easier to understand. In both books, a lot of time is spent talking over what is going on in the protagonist's head. As an older reader, this can seem tedious and unnecessary, but to someone who is younger, the repetition might really help them understand what's going on. It is unfair of me to label these two as lesser authors, but their writing styles definitely do not appeal to me that much. Whether I enjoy it or not, though, these authors possess a distinctive writing style which adds validity to the notion that it is not what solely characterizes the fantasy genre.

Sheri Tepper makes up another category of writing styles. Unlike many other fantasy authors, she writes her prose in a more creative, even poetic way. She really gets inside of her protagonist's mind, and this makes her book, The True Game, seem more realistic, and it also allows the reader to become more immersed in the story. Take, for example, just a random line from the text: "How so many could find power to exist, she did not say. We did not ask. It was only a tall tale, we thought. Hum of bees, quiet sough of wind. Then, suddenly, as we climbed a high ridge of stone, a cold gust from above, chill as winter, without warning" (Tepper 39). She presents the information to the reader in a way which emulates the flashes of thought and sensory information going through Peter's mind; this technique is effective, highly creative, and unique. I would argue that Tepper's style proves the great potential for evolution within the genre.

The last fantasy novel I read was Terry Pratchett and Neil Gaiman's Good Omens, which can definitely be set apart from other authors. Being an apocalyptic satirical novel which aims to make the reader laugh and think, a writing style which is similar to any of the ones discussed above would not suffice. Rather, Pratchett and Gaiman tell their story in short, inter-weaving fragments which keep it fast-paced and upbeat. The prose is also casual, witty, conversational, and laid-back. Take a look at this line from the first page: "By the same token the earth itself is generally supposed to be about four and a half thousand million years old.... These dates are incorrect" (Pratchett & Gaiman 13). It is not serious, or boring, or enormously creative, or condescending--it is just natural. By natural I mean the pacing just feels pretty leisurely, if you know what I mean. The effect this style has on the reader makes it one of the most enjoyable books I've ever read, and I don't just mean fantasy fiction. This style is a departure from the others we've seen, and not only proves that fantasy is not defined by a style of writing, but it also shows just how entertaining fantasy can be.

It will be the best thing to happen for the fantasy genre when it loses the stereotype attached to it that all fantasy books are boring and stale. There are so many cool and creative things that have been done with it. Look at Sheri Tepper: she did something that was completely different and innovative, which arguably rivals writers in other, more acclaimed genres, and yet she is relatively unknown because she chose to pour her efforts into a stigmatized genre. This must stop. Fantasy has so much potential but if it continues to be disregarded because of a false definition of it then it will never go anywhere.

Works Cited

Anthony, Piers. A Spell for Chameleon. New York/Toronto: Random House, 1977. Print.
Gaiman, Neil, and Terry Pratchett. Good Omens. New York: HarperCollins, 1990. Print.
Lewis, C.S. The Magician's Nephew. New York: HarperCollins, 1955. Print.
McCaffrey, Anne. Dragonsong. New York: Aladdin Paperbacks, 1976. Print.
Tepper, Sheri S. The True Game. New York: Penguin Group, 1996. Print.
Tolkien, J.R.R. The Hobbit or There and Back Again. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Print.