Aragorn is Dead
I write fantasy. I’m quite pleased writing fantasy. It’s a vast field that thrives on experimentation and whose greatest stories are born with the phrases: “what if,” “wouldn’t it be cool,” and “how does that work?” It is a genre which is based on the concept of doing whatever the hell you want to. The exploration of the however, the whyever and the wherever the hell you want to is what makes the story fun enough to match the concept.
But for every “what if,” “wouldn’t it be cool,” and “how does that work,” we have another set of voices. These ones say “been done,” “wouldn’t it be unrealistic,” and “it doesn’t work like that.” They’re not exactly as loud as they used to be, to be sure, but they’re still there and they’re still noticeable. Why? Because it’s annoying and it’s wrong and it doesn’t really work that way anymore.
If you’re one of his many fans, you might have seen this post by Scott Westerfeld, author of Leviathan, in which he bites back against those who accuse steampunk of being ridiculous, unrealistic or whatever the current complaint lodged against them is. In the interests of full disclosure, I’ve never really been all that into steampunk and my fancy of it tends to end at “oh, cool, zeppelins.” But I think what Mr. Westerfeld is saying is something that applies to all of fantasy.
Why do we keep trying to put rules on this genre? The fact that fantasy is more popular than ever and more diverse than ever is not a coincidence. I’m sure there’s more than a few people who remember when the genre as a whole was stagnant, mostly because everything was an echo of Tolkien or another author. We’ve moved far away from that, but have we moved far enough? I mean, try to have a conversation with a fantasy fan that doesn’t involve the words “Tolkien” and “genius” in one way or another. And once you’ve done that, see if the other guy doesn’t look a little more nervous at the mention of him. We speak his name in hushed tones and it seems like he has to be included as an influence in just about everything as a matter of paying tribute.
We’ve come a long, long way from Lord of the Rings. It’s okay to like that book. It’s okay to be influenced by that book. But do we really need to speak of him as though he were a god instead of a dude who broke rules in the first place?
There are rules to writing, yes. To writing. Not to writing fantasy. And good writing frequently shatters those rules (though a knowledge of them is needed to break them in the first place). When we put rules on writing fantasy, when we believe there are certain measures of a story that must be fulfilled or certain things that must happen or certain qualities a hero must have, it taints the creativity behind the story. The author is no longer writing what they want to write, but writing what they think they ought to write, which is the sort of attitude that should remain in middle school.
I’m sure there are a few people that will interpret this as a total blaspheming to Tolkien, Howard, whoever. I’m not saying what they did wasn’t important. I’m not saying their quality has diminished over the years. I’m not saying you can’t be influenced by their work. I am saying we don’t have to feel constrained by their influence. I am saying we don’t have to interpret their work as rules to be obeyed relentlessly. I am saying that, if you want to write something that totally spits in their faces, you absolutely should.
I like to think I get more than a few aspiring or practicing authors here as traffic, people whom yet have not met me in person and thusly still think my advice is actually worthier than the rantings of a delusional madman (oh, you are in for a shock), so I hope to impart this bit of wisdom to you.
Maybe some people will hate you. Maybe some people will hate your work, maybe some people will hate you for writing it. You can’t give a crap about them any more than you can give a crap about WWTD. You can’t please them. You can’t please them, because they want someone you aren’t. You can’t be that person, no matter how much tribute you pay or how many homages appear in your work.
You can only write for yourself. Even the people who will love your work are secondary, because you can’t write for them, either. And they don’t love your work because you wrote for them. They love your work because they love your work. It’s one of the simplest and most beautiful truths of this business. You can hope they enjoy it. You can even make minor tweaks to make them enjoy it more. But you can never do what another person did. And you should never try to be anyone but yourself.
It’s a hard attitude to come by and, don’t let me fool you, I’m not at all impervious to a person hating my book. But I am at peace with the fact that I write what I want to write, that I write as Sam Sykes, and that no one else can do what I can do. I can’t do what Tolkien did, either. Nor can I do what Westerfeld, Lynch, Scalzi, Abercrombie, Rothfuss, Mieville with a stupid accent, Priest, Resnick or Enus Schmidt does.
And because I can’t, we have a world where you have Westerfeld, Lynch, Scalzi, Abercrombie, Rothfuss, Mieville with a stupid accent, Priest, Resnick, Enus Schmidt and Sykes to read.
And that’s a pretty good place to be.