What Makes Fantasy Epic?
Oct
07
2013
This isn’t going to be a big post, but with The Gathering Of The Lost making the shortlist for the Gavid Gemmell Legend Award, I’ve been thinking a bit about what makes epic fantasy “epic.”
One suggestion made a few years back was that to qualify as “epic”, a fantasy had to be about large scale war — and certainly a lot of epic fantasies are. My own view is that large scale war is not a prerequisite for epic, but that to qualify a story does have to in some way encompass the grand sweep — very possibly world altering — of events.
But what do you think? What makes a story epic for you — and distinguishes it from other forms of Fantasy? I’d love to hear your thoughts.
Comments
I’m going to plug my “Stakes Scale”, again. Because you asked, and because I can.
For me, what distinguishes Epic Fantasy from other secondary world fantasy is the stakes in the conflicts that erupt in the novel. Its when you get to the fate of nations, multiple nations, that you get the epic in my epic level fantasy.
Two rogues wandering around a mythic version of China, chased by the agents of a very unhappy mage guild is Sword and Sorcery.
A caravan guide caught up in the machinations of a blood mage as the mage’s apprentice seeks passage across a deadly mountain chain, and possibly start a war”? Kingdom Level Fantasy
A threat to all the civilized kingdoms from an inhuman force held back by a thin red line of self-appointed heroes. Even if the focus is on the heir to one of those Houses, the burdens of that conflict infuse both of her novels. That’s Epic.
Generally, and its idiosyncratic, Epic fantasy for me takes place in a secondary world, even if its an alternate Earth.
That’s what bugs me about epic fantasy – that it’s synonymous with war. I kinda feel the genre needs to get over its obsession with Tolkien and find other narratives. It’s not that I want to banish war from epic fantasy so much as to see a bit more range – but I suppose that plague just isn’t as heroic a way to die as combat 🙂
On a more serious note, I guess it doesn’t help that the history of our great nations is one of war. The present day is actually a lot more peaceful than the world of the past, when wars could drag on for decades and peace came with the price of bored ex-soldiers turning to banditry.
Until I come up with an answer, I guess I’ll be sticking to the S&S/Kingdom level described by Paul!
Paul & Anne:
Thanks for your comments. 🙂
I know another compelling response to the whole question would be ‘why endlessly categorise’, it’s all just Fantasy, or even all just stories. But given categorisation does occur, I find it interesting to consider the parameters being applied.
I agree about the plague, Anne — just as major a factor historically as war (Justininian’s Flea, anyone?) but not nearly so ‘heroic’ – although Czech poet, Miroslav Holub’s, “The Fly” renders death in war far from heroic as well.
Fantasies I feel qualify as “epic” in that they involve world altering events, major social and cultural change and conflict without the “major war” include Feist/Wurts “Empire” series and Barbara Hambly’s “Windrose” series (although Paul might argue that as ‘kingdom level.’)
Other possibilities include Patrick Rothfuss’s Kingkiller Chronicles (although I’ve only read the first one.) Also what about “Jonathan Strange and Mr Norrell” — epic or not? (It could also be the exception that proves your ‘alternate world’ principle, Paul.)
Hi Anne, Hi Helen.
I suppose that a secondary world fantasy dealing with a magical plague affecting the entire realm would be epic fantasy by my definition. Conflicts don’t HAVE to be war but such is the nature of our civilization, really.
The Empire series is an exception to the “Major War” idea, although political conflict in those books is as sharp as any movement of armies. My definition of Epic also encompasses the Spiritwalker books by Kate Elliott–where there is not a lot of warfare and fighting until book three and even then we only glimpse it.
The windrose novels are also epic–isn’t both Earth and the magical kingdom under threat?
Paul: Yes, in the Windrose books both several worlds are at threat, but when I thought about the ‘scope’ of much of he storytelling I thought some might argue that’s “kingdom level”–but the overall premise checks the epic box.
I’m NO expert at all on the fantasy genre at all (Helen, it has been your writing that has stimulated my interest in the genre). But Anne’s comments interested me. I have a long ‘history’ of reading history, although my specific academic background is economics, and so I thought about Anne’s comments in the context of that discipline.
Here are a couple of thoughts:
1. “The ideas of economists and political philosophers, both when they are right and when they are wrong, are more powerful than is commonly understood. Indeed the world is ruled by little else” John Maynard Keynes (my hero economist by the way, regardless of views of the current relevance of his policies.. an extraordinary intellect)
and
2. “.. man’s character has been molded by his everyday work, and the material resources which he thereby procures, more than any other influence unless it be that of his religious ideals; and the two great forming agencies of the world’s history have been the religious and the economic.” Alfred Marshall.
I have on occasion been known to lay down a challenge to students to find a war in history that has root causes that can’t in some way be traced back to either economics or religion (interpreted more generally as belief systems).
OK, that said, where does that leave us? Anne, one way of getting away from the militarism of epic fantasy might be to consider those religious or economic causes.
Helen you once said to me that fantasy can be written from an economic perspective (at least I think you once said something like that LOL). I do have that sneaking suspicion that ultimately such a story might well still end up in the military domain.
Of course some great stories have been written from an economic perspective, Clavell has penned some ‘doosies’ (‘Noble House’ and ‘Taipan’ for example). These aren’t fantasy of course, just damned good examples business/economics based storytelling.
So there ‘s the challenge: write an epic fantasy story that is economics focussed. (I suspect that that will be more challenging than using religion??? No offence intended :-)).
How’s that for some random thinking??
Kind regards
Robin
Even more thoughts:
Economics are fundamentally driven by competition. Economic competition is just stylized warfare. Mathematicians model competition using game theory, so ‘predictable’ is it. But it is still warfare. The business world is littered with macho military jargon. “I’ll just go and review the troops”. Business leaders talk about ‘strategy and tactics’.
So even epic fantasy (as in world changing) that focussed on economics (assuming that that in itself is possible) might still be destined to end up as a story about conflict.
Anne, well anyone really .. I am arguing myself into a position whereby it is inevitable that epic fantasy focus eventually on warfare.
Someone.,. help please.. argue me out of that contention before I go mad.
R
Hey Robin, Thanks for your thoughts. I think you may have put your finger on one of the defining characteristics of epic fantasy–that of an external threat that overrides the more usual pre-occupations of economics and value systems, which falls into Paul’s “kingdom level” fantasy. But as you rightly point out, those value/economic conflicts do very often drive war so it becomes cyclical. The “Empire” series (which I recommend by the way) is a powerful example of a series that utilises the economic conflict in particular, but also cultural in the initial stages, with the external threat coming in later and driving a survival response. (Very Maslow.)
Epic fantasy is when it is “think BIG” across many factors – the story, the setting, the action or/and the theme, and it impacts across many countries / kingdoms.
Also can be subjective in perception. War is not a requirement to make it “epic” but often it is war that has such the wide impact. IMO.
I’ve had reason to think about this as I have been reading books from the Gemmell Awards short-listing.
I think most of the Gemmell books are predicated around war in some way, aren’t they? I believe Stormadancer predicates environmental (linked to supernatural) factors as the external threat, while The Red Knight is all out siege warfare and Irenicon draws in the religious/cultural values element, particularly around magic. But they all involve some element of what I call the “epic sweep of events, encompassing nations, cultures and the “winds of change sweeping through the corridors of power” But I’m thinking that the ‘external or overwhelming threat to life as we know it’ factor could also be a distinguishing thread of “epic” fantasy.
I agree that there are plenty of conflicts that can be epic in scope. It’s just that, as you say, they often lead to war – and epic fantasy does tend to focus on the war aspect. Perhaps because it’s a much more immediate visceral threat than the root causes you mention?
K J Parker manages to make banking crises pretty epic (e.g. The Folding Knife), but she’s not exactly in the epic fantasy mainstream 🙂
I’ve suggested ‘otherwhere’, Anne, that war may be a convenient shorthand for major conflict and that’s why it’s so easy to fall into it. I also think that’s one of the strengths of George RR Martin’s ‘A Game Of Thrones”, the way he blends the “kingdom level’ concerns of politics and values with the external threat.
Anne
Yes I meant to say in my second post that one big problem is that there is less appeal in boardroom battles (translated in to epic fantasy terms of course) than there is with knights slashing and jousting.
Personally I’m happy with the offerings. 🙂 I must follow up your parker reference, thanks.
Kind regards
Robin
Robin, You may also be interested to check out Daniel Abraham’s “Coin and Dagger’ series, which uses Renaissance level banking and related considerations as one of the major drivers for the story. The first book is “The Dragon’s Path” and I interviewed him about it (he talks about the coin/dagger dynamic in the interview):
An Interview with Daniel Abraham, Author of “The Dragon’s Path”
Helen
I’ve bought ‘The Folding Knife’ on my Kindle, so it’s in the TBR pile (just finishing off the last of Game of Thrones books ..). The ‘Coin and dagger’ series looks interesting too.
I’m wondering how far you could go weaving more modern business concepts into epic fantasy. Presumably it is possible to be guilty of unreasonable anachronism in epic fantasy? I had a vision of mediaeval caravan traders dealing in primitive futures contracts …..
Robin
Robin, you know what Toni Morrison would say: “If there’s a book that you want to read, but it hasn’t been written yet, then you must write it.”
Warning though, “Will Robinson”, in general SFF readers are not forgiving of “unreasonable anachronism”–but if you could convince us that mediaeval caravan merchants dealt in primitive futures trading (and who is to say they did not) then you could break new ground.:)
Helen
Yep.. absolutely understand that. Avoiding modern jargon like ‘selling short’ etc might be a good starting point..LOl
It was just an interesting line of thinking given that so much epic fantasy seems to be set in that mediaeval type of world..
BTW.. is that a necessary precondition for the genre, or is the world changing concept what really matters? That’s still not clear to me.
R
I think the medieval setting has been ‘traditional’, possibly because of its roots in the “romance” tradition of works like the Morte D’Arthur, Parsifal and Sir Gawain & the Green Knight. But increasingly the genre is moving away from that setting as a default, so if you just look at this year’s Legend & Morningstar finalists, there’s an epic/western mashup (Red Country), a Japanese inspired tale (Stormdancer) and one that is Middle Eastern in conception (Throne of the Crescent Moon), while Irenicon is renaissance rather than medieval, as is Abraham’s Coin & Dagger series. Kate Elliott’s latest Spirit Walker trilogy felt more late 18th / early 19th century to me, and the second novel is predominantly set in the “West Indies.” And I know Anne Lyle is “not epic’ but I understand the ethos is Elizabethan. So you see: variety!
Yep, mine is set in the “real” Elizabethan London, or at least an alternate history/reality version of it – I was bored of medieval fantasy 🙂
I think you could make complex economics plausible in a pre-industrial society – in fact the existence of magic might make long-distance communication far more feasible, which would have huge effects on society. I feel like a lot of fantasy ignores the “technological” impact of magic because its readers and writers are so in love with the Middle Ages.
Ahhhhhh …. inspired .
But I guess that’s why you are a writer 🙂
Thanks
Robin
I can’t speak for Anne, of course, but the main reason I’m a writer is because the stories won’t let me be–I don’t think any business case on earth could ever make the economics of the decision stack up. 😉
Helen
Totally agree with you about the economics of writing as an income earner … if I’d expected to ‘feed my family’ with the proceeds from the text books we’d all be long in our graves. The NZ market just isn’t big enough (and now my publisher has quit NZ anyway, so that little chapter comes to a close).
My own meagre fiction writing attempts are also driven by a story that won’t leave me alone… and this new idea is dragging my attention away as well .. but that’s what I love.
Kind regards
Robin
I love that era, Anne, so am longing to read your books when WALL3 is done–“The Alchemist of Souls” is first, right? Bt, are you familiar with Patricia Finney: I very much enjoyed her magical realism-historical novels set in Elizabethan London–I think the first is “Firedrake’s Eye.”
Interestingly, technological aspects of magic, will come into my WALL story, if only in a slight way.:)
Actually…caravan merchants did deal with a form of futures trading…they got backing on the basis of what prices would be by the time they got their spices/silks/slaves/ whatever back to their own market circuit. (Yes, one of my profs dragged us–unwilling as some of us were–through the economic history of the middle ages, not just the political, religious, and/or military history.)
I feel it’s impossible to discount economics in any era, but somehow a hero/ine swinging a sword or bard decaliming a saga is often more interesting to write about. But I love a story that convincingly places economics cenre stage for both great events and the cut and thrust.
I talked about this earlier this year over at SF Signal: http://www.sfsignal.com/archives/2013/02/the-notion-of-epic-fantasy-and-the-dreams-it-offers/ . A narrow definition is problematic because it is often crafted to exclude what a given reader doesn’t like to read.
Hi John, that was an interesting post. I also think the narrower you get the more sterile the offerings within the genre, which does come back to my comment that maybe we should all just forget the genres and stick with ‘storytelling’ or even ‘great storytelling’ — but we won’t, of course!
Epic scope to me means a panoramic view of events. War is often part of that but not the only part. Didn’t it used to be that a quest or journey was a central part of the definition of epic? I suspect that, as with everything, the definition shifts as fashions change and variations become more or less popular.
Hi Kate, the quest journey, in which many realms and cultures are explored still is a big part of epic, I think, and I guess the more you encompass (Robert Jordan style) the more epic the story appears, but I also see the quest-journey as a big part of Fantasy, so I incline more to the panoramic view of events as an indicator. What do you think about the ‘external threat’ ‘otherwhelming force’ idea as an indicator as well:
Really enjoying these responses!
I think the grand sweep of events or even of ideas, contributes to what is ‘epic’ for me.
Wish I could come up with more examples, but two off the top of my head – the way Robin Hobb or David Gemmell portray Loyalty seems ‘epic’ in the sense that it goes beyond what is human at times. So the idea of Loyalty becomes such a big presence in their stories that it becomes both subtly woven and most bold – and that boldness adds to the ‘epic’ feel for me.
Interesting: I hadn’t thought of Loyalty and shall definitely be giving it more thought.
I might be out on a limb a bit, but sometimes the ideas or themes just seem epic to my eye 🙂
No limb, at all, at all, I think it’s an interesting idea and made me think of the ‘band of brothers’, which i think often characterizes epic–but like the quest-journey is not restricted to that form of Fantasy, so while it can add to the overall flavor if done in an epic way (Achilles & Patroclus, for example, Roland and Oliver) I suppose I’m not convinced it’s a distinguishing characteristic.
Achilles & Patroclus is a great example of what I had in mind, yeah 🙂
I think you’re right, you can certainly have Epic fantasy without the idea of an epic loyalty (or any theme) – what’s probably a better marker is that idea of change. How deep does change run across the story?
That’s interesting, Ashley, because a lot of epic detractors are of the view that epic societies are effectively static, conservative, even reactionary — but perhaps you don’t mean that sort of change, or don’t agree with that view?
Ah! Maybe they start that way at times, but the grand sweep of events often brings change – like the early Riftwar books?
Sometimes I look back on the way a series or book ends and ask myself if anything significant has changed, and if so, how big is it? (Or at least, has the possibility of change been suggested)
Hm, yes, the early Riftwar books are a good example, and I think the Empire series that I quoted earlier is also a good example of social and cultural change in several respects, eg the cho-ja–although the fact that it moved from an oligarchy to an absolute monarchy (if I recall correctly) may underline the ‘reactionary’ argument, he-he.
I think it’s possible to read epic fantasy and be so swept away by the surface levels that the reader misses the deeper ones–and thus sees a static situation that does not really exist. OTOH, I also think modern political terminology (such as “reactionary”) isn’t appropriate for second-world cultures that aren’t specifically about that issue. (IOW, a writer certainly could depict a reactionary culture and its problems, but a culture not intended to be reactionary should be viewed with some caution in analyzing it.)
For me, the nature of an epic includes change: something big is going on, and as a result, there are changes, often catastrophic, running right through individuals, communities, etc. A social structure may be able to survive with surface elements intact (as modern nations may have the same flag, and the same apparent organization as they did 200 years ago, but they’re not the same underneath.) Epic fantasy is particularly good (IMO) at showing how the single boulder rolling a few feet down a slope can start an avalanche. The interior landscape of the characters changes, even if at the end they look the same. A fissure in one character can propagate into a society-wide division (as it does in real life, too.)
The history of epics (which long predates Tolkein) is full of this “individual action –> vastly larger outcome” progression. An ordinary bit of wife-stealing (or, adultery, take your pick) that in one family would lead to the injured husband stomping around and yelling…leads to the fall of Troy. A brash young man’s fit of anger resulting in the death of a traveler…ends in a widening circle of violence and damage because he killed his father…who had intended for the son to die as an infant to prevent exactly that.
There’s a power in epics from the exposed connection between the individual’s act, thoughtless or not, and the cultural/social consequences as connections are exposed. (And that’s why I like writing it. The current group shows cultures (and individuals) that may have been static, but are now under intolerable pressure to change..and the change propagates across everyone and everything.)
I do feel some epics play to the surface view, but the ones that satisfy me as reader are those that oblige me to see the bigger picture and take me below the surface level storytelling. From an historical perspective, I agree that’s it can be misleading to assume that how we see historical societies from our considerable distance — ie straightforward, static etc — is how they actually were, especially for those living in them. A criticism of epic is that it often misses those nuances, but I think a great many of them at least touch on those sorts of issues–and it’s one of the reasons I like writing it, too.:)
Simply scale. It has to encompass great depth and breadth in not only location and content but in it’s characters too. Just think ‘The Illiad’ and you can’t go far wrong 🙂
You know, I “have” been thinking about The Iliad this week, particularly in relation to blurring with Paul’s distinction between epic and kingdom level Fantasy. And also my own pondering over whether there needs to be an overwhelming external threat. Because the Iliad is clearly epic, one of the greats, but the conflict is also at the kingdom level, albeit with a corresponding “war in heaven.” Potentially though, those forces moving in the world are ‘major”, but I really think the epic power in the story comes out from the human and personal element: Patrocles and Achilles and Hector, and Priam as well. Without that dimension, I don’t think the story would have endured in the way that it has. Similarly with The Lord Of The Rings, its the relationships between the characters set against the scale of events/what’s at stake that give the story much (all?) of its power—which may be what Ashley means when he talks about ‘Loyalty’ in his comment.:)
Well, the personal stories are strong in The Iliad, but that’s not what makes it epic. It’s Greece versus Troy, and a slate of Gods and Goddesses on either side, that makes it Epic.
The Odyssey is NOT Epic even though its a powerful story of one man’s quest. It’s Sword and Sorcery
You know, while I agree that the mere presence of Gods and Goddesses make it Fantasy,(Aside: yes, even in the context of the times, the way the poem is written, ie how many times does the narrator say ‘of course we don’t have heroes like that these days’) am not convinced they are what makes it Epic. I believe it comes back to the scope of the story: the combination of conflict in heaven, playing out on the mortal plane (& plain), the warring states, that although kingdom level are also major in the context of the world of the time (ie the ‘thousand ships’) but also the human scope of the story against that backdrop, which — in my ‘umble opinion — is the most important and critical element of the story.
I think you’ve hit the core, there: it’s that connection between the personal and the scale of events, so that the personal is no longer “too small to count” and the huge scale is no longer robbed of its emotional impact by being so vast there’s no individual component. In newspaper terms, it’s the picture of the individual child standing in the wreckage that personalizes universality.
yeah it’s the stakes. Questing is optional. 😀
LOTR and Conan could, conceivably , have been written about the same world. The difference is Frodo et al were doing something a bit more game/world changing than Conan. Conan’s stakes were ‘If this doesn’t pan out, I’ll die. Bugger.’ Frodo’s stakes went beyond himself and that I think is where epic comes in — the stakes aren’t *just* about the hero. Of course there’s a lot of bleed over in genres. But that’s my go to. How many people will be affected by this? The MC and his mates? A city? The World? What does it change? If the answer is ‘The MC’ or ‘a village’ etc, then no, not epic. If what happens has ramifications further – countries, the world — then it’s epic. Because the *stakes*are epic
I really think I’m inclined to agree with you, with the ‘rider’ (if that’s what it is) that the line between the stakes at the ‘world altering’ and ‘kingdom level’ story, as per Paul Weimer’s three criteria, can sometimes blur.
And with apologies for coming to this so late, but…it’s my area and it fascinates me. Back in October I was both sick and buried in copy edits.
Elizabeth, I hope you are both feeling better and clear of copyedits now (the latter for the moment, at least!) But despite the time lapse, it’s still great to get your comments now.