10 Authors Who Wrote Gritty, Realistic Fantasy Before George

A place for anything *not* Donaldson.

Moderator: I'm Murrin

Post Reply
User avatar
[Syl]
Unfettered One
Posts: 13021
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2002 12:36 am
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 1 time

10 Authors Who Wrote Gritty, Realistic Fantasy Before George

Post by [Syl] »

10 Authors Who Wrote Gritty, Realistic Fantasy Before George R.R. Martin

Donaldson gets first mention. And when I saw it on FB, the LFB cover was pictured.
1) Stephen Donaldson

When you talk about works that brought a new darkness to fantasy, it's hard to overlook Lord Foul's Bane, the 1977 bestseller that launched Donaldson's Chronicles of Thomas Covenant series. Donaldson took all of the tropes of J.R.R. Tolkien and C.S. Lewis, and peered at them through an ugly light. And he gave us a protagonist that it's almost impossible to sympathize with, especially in the first book. Thomas Covenant is a self-loathing writer who's become a pariah after he's infected with leprosy — so when he goes to a fantasy world where he's hailed as the mythical savior, the first thing he does is to rape someone. And then he carries on being the hero of the series, slowly coming to invest in the reality of this strange fantasy world. Not surprisingly, this series has fallen out of favor somewhat — but it still deserves a place in the history of fantasy that challenged our heroic ideals.
It's interesting that the "fallen out of favor somewhat" hyperlink is a fairly positive review of the Final Chronicles.

And it's funny to me how people (like in the comments) catch on fairly easily to the whole 'doesn't believe the Land is real' aspect but almost never seem to mention how that's such a huge threat to Covenant's health, psyche, or even his soul. Yes, on one hand we're all supposed to get how most sane people would react to that kind of situation (not us, of course; most of us wear white gold rings for just such an occasion). But more importantly, Covenant isn't most people. There's a reason he has leprosy instead of asthma... or even cancer. He's the anti-us. Until he isn't.
"It is not the literal past that rules us, save, possibly, in a biological sense. It is images of the past. Each new historical era mirrors itself in the picture and active mythology of its past or of a past borrowed from other cultures. It tests its sense of identity, of regress or new achievement against that past.”
-George Steiner
User avatar
Avatar
Immanentizing The Eschaton
Posts: 62038
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 9:17 am
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa
Has thanked: 25 times
Been thanked: 32 times
Contact:

Post by Avatar »

Nice to see Gemmel listed there too, although his later stuff probably isn't as gritty. Barring the Troy trilogy and maybe the Rigante series.

(I'm enjoying the other SRD review it links to too: https://vacuouswastrel.wordpress.com/20 ... donaldson/)

--A
User avatar
Zarathustra
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 19842
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 12:23 am
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 1 time

Post by Zarathustra »

I read the long review for which Avatar provided a link. (And saw you pimping the Watch in the comments. :lol: ) It was decent. I think he's wrong on many points, but obviously a thoughtful person who put some time into his review.

However, I have a hard time respecting anyone who doesn't want to debate his opinion. I suppose that's why I like message boards rather than blogs. I guess some people find comfort in being their own little literary dictator, but not me. I prefer the messiness of the "democracy of ideas" that we get here. He talks about Donaldson being rejected 47 times as a sign that perhaps he should have edited/revised (and even advises aspiring authors on this point), but then doesn't take his own point to heart when people on the Watch repeatedly say his opinion is "utter bullshit." Why doesn't that tell him something about revising his opinion? He was rejected, and then simply went away.

I like discussions much more than reviews. Fanboys aren't the only ones who think their opinion is absolute, or that they know better than the author himself. But at least fanboys who participate here do expose themselves to criticism and face the challenge of defending their opinions.
Success will be my revenge -- DJT
User avatar
Avatar
Immanentizing The Eschaton
Posts: 62038
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 9:17 am
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa
Has thanked: 25 times
Been thanked: 32 times
Contact:

Post by Avatar »

I was hoping he'd come aboard and discuss his viewpoint, but yes, it seems he doesn't really want to. A pity, but that's ok too I suppose.

It was the thoughtfulness of it that attracted me, I must say. As for revising his opinion, you'll note that he admired SRD's refusal to compromise...could we expect him to do less?

(Or any of us for that matter. :P )

--A
User avatar
Zarathustra
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 19842
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 12:23 am
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 1 time

Post by Zarathustra »

I'd be interested to read some of the Watch discussions he was describing as "being put in stocks and having shit thrown at you." I know that some here were particularly rude or arrogant to readers who had problems with the Last Chronicles, but I don't remember any of that in the discussion of Lord Foul's Bane.
Success will be my revenge -- DJT
User avatar
Orlion
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 6666
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2007 12:30 am
Location: Getting there...
Been thanked: 1 time

Post by Orlion »

Zarathustra wrote:I'd be interested to read some of the Watch discussions he was describing as "being put in stocks and having shit thrown at you." I know that some here were particularly rude or arrogant to readers who had problems with the Last Chronicles, but I don't remember any of that in the discussion of Lord Foul's Bane.
We are all highly opinionated folks and many of us have no qualms speaking our minds.
'Tis dream to think that Reason can
Govern the reasoning creature, man.
- Herman Melville

I am Lazarus, come from the dead,
Come back to tell you all, I shall tell you all!

"All creation is a huge, ornate, imaginary, and unintended fiction; if it could be deciphered it would yield a single shocking word."
-John Crowley
User avatar
Vraith
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 10623
Joined: Fri Nov 21, 2008 8:03 pm
Location: everywhere, all the time
Been thanked: 3 times

Post by Vraith »

Avatar wrote: It was the thoughtfulness of it that attracted me, I must say. As for revising his opinion, you'll note that he admired SRD's refusal to compromise
--A
What I liked was his own [and self-recognized] paradox-like "conclusion."
Kinda "Yea, a whole bunch of stuff I thought totally sucked, but you should read it anyway cuz it is unique/memorable, and what doesn't suck is amazing."
He almost made it sound like the "Citizen Kane" of the fantasy world---even if you don't like it, it is important/valuable.
[spoiler]Sig-man, Libtard, Stupid piece of shit. change your text color to brown. Mr. Reliable, bullshit-slinging liarFucker-user.[/spoiler]
the difference between evidence and sources: whether they come from the horse's mouth or a horse's ass.
"Most people are other people. Their thoughts are someone else's opinions, their lives a mimicry, their passions a quotation."
the hyperbole is a beauty...for we are then allowed to say a little more than the truth...and language is more efficient when it goes beyond reality than when it stops short of it.
User avatar
Avatar
Immanentizing The Eschaton
Posts: 62038
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 9:17 am
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa
Has thanked: 25 times
Been thanked: 32 times
Contact:

Post by Avatar »

Yes, good description.

--A
User avatar
Linna Heartbooger
Are you not a sine qua non for a redemption?
Posts: 3896
Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2007 11:17 pm
Been thanked: 1 time

Post by Linna Heartbooger »

Avatar wrote:I was hoping he'd come aboard and discuss his viewpoint, but yes, it seems he doesn't really want to. A pity, but that's ok too I suppose.
Pshht, his reasons make sense to me.
Would we speak that way if one of us posted a substantial review with the exact same content? (or even with content that was far more flawed)
Zarathustra wrote:He talks about Donaldson being rejected 47 times as a sign that perhaps he should have edited/revised (and even advises aspiring authors on this point)
c'mon... he mostly talks about that with reference to how most people would have done differently.
...it's following his whole stream of thought on his respect for Donaldson's boldness and stubbornness... That's the main focus.
Zarathustra wrote:I'd be interested to read some of the Watch discussions he was describing as "being put in stocks and having shit thrown at you." ..but I don't remember any of that in the discussion of Lord Foul's Bane.
Pretty sure that is mainly in response to the other thread where we talk about his review:
kevinswatch.ihugny.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=24919
User avatar
Fist and Faith
Magister Vitae
Posts: 25424
Joined: Sun Dec 01, 2002 8:14 pm
Has thanked: 9 times
Been thanked: 57 times

Post by Fist and Faith »

Linna Heartlistener wrote:
Avatar wrote:I was hoping he'd come aboard and discuss his viewpoint, but yes, it seems he doesn't really want to. A pity, but that's ok too I suppose.
Pshht, his reasons make sense to me.
Would we speak that way if one of us posted a substantial review with the exact same content? (or even with content that was far more flawed)
Have you must us?? :lol: Yeah, we most certainly would.
All lies and jest
Still a man hears what he wants to hear
And disregards the rest
-Paul Simon

Image
User avatar
Linna Heartbooger
Are you not a sine qua non for a redemption?
Posts: 3896
Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2007 11:17 pm
Been thanked: 1 time

Post by Linna Heartbooger »

It does show respect to tell someone he's wrong if you know it to be the case.

To tell someone that things they're writing are BS shows disrespect...
"BS'ing" means making stuff up with no regard for the truth.

I'm thinking we certainly ought to do the first.
But the second...?
"People without hope not only don't write novels, but what is more to the point, they don't read them.
They don't take long looks at anything, because they lack the courage.
The way to despair is to refuse to have any kind of experience, and the novel, of course, is a way to have experience."
-Flannery O'Connor

"In spite of much that militates against quietness there are people who still read books. They are the people who keep me going."
-Elisabeth Elliot, Preface, "A Chance to Die: The Life and Legacy of Amy Carmichael"
User avatar
Avatar
Immanentizing The Eschaton
Posts: 62038
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 9:17 am
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa
Has thanked: 25 times
Been thanked: 32 times
Contact:

Post by Avatar »

Agreed Linna.

--A
User avatar
Zarathustra
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 19842
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 12:23 am
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 1 time

Post by Zarathustra »

Linna Heartlistener wrote:c'mon... he mostly talks about that with reference to how most people would have done differently.
...it's following his whole stream of thought on his respect for Donaldson's boldness and stubbornness... That's the main focus.
That's one side of the coin. But plenty of time is given to criticizing SRD, including the notion that he should have revised his books. The critic thought they should have been revised based on his own reading, and the rejections were used additional proof to support that claim.
Zarathustra wrote:I'd be interested to read some of the Watch discussions he was describing as "being put in stocks and having shit thrown at you." ..but I don't remember any of that in the discussion of Lord Foul's Bane.
Pretty sure that is mainly in response to the other thread where we talk about his review:
kevinswatch.ihugny.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=24919
After reading through the thread, that's some pretty gentle criticism. "Calling bullshit" on someone isn't the same as saying his opinion is shitty, but pointing out an error in an incredulous manner. When someone declares, "Bullshit," it's a statement of disbelief, incredulity. It's certainly not "putting someone in stocks and throwing shit them." That's taking the term way too literal.

If you're going to portray yourself as a critic, perhaps you should be better at taking criticism.
Success will be my revenge -- DJT
Post Reply

Return to “General Fantasy/Sci-Fi Discussion”