Heroic Standard

How does one be heroic? Is it strength? Rippling biceps? Or is the leaps of faith you take in your life, all the while praying to the gods that the chances you take flip heads and not tails. Recently, I've been thinking of this ... the real connection of the heroes I admired as a kid, and the reality of the struggles of everyday life. What is it?

Is it the honor as a friend? Justice against those that do wrong against my friends? A stalwart guardian against the opposite forces of my family taking each other to the boxing ring and duking it out?

Heroism, not unlike cowardice, is bred upon an idea of justice. It takes courage to go against the sedentary normality of your life and take a chance. We, as human beings, don't want to get hurt. We wallow along as best we can, making the best of the rocks that we stumble across along the road, all the while hoping against hope that all our desires and dreams will just stumble upon our path through sheer chance, and the resulting conflict breeds into happiness.

Kids should not read fantasy novels, at least the reclusive youths that have no basis for manly behavior other than the books they happen upon at the bookstore.

I wonder if it's strength that drives me to do the things I do, and the actions I take each day. Today's society is full of a million Tiger Woods and Jesse James'. "Do what you can, as long as you can get away with it," I've heard time and time again.

If you see someone drop a dollar bill, would you simply pocket it or would you tap that man on the shoulder, give him a courteous nod, and give him back what is rightly his?

The New Generation

I often wonder about what type of audience my writing may appeal to. They always say, “be cognizant of your audience,” and while may be a poignant fact, it doesn’t tell you exactly how your supposed to capture your audience. What that statement doesn’t say, but inherently infers, is that you should write for the audience that has traditionally sold. This means, feminine readers (a la Mercandes Lackey and Andre Norton), or the more traditional pen and paper Dungeons and Dragons. However, when you look at the fantasy market today, especially with the influx of Harry Potter fans, most have never even heard of these atypical authors. They’ve never read the works of Anne McCaffrey, or induged themselves in the long-chapters of Tad Williams. Hell, a couple of months ago, I caught a glimpse of an Age of Conan book. Not the traditional AoC books mind you, but one based around the, “just released,” MMORPG. Not that anyone bought it.

How about the average 14 year old kid? Lets face it, he doesn’t read. Back in the day, when people first fell in love with fantasy, they clung to it as a baby hatchling clings to a mother’s warmth, it was necessity. They didn’t fit into the normal crowd, or circumstances demanded that they lived a life secluded from normal friends, be it through constant moving or family issues that demanded one work all the time. Fantasy, at least in my mind, to the LOTR generation, was something that demanded one imagine a place far away. It was a mindset that you had to buy into, because there wasn’t fancy pictures or games to do it for you. When you pictured elves, it was your elves that stared back at you, not some guy’s creatures. When you pictured battles, it was the heroes of your own imagination.

But I digress, how is the new generation of fans any different? They’re different because World of Warcraft isn’t something you have to “buy” into, you just hop in. You don’t have to picture the trees in your mind, because they’re already there. Harry Potter is a simple book, you don’t need an intricate understanding of vocab to buy into that. Hell, lots of people just watch the movies. On the other hand, this might truly be the next wave the fantasy readers.

So, the question remains. How do you appeal to an audience which fell in love with fantasy via a visual medium? Or can you at all? I’ve played with dozens of teenagers online, male and female alike, that seem to crave the fantastical realm that fantasy provides, and while some may like to read and write stories, the vast majority don’t.

Would shorter chapters help? Or how about more distinct visuals and more action? Would fancy covers determine the sales of your novel? Or are we damned to make constant Harry Potter copies?

I know what you’d say, and that would be to write for yourself. And personally, I think that’s crap. Not that I’m saying you should totally sell out, but if no one appreciates what you craft, then what’s the point at all?

The Next Generation (Not startrek) is a generation that, to me at least, is an untapped well of readers. What pickles me is that, given the choice between playing an MMORPG like Warhammeronline and buying the next George R. R. Martin novel, your average male fantasy fan would buy the game 10 times out of 10.

-Longbow

Female Centric Audience

One point that’s always perplexed me is the incontrovertible fact, according to some, that the easiest way to gain an audience in fantasy, is appealing to the pseudo-intellectual sub-genre of feminine-entrenched plotlines. While I’ve nothing against authors like M. Lackey, J.V. Jones or even Jo Walton, it has always angered me that the majority of authors that I sift through are soap-opera fantasy, where the main plot takes a backseat to cutsie-type banter between characters who always seem witty, fun-loving and misplaced in world that treat death as a commonplace occurrence. For example, I once bought M. Lackey’s Owlknight trilogy of books, and while there did seem to be a central theme around the protagonist based around his own magic, the whole book almost seemed stuck in this love conquers all role that irked me a bit. Even after horrific battles with enemy mages, the protagonist always found time for, what was essentially, a high school romance.

So, if these types of books are true sellers, why are the so-called “Great” fantasy authors always based around more grand storylines? On the other hand though, one has to point out the male-centric fantasy that serves as the polar opposite of the feminine-fantasy types, namely, Dungeons and Dragons, R. A Salvadore and any fantasy associated with Diana Duane, where the book reads like a video game. I recall in one of R.A Salvadore’s books, he actually gave his main character a, and I quote, “quest”

I understand that the market for books has dropped with the onset of the technological evolution, but why is it that fantasy publishers who target young males continually think the only thing that appeals to them are, “World of Warcrap books” that are so superficial, you could cut them with a knife and nothing would come out except dog doo doo.

And is there even a market anymore for the feminist fantasy? I’m all for female characters and quest-like male books, but what happens when the D&D generation passes on?

I don’t really have an answer to this, but it is a point of interest that, as I read books on fantasy … they point out you need a certain type of dialogue and feeling if you want to easily get your book published.

War. Is it necessary?

War, or Bush’s folly, is not a subject to be glib about. If we’ve learned anything from the, “Greatest Generation” it is the folly of lunging headlong into the so-called glories of life-and-death struggles. Bullets do not fade. Some wounds never heal. World War I was called the “War to end all wars,” yet in reality, that couldn’t be the farthest from the truth. Centuries of conflict, intertwined within the lives of the maimed, the slain and the paupers, have taught us the harsh reality of war. It is harsh. It is unforgiving.

Yet, despite it all, fantasy is rooted within this animalistic culture of violence. Look at Age of Conan, yet another game spawned from the primal need to inflict as much gore and hurt on your fellow opponent. Darkfall, one of the more anticipated MMORPGs, promotes their graphics engine by stating, “You can see the wounds on other’s faces,” as if seeing the blood seep from an open sore was a good thing.

In seeing this, there is only one truth. Fantasy and War are intertwined. Conflict, like any story worth telling, is delved into the complexities of nations doing combat on the fields. This is the answer to the question, the deprecating truth that our mother’s don’t want to admit. So far, war is necessary in any great imagery of fantasy. What would Modisett’s Recluse Saga been without the war between Order and Chaos? What would Tolkein’s masterpiece been without Sauron?

Cool for games, not so much for the variety of fantasy.

Getting Away With It

I never read the whole Robert Jordan series. And, while this may not preclude others from berating me with, “Your not a real fantasy fan” hate mail, it doesn’t mean that I don’t respect what he meant to the fantasy genre as a whole. I have read parts of his series, hell I got the first novel in his “Wheel of time” epic FREE from a bookstore that was trying to promote his third novel. But what nags me about Robert Jordan was that languid, buildup style. You know the one, where it takes FOREVER to get to the point, but once you get to the point, it’s a GREAT point.

Sure, the first time you glossed over that kind of style, a la Tad Williams, it seemed like an immersive world … but after the 10th novel of that kind, it does seem to run a tad bit overdone. So, in memory of the late James Oliver Rigney, Jr., I picked up my old copy of “The Eye of the World,” in hopes of recapturing that old magic that, I confess, I had when I gave his world a try the first time around.

To fully express my experience, let me set the stage. There’s a term in the film industry that a friend shared with me once, telling me about the word, “Shoe Leather.” In this, it refers to the times when the camera will show a character walking into a scene, with no real dialogue, for a couple of seconds. The purpose, as my friend aptly explained, was to make running time flexible, so if they were short or long they could cut and add these scenes appropriately.

This is when I realized, especially with the fledgling authors of fantasy who sparked a legion of fantasy fans, that some of these authors were sooooooo long winded. I mean sure, lets get to know the world, but COME ON, I don’t need to know every freeking facet of the world.

Back in 2005 I bought L.E. Modesitt Jr.’s “The Wellspring of Chaos”. For those who aren’t aware of LEM, he is the KING of child-hero fantasy, and also shoe leather extraordinaire! His novels are the type of novels that are the staple (even over LOTR) in middle-school’s collection of fantasy novels. So, in this novel, which I foolishly bought in hardcover, the WHOLE novel is about one thing … and that’s KILLING TIME! Reading LEM was always a guilty pleasure of mine, but this novel went too far. This was literally a book of the main character going from port to port and trying different types of fowl, then at the end killing a wizard.

Maybe it’s just me, but like many creative aspects of our society, reader’s tastes have changed. I just can’t get through those longwinded dialogues anymore, or the blatant chapters in books where it’s ONLY info dumping. Not that I’m saying I could do better, but COME ON! Gives us a bone here! Gone with the Wind, however a classic, isn’t the type of acting we want in our modern day movie stars. Happy-go-lucky superheroes aren’t the type people will relate to in today’s information-driven society.

Yet .. I’m still hesitant to pull the trigger on these long-winded type of books … because the payoff is so good. When I picked up George R.R. Martin’s first novel for the first time, I only got past the first 20 pages then put the book down. It was only months later, when I gave the book another chance, that I got past the infodumping and fell in love with his prose and style, and, for the first time in years, end up actually being surprised by what his fantasy characters did.

Can epic fantasy still be “epic” even without the longwinded tangled web of buildup? Is there a line between epic fantasy and just another D&D novel? Maybe time has unraveled the cobwebs and facades, blown past all the word counts and leaflets and truly faced us in the mirror and revealed epic fantasy for what it really was. Perhaps fantasy was truly a one hit wonder and that these days, with the flouring information superhighway, mythology based stories are a thing of the past.

Perhaps we, as fantasy authors and fans, were just getting away with it – that all fantasy has to follow a certain pattern or else no one will buy into it. Here’s hoping someone comes out of the woodwork with that wild style, and then we can finally stand up and say, this is how new-age fantasy should be written.

The Mechanics of Change

Let’s face it, fantasy is in the doldrums. And, as much as I’d like to believe that movies such as Prince Caspian will force epic fantasy to the forefront, the more I feel that the movie will take fantasy a step backwards. Not that it doesn’t look like a good movie, but I feel myself skeptical of how it will feed us anything but the usual hero-fantasy dribble we’ve been force fed over the past few years.

Rise-to-power fantasy has been following a particular trend that seems almost SCREAMING for change. What am I talking about? Let me lay it out for you.

Lord of the rings started, as many know, as a children’s storybook. It captured the imagination of Tolkein’s extensive mythology background, and played on that to create a quaint little story of overcoming monsters. Not that this is an overall bad premise, but in all respects it was a forgettable one. But, like all great fantasy that came after it, it grew darker and darker. With each telling, the world shaped into an unforgiving world … a world of dark desires where greed rules all and heroes are defined as men who define common logic. Men who’s morals, based on nothing really, drive them to uphold what we define as “good” and sane. So, as the story goes, the story went from childhood tale, to dark after it sucked you in.

How about Harry Potter? Any fan will tell you, comparing the first book to the rest of the series will reveal that the first book is farrrrrrrr on the “light” side of the things that the books that preceeded it. So, in that respect, it followed the Tolkein template to perfection.

Now Prince Caspian comes along, apparently born of that same light, that same old adage. And, while I love that these classics are brought to the screne, I feel it may put the final nail in the fantasy coffin. That fantasy only falls into a neat little box, and can only draw in audiences by appealing to CHILDREN first and foremost, that fantasy in and of itself cannot appeal to the adult crowd. Sounds familiar? It should.

Margaret and Tracy Hickman reviewed their dragons of autumn twilight animated “movie” on their podcast a couple of months ago. In it, they describe their disappointment on how the producers dumbed the book down, focusing not as much on the characters and creating a tone that concentrated more on the aesthetics rather than appeals of emotion.

The problem, in my eyes, is that fantasy doesn’t have any real outlet to inspire change. Star Trek created fans, and challenged the normalcy of Science Fiction, breaking the common mold by inspiring those that came after it to appeal to a broader audience. No longer was Science Fiction a simple Saturday morning cartoon. The comic industry went through a similar change in the 50s, when there came a gradual transformation from goofy cartoons to sex-appealing, adult themed graphic novels such as “The Dark Knight Returns”, “Camelot 3000” and “The Watchmen”.

So, what does fantasy have? NOBODY! Did anyone watch that horror that was Eragon? How about that girl-infested girl with the bear movie that tanked? Or how about In the name of the King, featuring BURT REYNOLDS as a king! I mean GOOD GOD! Sure, its hard to change. Why would an executive fund a money based on a premise that has no real example in the fantasy realm to go on? We know HP made money, so why in the world would we do something else? Sure, LOTR was semi-adult theme, but it still had a child character in the center role. So, in this respects, I can’t entirely blame them.

Then again, outside the world of media, there is such a book that defines that fantasy needs. I’m sure you all know the author. Yes, friends, George R. R. Martain gives us hope. Let us pray that, someday, it might find itself on the silver screen.

Shadowbane Reboot

Shadowbane, the best MMO concept in the history of MMORPGS. Yeah, you heard me. Shadow FUCKING bane! Now, while this may pale in comparison to what the outside world has come to expect from mmos, SB at its purest was always the finest at it's core. No, i'm not talking about the PvP aspect of the game, but the immersiveness of it's world.

Lets face it, these days, MMOs are a dime a dozen. But, while the purists would want you to believe a fantasy mmo's sucess is based upon it's graphics, treadmill and quest number; the truth of the matter is that it is far from that. It is the immersiveness that truely defines a great mmo. This is why UO is still held, to this day, as the standard all mmo's a judged upon. To be fair however, UO's world was only big because of the lack of competition at the time, but that still doesn't detract from it's main selling point. It delved deep into your subconsious, creating a world you've never seen before and skills you've never touched. It was truely amazing to see the hand-held dice be replaced instead with buttons and characters that moved. Like Meridian 59, the world seemed limitless becuase you did not know what to expect and have not seen what had come before.

In leiu of this, Shadowbane was the next step. The world changed, as all great fantasy stories have done. It is not enough to put elves and trolls into a landscape, and hope one falls in love with the world, but one must capture one's mind.

Why is Shadowbane the greatest? Because of the human-player interactions that evolved out of a ruleset that, at it's heart, was limitless. Great kings were formed, holding rule over ENTIRE servers. (Server War) Rebellions formed within their own cadre of members, while factions fought to preserve what little they'd gained over the enormous empire. In other servers, greed populated some men's minds, creating towns who's sole purpose was money. (Money Tree) And still other servers seeded reigns of hope (KgB), desperatly trying to dicatate the rules of war against guilds who would have none of that.

This is the heart of why Shadowbane was the greatest, the fact that players were able to fall into the roles they've only dreamed of. While other games claimed, "You could be the hero", in Shadowbane you really could be. Hell, some guilds like Skyfang fell apart when their leader left for real life personal issues. THAT is a measure of power that other games could never acheive.

But, at the same time, this is also why Shadowbane failed. Faliure was too hard. Defeat was too big. In Shadowbane, if you said the wrong thing, to the wrong person, at the wrong time; (i.e. flaming on the fourms) you could find yourself at the end of a 100 character guild and blacklisted from any guild you tried to join. When you destroyed your enemies, your enemies were so decimated they tended to quit the game.

So, in retrospect, while Shadowbane was the greatest MMO, it was also a one time deal. It could have never survived at it's peak, even if it had fixed it's server-side and tower guard latency issues, it still would have died a premature death because of the toll inflicted on the losers.

Perhaps the Shadowbane Restart is a good thing, and while we may dream of a day when Darkfall becomes a reality, the truth is, whatever they do, it will be a shadow of what we experienced playing Shadowbane. Who know's how long it'll last this time? Is this a true reboot? No. Losses are still huge, and if a guild dominates the server, it's game over. But will that stop me from logging on? Probably not.

So, I guess, the time has come to log in once again, read up on those templates, and grease my axe.

I play to crush, let's hope that's enough for now.