The Great Cycle: Fate and Causality in Modern Fantasy

“The Wheel of Time turns, and Ages come and pass, leaving memories that become legend. Legend fades to myth, and even myth is long forgotten when the Age that gave it birth comes again.”  Eye of the World by Robert Jordan, from the Wheel of Time series.

I’m just sayin’

The Great Cycle is a well worn fantasy trope that is heavily invested in the idea that the world is governed by a series of grand cycles, usually referred to as ages. These cycles end in cataclysms and war, from which the next cycle springs anew.  There is usually a golden age and fall at some point during the cycle, as well. In most versions of the story the protagonists set themselves against the cycle, trying to break it and stave off the impending disaster. In some stories they succeed, in others they do not. Regardless of the outcome however, the Grand Cycle is a profound rejection of causality. The Cycle follows its own logic, or as Robert Jordan would say “The Wheel weaves as the Wheel wills.” It does not follow a causal chain, it is something that just happens because it is inevitable and the hand of fate always moves towards it.

Some books, movies, and even games have used the idea of a grand cycle are [Spoiler Alert]:

1) The Wheel of Time: Robert Jordans massive epic is perhaps the best use of the grand cycle in modern Fantasy. He makes good use of the lost golden age, the idea of a grand pattern, and a protagonist who eventually decides to try and end the cycle. I found it got too long and repetitive for my tastes, but I enjoyed that Jordan came right out and let the reader know he was writing a tale about the grand cycle right off.

2) Mass Effect: Nobody expects the Great Cycle in a Science Fiction computer game. The main enemies in the mass effect series are the reapers, monstrous artificial entities that periodically wipe out/harvest all life in the universe in order to further their own goals. The protagonists begin to learn of the cycle through contact with artifacts from a vanished species, the Protheans, who attempted to defeat the reapers last time around. I love Mass Effect’s spin on the great cycle. I could simply be a causal event on a grand scale. Although the reapers claim to be without beginning or end. Still cool.

3) Battlestar Galactica (2004): In the most recent iteration of BSG it is suggested that humanity is constantly wiped out by its own robotic creations, the cylons. The final episode contains the lines  ”All of this has happened before. But the question remains, does all of this have to happen again?” 

4) Ragnarok: Ragnarok in Norse Mythology is the fated end of the world, when most of the gods die. Interestingly it is seen as part of a cycle and the children of the Gods continue on, presumably to the next cycle.

5) The Stormlight Archive: Brian Sanderson’s next big project appears to include the grand cycle. The Way of Kings pointed toward a Grand Cycle, but with some possible differences… It will be interesting to see how he uses the idea.

The idea of the Grand Cycle has its roots in religious belief, likely originating in early agricultural societies who were very attached to seasonal cycles and thus inclined to view the world that way, I’d guess.

The Great Cycle in Fantasy fiction is ahistorical, being driven by fate over cause and effect. The events that line up to cause the are generally outside human agency. Thus if a story involves the Grand Cycle it is fate driven, even it breaks said cycle. The idea that events are predestined is not a product of reasoned cause and effect, except for notions of physics and philosophy well beyond the scale of most stories.

In theory though, some Grand Cycles, like Mass Effect could be rendered in causal terms. The Reapers claim to be without beginning, but establishing an origin for them would make the cycle causal, albeit on a metascale.

In general I don’t have a problem with the Grand Cycle as a device in Fantasy, or even mythology. On the other hand I hate the way people use the idea of the Grand Cycle in real life. The world as we know it is historical, and while the cause and effect of events are a matter for debate and study, juts because they lie beyond our grasp does not mean that we should shrug our collective shoulders and give up on seeking answers. War is a good example of this. I often hear people utter the phrase “war is inevitable.” On one hand this sort of truism is rather hard to disagree with considering some part of the planet is always at war. One the other hand it is also an excuse for ridiculously lazy thinking about how peace initiatives in the middle east are pointless because they are doomed to fail or how striving towards peace is naive because we will always be drawn into a war eventually. Dropping everything onto the lap of fate, and thus abdicating responsibility ignores the fact that history is progressive, with human life generally getting better as time goes on and science/knowledge advances.

Wars are caused by people, not fate. Attempting to understand the causes allows us to minimize the occurrence in the same way that modern medicine helps us to stave of infection, disease, and even live longer lives (awesome!).

Because I enjoy history I tend to prefer fiction that respects causality. Obviously some authors want to explore ideas of fate and Grand Cycles; I don’t hold that against them. Modern Fantasy is big enough for many different styles of storytelling, after all. However for examining ideas on a human scale, nothing beats causality. Fate and inevitability cheapen events on the human level by ignoring the question why?, which can easily be answered on the scale of human action.

Fantasy and Guns

One of my favorite read of late was Promise of Blood, an Epic Fantasy set in a period that approximates the Napoleonic Era. The book is advertised as Flintlock Fantasy, and prominently features guns and magic side by side. Now, when I was a wee lad, playing D&D and early video games and reading Fantasy, mixing guns with swords was almost heretical. It offended purists. Never mind that fact that guns and swords were used on the battlefield, at the same time,  for a relatively long period of history. Guns were frowned on in Fantasy settings until relatively recently. Here are a few of my personal theories as to why.

4 Points?... nice.

The Black 13th From Warmachine… mmm gunmages.

1) Realism: Who would wear plate-mail or bother to learn magic in a world with guns? This is an older argument and essentially a failure of imagination. The idea was that guns were such a dominant technology that they would overpower common Fantasy elements like mages and dragons. No seriously, people used to say this to me. As the genre broadened, writers have shown that they can easily accommodate both in the right setting.

2) Anachronism: Some pastoral Fantasy is certainly based on a yearning for the purity of an idealized pre-industrial middle ages, the kind of storybook setting you would see in an early Disney movie. This sort of vision has no place for guns. Even in modern day, Fantasies that want to evoke a strong medieval feel shy away from firearms. Think about how even simple gunpowder weapons or even explosives would alter a setting like Westeros or Middle Earth.

3) The idea that technology and magic cannot mix: Often magic was seen as the polar opposite of science. This makes a certain amount of sense since magic seems like a crazy superstition to us in the modern day. Thus when technology did show up in the same story as magic, the two would act as forces battling it out.  However many of the ancient magical and alchemical traditions were seen as pretty legitimate forms of thinking in their day. Modern Fantasy writers like Patrick Rothfuss draw on these traditions to create magic systems that feel a little more rational and mesh better with technology and the age of reason.

4) Lost Golden Ages and progress: A common trope in pastoral fantasy is that everything was better in the past. In the case of swords this is somewhat true. The making of a proper Katana is nearly a lost art, and certainly well past its Zenith. With Firearms this is harder to sell. Guns are an invention that have improved dramatically even in my lifetime. Hell, we even have guns that can aim themselves and come with a mobile hotspot, these days. Guns as we see them now are an artifact of progress. It would be interesting to read a Fantasy world where firearms were the product of some lost golden age, a convention usually reserved for post apocalyptic settings.

What changed? As the industrial age gives way to information age, guns have become acceptable in Fantasy. The easy answer as to why is that Fantasy has become a broad, vibrant genre where internal consistency and a good narrative are more important than following a particular formula. We have seen several new sub-genres of Fantasy develop lately with steampunk and urban fantasy, and even more seem to be budding. These are not displacing traditional Fantasy settings, but rather growing alongside them. Makes sense. Sadly it leaves me 400 words short of my goal, so here are some more specific reasons as to why I think guns have become acceptable in Fantasy.

1) Star Wars, yo! (and a lil bit of 40k): In many ways, Star Wars is Fantasy with spaceships and blasters. The Force is pretty much a magic system. It could be argue that Lucas’ early Star Wars movies helped pave the way for guns in Fantasy by popularizing them. The same goes for properties like Warhammer 40k and possibly even Dune, where elements of mysticism exist in a futuristic setting.  Even if you don’t buy that it is hard to deny that watching the Jedi parry blaster bolts with their lightsabers helped writers imagine how magic and guns might interact and share the field.

2) More experienced consumers: As Fantasy grew in popularity, its readers grew in sophistication. More books, games, and other media means more exposure to new ideas and paradigms. This makes it vastly easier for a new author to introduce new concepts like an enchanted gun with runed bullets that explode on contact. Sophisticated readers are willing to buy more divergent ideas, as long as they make sense. They can also help explain things to new readers, who might have trouble understanding what a spell is, let along a gun mage firing thunder-shot.

3) A niche to fill: As Fantasy becomes more and more popular it attracts more and more writers, people like me who want to make a living writing Fantasy books. It is harder to stand out writing traditional Fantasy. Fantasy with guns is yet another niche to explore for veteran authors and for new authors to try to establish themselves in.

4) Is the gun an anachronistic weapon? Terrorists use bombs, superpowers use fighter jets and drones. The gun still has a strong role on the battlefield, but it is hardly the sexiest technology in the arsenal these days. While some guns are crazily high tech, the idea of fighting wars with guns is pretty settled in our minds. Could it be that we are so familiar with guns that they seem to be a little anachronistic now? After all knives were pretty common weapons in the middle ages, but our soldiers still carry them. The gun is a banner artifact of the industrial age. If we are indeed moving to the information age, then perhaps Fantasy’s acceptance of the gun is merely an indication of a larger cultural shift…

Tuesday Teaser

These are character quotes from the synopsis in Bloodlust: Will to Power. They all have a similar theme.

I love the challenge of a tough fight and the roar of the crowd. I will impress you.” Sadira Lacivia, aka Red Scorpion.

 “There’s nothing quite like the feeling of finding that perfect comment to enrage an opponent. I will get under your skin.” Ravius Vergerus, aka Ravishing Rude Ravius

 “My friends trust me to defend them on the fighting grounds, I can think of no greater compliment than that. I will not fail them.” Vintia Legarda, aka Brightshield

 “The Great Games give us the opportunity to lend our strength to better causes. I will make a difference.” Omodo diYava, aka Hammerhorn

 “The arena weeds separates the weak from the strong. I will not let anyone take what is mine.” Karmal Kolat, aka Crimson Dragon

 “In spite of everything, I cannot deny that I enjoy the way the arena pushes me to test my limits. I will find my way.” Gavin Orphanus, aka Lionfang

The challenge with these character quotes is to convey familiarity, reminding the readers of the characters from Bloodlust: A Gladiator’s Tale, while showing how each of them feels about the Great Games.

The second part of today’s teaser covers familiar territory: A summary of the events of the first book. I took care to emphasize the key points that drive the narrative in the second book, hopefully without giving anything away.

Synopsis of Bloodlust: A Gladiator’s Tale 

In the Domains of the Chosen magic is power. Because of the Reckoning, a cataclysm brought about by a war between magic-wielders, the Gifted are also feared and controlled. Only those willing to face the rigours of the Great Games, as Gladiators, can earn the right to wield their magic unfettered. A lucky few might even win a place among the Chosen, immortal rulers of the Domains.

Gavin, a thoughtful young man, begins his career as a Gladiator in the Campus Martius. He seeks the freedom that can only be gained through the path of the Gladiator. Gavin is soon joined by Ravius, a cunning, sociable skirmisher who was his only real friend in training. Ravius introduces Gavin to the amiable Armodon Omodo. After he executes a Heretic, Olek Agvarson, in a Deathmatch, Gavin begins to question his place in the bloody games. The man’s only crime, in Gavin’s mind, was wanting freedom.

Gavin meets Sadira, a dynamic Shadow-Elf Gladiatrix, and the two fall in love. Sadira, already a skilled fighter and a consummate performer, seems destined for greatness. Many people do not understand what Sadira sees in Gavin. One of these is Sadira’s friend and rival, Karmal, who sees Gavin as soft and weak.

Sadira, Gavin, Omodo, Ravius, Karmal, and Vintia, another of Sadira’s friends form a troupe and travel to the town of Dreadwood Junction. There they hope to Gain the attention of Faction League recruiters and gain a fast track to better leagues. They succeed in gaining the attention of the Red Faction, but not before Sadira and Gavin get tricked into a Deathmatch against local favourites Bella and Cat. During the match Karmal kills the corrupt arena master, Meady Mox, whom she was investigating on behalf of the deliberative.

The six Gladiators join the Red Faction and travel to Camp Valorous, a busy military town on the edge of the Empire. They meet Cleothera, a friendly Grey-Robe. They train hard here and become favourites. Sadira, in particular, gains the attention of the crowd. When a rival Faction challenges the recruits, Sadira and Vintia are selected to represent them, winning handily. During this fight Gavin meets Valaran diVolcanus, the most feared Gladiator in a generation. Valaran becomes obsessed with Sadira, who he believes is the only woman worthy of him, and begins to send her gifts. Gavin struggles with feelings of self-worth.

When they troupe moves on, Omodo remains behind at Camp Valaran. He feels he must overcome his aversion to crowds and become more self-reliant. He eventually joins the Green Faction, but remains in contact with his old friends.

The rest of the troupe joins the Red Faction at Scorpion’s Oasis. Sadira hopes to win the patronage of Chosen Giselle, which will greatly further her career. The Oasis is a town traditionally dominated by the Blue Faction. Sadira is put in charge of the troupe. She trains her friends hard, learns to lead, and masters the complex Faction challenge rules with Gavin and Vintia’s help.

The troupe give their all and lead the Red Faction at Scorpion’s Oasis to a winning season, working hard to do so. As the season goes on it becomes apparent that Chosen Giselle will sponsor Sadira’s ascension to a higher league, but she will have to part ways with Gavin. Thus their victory at Scorpion’s Oasis is bittersweet.

Sadira and Karmal join Chosen Giselle in Brightsand Halls. Sadira gets a chance to train with a woman she has adored since childhood, but she finds that having little time to spend with Gavin is a heavy price to pay for Glory.

Vintia is saddened to be separated from her childhood friends. She decides to remain behind in Scorpion’s Oasis and defend their title. At least that way she will be close to Sadira in Brightsands.

Gavin meets Master Sax after a rough match in the Oasis. Sax reveals that Gavin’s spear bears the maker’s mark of the smith Liam Valcoeur, who never gives weapons to just anyone. Curiosity to meet this enigmatic smith and a desire to prove himself worthy of Sadira drive Gavin to travel to the north and join the Free Leagues. Ravius, Sax, and Cleothera join him.

Meanwhile Valaran seeks to find a way to eliminate Gavin and make Sadira his, and all the while the great players of the Domains plot, getting ready for the coming Grand Championships where the victor will join the ranks of the Chosen.

Religion in Modern Fantasy

“I like nonsense, it wakes up the brain cells. Fantasy is a necessary ingredient in living, It’s a way of looking at life through the wrong end of a telescope. Which is what I do, And that enables you to laugh at life’s realities.”― Dr. Seuss

This is not meant to be a comment on actual religions, but the rather the role of religion in Fantasy Fiction

Religion can be a touchy subject at the best of times. Fantasy settings provide a relatively safe place to examine the relationship of mortals to the divine, but few writers seem willing to get into theology these days, even though it is a remarkably interesting subject. Gods in Fantasy often seem to be window dressing, and Fantasy religions seem mostly to fade into the background. Even Fantasy setting where there are no gods or religion often do not seem to take that into account. It may be that Modern Fantasy is currently pre-occupied with Grimdark and Urban Fantasy and does not want to tackle the big questions directly. Or it may be that no one wants to court controversy.

Zeus!

I wonder if there is a difference between the way published and self-published Fantasy authors deal with religion. I would suspect a self-pub does not have to restrain themselves quite as much.

Why does this matter? well, religion is an integral part of society. It is one of the first systems that men create, and hence influences many institutions.  To illustrate lets take a standard medieval example. If you remove the Judeo-Christian religions  then you remove more than just the church and its direct traditions. The Nobility often leaned on God to provide justification for their regimes. I am astounded how often Fantasy writers who muck around with religion in a medieval society fail to take this into account. The Church often provided an alternate system of  arbitration and avenue for ambition for the nobility as well. Noble Families with extra sons would often send them to the clergy. The list of influences goes on. Taking religion into account makes for better world-building, even if your characters are cynical bastards who don’t really care for the spiritual.

And don’t get me started on the time I played an RPG where the Gods literally walked the earth and one of the players decided he would play an atheist :)

Here are some of the basic religious characteristics and paradigms that should be considered when making a Fantasy world.

What Are The Gods? (these are just examples)

  • No One Knows: It is realistic and offers moral ambiguity. Often paired with works in mysterious ways.
  • True Divinity: In this case the Divine is something special and unique, having a quality that cannot be replicated by mortals. One thing to keep in mind is that this means that the power of the Divine and Magic could be two different things in this case.
  • Ascendants: In some traditions it is possible for Mortals to become Gods. This makes for interesting settings and seems fairly common in Fantasy literature. Frequently the Gods are just supremely  powerful mages.
  • Social Consciousness Given Form: I once ran a game that I made called Nordan-saga. In this game it was theorized that the Gods were created by a form of cultural mass consciousness given form by magic, in that the Gods were the belief of the people made real. This meant  that the faithful and strong willed could call upon the powers of the Gods and that the Gods could walk the earth and so on. It also meant that the Gods were unable to act in places that they had no worshipers and weaker in places where belief was weak. Fun stuff.

How Many Gods Are There? (this list is by no means exhaustive)

  • Monotheism: There is only one God, or one God who is well above the others. Illuvatar in Tolkien could be fit into this category, along with the Judeo-Christian religions. I see surprisingly few Fantasy tales with a single divine power. Again, I think this is because Fantasy Authors are wary of offending potential readers. Still I think it would be fun to read a Medieval Fantasy or even a Grimdark tale with a serious take on a monotheistic system with an active Deity.
  • Polytheism: Polytheistic societies worship multiple Gods. These are often grouped into a Pantheon (or family) of Gods. The Ancient Greek Pantheon is the example that still gets quite a bit of use in modern fiction, partly due to the rich tradition of epic storytelling that involved the Greek Gods. Fantasy worlds tend to default to Polytheism because it is familiar, it leaves room for multiple beliefs, and it is simply less controversial than Monotheism in fiction.
    • Cultural Polytheism: Some Authors take an extremely wide lens view of Polytheism, with each Culture or Racial group having its own Diety or Pantheon. This has the advantage of allowing a great deal of cultural divergence and encompassing a lot of interesting religious traditions.
    • Animistic Twists: Animistic traditions often posit that natural features, animals, and such can have spirits. Particularly strong spirits can be considered Gods. These could lead to some really interesting religions.

How do the Gods Interact With the World

  • Works in Mysterious Ways: While Religion is real the Gods do not interact in an obvious fashion with mortals. They could exist or they might not. It almost doesn’t matter in this paradigm. Most Modern Fantasy tends to lean this way since it is realistic. Miracles could be coincidence, and are at least open to interpretation.
    • God as the Causal Event: I love the portrayal of God as the causal act of kindness in Les Miserables. If someone were to do this in a Fantasy work, I’d read it… just sayin’…
    • Diminishing Divinities: In this paradigm the Gods grow away from the world over time. People often wonder if they are dead/gone/uncaring while others still hold the faith.
    • Set the World in Motion and Left: In this paradigm the Gods created the world and have little to do with it afterwards. Simulationism could fit in here.
  • Limited Interaction but Grants Power to Followers: The followers of the Gods have powers. These could be a form of magic or they could be a true Gift granted to the faithful, but the power itself is undeniable. In this paradigm it would take a very sophisticated critic to doubt the Gods. Power tends to win converts. There is a broad range of interpretation here as well, from occasional small miracles to great power or frequent use. If there are multiple Gods they may grant different powers, if there is a single god, then different sects could get different powers.
    • Visions: Some followers might get visions. This is a useful way to convey information, but also open to skepticism and fallibility.
    • Divine Intermediaries: Some gods might send messengers like angels, ghosts, or lesser gods to communicate.
  • Real But Impersonal: The Gods are real but impossible to comprehend or just plain impersonal. In this case the Gods act more like natural forces than anything else.
  • The Gods Walk the Earth: In this paradigm the Gods walk the earth, communicate directly with mortals, and go about their business. Their presence should effect the story directly and they could even be characters within it. Steven Erikson offers a good take on this in his Malazan series, while David Eddings offers others. Some stories in Greek Myth show interaction between Gods and mortals.

The Details

  • Is God Good? (Monotheism) If God is good, then why do bad things happen? This is a fascinating question that has tripped up philosophers and theologians for thousands of years, especially in monotheistic religions where God is posited to be supremely powerful and and benign. As a Fantasy author you could really play with this. Perhaps the Devil Figure is powerful enough to challenge god, creating a dualistic system. Perhaps the God of your world looks upon people like we look upon ants. By Crom, that could lead to some interesting storytelling…
  • What about the afterlife? Almost every religion deals with what happens after death. This is a good place to start when defining your religions.
    • Is there as system of reincarnation?
    • How are the dead Judged?
  • Taboos and Beliefs: This is the least offensive way to distinguish Fantasy religions regardless of your approach to the actual Divinities. Beliefs can persist long after the rational behind them has disappeared and can justify all kinds of behaviour from clothing, to persecution, to human sacrifice. All of these can have a huge effect on the story, if you want them to. Erikson, Jordan, and Sanderson do a decent job with these.
  • How does religion relate to magic?
  • How does religion relate to various races?
  • What sort of Conflicts exist within a religion? Do different sects compete?
  • Can the Gods die?
  • Can Gods Breed? with Humans?

I could go on, but I should get back to writing Bloodlust: Will to Power. Religion is a complex, often irrational system that can really lend depth to Fantasy world building. Religious questions fascinate readers and fiction allows us to examine them on neutral ground (or as close to it as we can come). Instead of having an ambiguous, mysterious God in your Grimdark Fantasy, why not have an uncaring God who watches over the struggles of mortals with amusement. In the end it is another facet of the world to detail, but one that can be very exciting and relevant.

Modern Fantasy: Corruption as a Theme (with monsters!)

“…the corruption of the best things gives rise to the worst.” David Hume, Natural History of Religion

It is really hard to find a good fantasy corruption pic…

Corruption is a keystone topic of a rational society. In the middle ages, I’m sure people noticed corruption, but they were limited in what they could do about it. In the modern day you can get away with saying quite a bit about leaders and powerful people. In a medieval setting even with  had proof that someone in a position of power was engaging in abusive practices or downright crazy, one would  have to appeal to a higher authority to support any accusation to get anything done. GRR Martin illustrates this rather brilliantly in Game of Thrones. Ned is a naive rationalist, acting much like a modern day detective; he finds the truth he is seeking, but it only brings disaster because in his society power and position mean a great deal more than evidence and reason, especially with no force to back them up.

In more modern societies we can at least complain about, analyze, and attack corruption. It has become something of a pastime in democratic societies, with endless accusations of corruption and fascination with scandal being fundamental characteristics of our society. Our fascination with corruption comes with our ability to analyze, recognize, and act against it. We see it take root in our institutions and want to do something about it, often forming political movements or pressuring our representatives to pass laws. In the middle ages if you encountered corruption you would likely just have to suck it up, unless you were or or had the ear of someone with power. People generally dealt with crazy kings by staying out of their way and either waiting for them to die or another noble to murder them. The right to free association wasn’t exactly a thing back then.

Fantasy Authors have long been fascinated with the idea of corruption, here are a few examples:

1) JRR Tolkien/Middle Earth: The Ring is an obvious metaphor for power, a reference to the Ring of Gyges from Plato, and it corrupts the wearer and even those who look upon it at times. Most Fantasy readers are set, one way or another, in their view of Tolkien and his ring but when you actually sit down and consider what it does, the one ring is a rather sinister piece of jewelry. The relationship of Wormtongue and Theoden is another example of corruption in middle earth. Saruman clouds Theoden’s mind, and uses Wormtongue as his proxy to manipulate the confused king, thus allowing him to hamper the entire nation of Rohan even before he send forth his armies. In Tolkien corruption is the purposeful tool of evil men. (A deeper analysis is possible, but you need to be really familiar with your lore.)

2) JK Rowling/Harry Potter: The use of Corruption in Harry Potter is fascinating. The first glimpse of Lord Voldemort is as he controls someone else and the way certain people are seduced to the Death Eater’s cause is very interesting. Voldemort is presented as a combination of Dark Lord and fascist leader, both modern and fantastica; the end result of unchecked corruption. Dolores Umbridge (book 5) is an example of corruption in progress, a representative of an  institution that should be helping, but instead actively makes the situation worse by forcing her ideology onto everyone. The whole use of the ministry of magic in the books is very good for this theme in general, and one of the reasons I really enjoyed Harry Potter. In Rowling corruption is complex, not always part of a sinister plan, although sinister people do make use of it.

3) Robert Jordan/Wheel of Time: Corruption is omnipresent in the Wheel of Time. The male half of the power is tainted and causes madness, to the point that male magic users are seen as anathema. There is a blight in the north that is home to corrupt monstrosities: the trollocs, creatures created for war by evil sciences. The scale of the wheel of time is fairly large and the conflict is often black and white, but the idea that the structure of the world and the cosmos, the largest system of all, is not beyond corruption is a very modern notion.

4) Warhammer 40k: The super-heroic space marines of the Warhammer universe are beset on all sides by terrible aliens, yet the worst threats to the Empire are from within. The traitor marines who have sold their souls to the Chaos Gods, the various  mutants, cultists, and rebels that eat at the foundation of the Empire are evidence of one type of corruption. The corruption of the imperial bureaucracy is another constant theme in the lore, a massive uncaring machine with the power to casually consign whole worlds to death, and a dead god-emperor at its heart.

5) Howard/Conan: Conan is the incorruptible savage, immune to the decadence that comes with civilization. The idea that civilization itself is corrupt is a slightly older paradigm that has been rejected because cities are cool, but it is fair to say that if you see a civilized man in Conan, he is likely a bad guy or just useless.

One of the more interesting uses of monsters in Fantasy is as a metaphor for corruption. Jordan’s Trollocs are corrupt science, Monsanto making soldiers. Tolkien’s orcs are actually horribly twisted elves, victims of endless brutalization that turns them into brutes themselves. 40k’s Tyranids could serve as a metaphor for many things with their endless need to consume and absorb everything in their path. Fantasy monsters are ripe for this kind of metaphor since having them be a corrupted version of something else makes them a little more terrifying. Perhaps that’s why we love zombies and vampires.

In the end corruption is a theme that binds modern fantasy together; from a crumbling Wall in Westeros that should get more attention than it does, to a ring that promises power while whispering doom.

Teaser Tuesday

Making eye contact with any Chosen, let alone one of Moltar’s reputation, was considered unwise. Only fools draw the attention of the powerful. Gavin met the man’s gaze, unflinching, for just a moment, before purposefully looking down. In truth he was glad to look away, the Chosen’s gaze was fearsome.

“Perceptive,” said the Chosen. “Although you are perhaps overeager to show it. You gain nothing but a moment’s pleasure by showing me that you know…”

This is a sliver of a conversation that takes place in the last half of Bloodlust: Will to Power. Gavin is invited to converse with Chosen Moltar while watching a rabble match at the Killer’s Circle. I’m still not happy with it. Moltar is a character who is quoted a fair bit, but I want the readers to get a better sense of what drives him.

I don’t like the idea of Moltar being a non-causal Villain.

woodcut_sandstone

This is a projected cover for Bloodlust: Will to Power

experiment2b

Another potential cover art piece

Writer’s Intent, (Non) Causality, and Orson Scott Card

TM: You have written that “good artists do their best to sustain that which is good though their art, and call for the correction of that which is destructive of happiness.” Can you give examples of how your work tries to accomplish that mission?

OSC: I don’t consciously attempt to do any such thing. I’m not prescribing in that statement, I’m merely describing. Without any conscious thought at all, artists select the subject and the medium, the matter and the manner of their art. The very choices they make declare what they value and believe to be important. Artists are at their least effective when they try to make conscious statements through their art (they’re always free to write essays to make their case); the conscious statements are as obvious and empty and ineffective as “Rosebud,” while the unconscious statements are powerful because they are rarely noticed by the audience even as they have their effects. Orson Scott Card, Author of Ender’s Game and famed writing teacher, as interviewed my The Millions. Read the full interview here.

I like this cover best.

Orson Scott Card is an interesting figure. His political views, especially on homosexuality, are very controversial. Despite this his famed work Ender’s Game remains an enduring science-fiction classic. He is also well known for his books on writing and his writer’s boot camps. I first encountered Mr Card’s writing as a young man in this capacity, reading his book, How to Write Science Fiction and Fantasy, as soon as the local library could procure a copy. A few of my favorites among new Fantasy authors have string ties to Mr Card.

I find myself wanting to like him, and yet often annoyed when I read something he writes these days. It reminds me of Frank Miller, actually. I love his stuff, too, but anything he comes up with now seems like a salute to fascism and xenophobia.

The idea that a writer’s culture influences their work is hardly controversial, although it does lead to all sorts of sloppy critique in modern day. The environment that we are raised is responsible for a great deal of our knowledge and language skills. It certainly influences our writing. Every book has some level of unconscious subtext, which can be examined and analyzed for additional insight. In some cases this insight is more interesting than the content of the novel.  I do take exception to the idea that an artist is at their least effective when they try to make conscious statements through their art, however.

The modern novel is a child of the Enlightenment. The best and most enduring writers of the western tradition have generally been those who make conscious statements. Dickens is a good example. It seems odd to me to say that the obvious and conscious statements of Oliver Twist and A Christmas Carol are in any way diminished or ineffective, despite being purposeful. A skilled rhetorician might try to argue that Dickens was mostly an inspired  product of his culture expressing the zeitgeist of the moment, but this argument seems hollow. Dicken’s novels are very purposeful and the narrative is strongly crafted to purposefully carry his statement to the reader. The structure is the key here: what separates modern novel from the romances of the middle ages, and many novels that are still written following that tradition is the emphasis on causality to deliver a powerful message to the reader.

Take A Christmas Carol as an example. The structure moves from cause to effect. We are introduced to Scrooge, a miserly, but wealthy man. He is puposefully and obviously unlikable to almost every human being I have met, a crafted caricature purposefully created to illustrate a point. Scrooge really isn’t left open to reader interpretation, as one might expect from an unconsciously created character. He is ruthlessly pared down, the form of a miser, given just enough life to seem human and nothing more. Every scene in the book works towards Dicken’s purposeful statements about greed and happiness, his refutation of the culture of poverty that gripped his time. The story is exceptionally structured and consciously so. Scrooge is visited by a succession of Ghosts, starting with his recently deceased partner, followed by the three ghosts of Christmas: Past, Present, and Future  in an effort to show him the error of his ways by showing him the outcome of his life’s decisions. Causality rules this tale, which never wavers from its statement.

The success of Dicken’s approach can be measured in how few outlying interpretations of his work exist. Very few readers (some of them purposefully obstinate), deviate from the point that Dickens was trying to get across.

There are some interesting unconscious elements that can be examined, especially in the religious and pagan symbols used, but these are secondary. One can alter the symbols (which is often done in modern day) and the story remains essentially the same and successfully convey’s the authors points as strongly as it did when it was first written.

A more complex example would be Victor Hugo’s Les Miserables. Hugo brilliantly contrasts God as the causal act of Kindness that turned Valjean into a good man with the non-causal ideology of Javert and the broken Justice system that birthed him. Valjean’s story is purely causal. He serves his prison term, and is unable to find work. He steals from the priest because of his anger and desperation. The priest, who believes in redemption and compassion, forgives him and lies to the police to give Valjean as second chance. All of Valjean’s actions in the book stem from this single pivotal moment, from his adoption of Fantine’s daughter to his return to Paris to save the man who is mistaken for him from death. This is a purposeful vehicle for a statement. The causal structure is too tight to be otherwise. The second story in the book, that of Javert, acts as a counterweight to Valjean’s tale. Javert believes in fate, that the end of a man’s tale is determined at the beginning (written in the stars above, by God). Javert’s view of the world is exceptionally ordered, but non-causal. When he is finally, irrefutably confronted with proof of Valjean’s redemption, after Valjean returns to barricades to save him, Javert commits suicide. He cannot reconcile his belief with reality, because his belief is not based on cause and effect, it is based on a broken ideology that has given birth to a grotesque system that requires him to persecute men like Valjean, even after they have been reformed. It is a brilliant juxtaposition of the causal with the fate-driven and it serves the novel too well to be unconscious; it is an obvious statement on the part of Hugo.

These two novels are undeniably effective. You could swap out the characters and the cultural elements in both and they would convey the purposeful elements just as strongly and effectively. The modern novel has a strong history as a vehicle for rational critique that goes far beyond making unconscious statements in the right hands. It seems beyond refute that some writers are consciously able to use a powerful, purposeful, causal structure to make a strong statement that stands the test of time and interpretation.

Still, perhaps in his own case, Orson Scott Card is correct. He lets his unconscious mind dictate the flow of his works. Some authors seem to stumble upon brilliance in this manner. Perhaps Orson Scott Card truly has tapped some deep well of culture. I cannot gainsay this technique  in the case of Ender’s Game. I just wonder if that work has a powerful impact because of Mr Scott or in spite of him.

Just because a psychic makes an accurate prediction now and then, doesn’t mean that they can actually see the future…