Fantasy: When does an author go too far?

When it's another genre. Then the author has cross the line over into another genre. It's as simple as that. If you're asking some sort of moral/aestethical boundary then it has to do with sales IMHO. If it gets published and sells then it aparently is fine.

When the underlying premise lacks any consistancy because the author decides that 'this will happen because I need it to happen' rather than 'this will happen because that is how X works in my setting and here is the reason why...'., In other words, avoiding using your 'magic flangebeast' to solve the plot by some Deus ex machinae methodology...

I agree with areteus. However, that's pretty much it.

I haven't read the Twilight books. I don't intend to. But, when my wife watched the movies, I was right there with her (for obvious reasons). The author didn't 'ruin' the vampire concept. She twisted it - which is perfectly fine. If an author just gives you the same old thing, what's the point in reading her stuff? If you don't like it, that's fine too. Don't read it.

I don't dislike Eddings, even though he didn't write about the same dwarves and elves that Tolkien wrote about. People have imaginations. Let them be used.

Remember, vampires don't actually exist. You can write or prefer what you want.

DrZoidberg said:

When it's another genre.

Click to expand...

There are a few specific instances which I can think of where a change of genre after a couple of books has been the salvation of a series (moreso graphic novels than prose, but the point is still valid). When a successful series changes tack mid-novel, then it becomes a problem, but I see each installment as a potential new genre anyways. Some series tread the line between genres to begin with, so moving more towards, say, horror for a specific book (or any other genre) is well within the remit of the author.

As an addendum to that point, the change of genre can often be more popular with readers than the original - who here remembers Fist Of The North Star before it was a post-apocalyptic franchise? It wasn't always set in the irradiated wastelands. Similarly, the television series The Wire went from a (arguably) procedural police show in the first season, to become much, much more in later seasons. Genre-jumping is fine if you know what you are doing.

Matiasve said:

Alot of people dont like 'twilight' (including me) because it pretty much ruins the whole vampire concept.

Click to expand...

Not to derail this but- I didn't like Twilight because I considered the writing to be terrible- just terrible- I had no objection to SM twisting the Vampire thing-in fact I thought it showed great imagination- yeah ok I didn't buy the sparkles- but still not the reason I didn't like it-

I don't think there is a thing as taking it too far in fantasy- it's sort of required isn't it?

When they spell 'a lot' as one word.

To seriously answer your question, it only goes too far when your readers are no longer willing to suspend disbelief.

You can do that in the way the world is created or by having impractical rules in your worlds that conflict with each. Those are the two most common ones I've come across.

A book can't ruin a concept, it can just do something with it that doesn't interest you.

If Stephanie Meyer crossed a line I want to know where that line is and the location of the nearest crossing.

Matiasve said:

Regarding Fantasy books:

When does an author crosses the line?


For example:

A lot of people dont like 'twilight' (including me) because it pretty much ruins the whole vampire concept.

What else could make alot of people hate a book?

Click to expand...

But a lot of people liked Twilight too. This really just comes down to personal tastes.

But the Deus ex machinae thing feels like cheating to me.

ETA: tjwriter that link was awesome. I love Alots.

I think the best fantasy novels have a very well defined set of physical laws. That is to say, magic and mythical creatures are fine, but they need rules. That's one thing I give Eddings great credit for, his magic obeyed some of the basic laws of our universe. You can't create or destroy energy/matter, all you can do is make it change states.

The author doesn't have to explain the rules, but I think they should know the boundaries in their own mind.

Meyer wrote about fairies and called them vampires.

Now how about you quote the other person in this thread who referenced that point?

There is no too far, just different directions.

I'd rather read a story where an author picked one, acted as tour guide and took me on an interesting journey than one where the author is constantly changing course before leaving it to the satnav to get me there.

If they want to drive past a few sparkly vampires then I'll accept a few stops I don't like if the destination is worth it, if they want to drive over a few sparkly vampires I might go on their next tour too.

The whole twilight thing is a bit strange to me. I'm a big fan of Mark Kermode's film reviews and he defends it by saying that something appealing predominantly to a young female audience isn't a problem because there's nothing wrong with writing something for a young female audience. I happen to be oldish, cynical and male so I quietly ignore twilight and it quietly ignores me.


Craig

lbender said:

I agree with areteus. However, that's pretty much it.

I haven't read the Twilight books. I don't intend to. But, when my wife watched the movies, I was right there with her (for obvious reasons). The author didn't 'ruin' the vampire concept. She twisted it - which is perfectly fine. If an author just gives you the same old thing, what's the point in reading her stuff? If you don't like it, that's fine too. Don't read it.

I don't dislike Eddings, even though he didn't write about the same dwarves and elves that Tolkien wrote about. People have imaginations. Let them be used.

Remember, vampires don't actually exist. You can write or prefer what you want.

Click to expand...

I agree, I don't think Meyer ruined the image. There is no such thing as vamps, therefore we can make them do anything we want!

As for ruining a book, I hate convenient endings. I read a book once where it looked like the MC and her man would surely die. Instead, the most powerful vamp in the world just happened to be in the area, and just happened to sense the male, thus getting there in time to save his life.....huh? If you knew there was no other way to save him, why'd you put him in the situation?

Christyp said:

As for ruining a book, I hate convenient endings. I read a book once where it looked like the MC and her man would surely die. Instead, the most powerful vamp in the world just happened to be in the area, and just happened to sense the male, thus getting there in time to save his life.....huh? If you knew there was no other way to save him, why'd you put him in the situation?

Click to expand...

Deus ex machina

As the OP said, he isn't a native speaker, and making jibes, or sarcastic comments, isn't helpful, from any member. And I'm not referencing anyone in particular here, just a general comment that would go in any forum that has new members asking questions, who may not be native speaker/writers of the English language.

So let's keep this thread on topic, please, with relevant and helpful replies.

Not Fantasy (well, arguably) but I think the Mission Impossible movie crossed the line when it made Jim the villain. That was a serious betrayal.

Boston Steve said:

Deus ex machina

Click to expand...

Um, yeah. I guess I should've looked up this phrase before replying.

I was an editor for a couple of years for a paranormal romance line at a small romance epub. I saw a lot of submissions and I can tell you that quite often writers will open their stories with a character waking from a dream or nightmare, followed by the character looking into a mirror or other reflective surface and describing their looks.

I've even read this type of opening in published novels -- but no matter how well-written they are, they still seem a cliche' to me.

I also think the author crosses the line when they seem to be stunt writing--impressive sentences thrown into otherwise humdrum work. I like it when they are consistent (Elizabeth Peters) in their awesome sentence structure, not just throwing in some great sentences here and there (Patrick Rothfuss). Just my opinion.

You know, I'm seeing more and more threads in here that are discussions, not requests for expertise or research.

Matiasve, you might want to start this discussion in the Science Fiction/Fantasy forum. I could port this there, but given the thread is half derailed already I think you're better to start afresh.