Fantasy...

Are there any more stories about witches and wizards to tell, now that the Harry Potter series have pushed the "genre" to mainstream, to such new heights and visibilities?

I guess there have always been stories about magical people, and there will always be. The question is, how do you make it fresh and new, so that people don't roll their eyes and say, "Oh no, not another wizard story, Harry Potter rip-off."

What about Terry Pratchett?

When I think wizards I tend to think of Pratchett's Unseen Uni and Rincewind the Wizzard. I guess I'm too old for the Harry Potter universe, although Diana Wynne Jones remains a favourite.

I think the secret to a wizard would be having a believable, coherent world of magic - you know, rules that work all the time. I guess the risk is that you inadvertently "borrow" other authors' rules for their magic worlds.

I find fantasy world building hard work - I tried an historical novel (unpublished) and it was much easier because I had something concrete to start from. The fact that Rowling has been so incredibly successful in creating a world everyone wants to visit doesn't put me off trying to create my own fantasy world, but it does make me envious.

Jenny

Re: What about Terry Pratchett?

I think there are... at least I hope so. I'm attempting to write one :grin

Usually the first author I recommend to people reading the Potter books is John Bellairs - the man who started me on the path to writing in the first place.

Re: What about Terry Pratchett?

|I Who knows?

A Harry Potter fan will be the one to point out your book is a "ripoff." A LOTR fan will tell you Rowling ripped off Tolkien. This just goes back to those "8 plotlines." How you do it is up to you (and yeah, I'm totally ignoring your final question because I don't know [and if I did I'd have a killer book so I would tell you! :lol ]) except just don't use the Tolkien cliches - but you knew that.

But actually, because HP made fantasy more mainstream, I think it's helped the genre and other authors be more successful. As much as something might be similar, people tend to seek out what they know they like rather than something new. I don't know anything about that "Eragon" book or the author, so I might just be sticking my foot in my mouth, but would it be as popular if Harry Potter didn't precede it?

So... good luck? (Save some for me.)

Re: What about Terry Pratchett?

When I was younger it was all 'the Wizard of Earthsea', 'The Dark Moon Rising Trilogy' and a bunch of others. Even now there is Tamora Pierce and others. I would hate to see the whole genre retrospectively defined as belong to Rowling. I am not one of her many fans and I often see things attributed to her that shouldn't be (i.e. in the guardian a reviewer said she 'invented' the hippogryph).

I guess there have always been stories about magical people, and there will always be. The question is, how do you make it fresh and new, so that people don't roll their eyes and say, "Oh no, not another wizard story, Harry Potter rip-off."

Click to expand...

Magic is a plot mechanism, not a plot in and of itself. Jim MacDonald recently posted a number of movies that were adaptations of the exact same story. Another, classic, example of this is The Seven Samurai and Guns of the Magnificient Seven. You could easily go off and write Seven Magnificent Mages, which is a retelling of the same story, but where the heroes use magic instead of swords or guns.

That would have no recognizeable similarity to Rowling's stories, which are coming-of-age stories with a backdrop of magic. But people would say that you DID rip off Kurasawa. Because that's what they say about the western version.

It is when the genre features become the plot that an author is being gimmicky. Science dominates science fiction, the method of the murder dominates the murder mystery, the fantasy setting dominates the fantasy novel. Books need to tell stories. The setting is flavor and spice.

I'm writing a story inspired by the Lord Byron quote: "Power tends to corrupt. Absolute power corrupts absolutely." It's an old message and has been an element of a vast number of stories. I'm taking it into the fantasy realm and presenting the dangers of having personal power. I'm using magic as my source of power because I can make magic behave any way I want. If I want to demonstrate a character's mood with magical auras, I can do that.

I could easily rewrite the story such that it's about a reporter who gains privileged knowledge, making her powerful. She would then have to decide what to do with that newfound power. I wouldn't be able to use the crutches of magic, which permit me to write about metaphors as physical things, but I'd still be able to present the same points. Because of the characters.

So don't sweat it. Find a story that you want to tell, set it in a fantasy world that can carry your story and go write it.

JB

Most of the fantasy fiction I've read, even when it does have witches and wizards, is nothing like Harry Potter - it would never occur to me. I don't even find her books particularly fantastical (I know, I know, it's just my opinion, ok?).

What I found frustrating about the HP success is that people were treating the series like the first (children's) fantasy book ever.

Le Guin's Earthsea and Wynne Jones' Chrestomanci series both use similar elements, and were written earlier (and I like them better ). Fantasy as a genre has been around for hundreds of years (depending on you define it) and much of it is completely different to Wizards at School.

There are no new stories - but lots of different ways to tell old ones. I'm sure some people will try and rip Potter off. Others however, will write about witches and wizards (and schools!) and write a different, and maybe even better, story.

I think there will always be new worlds and new ideas. I think Orson Scott Cards tells how to come up with new worlds best in his book How to Write Science Fiction and Fantasy. Great read!

I don't find Rowling particularly original. Schools for magic are nothing new. In fact most of the elements in the books (as far as I can say without having read them all) fall into the "nothing new" category.

I guess she just put it all together in an appealing way, and it caught on.

I think you go about making a fantasy novel fresh and new just the way you would go about making anything fresh and new. Put your own twists in, add your own perspective, don't use elements that are obviously stolen (disguise it! ).


Jenny-

I tried an historical novel (unpublished) and it was much easier because I had something concrete to start from.

Click to expand...

That is funny because I find the exact opposite to be true for me. Historical fiction is tons harder for me because of all the research! With fantasy I can just make it all up.

This is a bit off topic, but I figure someone around here might have an answer. While watching "5 Days 'Til Midnight" on Sci-Fi (a pretty good story, incidentally), I saw previews for a December miniseries called "EarthSea". Does anybody know if it's based on the book?

I believe it is based on the book. I'm really looking forward to it - just hope they can do it justice!

I would have said that the main interest in Harry Potter is not the "Wizard at school" part of the plot, but the "One boy against overwhelming odds" underlying plot that runs through the series. In a sense, the idea of "Wizard at school" is as much set dressing as the fantasy genre; it's a subgenre rather than necessarily a plot in and of itself. The "Wizard at school" subgenre shapes what events happen, but not the shape of the plot itself, if that makes sense.

Compare and contrast with "The Worst Witch" by Jill Murphy, where Mildred Hubble deals with being the most incompetant witch in her year, but still saves the day; or "Equal Rites" by Terry Pratchett, where Eskarina Smith has to fight against gender stereotypes of magic from both sexes in order to get her place at Unseen University.

In a sense, the idea of "Wizard at school" is as much set dressing as the fantasy genre; it's a subgenre rather than necessarily a plot in and of itself. The "Wizard at school" subgenre shapes what events happen, but not the shape of the plot itself, if that makes sense.

Click to expand...

Do you mean for the adults or for the kids? I asked my pre-teen nieces what was so enjoyable about the Harry Potter books and I was told "The magic!"

It's just simple fun that kids can identify with. The school-and-friends aspect makes it applicable to their lives, and the magic is pure entertainment (a bit like having funky new video games). You've got sports and other physical activities for the boys, the social setting of the school for the girls, and the more complex themes ("One Against the World", "Man of Destiny", "Loyalty of Friends", etc) for the adults.

Rowling found a sweet spot by keeping it easy to read and by hitting on basic themes. We're all so busy trying to find our edgy twist on reality that we missed the value of a good old-fashioned wholesome yarn.

Now we'll be inundated with old-fashioned wholesome yarns and the edgy stuff will find new appeal

JB

I would have said that the main interest in Harry Potter is not the "Wizard at school" part of the plot, but the "One boy against overwhelming odds" underlying plot that runs through the series.

Click to expand...

That's what makes up a fantasy story, basically. There are very few original fantasy stories, if you look at it that way. Because it is almost always the "one person against overwhelming odds". The "Wizard at school", while not original at all, is still a plot that makes the "one person against overwhelming odds" into a slightly more original story.

_-_-_-_-_-_

:hail
Hail to fantasy

Maestrowork wrote:

Are there any more stories about witches and wizards to tell, now that the Harry Potter series have pushed the "genre" to mainstream, to such new heights and visibilities?

Click to expand...

You're joking, right? That's like the old saw (probably false) that there was once a call to close down the U.S. Patent Office in the 19th century because "everything useful had already been invented."


Have Fun,
- Steve Eley

maestro,

In answer to your question...

Of course! I'm writing it now. When my novel is finally published, then you can ask that question. :ha

Ruth

Yeshanu, is that what you've posted on the 'share' forum? Best of luck! :thumbs

You're joking, right?

Click to expand...

And Steve, I think maest's question was more in reference on how to top and compete with Harry Potter, especially when Rowling has integrated so many of the known (and unknown) fantasy symbols/ideology into her tale. She's gobbled them all up and left none for us! :lol

No, the share forum piece was just a short-short. No, I have a real novel in progress... :grin

What amazes me most about HP is the wide age readership that enjoys it. My three-year-old daughter and 4-year-old son loved it and older people I know loved it too. I wish I'd manage to write a book for such a wide readership.

Another thing is the 'wow' factor. Something that amazes you, it tickles your toes and then it stays with you for some time. I thoroughly enjoyed Philip Pullman's Dark Materials too. The creation of that 'wow' factor is the one that puzzles me most.

Harry potter are great books. I love them more than any book in the world, second only to LOTR.
The themes of coming of age, boy against impossible odds and all that are older than books themselves, and school stories, and magic stories are really old elements to. In fact the idea that HP is origional is laughable. There is a book by Jane Yolen called wizards hall that was published 5-6 years before HP, and is a wizards school story where a boy faces impossible odds. It is very similar.

You can name any number of books that Rowling "ripped off" but everyone ripps off everyone else, weather they have even read the book they're "ripping off" or not. J.K. Rowling is popular because she's a good writter. She makes it believable and you can relate to her Characters.
In Jane Yolen's book, her world is not really believable, and you can't relate to her characters in the same way you do to Rowlings. It's a good book, but not popular material.

-Ally

Re: What about Terry Pratchett?

(i.e. in the guardian a reviewer said she 'invented' the hippogryph).

Click to expand...

Wow, there's someone who's fact checker was sleeping on the job. And something like that is so easy to check on. I happened across it myself doing research on Greek myths for my WIP.

new

"Are there any more stories about witches and wizards to tell, now that the Harry Potter series have pushed the "genre" to mainstream, to such new heights and visibilities?"

Writers asked the same question after Tolkien. For most writers, the answer is "no." For the rest, those with enough talent and imagination, the answer is always "Yes." There's always something new to write. But no one ever said being both good and original was easy. It's simply up to your imagination and talent to find that new take on something, and write in in a way that makes people want to read it.

I do think Harry Potter is highly original. Just because schools for wizards have been done before doesn't mean a thing. No one has done it in quite the same way, or nearly as well, as Rowling.

Inspired by John Belairs

I read "The Figure in the Shadows" when I was in the third grade. I stuck with me and inspired me to write. I now own every book he and Brad Strickland have written and I still re-read these "classics" often. I'm so glad to hear that someone else has read these, too.

-Elyse

Re: Inspired by John Belairs

About the wide age range of Harry Potter fans--

Once I was sitting at the light rail station reading a Harry Potter book. The gray-haired gentleman sitting near me kept looking at me, which made me uncomfortable, and looking at my book. I thought perhaps he thought it odd that a middle-aged woman was reading a child's fantasy, but I finally looked over at him, and he saw the cover of my book and began to laugh. Then he showed me the cover of his.

Harry Potter.

In fact, I've seen more adults reading HP books than kids.

I'm definitely a fan of Harry's. Yes, Rowling used elements that have been used before. And they'll be used again. You could just as easily argue that we fantasy writers are cribbing off the Arthurian tales, or The Odyssey, or any mythology book you can find. The boy wizard, unaware of his heritage, who finds himself pitted against some great evil, has been done and redone. Rowling took traditional elements and wrote engaging tales, as others before her have done, and as others will again.

I'm surprised no one has mentioned Lloyd Alexanders Black Cauldron series. Or Alan Garner's Weirdstone of Brisingamen and Moon of Gomrath. If you haven't, go pick them up. They're great.

Re: Inspired by John Belairs

I have many adult friends who love HP books. I personally find them (at least the first two which I read) a little too juvenile for me. They're good YA fiction, but not quite adult enough for me. I enjoyed them to an extent, then I lost interest.

I haven't read the third or forth... but the third movie was pretty good.