|Posted on Tuesday, May 17, 2005 - 04:24 am: |
Drop by and look at the timeline of Sword and Sorcery, Sword and Planet, and Swashbucklers. Penned by the talented Ryan Harvey, it's a thumbnail history of the genres and their major moments.
Howard A. Jones
|Posted on Tuesday, May 17, 2005 - 06:26 am: |
Gave it a look over. Interesting. Thanks.
|Posted on Tuesday, May 17, 2005 - 06:34 am: |
I think Steven Erikson and Glen Cook should be added to the timeline, for the Malazan and Black Company books. While they're epic in scope, the dark grittiness is more along the lines of Sword & Sorcery then High Fantasy. I haven't really read much by Cook, but he's influenced writers like Erikson who are at the leading edge of the genre.
|Posted on Tuesday, May 17, 2005 - 07:00 am: |
Also, where's Gormenghast? Do you think it'd fit?
|Posted on Tuesday, May 17, 2005 - 07:29 am: |
Thank you for your suggestions. I don't really think Gormenghast is a fit on the sword and sorcery scale. Peake may very well have invented his own genre. (Dickensian fantasy? The only thing I can think of that comes close is Stoddard's THE HIGH HOUSE.)
We'll probably hold off adding Steven Erikson and Glen Cook for a bit to this page--this is a thumbnail history, and we're trying to keep it to major movements. It may be that those guys are on to something, and the future years will tell. You'll also note that VIROCONIUM isn't on there, nor is Zelazny's Amber series and a host of other important things...
We're working on another page that's dedicated to authors that should address all of this. It's a time consuming process, so it may be a few months yet before it goes up.
|Posted on Tuesday, May 17, 2005 - 08:33 am: |
Yeah, I was going to mention M. John Harrison's Viroconium too (which I still haven't read, but will someday). Didn't think of Amber.
|Posted on Tuesday, May 17, 2005 - 07:03 pm: |
isn't the epic in scope stuff kind of what removes something from being sword and sorcery? i've been talking about it, oddly, on my blog, and i know a lot of people aren't quite sure what makes S&S apart from fantasy. you can check it here if you want http://benpeek.livejournal.com/323453.html
reckon your time frame misses all the role playing books such as forgotten realms and the like. the quality isn't hot in them, i know, but it's where sword and sorcery has ended, imho.
|Posted on Wednesday, May 18, 2005 - 04:33 am: |
Take a peek at the main page of the site, where I've tried to define sword and sorcery broadly, and poke through some of the articles pages, where several contributors discuss definitions and the history of the genre. It sounds like we've got pretty much the same viewpoint.
As to your suggestion, I'll consider that one. Ryan does mention D and D and the novels that come from it. I'd argue that the D and D novel often isn't real sword and sorcery--magic comes too easily, for one thing. Still, might be worth a mention.
I think s and s for the most part (aside from Gemmel and one or two others) has had to go to the small press. That's the only place I've really been able to find it over the last ten years. That means that there's a lot of crud published alongside it (and in it), but I do find some gems from time to time.
|Posted on Sunday, August 12, 2007 - 03:35 am: |
I will take a look too. Thanks