Fantasy Elements #4: Chosen Ones

It's been a while since I've done a Fantasy Elements post, but you can find the rest of them here.

Chosen Ones: that fantasy staple that enough to set fans cheering wildly and opponents tearing out their hair - or the pages of the book, if they get a choice in the matter. What are they, and why do they engender so much controversy?

According to the all-knowing Urban Dictionary, this is the definition of a Chosen One:

Can also known as "The One". A common cliche in sci-fi and fantasy. This individual, the "Chosen One" is the sole person chosen by destiny to stop an impending disaster that threatens all life, save the world from a super villian, stop corruption, etc. Basically, the only person who can save the day. Not their sidekick(s). Not mom. Not Dan. Only them.

Okay. So Chosen Ones are cliches, and cliches are bad, right? Sure, but before we blindly go throwing around words like this, it's good to know why. After all, most things only became cliches because they worked, and hello, something are still going strong even though they've been done long enough to be a cliche - only they reached that mystical status of 'classic' instead.

Hence, Chosen Ones: The Good, The Bad and The Ugly.

The Good

Chosen Ones, I propose, rose to popularity because they're the ultimate metaphor of something we all desire. They're the scrawny little kid who everyone picked last for sport who ended up being Special somehow and got to Save The World. They're the person who everyone thought was no one, until it turned out they were the one.

Chosen Ones give us hope that anyone can be special, that one person can save the world, that larger things than us - Fate, destiny, prophecies - are guiding us, and that no matter how much we might personally suck, if we're meant to be a hero, we will be.

That's kind of comforting, because it means it doesn't matter how individually talented we are; if we're supposed to do something, then somehow, mystically, it'll all work out and we will.

But that brings us to...

The Bad

Chosen Ones became a cliche, not a classic. Why? Because modern readers need modern characters. While in ages past (and in some genres present) characters could get away with being passive, most readers demand now that main characters stand up and Do Things. Make Choices. Take control of their own lives.

This is a pretty good thing for us to learn, too: that we can take charge of our lives, that destiny needn't rule us, and it still supports the idea that anyone can do anything if they only try hard enough (hey, we are talking fiction here).

Which is the main problem with Chosen Ones: they don't have to try hard. They don't, in fact, have to do anything. The prophecy dictates they will save the world, and lo! they shall, often with minimal fuss on their part and with no active decision. Chosen Ones don't do things; things happen to them. Okay, that might be kind of nice in Real Life - sit back and do nothing and a handsome sparkly vampire stranger will come and save the day for you, because you are Speshul and the Chosen One.

Passive main characters: not so fun in any form.

BUT.

Chosen Ones: inevitable?

The Ugly

Here's the interesting thing, though. I had this discussion once with my husband, who's not much a reader and isn't really into fantasy, and his counterargument made me thing.

The Boyful One proposes that ALL characters are chosen ones. We as the author choose them; it's their story we tell, not anyone else's. They ARE special in some way, or there'd be no story to tell. You can't escape 'chosen ones' if you write a story about someone.

I agree. A character has to be 'special' in some way in order for you to write about them. They don't have to be passive, though.

So while the 'ugly' is that even those who hate Chosen Ones are writing chosen ones, at least we can differentiate (by the use of handy capitals, yay!) between active MCs, chosen ones who are special but who take charge of their actions, and Chosen Ones, who have decisions about their actions made for them.

I know which I'd rather read about. You?

Fantasy Elements #3: Good Versus Evil

It's an interesting dilemma, one that all fantasy writers - if not all writers - have to deal with at some point or other. Good. Evil. Where's the line? What's the difference? And how do we deal with that in our writing?

Conventionally, the MCs are the Good Guys. People who oppose their aims are the Bad Guys. Good Guys win. Bad Guys lose.

I have an entire series that plays with this idea; it was my first novel, though, so it's not as deep as it could be, and I can't wait to sink my teeth back into it and ask and answer some of these questions.

Because that's just the thing: it isn't all as simple as that.

Maybe it was, once - in writing, if not in life. Maybe there was a time when you could get away with straw villains and two-dimensionality.

But that time is not now. Now we are post-post-modern. Now we ask questions like, "Is evil really evil? Is my evil your evil? Can we make judgements about someone else's evilness? Is there objective evilness?"

Which all means that our work has to be a lot deeper, a lot more textured - a lot closer, in many ways, to reality. The world isn't black and white, and neither should our writing be. There should be shades of grey, areas where the boundaries aren't clearly defined, where everyone's maybe acting in the way that they think best, and they're trying to do some good but doing it badly, or even trying to do some bad but doing that badly so they end up doing good. Villains should be as motivated as heros.

Heros should be motivated.

Things happen for a reason; people get entangled because they Believe In Things, whether that's God, the Universe, or Themselves. Or even Mice. 42.

It's my opinion that the most interesting stories are those that happen in the grey; they're the gritty stories, the edgy stories, the stories that leave us slightly uncomfortable with either the way things are, the way things were, or the way they someday might be. They make us think about ourselves, our lives, our culture - our own stories.

But on the other hand, sometimes evil is just evil. And black-and-white stories - like archetypal stories, like fairytales - serve a great purpose also. They remind us, in our post-post-modern world of relativity, that some things just are; that some things probably aren't subjective; that we pretty much agree on basic standards of human decency.

They remind us of the things we need to protect.

And the grey stories remind us of just how hard that can be, both to protect what needs protecting, and to decide on what needs protecting in the first place.

I'm curious: Which type of stories are you more likely to read? Which are you more likely to write? Why?

Fantasy Elements #2: In Defence of Fantasy

Warning: This is a rant, and contains religious references. Deal, or skip this post return on Monday :P O:) And should you happen to be interested, here's my first defence of fantasy, where I explain one of the reasons why I love the fantasy genre.

Fantasy is evil. Fantasy is the spawn of the devil. Fantasy is inherently immoral, amoral, anti-moral, and wrong.

Gah, how comments like these make my blood boil, particularly when issuing from the mouth of religious leaders or religious people. Yes, this happened a couple of days ago :)

So why, exactly, does this get me riled?

Mostly, I think, because it displays a tremendous amount of ignorance and narrow-mindedness.

First off, 'fantasy' is just a genre. Genres have defining features, but underneath, they're all stories. So why is 'fantasy' so much more evil than anything else?

Apparently the primary issue is magic. At least, I assume it must be, because what other difference are there? Setting? Nope, see sci fi and historical, or alternate historical. Character? Well, some people are good, and some are bad, but that's the same in all genres. Plot? Yeah, sure, some fantasy plots are so cliched they might as well be evil, but really, that's not fair...

So it must be magic.

But here's the deal: magic is a thing. Things can't, in and of themselves, be evil. Things can be used for evil - but they are not themselves evil. Notions of good and evil is a people thing. Not a thing thing.

Secondly, stories are written by people, and people have beliefs, and those beliefs seep through into their writing. Sure, some fantasy is atheistic; but wow, so is a heck of a lot of non-fantasy, and you know what? It's to do with who wrote it, not what genre they wrote it in.

And a heck of lot of fantasy is religious. A lot of it's even Christian. Fantasy writers are the devil's tools, are they? Great. Tell that to J.R.R. Tolkien, founding father of the entire freakin' genre, whose Christian themes and allegories abound, or to C.S. Lewis, arguably one of the greatest and most prolific Christian writers of the century.

Yup. Fantasy's evil. Darn that Narnia, and it's allegorical Aslan.

Not to mention, if we're going to be blunt and truthful about it, the Bible. Prophecies that come true? Dreams of the future? Allegories and strange visions of fantastic beasts that don't exist in our reality? Come on, that's not fantasy?? Not to mention the ultimate Chosen One, and - le gasp - magic. Yes, magic. Hello, water to wine, anyone? Healing the sick? Raising people from the dead?!

(Hmm, interesting doctrinal point: Is God the ultimate necromancer? Or is necromancy by definition the raising of the dead to an unlife, rather than to life?)

And finally, the ignorance. The people that disparage fantasy so emphatically seem to have little conception of what fantasy really is (see number two above). Apparently, it's only fantasy novels that are evil, and even then only ones written in the last century or two. If it's old enough to be called a myth or a fairytale, apparently it's fine. Cinderella? Yup, that's a pretty evil story. The Little Tin Soldier? Oo, terrible story, that one.

Not to mention Disney. So, it's evil of novelists to write stories that involve magic, but Disney is a happy, fun, family-friendly, movie-making company (heh, actual evils of the company itself aside %-))? Let me get this straight: The Wheel of Time, Narnia, the Lord of the Rings, Song of Ice and Fire, the Farseers, and so forth, are evil, but The Lion King, Suddenly 30, Aladdin, Beauty and the Beast, and Toy Story are not?

Riiiiight.

I'd like to end by saying - People, before you try to take a swing at me for writing fantasy, you'd better be damn sure what you're actually swinging against - but since most of the people to whom that applies won't ever read this, is there really any point? :P

So, tell me dear faithful readers: What genres do you write in, and do you ever cop any flak over it? Are you perfectly happy to tell anyone who asks, "Yes, I'm a writer, and I write blah genre!", or do you hedge around the edges, mumbling non-committal responses in the hopes that they'll go away and that once, just this once, you won't get flamed for your writing preferences?

(Okay, so I've never actually been flamed, as such, and I've been pleasantly surprised a few times by a supportive response. But the point remains :D)

Fantasy Elements #1: 'True' Language

It's been a while since I posted articles in the Story Elements and Fantasy Elements series, but I thought it was high time to dredge them up again and continue :) So today, the whole concept of true names and language.

There's a lot of emphasis in the fantasy genre as a whole on words and language. You have magic systems based on words, you have made-up languages that embody the culture of the people who speak them - and you have names. Often, you have True Names, which are different from ordinary, everyday names because they have Power. The name of the thing is the essence of the thing, and to call something by its essence is to have absolute power over it.

I was thinking about this the other day, prompted by an old post over on A Nudge In The Right Direction. I have a major in linguistics from university, so have a bit of experience with languages and language and the concepts thereof.

Throughout history there have been many theories of art: art imitates nature, nature imitates art, art should imitate (or at least represent) nature, art is art for art's sake. In the late eighteen hundreds the work of a Swiss linguist called Ferdinand de Saussure changed the way many people thought about the interplay between art and nature, and linguists worldwide began to question and explore the idea of the word as representative of reality.

For centuries it had been assumed that language was in some way mimetic or representative of reality - the term 'dog' was fundamentally doggy, 'tree' was fundamentally treey, etc. But Saussure said that there could be no relationship between a word and reality apart from arbitrariness, principally because if there was some sort of mimetic connection, then all languages would have similar sounding words for similar concepts - and they don't.

There's a lot more to his theory, of course, but I'm trying to keep this non-technical. If you're interested, I'd be happy to expound; it's relevant to the fantasy genre generally and to anywhere you're using made-up words specifically. But for now, assuming that Saussure is correct and that there are no necessary connections between things and the sounds we use to represent them, let's examine some of the issues this raises for the 'true language' idea.

To say there is one 'true' language necessarily disparages all other languages. All other languages are not true, which is to say they are lies...

And who's to say which is the true language? Different ethnic and/or religious groups might reasonably claim that they alone have the true language, and that all other languages are impure, and the people who speak them unclean or infidels. Which leads to language stagnation, where languages refuse to invent or borrow new words for new concepts because that would mean corrupting the language - and this of course leads to societal stagnation, for a language that allows no new concepts will not support a changing society...

And yet despite all this, fantasy still insists on a true language. The world called into existence by a single word or phrase, the breath of some Creator, a sound that resonates throughout all creation and lends it Power, names that have the power to bind a person and their soul, to call up the dead, the capture immorals and trap them to one's will...

Where does our fascination with this come from? And why is it that characters are so much easier to write once we've named them, and so impossible to write when they have the wrong name? Are the two connected? How? Why? What is it we're seeking when we long for a language that is true, and pure, and power?

Fantasy Elements: Introduction

Many months ago (May, in fact), Merc posted an article titled Throwing Down the Gauntlet. I read it, and immediately knew I needed to respond to it - but it's taken me this long to figure out how.

See, Merc's challenge was to explain why you like the genres that you like. It's so easy to get caught up with what you don't like about a genre - and it's much easier, too. I can list a squillion things I don't like about fantasy off the top of my head. It's taken me three months to find a satisfactory answer to why I do like it.

And of course, I figured it out when I was penless, and the words were Perfect and Right. And now that I come to write this, I can't remember them. I hope you'll forgive any awkward moments :)

Fantasy.

It's quite a controversial word, really. People tend to either love it or hate it, and it's part of that oft-scorned cluster known as 'genre fiction'. As in, 'not literary fiction'. As in, 'not real fiction' - not real writing.

We who live in these Other Worlds, of course, know better - but how do we convince the masses that fantasy is not 'just escapism', it's not unreality, it's real, and it's concrete, and it's meaningful?*

This was a discussion I had on Friday night with my husband. He's extremely supportive of my writing, but like so many people I know exists in a state of puzzled bemusement regarding the fantasy aspect.

I hit on it during the discussion though, and I've mentioned it above. Look hard.

Did you find it?

It's one little word: concrete.

Fantasy takes all our fears, our desires, our hopes and dreams - and it makes them real. Concrete.

You're terrified of the dark? In Fantasyland, it can kill you.

You long more than anything to be known as a brave hero? In Fantasyland, you have dragons to kill, maidens to rescue, and evil to overthrow.

There's another key concept: evil.

Most of you who know me well will know I'm religious; those of you that don't, well, now you know too :) As a part of that, I believe whole-heartedly in the battle between good and evil - and nowhere can it be more concretely demonstrated that in fantasy.

In 'real life', evil is (given a majority consensus) murder, rape, abuse, corporate greed and so forth. In fantasy, it can be those things too - but the stakes are higher.

A man murders others in order to preserve his own life? How about a man murders others, rips his soul apart and stashes it around the world to preserve his own life...

A person manipulates others to get what they want? How about a person takes control of other people, leaving them with no will, no thoughts of their own - or at least no way to utilise them...

You see, in fantasy, you have magic. And magic is power. And power means that the stakes are much, much higher.

Because with greater power comes greater responsibility.

In this world, we can fight evil. In fantasy, we Fight it.

As Holly Lisle puts it, we're designed to fight monsters. Our subconscious knows it. And if we don't give it big monsters to fight, it will make big monsters out of little ones.

Fantasy reminds us that there are big monsters, that our little ones here at home really are little in the context of the world, and that there are bigger things, more important things to fight for.

And that is why I like fantasy.

*Assuming, naturally, that we're talking about good fantasy here; no genre, literary and commercial included, are exempt from their share of trashy pink books (the term 'pink' is thieved from my Twin of Darkness and Good, Liana Brooks).

The Results Are In...

It appears that majority favour a once-a-week approach. 5-a-week nearly made it there, but not quite.

Honestly, I'd prefer to do more than 1 per week, else all the pipeline articles will take months to see the light of day. But also honestly, I think 5 is going to be too many with all my other commitments, much as I'd like to.

So, from now on, each week you'll get the following from me:

* One article from either Story Elements, Fantasy Elements, Writerly Advice, or any other 'series' I have on the go.
* One Welcome to My Sidebar post, for as long as it takes to get through all my shiny links B-)
* Half a progress report - ie, I'll give you a progress update once every two weeks
* Other miscellania as it occurs to me :)

Which means 2.5 articles per week, plus miscellania. I hope that's amenable to you all :)

Thanks to everyone who voted - I look forward to hearing from you in the comments :)