Made up worlds

[Tariel]

Maybe not, but I know what I'm missing for my world....If I used the Celtic bardic system for my tribal people, then there'd be a lot of bards walking around singing "Whiskey Lullaby" type songs, followed by the optimistic ones singing "Don't worry. Be happy! You aren't gonna die." Funny, but no.

lol....I agree

 

[Jehane]

Good heavens! No wonder you don't want bards! No, no, no. A bard might curse you, or caste a spell on you or sing you to your death or publicaly satirise you for cowardice or avarice; The time frame is wrong for whiskey ; mead or nothing ... dear, dear, dear. What do they teach in these schools? ​

 

[Lessien]

Nothing.....

 

[Tariel]

A bard might curse you, or caste a spell on you or sing you to your death or publicaly satirise you for cowardice or avarice;​

Isn't that what Mages are for?​

 

[Jehane]

Not if your a Celt. Bards were druids & we know all about those, don't we? Say yes, please!

When I say I work within a Celtic base I mean that quite literally, so no mages. They didn't exist. Druids did & all branches of druidism practised their own brand of magic - bards were trained in a number of areas that we wouldn't normally associate with music but then the Celts had a very supersticious belief in the power of the spoken word. The spoken word was magical in & of itself so those who were trained to used it well were also considered magical. They were so good the Romans took Celtic slaves to train their children in Rhetoric. Some pro-Roman history buff will eat me alive for saying that but it's true.

Sorry if I've ranted. I came to fantasy via history - King Arthur to be exact - so I do tend to use a solid historical base for certain things as I think all the best fantasy is solidly grounded in reality. Has anyone read Alan Garner's The Owl Service or The Weirdstone of Brisingamen? He does that & his best books are absolutely brilliant because of it.

 

[Lessien]

I haven't read them....Like I said in another thread, my mom doesn't like fantasy and REALLY doesn't trust the fantasy section. So I have to keep my love for the genre low-key around her.

But I agree. The best fantasy is rooted in history. Why? The scariest nightmares are the ones that are firmly rooted in reality, and the best dreams are the ones that could actually happen, at least to an extent.

 

[Jehane]

I missed that connection I think. Sorry your mum doesn't approve. I can understand up to a point but I think a lot of the fear is rooted in not understanding what the attraction is & how fantasicts think. I see it in the HP threads but I do not blurr the lines between what I know is real & what I know is not; never have & nor do my kids, who all love fantasy & read it a lot. Some of the suppossedly 'realistic' books are far more dangerous but no-one will believe me so there's nothing to be done.

The last part of yor post is spot on.

 

[Lessien]

That's probably it. That, and I think a lot of fantasy fanatics she's met have been obsessed with some book or other to the point that they'd dress and talk exactly like their favorite character if it were socially acceptable, and that their favorite book/movie/TV series is all they ever talk about. I knew one of them, and I thought she was the most annoying person I've ever met. Guess Mom doesn't want me to turn out like that. I respect her concerns, I just wish she didn't have so many!

Oh, and thanks

 

[Jehane]

Wow! I've only ever known one person like that. She was a trekkie fan & dressed it. I had to work with her but all is forgiven; she introduced me to The Mabingon. Hm. I think my spellings off but I can't think what's wrong with it. Anyway far less annoying than some sports freaks I know. Now that is seriously scarey.

 

[Tariel]

Not if your a Celt.

"you're" and I'm not


I actually prefer a highly fantastical base for my own work. That historical stuff is too constricting for me right now....I enjoy my mages.

In my opinion, the best kind of fantasy takes reality and warps it into a totally unrecognizable form. When what you know--what you think you know--means nothing, and even the very definitions of good and evil are threatened. When you can never trust what anybody tells you until you see it for yourself, and even then you need to be skeptical. That's what I write.

 

[Jehane]

Fine. That's a differen't sort of fantasy & I don't usually go there. That ends up too open ended & I don't believe in 'anything goes' sort of fantasy. Boundaries give shape. Room for all sorts in the fantasy genre.

My keyboard drops letters out all the time & I don't always catch the spelling before I post so I apologise prior to any more errors.

 

[Lessien]

I agree with you both. It all depends on what kind of story you want to write. I prefer a happy medium. One where reality is used for the basis of a culture/world/country/tradition, and then is warped and/or combined with others so that you can't pinpoint the influences on one culture. Original races are good, as long as they're not too powerful, perfect, or "out there." If it's so grounded in reality that it's almost historical fiction....well, not my kind of book. But influenced by history is good.

 

[Jehane]

Very balanced & diplomatic of you!

I lost it with the 'Wheel of Time' books because I felt there were just no boundaries at all & one of the things I find interesting is how characters work with limits. I admit I'm a little strange.

How did you two enjoy the Belgariad? And did you like any of Edding's other work?

 

[Windlord]

I've created several worlds myself. Otherworld is taken almost completely from Irish Mythos. I've also worked with Scandinavian and Japanese Mythos a bit.

My current work is taken largely from the vast Medieval European society (although the Middle Eastern Societies get their due as well.)with warring factions that are all united on a religious front, at least openly. Secretly, of course, their all plotting against each other, but openly they bare a generally united front. My main characters are Church Knights (and I sincerely hope that my work doesn't end up looking like a copy of Elenium or Tamuli), A Deaconess, a NightShade, and a Spellsword.

Peace,

Windlord.

 

[Lessien]

Very balanced & diplomatic of you!

That's me. Non-confrontational. My family calls me "Switzerland" whenever they ask me my opinion on stuff I'd rather not take a side on.

I lost it with the 'Wheel of Time' books because I felt there were just no boundaries at all & one of the things I find interesting is how characters work with limits. I admit I'm a little strange.

Never read those and I don't plan to. I like it when characters have limits, too....that's one reason I hated Eldest so much. After his training from the elves, Eragon could do just about anything with magic....and even the whole "you can't use too much magic or you'll die from overexertion" thing was thrown to the wind, since it was revealed that he could use magic to draw energy from other life forms, and the only thing stopping him was that he's a vegitarian!

How did you two enjoy the Belgariad? And did you like any of Edding's other work?

Haven't read them. Are they any good?

 

[Jehane]

Hm. Yes...& no. I loved the first couple of books which I thought were clever & original then Eddings seemed to loose control of his characterizations & they all became too much alike, which was a pity as they were very good & very well defined in the beginning. By the end they were all irritating me no end & the 2nd series was terrible. Repetitive - I know that was the idea but just the same....

What about Robin Hobb? Anyone read any of hers?

Your stuff sounds interesting, Windlord. Have you read any Tracy Chevalier? Not a fantasy writer but does a lot with the medieval period & very good.

 

[Tariel]

Fine. That's a differen't sort of fantasy & I don't usually go there. That ends up too open ended & I don't believe in 'anything goes' sort of fantasy. Boundaries give shape. Room for all sorts in the fantasy genre.

My keyboard drops letters out all the time & I don't always catch the spelling before I post so I apologise prior to any more errors.

I make my own bounderies, and stick to them faithfully. It's half the fun of fantasy writing. I would never have a character do something TOTALLY rediculous

 

[Jehane]

Way to go girl! Not many writers can do that. Once they end up with a character in a bind they chuck the rules out. So annoying!

 

[Tariel]

Way to go girl! Not many writers can do that. Once they end up with a character in a bind they chuck the rules out. So annoying!

"In a story where anything can happen why should the reader care what actually does?"

 

[Windlord]

Hm. Yes...& no. I loved the first couple of books which I thought were clever & original then Eddings seemed to loose control of his characterizations & they all became too much alike, which was a pity as they were very good & very well defined in the beginning. By the end they were all irritating me no end & the 2nd series was terrible. Repetitive - I know that was the idea but just the same....

I like Edding's Dialogue the most, he is very good at that. But you are right, his Characters tend to run together, especially if you compare different series. And the Plot is almost always the same. Unfortunately most of his Characters are also flat Characters, and have little personal growth in the story. If it were not for the dialogue, we would be unable to identify with any of his Characters.

What about Robin Hobb? Anyone read any of hers?

I haven't.

Your stuff sounds interesting, Windlord. Have you read any Tracy Chevalier? Not a fantasy writer but does a lot with the medieval period & very good.

No I haven't. I will have to look into her. I've always loved historical writing, as long as it was true to the time period.

Peace,

Windlord.