What do you think?
Rate this book
Fantasy and Science Fiction Medievalisms: From Isaac Asimov to A Game of Thrones
From advertisements to amusement parks, themed resaturants, and Renaissance fairs twenty-first century popular culture is strewn with reimaginings of the Middle Ages. They are nowhere more prevalent, however, than in the films, television series, books, and video games of speculative genres: fantasy and science fiction. Peter Jackson’s The Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit film trilogies and George R. R. Martin’s multimedia Game of Thrones franchise are just two of the most widely known and successful fantasy conglomerates of recent decades. Medievalism has often been understood as a defining feature of fantasy, and as the antithesis of science fiction, but such constructs vastly underestimate the complexities of both genres and their interactions. “Medieval” has multiple meanings in fantasy and science fiction, which shift with genre convention, and which bring about their own changes as authors and audiences engage with what has gone before in the recent and deeper pasts.
For several decades after medievalism was established as a field of legitimate scholarly enquiry in the 1980s and 1990s, popular culture iterations were largely viewed with some suspicion if not outright disdain. The twenty-first century, however, has seen growing recognition of the importance of what has been termed the “neomedieval”: medievalisms which playfully reimagine the past rather than attempting historically accurate re-creation.
Science fiction and fantasy, with their necessarily impossible worlds, are perhaps the ultimate in neomedievalism. Earlier volumes have examined some of the ways in which contemporary popular culture re-imagines the Middle Ages, offering broad overviews, but none considers fantasy, science fiction, or the two together. The focused approach of this collection provides a directed pathway into the myriad medievalisms of modern popular culture. By engaging directly with genre(s), this book acknowledges that medievalist creative texts and practices do not occur in a vacuum, but are shaped by multiple cultural forces and concerns; medievalism is never just about the Middle Ages.
Studies of genres, moreover, often focus on a single medium—fiction, film, or television. Each section, and some individual chapters in the volume explores at least two, reflecting the multimedia nature of contemporary popular culture in general and genres in particular. By exploring the way medievalist discourses travel and shift across media within connected genres, the volume explores some of their internal complexities.
Studies of popular genres illuminate social and cultural trends and concerns, while medievalisms reveal far more about the milieu in which they were created than they do about the Middle Ages. By exploring how popular genres develop, pulling on and being pushed by changing approaches to “the medieval,” this collection sheds light on twenty-first century popular culture’s dynamic and at times conflicting moves, and those of the society which creates and consumes it. Individual chapters take diverse approaches, both synchronic and diachronic, some offering detailed case studies and others broader reviews of themes and trends. The variety enables a detailed picture of the complexities of fantasy and science fiction medievalisms to emerge.
The first section explores the reception of J. R. R. Tolkien’s The Lord of the Rings, the two chapters together demonstrate that fantasy’s “Tolkienian” medievalism is not that of a single author, but of many readers and creators making and remaking it in different media. The second shows that the dark and dirty medievalism of Game and Thrones and the subgenre of gritty fantasy is complex and at times contradictory. It illustrates the impact of market trends and forces on popular culture texts and the ways they are understood to engage with the past. The third section demonstrates that medievalism has been at the heart of science fiction since the ‘Golden Age’ of the 1960s, and illustrates that use of medieval material and reference points connects it with fantasy as much as it separates the two genres. The final chapter shows that in the twenty-first century, fantasy definitions of medievalisms are expanding to include more than just references to the European Middle Ages which have long been conventional in the genre.
Fantasy and Science Fiction Medievalisms will be of much interest to scholars of fantasy and science fiction, and of medievalism.
For several decades after medievalism was established as a field of legitimate scholarly enquiry in the 1980s and 1990s, popular culture iterations were largely viewed with some suspicion if not outright disdain. The twenty-first century, however, has seen growing recognition of the importance of what has been termed the “neomedieval”: medievalisms which playfully reimagine the past rather than attempting historically accurate re-creation.
Science fiction and fantasy, with their necessarily impossible worlds, are perhaps the ultimate in neomedievalism. Earlier volumes have examined some of the ways in which contemporary popular culture re-imagines the Middle Ages, offering broad overviews, but none considers fantasy, science fiction, or the two together. The focused approach of this collection provides a directed pathway into the myriad medievalisms of modern popular culture. By engaging directly with genre(s), this book acknowledges that medievalist creative texts and practices do not occur in a vacuum, but are shaped by multiple cultural forces and concerns; medievalism is never just about the Middle Ages.
Studies of genres, moreover, often focus on a single medium—fiction, film, or television. Each section, and some individual chapters in the volume explores at least two, reflecting the multimedia nature of contemporary popular culture in general and genres in particular. By exploring the way medievalist discourses travel and shift across media within connected genres, the volume explores some of their internal complexities.
Studies of popular genres illuminate social and cultural trends and concerns, while medievalisms reveal far more about the milieu in which they were created than they do about the Middle Ages. By exploring how popular genres develop, pulling on and being pushed by changing approaches to “the medieval,” this collection sheds light on twenty-first century popular culture’s dynamic and at times conflicting moves, and those of the society which creates and consumes it. Individual chapters take diverse approaches, both synchronic and diachronic, some offering detailed case studies and others broader reviews of themes and trends. The variety enables a detailed picture of the complexities of fantasy and science fiction medievalisms to emerge.
The first section explores the reception of J. R. R. Tolkien’s The Lord of the Rings, the two chapters together demonstrate that fantasy’s “Tolkienian” medievalism is not that of a single author, but of many readers and creators making and remaking it in different media. The second shows that the dark and dirty medievalism of Game and Thrones and the subgenre of gritty fantasy is complex and at times contradictory. It illustrates the impact of market trends and forces on popular culture texts and the ways they are understood to engage with the past. The third section demonstrates that medievalism has been at the heart of science fiction since the ‘Golden Age’ of the 1960s, and illustrates that use of medieval material and reference points connects it with fantasy as much as it separates the two genres. The final chapter shows that in the twenty-first century, fantasy definitions of medievalisms are expanding to include more than just references to the European Middle Ages which have long been conventional in the genre.
Fantasy and Science Fiction Medievalisms will be of much interest to scholars of fantasy and science fiction, and of medievalism.
268 pages, Hardcover
First published June 18, 2015
32 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
August 14, 2017
For an edited volume, this was surprisingly consistent in its mediocrity. Every chapter took too long summarizing plot and shallow observations about stories, making easy points without much elaboration, and failing to ask particularly interesting questions. I have skipped the chapter concerning Abercrombie's The Heroes; I'll revisit it after reading that book sometime this summer (academic library lending periods are insane). The breadth of topics in the book as a whole added to the impression that it was shallow, though given the essays involved, a more focused book might have felt repetitive.
Aside from that chapter, the only one I really found relevant to my current interests was Shiloh Carroll's entry on Game of Thrones. Her development of Sansa and Jaime's arcs and their conversations with tropes of chivalry and virtue are largely well done. But the framing of those ideas feels churlish, challenging some views I hold with a scornful 'tude but never deigning to actually explore them. She describes Martin's assertion that his works are more mature and realistic than "Disneyland" medievalisms with a thinly-veiled suggestion that she finds this arrogant and perhaps wrong, but never challenges it. She finishes the essay by quoting Tolkien's definition of fantasy and suggesting Martin's goals are "at odds not only with the bulk of fantasy literature but with Tolkien's ideas about fantasy as well." This is the end of the piece. Maybe I'm reading too much into Carroll's phrasing, but it certainly feels like she's suggesting this is a failure on Martin's part--else why wouldn't she talk about what he might be succeeding at instead, whether his successes might cast doubt on Tolkien's ideas, etc? None of these questions are raised even in passing.
More egregiously, I think, Carroll remarks that "debate on the authenticity of a fictional text's portrayal of the Middle Ages is problematic and counterproductive" and never addresses this claim again. Surely, this has some bearing on Martin's claim to realism? And while the question is obviously problematic insofar as it involves deciphering layers of provincial projection by generations of historians onto an unknowable medieval reality, it's not clear if this is what Carroll meant. By claiming it as counterproductive because of the text's fictionality, she seems to imply this concern with authenticity doesn't apply to contemporary academic histories of the Middle Ages, though again, no defense of that implication is provided. I'm hammering in on this point because she writes off a discussion I think is super interesting and important in a political context as well as in terms of defining ambitions and methodology for a genre of fantasy, but also because it seems central to her argument as well.
Carroll (and Helen Young makes similar claims in her intro and in Race and Popular Fantasy) seems to want to say that Martin's medievalism isn't more historicist or realist, it's just got a flavor that has cues contemporary audiences accept as such. But by implying this has something to do with fiction, and isn't a general condition of all historical work, and then failing to nail down whether Martin has actually failed to achieve his stated ambition, the discussion and surrounding shade feels pretty confounding to me.
Aside from that chapter, the only one I really found relevant to my current interests was Shiloh Carroll's entry on Game of Thrones. Her development of Sansa and Jaime's arcs and their conversations with tropes of chivalry and virtue are largely well done. But the framing of those ideas feels churlish, challenging some views I hold with a scornful 'tude but never deigning to actually explore them. She describes Martin's assertion that his works are more mature and realistic than "Disneyland" medievalisms with a thinly-veiled suggestion that she finds this arrogant and perhaps wrong, but never challenges it. She finishes the essay by quoting Tolkien's definition of fantasy and suggesting Martin's goals are "at odds not only with the bulk of fantasy literature but with Tolkien's ideas about fantasy as well." This is the end of the piece. Maybe I'm reading too much into Carroll's phrasing, but it certainly feels like she's suggesting this is a failure on Martin's part--else why wouldn't she talk about what he might be succeeding at instead, whether his successes might cast doubt on Tolkien's ideas, etc? None of these questions are raised even in passing.
More egregiously, I think, Carroll remarks that "debate on the authenticity of a fictional text's portrayal of the Middle Ages is problematic and counterproductive" and never addresses this claim again. Surely, this has some bearing on Martin's claim to realism? And while the question is obviously problematic insofar as it involves deciphering layers of provincial projection by generations of historians onto an unknowable medieval reality, it's not clear if this is what Carroll meant. By claiming it as counterproductive because of the text's fictionality, she seems to imply this concern with authenticity doesn't apply to contemporary academic histories of the Middle Ages, though again, no defense of that implication is provided. I'm hammering in on this point because she writes off a discussion I think is super interesting and important in a political context as well as in terms of defining ambitions and methodology for a genre of fantasy, but also because it seems central to her argument as well.
Carroll (and Helen Young makes similar claims in her intro and in Race and Popular Fantasy) seems to want to say that Martin's medievalism isn't more historicist or realist, it's just got a flavor that has cues contemporary audiences accept as such. But by implying this has something to do with fiction, and isn't a general condition of all historical work, and then failing to nail down whether Martin has actually failed to achieve his stated ambition, the discussion and surrounding shade feels pretty confounding to me.
Displaying 1 of 1 review