SciFi and Fantasy Book Club discussion

Dragons suck. I think Rothfuss might be one of the few authors to handle them well (essentially making them fire breathing cows). If you can avoid them at all, don't use them. They are now a cliché. I love Erickson's Malazan Book of the Fallen series, but the few dragons that show up are the worst part of the series.

I have no strong feelings about dragons. They've been used well (Pern) and terribly (The Hobbit movie). Don't put them in if you're trying to write toward getting an audience. That way lies failure.

Interesting ad alongside this post:

Well, you could have just as likely met a few people who love mermaids. Or wolves. Or horses.
Like Trike says - doing a 'plug and play' of established story elements in an attempt to boost your narrative's appeal is the wrong way to go about telling your story. In my view, the story tells you whether a dragon needs to show up or not.

I will suggest that you look at John Howe Forging Dragons. John Howe is one of the two artists - along with Alan Lee - most responsible for the look of the Lord of the Rings films and along with many examples of his artwork, the book has a lot of commentary on the different strains of dragon-dom and their place in world myth and folklore. It might get some fruitful ideas knocking around.

I'd also encourage you not to put dragons in unless you really need them in your story- for as many people as you're hoping to attract, there's likely an equal number that will find them a turn-off.

If you are going to use them, have them make sense, in the context of your world and your story. Anne McCaffrey wrote her dragons as bigger, telepathic, emotionally intelligent horses, but created a world where they had something to do, and where their development made sense. If you're going to have an evil man-eating dragon, don't put it in a remote area with one small village to dine on, because given carnivorous appetites, it will probably de-populate that village in a hurry.

I do love dragons when they are done well- I've been in love with them since I was very young. They're such an elemental force, and there is so much mythology that goes along with them that seeing someone do something new with them is exciting.

The Dragon and the George was one of my favourite books growing up, and I think that Guy Gavriel Kay did a good job in The Fionavar Tapestry with his dragons. He had both good and evil dragons- they made very sparing appearances, but were major plot points for a short and crucial time.

If you are going to use them, I'd also suggest doing some reading on their history. Dragons: A Natural History and Dragons and Unicorns: A Natural History both have a lot of good information in them. I would put your twist on your own dragons if you're going to use them, but at least be familiar with the world mythology about them.

I've written five fantasy stories, none of which include dragons (nor elves, orcs or hobbitis precioussssss)

I fully intend things stay like that :-)

Probably overused a bit, but I still want to read something about people transforming into dragons when in battle mode ;p

Dragons books are like Vampire books I pick it up going ohh man I love this kinda stuff only to be disappointed at how crappy it is.

@Silvana
Yeah I have seen that done well, more in eastern stuff. That kind of stuff is just plain fun.

I'm with Jen. In fact I would make it even broader. Anything AT ALL that is not essential to the work should be left out. Books should not be like Americans, kind of plump, holding a Big Gulp, and with rather more body fat than recommended. Books should be like cheetahs, fast and lean.
In other words, if there don't HAVE to be dragons, there should not be any.

Brenda wrote: "I'm with Jen. In fact I would make it even broader. Anything AT ALL that is not essential to the work should be left out. Books should not be like Americans, kind of plump, holding a Big Gulp, and ..."

Does that include using the word 'Dragon' in the title of a book, Brenda? :-)
"The Dragon of Mishbil"

I enjoyed the Pern books and have always liked dragons, but you need to think things through, and I'd agree, make them a main feature of your world or leave them out.
However, fantasy is a platform for your imagination. Once upon a time maps were marked 'there be dragons'. All manner of animals have been called dragons when their true nature was unknown or misunderstood. Why not feature a 'dragon' of that type, a creature of your own invention? Then you can decide on their nature. Are they truly destructive? If so, why? Your 'dragon' could even be one of the protagonists of your story.

I've read quite a few dragon books in the last few weeks - each has had a different take on dragons.

Echoing an earlier poster - dragons are like vampires: do it right and you could have a hit. Do it wrong...well, there's a pile for that.

My suggestion: Look at your work and decide do YOU like dragons. Do YOU see a dragon in your WIP? What kind of dragon would work in YOUR created world while not sounding like a copy?

If you shove it in just for shits and giggles, it will look like that.

My first novel had dragons and vampires and, er, just about everything in it, though not in a superfluous way. Ultimately the question is why they're there.

Zayne wrote: And Joseph, I think that so long as the dragon is dragon-like and not some fruity, human-loving beast, then putting a dragon in the story would be awesome.

Absolutely. The most important thing about a dragon is that it should be dragonish. Everything else is optional. And sorry guys, but dragons do not have to justify their inclusion in a book. That's like saying that humans have to justify their inclusion. Dragons are no more a cliché than humans are. Every character in a fantasy novel has to have a species, and there's absolutely no reason why that species can't be draco sapiens rather than homo sapiens.

To misquote Dr Johnson, the man who is tired of dragons is tired of life.

Dragons do not suck. They rule.

Heh heh, Mark. Metaphor, our friend!

Throwing in a dragon "just because" makes just as much sense as throwing in a romance "just because."

EVERYTHING in a book must have justification. Nothing should just be window dressing.

I too am working on my first fantasy-fiction novel. Is there a dragon in my novel? Well...yes! ;) But he is different (he is still a true dragon, but his manner is unique) and he serves a special purpose. He also happens to have a fantastic name (in my opinion--although I jokingly refer to him as, "Fluffy" beyond the books' scope). He is one of my story's most thrilling characters. While he is not a 'main' character per se, his presence is a crucial part of the storyline.

Are there other dragons in my book as well? You bet there are! They too are unique and they too serve a special purpose as to story's plot and my fantasy world's background.

Chris is right upon right in that dragons do, indeed, RULE! Amen to that! I too fail to see them as redundant in the world of fantasy.

Channel your work as all good writers and/or artists do...Flow the writing of your tale and you will know whether or not the inclusion of a dragon (or dragons) suits the weaved-together threads of your story, its world and its characters.

Good luck with your book in all ways!

I always think of the Dragonlance series. It seemed like there was only one type of bad guys: the draconians. The group spent the whole series fighting the same monster. I think there were dragon too (it's been awhile since I read the series). But anyway, I remember having the feeling that the world was very narrow, so I say the more the merrier.

The more diverse your world is the better. Look at our own. All the cultures and species of animals and insects. Nearly every week I come across an article on an animal that I've never seen or heard of before. In other words, populate your world and make sure you consider how one culture would react to another or habits of predators and so forth.

Forgot to add that China Meiville's Perdido Street Station is an excellent example of top notch world building and diversity.

Mrs Joseph wrote: Throwing in a dragon "just because" makes just as much sense as throwing in a romance "just because."

EVERYTHING in a book must have justification. Nothing should just be window dressing.

OP did seem to be implying that the dragons were not essential to his book. While I would defend to the death an author's right to include dragons (preferably your death, not mine), I entirely agree that they should be in the book because you need them there, not as some sort of visiting celebs.

I think what worried me most was the suggestion that dragons are a cliché and should therefore be dispensed with. If you start thinking like that, you could end up throwing out almost the whole of fantasy - elves, dwarves, wizards, even magic. Hardly anything distinctive of the genre would be left. Much of fantasy is rooted in traditional folk-tales and legends, and I think that is a strength, not a weakness.

Totally sick of dragons. Then again, I've been sick of them since the death of Smaug.

But you probably shouldn't listen to me. I'm sick of dragons and zombies and vampires and werewolves and ghosts and elves and dwarves and "ser" or "sirrah" instead of "sir", and teenage wizards in the modern world...yeah, sick of fantasy in general.

**grumpypants**

Now...a vampire dragon zombie...nah, still doesn't work for me. ];P

I'm with you, Micah. I find Fantasy hard going even at the best of times, because it seems like they just keep traveling over the same ground.

The Books of Malazan seem from the outside like another big Tolkienesque adventure, and Brandon Sanderson is essentially writing D&D modules. As entertaining as the Iron Druid novels are, I've still only read the first couple because that type of character is over-used currently.

That's why I'm currently looking for some Science Adventures like Jonny Quest and Tom Swift: I haven't read anything like that in ages.

I too wish more fantasy books were speculative fantasy rather then just retreading ground.

One of the more conceptually unique dragons I've come across was the titular Griaule of Lucius Shepard's novella The Man Who Painted the Dragon Griaule. For one thing, the beast is less of a bon mot dropping scaly Oscar Wilde-type character and more an all-encompassing malevolent presence. For another, the story's setting is the mid 19th Century in a vaguely Ruritanian Mitteleuropa.
This is a pretty good review and overview: http://www.strangehorizons.com/review...

Chris wrote: "OP did seem to be implying that the dragons were not essential to his book. While I would defend to the death an author's right to include dragons (preferably your death, not mine), I entirely agree that they should be in the book because you need them there, not as some sort of visiting celebs."

Oh, I like dragons, too. I recently read Seraphina, Joust, Alta and Dealing with Dragons back to back.

I've even been thinking of starting Wings of Fire: Dragon Stories. But I want them to be more than window dressing (cause window dressing sucks).

But those books were about dragons and gave their dragons character and attitude and pazazz. If someone is just throwing in a dragon hoping for sales...well, count me out. I respect dragons more than that.

The chief appeal of dragons in a book is:
DRAGONS!!!!!

*cough*
I'm a fairly jaded reader, I don't tend to respond well to old tropes of fantasy (which isn't the same as saying I wouldn't love to see them done well and imaginatively), but there's still a sort of trigger somewhere in the hindbrain that goes off when there's a dragon. And judging by the reactions I've seen from some non-fantasy-readers watching Game of Thrones, it's quite a widespread trigger.

More seriously, what's the point of dragons? Well, I think the key is that humans are always in control - even when there are other sentient species around, it's hard to imagine humans not being on top, or at least having some hope of getting to the top in an equal fight. Those conflicts play out as, essentially, colonial conflicts, freedom-fighting. And even when it's bloody, there's a degree of safety there.

What dragons do is introduce the idea that humans aren't on the top of the food chain. Dragons are powerful and frightening, and specifically they're powerful and frightening in a very primitive, direct way: at heart, they're very large, very hungry, predatory animals, and when they're around humanity becomes a prey species. But because humans are sophisticated people who aren't easily scared of mere predators, dragons get everything else they need to prey on mankind. Forget vampires, zombies, werewolves, dragons are the ultimate nightmare - they're basically written to trigger every fear and feeling of insecurity and helplessness that people have.

So they're physically powerful - they can crush and destroy. But humans can kill powerful things. So dragons are basically invulnerable - a tank and a predator in one. But humans can always hide away and keep their distance from a predator. So dragons can fly - they can cross great distances in no time at all, and can completely bypass all the walls and armies set to stop them. But humans can build defences - we can wear armour and live in castles! So dragons can breath fire (or sometimes acid), and burn people alive and roast them inside their armour, and sometimes even melt the very stones. Fire AND big predators - the two great primal fears?

This makes them more or less unstoppable killing machines. But humans are smart and can think their way around any problem! So dragons are smarter. And they're older, and more knowledgeable. Suddenly a fundamentally alien predator has been given the ability to take man on at his own game. So humans have no chance at all - but humans can at least get their affairs in order - humans can actually cope quite well with a predictable form of doom. So dragons are unpredictable - smart, but patient, inscrutable. So humans just have to go about their lives doing the best they can and being honourable in the face of being eaten/roasted at any moment? But then the worst of the dragons go further - they can warp mind and morals with their will, force loyalty and love, or spread despair and paranoia. They are literally the worst of nightmares.
And if that's not enough, some of them can even pretend to be humans.

Of course, in pure form dragons are SO much the pure nemesis of humanity that it's difficult to have an engaging story when they're around - it's all unavoidable and relentless reptillian mayhem. So most authors take away an advantage here or there, or else make them cuddlier by making them 'nice'. But underlyingly, they're death incarnate.

Which I think is why even non-fantasy-fans get excited about Dany having dragons. They don't know what the dragons will be able to do, exactly, but a dragon is like a promise. It's a much more primally understandable equivalent of giving a character a nuclear missile: even if you can't see how one is actually going to be useful in this story, even if the missile just sits in its silo the entire time, the fact that it's there transforms the story in an exciting way.

Oh, I meant to spell out: by taking one bit or another out of that package, different authors can produce very different dragons that are still recognisably draconic.

Two examples. The Shadowrun setting takes its cue from Glaurung, and from Smaug atop his hoard: it puts dragons into a 21st century setting by making them the ultimate corporate predators. They play up the reptilian coldness, the inscrutability and ancient patience, the deviousness, the telepathy and ability to influence minds, they let them walk around in people-suits, and they back it up with physical (nigh-on, much like a tank iirc) invulnerability.

Robin Hobb, on the other hand, emphasises the physicality, the fact that these are large, hungry cow-gobbling carnivores. They're not all that smart, they're impulsive and instinctual, and it's almost as though their ability to communicate with humans is some evolutionary coincidence. Put Tintaglia next to Lofwyr, and you'd barely recognise them as the same trope - much more so than any two elves or two dwarves or two wizards from different settings. But they both feel like natural uses of the concept of dragons.

[Surprisingly, it's the Shadowrun suit-wearing business executives who feel like the more direct descendants of Tolkien. Hobb's dragons, on the other hand, feel like a more realistic version of McCaffrey's (or rather: it feels like Pern's dragons are to Hobb's dragons what horses in teenage girl stories about horses are to actual horses...), and hence at several removes from Ancalagon.

EDIT: final edit and then I'm done. Another pop culture thing: watch how people react to the Hobbit films. Elves appear on screen, people shrug, maybe, perhaps, say they're beautiful. Orcs and Nazgul and whatever, people understand that they're monsters. But there's a reason Jackson finished the first film with gold trickling as a dragon's eye opened: because even people not versed in fantasy can be expected to get a thrill out of a dragon, even if he's barely been mentioned in the film and it's not really clear how dangerous he is. Again, it's like the scene in a Bond film where the villain shows you that they have a nuke. And there's something really visceral about, say, the scene where Bilbo is hiding from the big stalking dragon - something that attacks some primal instincts in the mammalian brain.

(I'm not saying they're great films - they're not, but that's partly the point. That the dragon works even in a not-that-great film directed at a general, non-genre audience. Because it's a dragon.

Joseph wrote: "I am working on writing my first fantasy novel, and I did not plan to include dragons, but I have met a few people who love dragons. I was wondering if anyone would be kind enough to share their th..."

I enjoy stories that involve Dragons. I recently read
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/7... and I liked the domesticated/wild and mythical dragon thing that went on in the story.

But most of the stories I read for pleasure don't regularly involve dragons..

Micah wrote: "Totally sick of dragons. Then again, I've been sick of them since the death of Smaug.

But you probably shouldn't listen to me. I'm sick of dragons and zombies and vampires and werewolves and ghosts and elves and dwarves and "ser" or "sirrah" instead of "sir", and teenage wizards in the modern world...yeah, sick of fantasy in general."

Oh, there's plenty of fantasy that doesn't have any of that stuff. I don't like dragons or werewolves or vampires or elves, etc etc but I still find plenty to read. Malazan, Sanderson, Carol Berg (especially the Collegia Magic, Bridge of D'Arnath, and Rai-Kirah series), to name a few.

Write the type of story you would like to read. If that story involves dragons, so be it.

Dragons are cool.

Or hot.

do not pander to your audience....ever. it will end badly. write what your comfortable with if you try to push the story into something it isn't both you, the reader, and the book will suffer.

D.W. wrote: do not pander to your audience....ever. it will end badly. write what your comfortable with...

That is the best piece of advice so far in this thread.

Wastrel wrote: I'm not saying they're great films - they're not...

So far I have seen the first Hobbit film 7 times, and the second 3 times. I fully intend to watch them over and over again. Are they highbrow? No. Are they intelligent? No. Are they faithful to the book? No. Are they exciting and fun? YES!!

Sorry. Personal view. Just a big kid, really.

You have a great supply of good advice here, quite a lot of it i endorse, but i have just one caveat to add:
The more popular a trope is, the better your writing of it has to be, and the more you have to follow certain traditions.
You can mess around with an Avenc, or a girtablilu, or something equally obscure, and no one cares because they have not seen it before. Make a vampire who has no aversion to one of daylight, garlic, crosses, etc., and you are playing with your readers' preconceptions. It can certainly be done, but it has to be done WELL.
Good luck :)

Except in PNR where vampires are so flawless, beautiful and powerful that all conventional rules of storytelling can be quietly consigned to very same graves the vampires should be resting in...

Francis wrote: "Except in PNR where vampires are so flawless, beautiful and powerful that all conventional rules of storytelling can be quietly consigned to very same graves the vampires should be resting in..."

Sorry. I thought you were talking about elves for a minute...

I have met with dragons that are invisible, ones that have lots of colours, many that talk, several that are friendly...

if you are going to be a writer - write. don't write things that you think other people want to read. That will make you a journalist.

:)

Best observation on the topic:

whether a scene in which a dragon is introduced is affecting, amusing, or agonizingly dull depends primarily on the choices made by the scene's author. I say "primarily" because dragons have appeared in thousands of stories over the centuries, and almost any reader may be presumed to have been exposed to at least one such. The reader's reaction will naturally be influenced by how they feel this new dragon compares to the dragons which they have been introduced to in the past. (Favorably, one would hope. A dragon must learn to make a good first impression if it is to do well in this life.)

(Grabbed it from here:
http://www.strangehorizons.com/2002/2...
)

However, to expand on that, if the story doesn't call for dragons, don't shoehorn them in. The races used in a story should have sufficient reason for being there.

(Yes, including humans. Then, most of your readers are humans, so they will identify more readily with human characters; furthermore, default human traits more easily map to human stories, which is why we get so many complaints about elves that are pointy ears stuck on humans.)

Wastrel wrote: Of course, in pure form dragons are SO much the pure nemesis of humanity that it's difficult to have an engaging story when they're around - it's all unavoidable and relentless reptillian mayhem. So most authors take away an advantage here or there, or else make them cuddlier by making them 'nice'.

Nice dragons tend to be small and cute, like puppies. There's a cute dragon in one of Tove Jansson's Moomintroll books, I forget which one. And of course there's Norbert the Norwegian Ridgeback, Hagrid's pet in the Harry Potter books.

Better than making them nice, I think, is to make them flawed, especially in personality. My favourite dragon is Chrysophylax Dives, in Farmer Giles of Ham, who over-reaches himself and is outwitted by the canny farmer. I suppose Tolkien modelled this story on the folk tales in which a peasant or farmer outwits the Devil.

There's plenty of life left in the old worms yet. You just have to find an entertaining way of writing about them.

Chris wrote: "Are they exciting and fun? YES!!

Sorry. Personal view. Just a big kid, really. "


I agree with this.

I thought the first dragged too much, especially in the goblin cave... but I thought the second was much better paced, and the whole barrel scene with the elves and orcs was just ridiculously awesome.

Chris wrote: "Nice dragons tend to be small and cute, like puppies. "

I will observe that small does not have to be a property of nice. Many Eastern European fairy tales are small. Small enough to ride horses, marry princesses, and get tricked into a trap by being told it's for the hero of the tale, and would it help test it by getting inside to check its size, since it and the hero are the same size. There is therefore a long folkloric tradition of small dragons.

Convincing your audience of that is another matter.

Chris wrote: "
Nice dragons tend to be small and cute, like puppies. There's a cute dragon in one of Tove Jansson's Moomintroll books, I forget which one. And of course there's Norbert the Norwegian Ridgeback, Hagrid's pet in the Harry Potter books. "

Not sure you can really count Norbert as cute, being as he was only cute to Hagrid, and Hagrid's kinda nuts... and he was only little for a few months. ;)


And there are bigger dragons that are nice. Like Elliot, from Pete and the Dragon, and Toothless, from How to Drain Your Dragon - though, of course, that's over time.

Oh, and Draco from Dragonheart.

c.o.lleen wrote: the whole barrel scene with the elves and orcs was just ridiculously awesome.

Or awesomely ridiculous.

I like the first film more than most people do. I think it builds splendidly from the cosy and amusing opening to the frenetic ending. And the music is, at times, just exhilarating.

Chris wrote: "I like the first film more than most people do. I think it builds splendidly from the cosy and amusing opening to the frenetic ending. And the music is, at times, just exhilarating. "


I will say I liked the first movie better the second time I saw it. It didn't seem as draggy. Maybe that's partially the difference from being on a comfy sofa as opposed to being stuck in the theater.


Anyway, I always hafta laugh at the end of those movies where everyone in the theater is like "really, that's where it gonna end?"

And I'm like "What did you expect? It is part 2 of a three part movie! Of course it's gonna be a cliffhanger. Duh!"

Francis wrote: "Except in PNR where vampires are so flawless, beautiful and powerful that all conventional rules of storytelling can be quietly consigned to very same graves the vampires should be resting in..."


Stan wrote:
"Sorry. I thought you were talking about elves for a minute... "

Ha exactly the way I feel. Elves done best are arrogent jerks that lie by ommision all the time. But 9/10 they are boring SO UNBELIVABLE BORING, at least even the poorly done vampires do something awesome every so often.

Speaking of Elves in a Dragon thread I have seen more in Chinese books and the like where Dragons more or less replace Elves as the super high up elder race that knows all sorts of things and tend to not tell other people things. I tend to like this better because Dragons are normally not considered to be "good" like Elves are and while they act refined normally are prone to losing their temper. Plus they tend to have really awesome moments because dragons.

Joseph wrote: "First of all, thank you for giving me so much feedback! I usually address every post... but on this thread I can't keep up. For those who are admonishing me for planning to pander to an audience, I..."

Oh dear God, forget I said anything. Write the story you want and good luck getting published.

Missed this....but there have been a couple of GOOD dragon writers mentioned: Anne McCaffrey and Robin Hobb....but everyone has missed Ann Aguirre's dragons which are hilarious (and totally un-dragon-like!!)

But then, if you don't like "Romance" then I suppose I should crawl back into my 'treasure' hole and disappear :)