Sword & Sorcery: "An earthier sort of fantasy" discussion

I've been highly interested in Sword & Sorcery for several years now and one thing that I noticed, and I guess most people would agree with, is that Sword & Sorcery today is more or less the curating of old classics.

Howard, Leiber, and Moorcock are the undisputed Old Masters, and I also consider Wagner to be of equal standing with them. There are a few other names that frequently get mentioned, but all of them wrote their works decades ago. Occasionally you see a new anthology or a magazine here or there, but they don't appear to cause any ripples in the fantasy world and feel to me like one-off homages to the old classics, aimed at the nostalgia of existing fans. At 35, I always feel like the green kid in discussions about Sword & Sorcery.

Curating the old classics of the mid-20th century is a great thing. The ones that are still being remembered today are great stories that are pretty timeless and that you can always go back to. And even today, sometimes new people discover them and enjoy them. But as fun as they are for nostalgic fans, I don't Sword & Sorcery magazines and the occasional anthology will ever reach new audiences and allow today's authors to create new big works that will be remembered.

To have a revitalization or resurgence of Sword & Sorcery, I think it has to change and adapt. As we are entering the 2020s, these times are no longer the 1930s or the 1970s. You can get new readers to read and enjoy Conan or Elric, but you can not create a new Conan or a new Elric. A 21st century writer writing for 21st century readers has to write 21st century fiction. Homages can be fun, but they are not something that finds a new market.

While we can not recreate more of the old material, I feel very certain that today's fantasy market absolutely has a place for a form of Neo-Sword & Sorcery. Something that is in the spirit of classic Sword & Sorcery and hits the same notes, but that isn't bound to and restrained by the form of the old works. Not being the same as the classics, but something that is engaging for the same reasons.

Now I am a huge fan of Robert Howard and Karl Wagner, I really like the Conan the Barbarian movie, and greatly appreciate Frank Frazetta and Boris Vallejo. These are great and should not be changed. But I also in complete acceptance that the outward presentation of Sword & Sorcery from the 70s and 80s is hugely offputting to great numbers of modern readers. Sword & Sorcery has a reputation of being trashy and sleazy, and I don't think there is any solid ground to deny that this wasn't based on good reasons in the final years of mainstream Sword & Sorcery in the 80s. Even being the bleeding heart green lefty that I am, I am still more than happy to give people from half a century ago some slack for their blind spots and enjoy their artistic expressions. But it still irks me when people repeat the same things today, even though they really should know better now. I think if writers want to reach new audiences with Sword & Sorcery, the loincloths and chainmail bikinis have to be left behind. These things won't fly anymore. Same thing with the hordes of swarthy Eastlings or subhuman savages.

The other big obstacle I see is the devotion to the format. 10k word one shots are not what people are looking for these days. I think readers are just not terribly interested in characters they will only spend a hour or two with and then never see again. And as I said before, magazines and anthologies only reach existing fans of classic Sword & Sorcery who are actively looking for them. If you want to become a successful Sword & Sorcery, sending short stories out to agents does not seem to be a viable option anymore. But that doesn't mean that the 500k word trilogy is our only option. People want 300-400 page paperbacks, and often preferably three, four, or more of them. I think writing episodic series is the perfect solution to bring the two together. How are we reading Howard and Leiber today? Not as single stories, but as full size paperbacks containing a whole pile of stories, connected by their shared protagonists. They were not originally written that way and compiled only later, but there's really nothing stopping us from approaching the writing process with this goal from the start. I think most people who like to read trilogies would be quite happy to buy three volumes of four stories each that present the adventures of the same hero.

I think both the aesthetic presentation and the publishing format are the two main obstacles that so far have impeded a resurgence of Sword & Sorcery. And I think these are actually pretty easily solved.

But just having the ladies put on some clothes and writing stories in batches would not rally create new stories. While those are the main obstacles, there still remains the question of what Sword & Sorcery can actually be when it's not short stories and semi-nudity? Or in other words, why Sword & Sorcery in the first place?

To paraphrase Leiber when he created the term Sword & Sorcery, the definition is "Howard, Leiber, and Moorcok, but not Tolkien". That's what the term was meant to describe. While I think fighting over specific details is pointless (especially when discussing what a future Sword & Sorcery could be), there are a couple of key points that people have identified over the years, and which I think few would dispute:
Sword & Sorcery is about protagonists who are acting on personal motivation and not in the service to other, who are unbound by by many of the social commitments and obligations that restrain the people around them, and who are facing obstacles and problems through action.
In addition to that, Sword & Sorcery stories are also fundamentally about encounters with the supernatural. Treasures and revenge might motivate the protagonist to begin the adventure, but the true meat of the story and where the outcome is decided is when the protagonist comes face to face demons and sorcerers.
To this conventional wisdom, I would also personally add that Sword & Sorcery is always at least a little bit sexy. It's clearly in the tradition of the romantic literature and not rational. Everyone is driven by their passions, not by calculating logic. Problems are not solved through civilized discussions. It does not have to be bloodshed, but it has to be some kind of dramatic action. Even when the protagonists maintain a cold brooding exterior, there's still a burning fire of rage inside of them. Ultimately, Sword & Sorcery knows no shame. Perhaps on some occasions regret, but both protagonists and antagonists will never apologize for what they are, what they feel, and what they want.
I think the main question that needs to be solved to really bring Sword & Sorcery into the present day, is to develop a new language to express the passion and sexiness without turning characters into bullies, sluts, or trophies. This is the real challenge that stands in the way of bringing Sword & Sorcery back to the masses.

"10k word one shots are not what people are looking for these days."

I would quibble with this. Gardner Dozois knew his way around S&S, and he put together several anthologies (often in collaboration with George R.R. Martin) that were either pure S&S or heavily thus.

Songs of the Dying Earth, The Book of Swords, The Book of Magic, Rogues, and The Book of Legends (which died when Gardner did), are all anthologies of 10k-word novelettes. That was the length Gardner and George asked for, and all those books were commercially successful and/or award winners.

My contributions are not so sword-heavy -- I do mostly thieves and wizard's henchmen -- but again I write in the 10k to 15k range, and I've sold a dozens of such novelettes to Fantasy & Science Fiction and Lightspeed. Feedback from the editors tells me these pieces are well received by the readership.

Sure, of course these exist and have an audience. But in my experience, or at least perception, this audience appears to be a rather exclusive special interest club from which little emerges out into the rest of fantasy culture.

Martin wrote: ". . . this audience appears to be a rather exclusive special interest club . . ."

They are, by definition, specially interested in short fiction, but I believe that audience overlaps into novel reading as well. My impression is that, as more and more people read on their phones, shorter-length fiction is making a comeback, overcoming the disadvantage it suffered when consolidated magazine distributors simply stopped putting digest magazines on supermarket and drugstore shelves.

I believe S&S fiction reads best in short story/short novels. It’s more about marketing and publishing business that dictates book length/word count rather than what people want to read. We’ve been conditioned to believe that books in general need to be 350+ pages, and that fantasy/S&S stories need to be trilogies or longer. The size of these books helps to justify the cost, and does not necessarily add to the quality of the story. Now, I’m not saying you can’t write an epic-length S&S novel (I’d love to see one!), but the tales simply don’t require a huge word count because they are by definition small scale and often episodic in nature. To be clear, just because a story has swords and sorcery in it, that doesn’t make it S&S.

Also, I see no reason why modern S&S fiction cannot meet expectations of modern readers, without the baggage of the early 20th century like racism, sexism, ect. I’ve read quite a bit of recent fiction published as S&S that is true to the roots of the genre, but without some of the content that modern readers find offensive. It’s just that to expand it into big, fat novels you need to add padding, or essentially transform it into an epic fantasy tale with a large cast of characters and earth shaking consequences. In other words, not S&S.

As I said, putting six to eight stories of one character in one volume should satisfy both the established pacing and structure of S&S stories and the demands of book publishing. There are seven such volumes of the Lankhmar series, two such books each in the Kane and Witcher series, and Conan is printed today in either three or one volumes. It's a great format for S&S.
Publishing houses might not be too hot about taking them, but I think readers really wouldn't care about the difference between a book with a single story or six episodes.

One recent work that was hugely popular and to me really represents the spirit of what makes Sword & Sorcery entertaining and work is the movie Fury Road. Joe doesn't have any magic powers, but other than that he perfectly fits the evil sorcerer king archetype. All the other characters, their interactions, the dynamics of the story, and the overall aesthetic and atmosphere line up beautifully with the conventions of Sword & Sorcery.
I think the movie can teach us a lot how modern big name Sword & Sorcery might potentially look like.

Martin wrote: "As I said, putting six to eight stories of one character in one volume should satisfy both the established pacing and structure of S&S stories and the demands of book publishing..."

My strategy over the past few years has been to write a series of novelettes about a single main character -- Raffalon the thief and Baldemar the wizard's henchman -- and sell them to The Magazine of Fantasy & Science Fiction. Once the exclusivity period of the last story in the series expires, I put them together in a collection and self-publish them as ebooks and POD paperbacks. Each series of stories actually makes an episodic novel.

The collection 9 Tales of Raffalon came out in 2017 and has been selling steadily. I've just submitted what will probably be the ninth and last Baldemar story to F&SF, so by late next year, I'll be ready to bring out his collection, too.

Great to hear that.

I feel that over the last year or so, more and more people have started voicing their desire, and in some cases efforts to see Sword & Sorcery regain a more prominent presence.
In these times where our art is becoming increasingly conformist to the point where their stories no longer work because they are too occupied dodging any bullets (see the recent Star Wars and Terminator drama), people are starting to look for works that dare to be different and adventurous and don't shy away from being a bit edgy. I think Sword & Sorcery is particularly well suited to bring a little bit more risk into fantasy.

I like the continued trend in S&S to provide broader, more diverse settings. This is nothing new, as Saunders created an African-based world and Salmonson worked with an Asian (Japanese?) based world, as did Ted Rypel. I would like to see more stuff like Bronze Age worlds or even late Stone-Age (something I wanna try myself). We are used to Northern European- style worlds, but I really believe continued expansion into more diverse settings is a big plus and will draw more readers.

I miss the prehistoric feel of some Conan stories, and the ancient age that comes across in Elric. My whole interest in creating fantasy started with an idea for a world that I conceptualized as "Bronze Age Pangea."

I also feel like in many ways, Wuxia has a great overlap with Sword & Sorcery.

C.A. wrote: "We who love the genre see the elements of S&S everywhere."

That's so true. I find that for me there are 'pockets' of intensity in long epic fantasy books which are essentially S&S.

Yes, but finding individual fragments of Sword & Sorcery in many places is not the same as having complete Sword & Sorcery stories.

I like "Tradition is not the worship of the ashes, but passing on the fire."

Earthier means dirtier, muddier, and grimier. Also more emotional than rational.

Though tradition is also aka as peer pressure from the dead.

Martin, we've grappled with this very topic on our Rogues in the House Podcast. I echo much of your sentiment. I love reading old school sword and sorcery, but find it a little irksome when modern writers explicitly ape the voices from the past. It's okay that they do, but honestly I'm more interested in seeing the tropes of old (cults, demons, sorcerers, self-serving protagonists) than I am in authors throwing in archaic words like "thews."

And yes, the chain mail bikini and fur diaper have got to go! We even devoted an episode to that ;)

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast...

I think part of the problem in regards to short works is pricing.

Fortunately, with indie publishing it has allowed a whole host of authors who would not normally be published to publish and find an audience.

Unfortunately, it's everyone for themselves. So, people used cheap prices to try and find readers. Those prices became even cheaper when authors started bundling trilogies and then longer works together for 2.99, or . 99 cents, or free.

The repercussions from that is that the indie market doesn't have a cartel to protect the pricing tier. Once people can get a 100k word novel for free or .99 cents, it's difficult to convince them to buy a 10k word story for .99 cents or 1.99.

Therefore, to sell shorter works writers have to create collections, publish in anthologies, or submit to e-Zines, or write longer works (which many S&S readers say they aren't interested in for the genre).

Matt wrote: "Martin, we've grappled with this very topic on our Rogues in the House Podcast. I echo much of your sentiment. I love reading old school sword and sorcery, but find it a little irksome when modern writers explicitly ape the voices from the past. It's okay that they do, but honestly I'm more interested in seeing the tropes of old (cults, demons, sorcerers, self-serving protagonists) than I am in authors throwing in archaic words like "thews."

And yes, the chain mail bikini and fur diaper have got to go! We even devoted an episode to that ;)"


Hey! What's wrong with fur diapers and chainmail bikinis?

It's the only way to show off those gigantic thews our heroes have. Do you know how hard you have to work to develop thews like that? Not to mention it's a great outfit to wear to the barbarian beach party. :)