Reddit Topic: Would Something Tolkienesque Be Read Today?

[Coír Draoi Ceítien]

There's an interesting thread going on right now on Reddit that you might want to check out: https://www.reddit.com/r/Fantasy/comments/7e04z7/would_something_tolkienesque_be_read_today/

Basically, it's being asked if something with deep lore and archaisms with epic overtones would sell well in today's market. Sure, it may go without saying, but some of the series going on today aren't so completely new - they've been around for a while. In fact, it's only with the TV adaptations that they're reaching wide public audiences.

Take a look through the comments and tell me what you think. Is there a place for more Tolkien-style works, preferably original? Or have attention spans been considerably shortened?

[Raven]

Interesting discussion happening over there.
My thoughts on the matter are that it wouldn't really sell. What would sell today? Game of Thrones and Harry Potter would sell. Notice neither use the older forms of the language, really. We're another 70 years-ish removed from Tolkien's language now than even back when he wrote, and our language continues to undergo serious changes.
That said, there is a niche audience for Tolkienesque things, sure. But the reality is there are more books than ever and it does not seem like the readership has necessarily expanded to match that, what with screen time being what it is.
I think a few people had some really nice points about this on the discussion you linked. It makes me think of Sir Thomas Mallory and Le Morte D'Arthur. Would a book about King Arthur sell today? Yes, possibly. Would one even based on Le Morte D'Arthur sell? Possibly. Would a new Le Morte D'Arthur sell (i.e., same style, same type of content)? Not likely, in my opinion. Fashions change and so does language.

[Nephmodule]

I didn't read the Reddit nor the other response to this thread. The reason being that I've been a fiction writer for 10+ years and I've been in the audio drama writing/production scene for a couple years and in both those circles I've seen this same topic become ad nauseam. 

With the rise of self-publishing and with the new trend of audio dramas catching on, there are accessible channels for creators to produce content (of varying quality) and with less 'gate-keeping' (quality assurance). But with this content also being more easily accessible by the masses in this ditial age then the content has the possibility of reaching a larger and wider audience.   

People who've probably never read LOTR or know what "Tolkienesque fantasy' is would probably listen to any Tolkien pastiche story without prior bias. Plus, there is always new generations who haven't been exposed to Tolkien who may discover it through new channels (Youtube, Spotify, pod catchers, ebook, etc.); plus, the video game industry is now rivaling Hollywood's movie industry -- someone makes a LOTR or similar Tolkienesque video game and boom! -- Tolkienesque-fantasy styled novels would be a new hot trend. Don't underestimate the power of social media marketing. 

Lovecraftian-style Cthulhu Mythos stories are still popular enough these days that anthologies still pay pro-rates for well-written mythos.


But if we're talking $$$ ka-ching capitalism . . .   

Prolly not. 

YA dystopia and YA paranormal and YA melodrama is king of the publishing world right now. Even in the romance industry, the biggest money-making scheme in the publishing world, you gotta write NA (new adult) in a modern setting.

Also, the term 'fantasy' has exploded . . . I mean EXPLODED! -- since Tolkien's days. Grimdark is (or was) a trendy new direction and that term wasn't coined until the late '80s with the creation of Warhammer 40k. 

Arguing over whether Tolkienesque-type book would sell now or not is a complete waste of time.

Might as well argue over whether a new Conan movie would be a good or bad idea for 2019. 

[Raven]

Nephmodule,

You've reflected some of the points I made in my reply.
There are niche markets for just about everything. But times change and the "big thing" changes.
Personally, when I look at the dominant publishing industry, I don't see a whole lot of room for the kind of stuff I like to write. But does that matter? There are lots of ways to create outlets for writing, in whatever style. Doesn't mean you're gonna get tons of readership, but you might get some.

[Nephmodule]

I try not to be cynical and jaded toward the topic, but after having endured it throughout the years, it's difficult. 

What I'd like to do now, if this group's direction could permit, is to explore the topic in more detail, from an analytical angle.   

Let's break things down into: Commercial vs. Fandom

And: Can Fandom become Commercial?   

Does Tolkien describe a style of literary writing? 
Or does Tolkien describe a style of fantasy tropes? 

What is the definition of 'Tolkienesque'?
Is it style? Content? Both?

What makes Martin's SoI&F different to LOTR? 
What makes it similar to LOTR? 


-
Can Tolkien's literary style be incorporated into more modern styles?
How so?
Why not?
Why should they be avoided?
Why shouldn't they be avoided? 


And I'm sure a hundred more questions could be asked that could produce another hundred questions and so forth.   

It all leads to bigger and better things. 

Or to bigger things within in the same things? 

















44

[Raven]

Analytical . . . We can do that.


I'll take the topic question by question:


Let's break things down into: Commercial vs. Fandom

Sounds good.

And: Can Fandom become Commercial?   

Absolutely. Didn't Shades of Grey start out as Twilight fan-fiction? That certainly went commercial.
The trends within genres and literature itself are kind of a fandom of literature's contemporary styles, in one respect. Tolkien himself was a "fan" of certain types of folklore and history as well as writers such as George MacDonald, I believe (I believe the Princess and the Goblin was an inspiration in the Hobbit). Tolkien's story of Turin son of Hurin likely came from the Finnish Kalevala.
Most people are reflecting trends and styles in how they write. People don't write in a vacuum.

Does Tolkien describe a style of literary writing?

Sure. Tolkien drew heavily on Anglo-Celtic (and probably other) languages to populate his world with certain types of sounds. His prose can certainly be copied stylistically, including the somewhat elevated diction.


Or does Tolkien describe a style of fantasy tropes? 
This more than anything. Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Tolkien basically create the -ves ending for elves and dwarves? Prior to that it was elfin and dwarfin, I believe. The "big four" races, as I would like to call them, are orcs, elves, dwarves, and humans for a reason -- Tolkien. Tolkien is also fairly cosmic. His worldbuilding encompassed creation and apocalyptic prophecy. Granted, Lewis was doing something similar at the same time. I'm trying to think of fantasy works prior to that that had such a scope.
Also, Tolkien made his characters in The Hobbit and the Lord of the Rings walk. A lot. There was the epic journey that played such a big part of his more iconic works. Was this present in fantasy literature prior to him? Yes, there were journeys, certainly -- MacDonald's Phantastes and the journey through fairyland, for example. Travel has long been part of the fairy tale tradition. Still, Tolkien's work made it happen on a grander scale, I think, in a more fully fleshed out world.



What is the definition of 'Tolkienesque'?

I would suggest some combination of the above descriptions of style and tropes.




Is it style? Content? Both?

Yes, both, I think.

What makes Martin's SoI&F different to LOTR? 

SoI&F exists in a world without such hyper-clarity in terms of good and evil. Tolkien's world was in some ways a moral simple place. It was Sauron and the ring which represented evil. In SoI&F, evil is more endemic to humanity, and "good" qualities do not necessarily bring the type of victory we would see in a Tolkien work (even victorious defeat). The morality and spirituality of Tolkien's world is very clear. Martin's prose is also much "lower" in terms of diction and content, obviously, and his characters are more complex generally (even the winter king is more ambiguous than Sauron). Martin is as much a psychological and sociological story as an epic or mythology. Tolkien's One Ring is the flaw of all humanity. Martin doesn't externalize that in the same way.

What makes it similar to LOTR? 

It is similar in that it is set in a large world with a significant mythos and it does have a terrible evil scourge trying to overrun the land. There is a lot of walking. There are swords and battles of an epic scale (though written differently). There are magic powers and other races and dragons. The elements and tropes set it within the same general world of genre. But the perspective, style, and prose are quite different.


-
Can Tolkien's literary style be incorporated into more modern styles?

In terms of prose, that would be difficult. In terms of some linguistic conventions, it would be easy. The way that the world's languages, placenames, etc are constructed from particular linguistic traditions and sounds -- that would be possible. Having a more removed method of description than a Martin -- for example, Tolkien is more broad and mythic in his description of battle -- would be possible, absolutely. Would it be as well received as a nitty gritty work like Martin's? That's iffy. But then again, what makes something "modern?" The fact that it is contemporary, happening right now?

How so?
Why not?
Why should they be avoided?
Why shouldn't they be avoided? 

I don't think things should or shouldn't be avoided. Can or can't is one thing. Should or shouldn't is a very different thing. I want to write what I enjoy, in a style that feels natural to me.

[Coír Draoi Ceítien]

I would also like to add that another of Tolkien's chief inspirations was William Morris, who was quite prolific in fiction as well as poetry, essays, and translations of medieval texts, especially Icelandic sagas. According to the Wikipedia article, Morris's work was a deliberate attempt to revive the genre of medieval romance, as well as the first (arguably) to set fantasy fiction in a totally separate imagined world. So part of the argument may be a question if the world is still welcoming to romantic works, in the old sense. It would seem that a lot of authors today want to dispel most of the romantic imagery for realism, perhaps in an effort to make sense of reality while still retaining the otherworldly background. Still, I say there is a place for romance, even if it may not be exactly to the level that it once was.