[Gary Wassner]

"The value of a fictive element is not an inherent quality, but a contextual one, determined by its relationship to the other elements of the story it is embedded in." (http://www.strangehorizons.com/2002/20020624/epic_fantasy.shtml)

True or not?

[Gary Wassner]

Just to focus on that one quoted sentence, it seems to me that when an author uses an elf as a character, certain qualities are inherent or assumed and inherent. In the context of epic fantasy, even a 'dark' elf is a relatively known quantity.

[KatG]

Apologize for my earlier rant, Gary. It was late at night. I've removed it. Discussing common fantasy elements is a good subject and one I can understand you want to have in your forum. Such elements are part of plot and story construction, however, not quality of writing or anything having to do with prose style.

That dark elves are familiar I would lay primarily at the feet of the role-playing gaming field, whose impact on the development of genre fantasy and particularly epic fantasy is considerable. (And sadly, usually ignored.) Elves are a species of fairy and there were dark fairies and dark elves in folklore, but dark elves weren't particularly prominent in the literature. In Dungeons and Dragons et al, however, they became a popular tool, both for heroes and monsters. R.A. Salvatore's well known dark elf, for instance, was written as an adjunct to TSR's games lines, and in turn, games were constructed based on Salvatore's books, and as we know, Salvatore's books earned a wide readership. So the element has become very common in genre fantasy and epic fantasy, and of course dark vs. light, evil twins, not so hard to understand. In non-genre fantasy, classical fantasy and fairy tales, dark elves are not nearly as prominent.

Elves themselves are of course pretty common in fantasy literature, stemming from Celtic but also other cultural traditions and folklore. The "known" quantity of elves comes from the cleaned up elves as a matter of noble chilvary, as in the King Arthur legend with the Lady of the Lake and the mischievous but noble fairy elves Oberon and Titantia of Shakespeare's "A Midsummer Night's Dream." Elves thus became reclusive, stewards of nature, possessors of powerful magic, fragile often in population, often guardians of some important item or person, sometimes mischievous, even though that was not entirely their personna in early folklore. (How they came to have pointy ears is an issue of much debate.)

Tolkein, drawing on past medieval texts and British and Scandanavian legends, kept his elves to this vision in LOTR. And since Tolkein jumpstarted genre fantasy, that vision has had a strong impact on genre fantasy, particularly epic fantasy. Elves also often pop up in children's fantasy fiction, so by the time a person starts reading adult genre fantasy, they've usually run into elves before and have an idea of what they are like. Elves very seldom appear in non-genre fantasy, though. You could say that they are a legacy of the genre.

And you can play around with that legacy a great deal. Elves are not locked into the high fantasy mode. There's the old folklore version of elves and completely different versions of elves, just as can be done for vampires, werewolves, dragons, etc. That loses you some familiarity, but creates other options. Of course that's just my take on it, open to debate.

[Gary Wassner]

I believe that what you just said supports my claim that there are inherent qualities in the tropes or characters of epic fantasy that the context may tweak and modify, and even revolutionize, in some cases, in contrast to what this commentator said.

[JRMurdock]

It has been said more times than I can count "Every plot line has been written." So, can something be over done? Yes. Has fantasy had all it's plot lines over done? Yes. Have some authors broken out from the pack? Of course.

The question is not IS it over done but should be WHY do some break free of the drudgery?

Quality Writing.

Combining enough of the over done with a sprinkle of something fresh OR combining enough of to the over done in a way that's not been done before (i.e. Harry Potter). It's not about doing the same story the same way over and over, but mixing it up enough that the reader isn't saying "Dang, another Tolkein clone".

How is that done? I thing those of us who write Epic or even YA fantay would love to figure that out. As Terry Brooks said in his how to write book 'Sometimes the magic works'.

[KatG]

I believe that what you just said supports my claim that there are inherent qualities in the tropes or characters of epic fantasy that the context may tweak and modify, and even revolutionize, in some cases, in contrast to what this commentator said.

I'm not sure. My initial problems with the article don't have to do with the quote you're using for this thread. The quote seems to be saying, it's not the element, but how the author uses the element in the context of the story that gives it power, yes? And you're saying that the element itself does have a power without context because of our understanding of the element? If I've interpreted that clearly, I'd say that you're both right, actually.

[Gary Wassner]

There definitely is an element of truth to both sides. I agree that the tropes have inherent meanings that you cannot avoid as an author if you choose to utilize them. On the other hand, you choose them partially because of those qualities. And I agree that how you use them can certainly increase the dimensions of those qualities and in some cases, sublimate them entirely so that the result is a wholly new understanding of a much used trope.

My comment before was simply to disagree with the statement that they have no inherent qualities outside of individual usage. They do certainly.