Last 20 years - Author - Impact

[ChrisW]

Well fringe fantasy does play its role in influrencing popular fiction.

[Eurytus]

The author who has the widest impact overall, and by this I mean outside of our incestuous genre, would clearly be JK Rowling. Eddings may have been the only thing going in the early years, Feist may have been successful and Jordan more so, and Martin may be well regarded but all of those authors are pretty much totally and utterly unknown to the greater public.

Unless you venture into the fantasy section of a bookshop you would not even know anything about them. With Rowling, even before the films, there were numerous articles about her and the books in mainstream media. In the tabloids, in the broadsheets, on TV.
I can't say the same for any of the other authors mentioned.

Tolkien, Lewis and Rowling are the only authors I see commonly mentioned by the greater public when fantasy is mentioned.

Going beyond those 3 I would say that certainly in the British Isles (can't say for the rest of the world) Pratchett is probably a more widely known author than the rest.

For impact within the genre itself I would have to go with Jordan. He proved that never-ending series of massive tomes would sell. He also appeared to convince every piss-poor writer that they could make money in fantasy.
But his impact outside of the genre is pretty much nil.

[Mithfânion]

Tolkien, Lewis and Rowling are the only authors I see commonly mentioned by the greater public when fantasy is mentioned.

I think you'd have to at least add Phillip Pullmann to this list. Maybe not the first name to come to mind, it certainly isn't for me, but he is very widely read. In fact, he came in third in this year's BBC Big read, where a general UK audience voted for their favorite books, beating for instance Rowling and Lewis (though both of these are in the top ten as well). If you look at the top 200, that's a very impressive and diverse list, modern as well as classic.

Not that I think he has much of a genre impact. For genre impact I'd agree with the choice of Robert Jordan. Maybe one should add Eddings and Feist as well for doing virtually the same thing as RJ. They may in fact have beaten him to it.

Mieville has some impact as well, you see more and more of these new wierd books being published since he became famous for PSS & The Scar. I'd like to add Martin but I don't think that the effects of his writing are that influential on the genre yet.

[Eurytus]

Yeah I forgot Pullman. I think he is very well regarded amongst people who read a lot (hence the big read result) but a huge proportion of the population hardly ever read. And Rowling/Harry Potter is known to them and was even before the films.

I think Pullman has a way to go before he gets to that stage. But the fact that he would feature so highly in the Big Read when pretty much every other fantasy author outside of Tolkien, Lewis and Rowling was not is impressive. Actually it might have been 4, was Peake in there too? Was TH White? That could be classed as fantasy.

In any case, Jordan, Martin, Hobb et all were not. So Pullman punches well above his weight in that regard.

[magze]

I would say Marion Zimmer Bradley and Fiest.
Oh and King's Dark Tower will have an effect in years to come

[Gary Wassner]

Though I know so many disagree, Jordan! Those first four books were just great, and I think they will be just as good 20 years from now if I should read them again.

[Eventine]

Is accessability an issue here?
And I mean that on more than one level. Are Pullman/Rowling/Lewis so popular because they appeal to a more diverse age range?
Will people in 20 years be prepared to fork out for a 10+ BFF series that received much criticism in it's later stages?

[Bond]

Originally Posted by Eurytus

Yeah I forgot Pullman. I think he is very well regarded amongst people who read a lot

That's probably an incomplete description. It's probably more like "amongst people who read a lot but find it distasteful to 'stoop' to reading popular fare".

. . .but a huge proportion of the population hardly ever read.

My own view is that that is perhaps because of authors like Pullman.

Originally Posted by Monosylabik

Skimming the thread I can't see mention of Stephen King

Been there, done that.

[Eurytus]

Originally Posted by Bond

That's probably an incomplete description. It's probably more like "amongst people who read a lot but find it distasteful to 'stoop' to reading popular fare".

I don't agree with that at all. I would suspect that most people who have read Pullman would have read "popular" fare. Not Jordan, Goodkind et all maybe, but then most people would not have read them.
But if you are saying that Pullman is expressely popular amongst people who don't read Clancy, Grisham or Rankin then I would not agree.

Originally Posted by Bond

My own view is that that is perhaps because of authors like Pullman.

Not sure what you mean here. I don't agree if you mean that people don't read because of authors like Pullman.
Not at all.

[Calandra]

I agree with Eurytus about JK Rowling and Robert Jordan. Growing up in the 70s and 80s and being a Tolkien fan but not really a general fantasy fan, there was never really anything that was main stream enough to grab my attention. In contrast, sci-fi had Star Wars and Star Trek which were very appealing.

I don't think I would have ever started reading fantasy except for one night sitting around a pub with some friends discussing Tolkien and someone suggested reading Robert Jordan. After that I became an avid fan of the genre. And yes, he has paved the way for a huge industry of arguably mediocre writers to churn out books that we all buy.

If JK Rowling had been on the scene when I was growing up, I think that things would have been a lot different. For whatever reason, her formula has again catapulted fantasy back to the mainstream. Perhaps it was a coincidence that her star rose at the same time that a visonary like Peter Jackson chose to tackle the impossible and make the LOTR trilogy. I only hope that someone else will come on the scene to move things along even more (as I think Rowling's books are starting to play themselves out and obviously there are no more installments of the trilogy. Incidentally, what a poor Xmas this is going to be with no new LOTR movie to look forward to).

For people in the UK, Pullman is also an important influence. He is big enough that his works were adapted to a major sell-out production at the National Theatre. And in my opinion, his books have the same kind of mythic/biblical elements to them that made something like Star Wars so appealing.

Well, I guess I'm getting a bit off topic here, but my votes go to Rowling, Jordan, and Pullman.

[Bond]

Originally Posted by Eurytus

I don't agree with that at all. I would suspect that most people who have read Pullman would have read "popular" fare. Not Jordan, Goodkind et all maybe, but then most people would not have read them.
But if you are saying that Pullman is expressely popular amongst people who don't read Clancy, Grisham or Rankin then I would not agree.

Well I don't know about the Clancy, Grisham, Rankin bit. I guess I was reminded of the attitude of those people who avoided reading Harry Potter because it was too common and popular and I suspect those votes for HDM are a sort of reflection of that kind of attitude. Frankly, I simply cannot fathom how people could say HDM could be better than HP on almost any criteria unless you like preaching about the evils of religion.

Originally Posted by Eurytus

Not sure what you mean here. I don't agree if you mean that people don't read because of authors like Pullman.
Not at all.

Pullman's writing is described as intelligent by some folks but I find it dumbed down. The complete divergence on this point makes me distrust the opinion of the supposed book authorities that recommend this book. Such disappointments if repeated eventually turn one off reading altogether. I only wonder how many have been less perservering than I because they haven't had as many good experiences as I have to make up for the disappointing ones.