Let's Compare Classic Fantasy VS Modern Fantasy

[@BlackJar72]

I actually like the straight-forwardness of Tolkiens characters -- there are places for gritty, conflicted character, even protagonists, but there are also places for straight-up heroes (and villains). Gritty characters already existed in fiction, including some fantasy. Tolkiens sought to create a purer world, where the lines were less blurred, and also to emulate the patterns of the classic literature (largely myth and legend) he loved, complaining at times that such stories were no longer being written.

[@deborahminter6231]

Ageed!

[@TrueImmortality]

A point I will argue: in the case of books like Lord of the Rings, the characters are archetypes. They're supposed to be cliché because they embody the sum of all characters like them. That's the point of an archetype. Lord of the Rings, Narnia, Prydain, all these books use a classic character type in the same way ancient myths did. They were designed to imitate classical myths.

[@samstruyven8523]

Totally agree. The spiritual function of myths and legends is something that has gone under the radar. I always cringe a bit when I read GRR Martin talk about Tolkien. Archetypal characters are supposed to inspire and encourage readers (or more traditionally, listeners) to emulate their qualities. That's very different from 'contemporary/realistic' characters such as in GoT with whom readers are able to identify because they are so obviously flawed and have familiar kinds of relationship and family issues. Martin's universe is quite dense, elaborate and fascinating, but it's the ending that will show to what extent he has been really creative: the battle between good and evil has been told a gazillion times by now, so I hope he does bring something a bit different to his story than just time-loops and "every character has some good and some evil in them".

[@danecobain]

I'd argue that in the Princess Bride, it was essentially a parody of other fantasy novels and so the composition of the characters was very deliberate

[@kingconan4crom]

I find it interesting how people nowadays enjoy what they can relate to more than what they can look up to or strive to be like, which is what the hero always represented. The hero was never intended in my humble opinion to relate to the majority, because in a sense, he or she would not be a hero. Heroes are what they are because many are not willing to follow in their footsteps. Heroes are supposed to inspire, not make you feel like you're not all that bad because you've got the same problems as they do. I'm not saying heroes shouldn't have problems, that's not realistic. I am simply saying that Heroes were not meant to be like the majority, otherwise everyone would be a hero. Also, I don't think it is fair to say "well you know who is going to win because they are the hero." A good story is not comprised of plots that you can't figure out or guess ahead who will win or not. Good stories to me are the ones that make a believer out of you in what its trying to sell whether its typical or not. I can list many things on what makes a good story, but I think one of the most important elements to a good story is consistency. The characters and their archetypes must leave you with some sense of satisfaction, some sort of relief based off all they went through or worked towards. If all people want are stories that they cannot predict, all we're going to end up with is stories that are NOT consistent. If all people want is a character they can relate to, were going to end up with nothing but anti heroes and the true essence of a heroic character will die out.

[@lotrings1]

This 100%

[@destiny-1831]

You make a good point, but i think charecter developement in LOTR is just more subtle that in other fantasy books

[@Anonim_Anonimovic]

I enjoy both classic and modern fantasy, but I have to say that I enjoy the classic type more because it just touches me on some deeper level. Sure, in modern fantasy you have unpredictable characters, areas of gray in morality, and interesting stories. When I watch/read/play modern fantasy I'm always on the edge of my seat wanting to see what happens next. And yet, I can watch LotR over and over and never be bored with it, for one simple reason - I don't watch it for the story, I watch it for the atmosphere. The down-to-earth aesthetics of the world full of anglo-saxon/germanic/celtic elements, the way characters act in an old-fashioned "era-appropriate" manner, the fact that magic is extremely rare and unexplicable, undefinable, all of that combined with a fantastic soundtrack provides an atmospheric experience like no other. The opening shots of the Shire, when Haldir dies, when Theoden's son is being buried, and afterwards when he and Gandalf linger on his grave, or when Aragorn is crowned... I know all these moments by heart. Yet they always make me tear up, because they truly move me, I truly feel that classic fantasy vibe, and that is something modern fantasy has never done for me. Banner Saga gave me the same experience. It's a shame classic fantasy is so rare nowadays. I would exchange all of Martin's work for just one more good classic fantasy book, movie, or game.

[@chowyee5049]

I have to completely disagree here. Susan eventually grows up and rejects Narnia. Gollum reverts to his old ways but becomes the saviour of Middle Earth by pure accident while Frodo succumbs to the One Ring and ultimately fails to fulfill his mission. Can you really tell me that any modern fantasy author has bent their characters like Lewis and Tolkien have? Also, do you really think that the Pevensie siblings in Narnia fall into any kind of D&D archetype? I sure can't see it.

[@GungfuRichard]

In Lion Witch Wardrobe, Edward's and Mr. Tumnus alignment went back and forth.

[@andreaw2053]

I have a question - were these character clichés actually clichés at the time that classic fantasy was written, or have we just come to see them that way because clichés have been derived from them?

[@omkargurav8992]

Modern fantasy not using classic cliches has become new cliche which is actually getting tired.

[@andreaw2053]

@@omkargurav8992 it's a confusing cycle

[@omkargurav8992]

@@andreaw2053 Yeahh. I think it depends upon plot also like I don't like hp and chosen one thing but in contrast I love rand and chosen one dragon reborn thing.

[@woomod2445]

@@andreaw2053 The cycle is one set of character archetypes becoming the cliche and then becoming discarded as they no longer speak to the cultural zeitgeist, we won't go back to the tolkein tropes, but the current characters will be codified called cliche, and new archetypes will spring up as remixes of them and the world around the next era of fantasy.

[@deborahminter6231]

Exactly!

[@athenassigil5820]

Everything is of its place and time. I love fantasy, period.

[@Kikilang60]

There was copious amounts of fantasy written before "Lord of the Rings", like Lord Dudsany's "King of Elfland Daughter", Kenneth Grahame's "The Reluctant Dragon", or the very famous "The Princess and the Goblin.' by Geoge Macdonald. What was so special about "Lord of the Rings" was it was written in mainstream style. Remember, "The Hobbit" was a childrens book, but it was part of that movement to write up to children, not down. After, "Lord of the Rings", hundreds of fantasy novel were written, most of it existed a genera ghetto. Then there was the Year 1977, and Terry Brooks published "The Sword of Sharnna" and Shephen R. Donaldson wrote "Lord Fouls Bane". Both novels were inspired by "Lord of the Rings", but were written for the mainstream audience. Terry Brooks work was good, but it lite literature. Stephen R, Donaldson's work was a full blown adult literature. 1977 was a ground breaking year, the success of Brooks, and Donaldson fueled many amazing works, which inspire dozens of sub genera fantasy fiction lines. There was modern urban fantasy, and anthropomorphic fantasy, horror fantasy, and humor fantasy. The level of variety has never been matched again. Than fantasy died down for a while. Eventually, fantasy was reborn, but it parady of itself. The variety was gone, but it replaced with epic fantasy where people politically correct. Modern fantasy is very limited in style.

[@gorthalaxtheinsatiable8718]

Fafhrd and the Gray Mouser fought strange beings with blades for hands who send a hallucinatory old man with a magic voice to lure travelers to their island so they can feed them to their strange offspring which hatch from eggs. In their first published story, they tried to get a treasure from some ruins that turned out to be a giant living being made of stone. The first story ever written about them was completed a year before The Hobbit, though it wasn't published until later. Also, Conan murdered some dudes for insulting him and then rescued an emaciated elephant god from a mad wizard in The Tower of the Elephant, released four years before The Hobbit.

[@kamuelalee]

Nice comments!

[@kamuelalee]

I respect your opinions but I disagree wholeheartedlly. Modern fantasy emerges out of Robert E Howard's Conan the Barbarian (the modern beginnings of Sword and Sorcery fiction) in the 1930s, Lord of the Rings (1930 through the 1940s) and runs through the New Wave genres of fantasy that emerged in the 1960s and 1970s with counterculture writers like Piers Anthony, Michael Moorcock, Roger Zelazny, among others. Those writers, along with Tolkien, paved the way for the fantasy of later years like George RR Martin and Jordan. Also, Princess Bride the novel is not classic fantasy either -- unless 1973, the year it was written, long ago for you.

[@bobschmidt419]

Go back farther. ERB. Created Tarzan and John Carter. That IS classic, not necessarily fantasy. You need to start at the beginning.

[@bobschmidt419]

Michael Moorcock is one of my favorite authors. Alan Dean Foster and Anne McCaffrey are right behind. Dennis L McKiernan , Terry Brooks are also enjoyable.

[@capgangchannel6309]

Lotr is not classic fantasy. Lotr is the first modern fantasy. Classic fantasy are tales like Beowulf and Gilgamesj.

[@raknai]

Truth

[@arte0021]

these are old myths. they are not considered fantasy. fantasy is a literary genre that is influenced by myth but has named authors and started in the early 20th century

[@malcomalexander9437]

Incorrect, LoTR is not the first modern fantasy book, that would be Lord Dunasy's Gods of Pegana, a book that had a great influence upon Tolkien.

[@kodan7879]

But then there is Dracula, Frankenstein and the others with monsters and magical stuff. Where do they fit?

[@radamanthium]

@@kodan7879 Frankenstein it actually a predecessor of Sci-Fi

[@NerdyBlurbTV]

I think you're absolutely right. Even though we see character flaws, like desires that may be darker for main characters in classic fantasy, modern fully exposes those flaws and acts upon them. Good point and thanks for the thoughts!

[@Charlie-wm3io]

This is the discussion I have with myself all the time. I agree on each and every point. The character quality is much better and they are amazing.

[@chadrickm]

Agree totally on characters in modern being more relatable. Internal conflict and the potential for your favorite characters to go down the wrong path is very real and exciting.

[@allisonoliveira6758]

_I liked your point of view, the video was excellent, fast and objective. Congratulations. I'm sorry for my bad English, this comment is a Brazilian fan. Peace._

[@deborahminter6231]

There is also a bit of a darker style going on in fantasy nowadays, in the past the hero's journey was a basic format for the plot and character development in fiction as well as myth and legends. The heroic character was and is popular in audiences, even so modern authors are exploring new ways to create conflicting characters with darker themes in modern times.

[@austindavid7155]

Having grown up on classic fantasy, that's pretty much what I stick with. If there's not a clear-cut Fighter, Elf, Dwarf, Wizard, Thief, or Cleric type character, I don't find the fantasy relatable.. which is one of the reasons I never got into Stormlight Archive and similar works. I actually hope fantasy goes back to these roots pretty soon.

[@andrewbakonyvari7381]

Thanks for the videos, enjoying them as not many of my friends are in to fantasy and I'm fairly new to the genre. Read the entirety of the song of ice and fire (as far as written), wheel of time, riftwar cycle and a good bunch of the Discworld books... what would you recommend next, enjoyed all of the above? Also, if you've not come across the Discworld books by Terry Pratchett, they are VERY different fantasy books, wonder what you would think of them.

[@boxbo7926]

Andrew Bakonyvari I’m new to the fantasy genre too, but some books that I’ve read and really enjoyed (although they a a little more lighthearted than a couple of the books you listed and I haven’t read all the books you’ve listen either) are the belgariad, sword of truth, the mistborn trilogy, and right now I’m reading sword of shannara (which I am really enjoying) (FYI a lot of these books follow the “farm boy is the one destined to save the world classic fantasy trope so just a warning

[@tedpaulus]

I’m no expert but I don’t think character complexity is the defining factor. Look at Boromir in LoTR and even Frodo being tempted by the ring and being paranoid of Sam. Look at Edmund in CoN. In my opinion the difference is really the scale and involvement of human politics and intrigue that defines modern fantasy. Modern fantasy has exploded in scale, multiplying books and numbers of characters and also become serial in how it is created and consumed rather than with a predefined beginning and end.

[@ebiadmin4220]

dude! Warn me before through out a spoiler about Rand like that! I am still reading the Great Hunt. :-( I was hoping he wasn't going to go crazy

[@AngryGoats555]

Ryan Holsapple He has to. It’s established that the Dragon has to go insane because he’s a man

[@arte0021]

isnt it obvious though? they literally say that all men who use the One Power will go insane

[@michaelshort2388]

Not really. I am still on book 8 and there have been hints that he is looking for a way to cleanse saidin.

[@arte0021]

he is

[@arte0021]

wasnt he pretty insane in book 8? i remember hating it because Rand was an unlikable paranoid schizofrenic

[@marioksoresalhillick299]

I think The Lord of the Rings has very interesting character development.

[@jamesmacleod9382]

I would argue that Forgotten Realms and Dragonlance et al did far more to make these character types "predictable". With like a 100 books with the characters lifted more or less from D&D which in turn took the archetypes from LOTR. When did the modern era start anyway?

[@christopherpoet458]

I am not sure Lord of the Rings is the best example here. And my only reason for this is the movies. For the books, I agree, the characters are rather classified by these roles that they play and never do much to grow from them but through the movies, there is a lot more character development. At least, it looks like there is. I know people who have never read the books and when they hear LOTR being mentioned as a "Classic" fantasy, they just get this confused look and ask "How?". If your only referring to the books it works but if we include the movie adaptations, then is could arguably stand in both as the movies lean more towards a Modern Fantasy than a Classical Fantasy. IMO.

[@roderik4]

In the first half of The Fellowship of the Ring, Frodo does not want to inherit the Ring even less leave the Shire. Sam an NPC. Merry and Pippin are also NPCs, but more childish and naive. Boromir is heroic and loyal to the cause, Gimli resents Legolas and his people for how they treated his father and his king and Legolas has no respect for him. In my opinion, for a work of literature that imitates mythology and archetypal (you can call them cliches if it suits you) themes, LOTR has a lot of character development. One could criticize ASOIAF for having too few archetypal figures, but it would be missing the point I think

[@WillMassey-by5nk]

Technically I kinda think that the wheel of time is more of product of the Lord of the rings because both of those two book serieses technically came out 20th century and that's also because of the longevity that they have with the span of the years that they came from

[@OleDack]

You really should've given a spoiler warning for Wheel of Time...

[@jamaluddinkhalifa8371]

SPOILERS FOR WHEEL OF TIME from 2:25 till 2:28

[@wdmassey1734]

Ok look the idea of classic fantasy is technically based upon the fundamentals of what makes high medieval fantasy more popular than modern fantasy is that what makes modern fantasy is generally made up by stuff that was considered as the pop culture in mainstream culture but with classic fantasy it`s more based on the solid foundations of what we call fantasy entertainment and you can see that in the early 2000s because back when i back i was a kid there was stuff like medieval history books and historical documentaries like say national geographic and they would references that you can actually find in like the lord of the rings and king arthur and the knights of the round table and also beowulf within mythology and folklore and the supernatural but as for the cliche's in classic fantasy they are more traditional based on the stuff in the mythology and folklore in what JRR Tolkien talked about in his essay on fairy stories with knights and castles, dragons witches and wizards, elves, dwarves fairies goblins , ogres but it's with the basis on medieval stories that would have supernatural mythology

[@WillMassey-by5nk]

Technically I kinda don't agree with what you Daniel Greene was talking about when your saying that classic fantasy doesn't much appeal to modern fantasy because classic fantasy is more popular than modern fantasy because of the the fact of the Longview of that genre

[@wdmassey1734]

Ok here is I'am going to say is that the real idea of classic fantasy is technically the reason why classic fantasy is kind of predictable is because in the style of what JRR Tolkien did with his lord of the rings trilogy is by giving Britian a new kind of mythology and that's due to the Norman conquest of 1066 and as for Tolkien is that he was a fan of the old Norse Germanic folklore and that's the same with CS Lewis in where both him and his best friend JRR Tolkien was that with classic fantasy it's more relating to the style of their works of fantasy and what you and the other fantasy authors and even college professors call it would be known as high or epic fantasy and in where as we call classic fantasy would be classified as mythic fantasy which is based on mythology which can also be called medieval epic fantasy

[@michaelwatson4426]

A lot depends on how the story is being presented. Myth, allegory, fable or direct first person. Who is the story for etc.?.

[@zakdickerson9154]

No Daniel! How dare you 5 years ago spoil a part of wheel of time for me! I’ve made it so far through your videos without it happening…😅

[@mrfriendlyguy]

Maybe you should do a talk about black powder fantasy, a subgenre I am really enjoying with writers such as Django Wexler and Brian McClellan.

[@omarbinno4390]

I wouldn't say that characters today are beating those of yesterday's fantasy due to less cliche. I just think it's a different trend/mindset.

[@josephgarvey5505]

I just started reading WOT because of the passion you have for the series. That said, huge spoiler for RANDS caracter. I'm kind of depressed now... :(

[@wdmassey1734]

Actually I kinda think that in classic fantasy is that with aragorn was more of a hero in the context of the lord of the rings because in the fellowship of the ring he said to arawn that he has the same weakness as his ancestor did back when he had the ring and that's kind of the same with prince Caspian in the chronicles of Narnia in where he had the same weakness as his father in not by being a tyrant to the kingdom of Narnia because his uncle had the power to rule but that's not the right way to govern a kingdom

[@vgmaster9]

Since D&D is an example of classic fantasy, let's see an RPG that's the equivalent to it on modern fantasy.

[@mandaloretheangry9043]

what about Fantasy set in a Modern word

[@Yora21]

Interesting to class Wheel of Time as modern fantasy and contrast it to The Lord of the Rings. Wheel of time is closer to the Lord of the Rings than to today.

[@johnparker4484]

He argue elsewhere that that series really helped bridge that gap

[@Charlie-wm3io]

I agree completely. The characters are definitely more tangible and real in my opinion for modern fantasy. I feel the female characters have grown to be absolutely fantastic... is great. females were good in classic fantasy but modern it feels more fleshed out I guess. I bring the nerdy nerd I am enjoy both.

[@eymerichinquisitore9022]

Elric of Melnibone is the first modern character (1971)

[@arte0021]

Elric first appeared in 1961

[@Mankcam]

Yep and Elric was an anti-hero as well, much earlier than anything George Martin cooked up

[@arte0021]

modern fantasy has a tendency to be extemrely long, tedious and boring and have a lot of different characters without one protagonist and seem to favor the third person limited style with shifting to different characters` POV.

[@arte0021]

i think you replied to a wrong comment. what has that to do with my comment?

[@Pend3rlab]

Not sure if trolling or just confused....

[@kodan7879]

yes.

[@adenmacdonald2911]

I'm currently reading Wheel of Time for the first time, and you just dropped a big spoiler about Rand for me. Thanks

[@aj2563]

Maybe just stick away from fantasy videos if you didn’t want spoilers??

[@adenmacdonald2911]

Or put a spoiler warning in? This wasn't a Wheel of time specific video

[@aj2563]

@@adenmacdonald2911 again, do your due diligence. Kind of happy you got it spoiled tbh

[@adenmacdonald2911]

@@aj2563 your commenting on something from a year ago. Do you have a life? Are you sexually frustrated??? Try meditation. Exercise? Does wonders. How can I help you?

[@aj2563]

@@adenmacdonald2911 you might wanna watch out on the self projection

[@_MrPixel_]

For me it really depends some time a well crafted world with a good story is more than enough while character growth a development is in many instances are good it can be a hassle since hearing the character struggles all the time can put me off the world and the story

[@JCMacDonald]

can you please do a review on lightbringer trilogy? i love those books and would love to hear your review on them, trust me it will NOT be a waste of your time

[@DanielGreeneReviews]

Well this is a late reply, but I am doing the king killer series, then Lightbringer right after that!

[@johnparker4484]

Interesting calling Tolkien “classic”, since he’s really known as the one who created “modern” fantasy

[@meganwaybright1009]

Great video

[@vagabondvlad]

I think LOTR, Amber Chronicles and many other classic fantasy books shows us no less good characters than any modern fantasy writers. Modern fantasy characters are more often (than in classic fantasy) are unstable and mentally ill, controversial, etc. So what? This do not make them more believable , close to reader or overall better. They widening gray zone not always bring new dimensions to a story about fight between light and darkness 🙄 and ... Anyway 50 shades of gray will not help you to tell really good love story 😉 When I read lotr, I recognize in Sam, Boromir, Frodo, etc some of my close friends. I never had that feeling reading Game if Thrones.

[@iriya3227]

Totally Agree here man. I feel like tho classic fantasy was more like escape from real-life into a magical world where the super good beats super evil. Generally author championing his/her intended value, e.g love, loyalty etc. Modern family seems more interesting and I can connect to it more and empathize with the characters more often. It's more like what if real humans lived in a magical world. The character's action and the story is more logical and closer to reality making it more of like what if reality and history were more entertaining rather than just sensational escapism and ex-machinas.

[@chloe_363]

Please review the king of elfland's daughter :)

[@RhiannonSenpai]

0:50 Wheel pf Time doesn't pull from "Middle Eastern ideology" that's such a dumb phrase. Some of the settings and cultures resemble the Middle East but not the ideology or religion. The magic system and philosophy with the Yin and Yang pulls from Taoist philosophy and Chinese spirituality.

[@Kikyuoo]

Watching cause of nglish homework

[@zedatkinszed1216]

What a lot of hog wash. Books don't "beat" books. And please don't hold up Brandon Sanderson's 2 dimensional writing as an example of good characterization that's just silly. Sanderson does great plot. His characters are telegraphed cliches. Tolkien and CS Lewis characters might look like cliches or DnD rogues and mages *to you* Because *you* are anachronistically comparing them to that, but in truth Lewis and Tolkien made the tropes. Other people copied and derived from them. Also classic fantasy what do you actually mean - Lord Dunsany, Edgar Burroughs, RE Howard, Lovecraft? Tolkien and Lewis came 1 to 2 decades later than most of these (and 3 to 4 after Dunsany) And Tolkien didn't become popular outside the UK till the 1960s (a further 2 decades) You might as well lump his work in with Le Guin and Moorcock (who btw are fantastic writers and put Sanderson to shame). Sorry mate but you don't even have the knowledge to give your own argument context.

[@MCshowuhz]

I think you nailed it, sir.

[@andrewpmckim]

Wow, that was biased

[@kamuelalee]

Shallow review of fantasy genre!

[@marlonheiss5704]

KALADIIIN!!! I Mean wheel of time and all that but KALADIIIN!!! :D