I personally have a massive beef with urban fantasy because so many that I've read (mainly YA as I used to be really into them when I was a teenager) heavily focus on romance, which I am not a fan of. The romance is usually not representative of a healthy relationship. I don't think I've ever read an UF that didn't have a dark mysterious, dangerous male hero who everybody misunderstands and must be 'tamed' by some silly heroine who spends WAY to much time obsessing over his 'godlike' looks and ignoring the fact that that man is frightening her. Where are all the good guys with great personalities and badass powers? Where are all the bad guys who are actually presented as being emotionally or physically abusive? Or controlling and creepy. *Coughs*, Twilight, *coughs*. I personally, would love to read an UF that doesn't involve generic characters, romance, dead parents or a 'chosen one'. But that's just my opinion.
While fairly smutty, the (3) book series starting with Good Intentions by Elliot Kay is decent enough urban fantasy that had pretty good (as in healthy) romance, with really good characters. You could give it a try.
S. M. Reine's Descent and Ascension series have a female protagonist who is far from silly. I would say that Elise Cavanaugh's personality is more like Anita Blake's (if you've read Laurell K. Hamilton), but Elise deals with angels, demons, and a whole mess of nasty supernatural creatures. She's an angry, crass, kick-ass character. Also, sex takes a back burner to story in Reine's books. The first three books in the [Descent](https://www.amazon.com/Descent-Books-1-3-Deaths-Darkest-ebook/dp/B009YADS38/ref=sr_1_22?ie=UTF8&qid=1491495633&sr=8-22&keywords=s.+m.+reine) series are currently free for Kindle on Amazon (via the provided link).
>I personally, would love to read an UF that doesn't involve generic characters, romance, dead parents or a 'chosen one'.
What about one with not so generic characters (at least in my opinion), the most "romance" thing being an awkward kiss between a gay boy and his straight crush, the parent (also the more or less main character) doesn't die until the end, and the 'chosen one' may or may not be the 'chosen one'? (._.)
Don't get me wrong, I think anything can be a great story, as long as the characters are fleshed out and I can really get behind them. I have read books with plots I've hated, just because I loved one or two of the characters. I believe characters are everything, but obviously, this won't be the case for all readers.
The Protagonist or the Villain is always a special half-breed of sorts, just an excuse to add a special factor because 5 times out of 10, it's the only thing that stands out next to their empty personalities.
The "Chosen Heroine" plot. Short description:
- Normal girl, with no connection to the mythical stuff
- Meets dark brooding love interest
- Love interest has secret
- Said secret leads both of them into trouble with mythical stuff
- They fall in love
- Find special item that will help them win
- Big unnecessary battle
- Girl and love interest go to fuck off-screen for a happy ending
It's so overused that I can't bring myself to read YA fiction anymore.
''God, somehow you saving my life erases all the things I hate about you!"
Yeah, that's annoying too. Saving someone's life can go far, and when it's with people that you hate it can give you a reason to tolerate them more; but it doesn't erase what pisses you off.
Well hey now, that plot structure is not a bad one. There are almost no bad plot structures. Sure it's pretty trope heavy at this point. However, good things can still come out of it. Star Wars is about as cliched as it gets, however that does not make Star Wars bad. You feel me?
I wouldn't say Star Wars is bad, because it obviously isn't, but I will say that I do not particularly like it. I liked the original trilogy, but this completely new shit, while certainly visually impressive, I find to be just an uninspired piece of fanservice that does nothing new because it is afraid to explore the potential of the Star Wars universe after the crimes against humanity that were the prequels.
I don't think this is a trope necessarily, but a pet peeve of mine is how UF will have a super powerful, ancient paranormal race but in a human dominated world. For example, how exactly does a super powerful vampire race allow ancient humans to develop beyond being a food source/slaves? Why do they have to hide? If vampires have always existed and in numbers of more than say 100 worldwide, why would they need to hide their existence? Why wouldn't they rule the world? Add in other powerful, supernatural races and many characters with a "I hate humans, wish we could go back to the old days of indiscriminate feasting on humans" attitude and I just can't see how it can be a mirror to our world without some explanation.
Very good point. I have read a few vampire books that made me think this. If vampires are so much faster, stronger, smarter and overall more powerful, then why are they hiding? It doesn't make much sense.
It would make sense for the vampires to rule the world but keep their rule secret. That way, humans continue to create a comfortable technological civilization and provide an abundant food source while offering no resistance, because they believe that vampires ruling the world is just an urban fantasy 'conspiracy theory.'
I like this one. If they're more powerful than humans in [almost] every way, then they'd be capable of playing longer, more patient games. Simply ruling the world and eating all the humans would be like us killing all our livestock in one go, thinking it'd solve all hunger-related problems.
This is actually a plot point in my current project. My local equivalent of vampires *did* rule the world until humans discovered magic, at which point hundreds of thousands of pissed-off mages descended on tens of thousands of unprepared vampires. Those that survived and their descendants were forced into hiding; the main protagonist is a (relatively) young vampire on a quest to restore his people's rule.
If I'm a vampire and part of the minority ruling class, how do I not notice hundreds of thousands of people being trained in the magic arts to kill me? That's a big army. Seems like way too big a number to be all secret like.
The way it happened in my world was that one (human) general in the vampires' service began a massive recruitment drive for mages once magic appeared, while simultaneously plotting with other generals to use them to overthrow their rulers. When the day came, the general and his followers offered the mages an ultimatum- fight for the vampires, or fight to destroy them. The vampires were not exactly popular for various reasons, and most of the new mages chose to rise up in rebellion. The closest comparison I can think of would be Order 66 in Star Wars.
One of my favorite UF books, Monster Hunter International, stated that if vampires ever called too much attention to themselves by the general public they wouldn't stand a chance of surviving, no matter how powerful they were.
When there are billions of humans, yes. But historically when a large village might be 50 people, not likely. Especially those authors who make their vampires magical or great diggers *and* plentiful. How is the human population of 200 bc supposed to overcome a vampire, much less have the time to become the human race as it is today? Even numerical advantage doesn't matter if you can't get close enough to kill them.
But even then they'd be killing off their food supply.
I think 50 people could definitely kill a vampire. There'd be like 5 survivors, but still.
I suppose it really just depends on how strong the writers make their vampires.
Definitely. Some authors just make them so strong and so numerous you just can't help but think it's too much. Everything in nature has strengths and weaknesses; I find stories that follow that kind of logic more interesting. They don't have to spell it out but some kind of logical reasons for everything is appreciated. ;)
Sure, but there are plenty of UF novels around where the supernatural populations aren't small and have few weaknesses that humanly can exploit. So there's little to explain how these, clearly dominant, species allow humanity to develop technology to the point of being a real danger to them. Forget guns, I'm talking about tanks, missiles and nuclear bombs. In stories where there are very few vampires (or whatever) then it makes sense, but some have enough that the human birthrate doesn't explain it all to me.
There's always the World of Darkness explanation:
Vampires can run things from the shadows so effectively that revealing themselves wouldn't accomplish anything other than making things harder on themselves. They don't need to openly rule when they can just put the mayor under mind control anyway.
You know, if these stories were actually realistic, the vampires wouldn't even have to do much except demonstrate their powers and the ancient humans would worship them as gods on the spot. I mean hell, ancient people, and modern people alike are known for worshiping all sorts of crazy things, or at least believing that they have religious significance with very little evidence. Like the Greeks thinking lightning was caused by Zues or people thinking that Jesus is showing up on toast and such. If there were actually walking and talking creatures with superhuman and magical abilities. They would be considered gods among men and people would blindly follow them out of fear alone.
Worked on one UF and, yeah, they pretty much do rule the world. Not with an iron fist, or anything, but the oldest ones are more or less the .1% that own most everything.
I don't thin Urban Fantasy necessarily has to have the trope of the "Vampire Hunter" (made famous in Dracula). I much preferred Frankenstein, where the doctor is chasing the monster, but also have quite an attachment to it as well.
I also hate that "Urban Fantasy" often ignores the every-day life struggles. Not enough scenes set in restaurants, or people waking up in a normal bed in a normal house (not being scared awake, having fallen asleep there themselves).
I love urban fantasy but I hate the slipperly slope morality that seems every present (i.e. an evil demon is completely bad in book 1, but after having to work with the good guys is now boyfriend material in book 3)
I hate main characters who just keep getting more powerful with no consequences or additional tensions. As a side note I hate it when MC's manage to fit into multiple roles across supernatural groups when surely they would preclude each other, i.e. being an alpha male or mate, vampire slave, voodoo priestess, Congressman/women and so forth,
Finally I hate hugely built up bad guy monsters that are defeated by a brief distraction or outright stab to the heart without much fuss.
I don't write or read this genre often, but I have a couple:
1. *Why does everyone seem to be in their 20's?* Can't we have a UF novel about a couple 60 year olds running around defeating evil with lawn chairs, telephones, and purses? I know the reason you barely see anyone over 50 is because the audience is commonly in the YA crowd, but it still irks me.
2. *Apparent lack of married couples*. I'm not sure if this is just me, but I've noticed a huge lack of married couples in YA fiction these days. I know people think that people in the YA crowd don't like to see married couples, but as a person who primarily writes married couples, it kind of annoys me. Why does it always have to be a story with a girl who suddenly develops magical powers and meets a brooding love interest? Can't we have a story with a married couple in their 70's vanquishing evil and complaining about kids these days?
3. *The Chosen One Trope*. I hate this trope with a fiery, burning passion. I know there are some works that do it well, however it is still a trope that irks me. It feels like a cop out.
4. *Where's the Comedy?* There is a lot of things you can do with UF fiction, but comedy doesn't seem like one. They always have to be so brooding and dark. While I do enjoy some dark fiction once and awhile, I find it to be a slog when everything is like that.
5. *Romance that goes nowhere because I do not care about the characters*. Twilight, I'm looking at you.
6. *Why do, in most UF fiction, humans just seem to passively accept that mystical creatures are running about?* There are so many things that we could do with a concept that includes magical fantasy creatures, yet we always seem to ignore religious or political problems that could pop up when these creatures are involved. Should these creatures be given rights? How would they affect major world religions? I don't know, because the author doesn't want to tell me.
7. *They often feel so trite*. Art is about being creative, not about following the most popular trends.
8. *Why are all the love interests creepy?* If you want to write horror, go for it. (Again, something that should've happened to Twilight.) If you are going to portray a love interest as creepy, make sure it is for a reason. (Maybe he is the villain? Maybe he is mentally unstable?)
9. *Why are there few characters with mental illnesses?* I love writing about mental illness and other disorders. Why don't they seem to pop up more? Maybe the main character has a personality disorder? Autism? There is a lot of inspiration you can take from the world. Why do we seem to ignore a portion of the population?
Sorry for the long rant. There is just a lot of things that really irritate me about the genre. This is why I tend to stick to Sci-Fi, Noir Fiction, Lovecraftian Horror and Political Fiction. I know a lot of my complaints are either because of the genre, the audience, or they are deemed to be too demanding, but it is a shame that the genre feels so uniform.
Hi. Since you went to the trouble of typing out that long rant, I thought I'd ask your opinion on the piece I'm working on at the moment, if you're interested in giving me some feedback. Mostly I avoid the things you find annoying but there are some instances where I don't, so I'd love to hear your thoughts.
**Age**: My story is told in three non-linear parallel narratives at different times of my MC's life. One is when he's a teenager, one when he's in his late 20s, and the other when he's in his 30s or 40s.
**Romance**: My MC isn't married in real life... but he is in his dreams. In the earliest narrative, the only girl he's ever loved was killed, when she was a teenager. Even 10 years later he's plagued by her loss. He sees her in his dreams, where she's alive, where they've shared an entire life together. But then he wakes up and it's like losing her all over again.
**Chosen One**: I *do* have a Chosen One, but it's only there to subvert the trope. The chosen one isn't my MC, but his older brother; and it turns out there's no such thing as a chosen one at all. The prophecy is bullshit.
**Comedy**: No overt comedy in my story, though the narrator occasionally makes some playful observations.
**Romantic Progression**: My romance does have a conflict, progression (the love interest, surprise surprise, isn't dead after all) and a resolution (but it's not a happy ending).
**Mystical Creatures**: The only mystical creatures that really play into my story are monsters which are threatening the populace. People aren't really surprised to see them (they're a known quantity by the time my story begins) but they are terrified of them.
**Creepy Love Interest**: My MC actually could be considered kind of creepy, but I think I'm doing a good job of making his love interest come off as endearing.
**Mental Illness**: I actually do have a whole mental illness subplot -- my MC's brother has his whole identity wrapped up in the chosen one nonsense, and he doesn't handle it well when he finds out the prophecy is bullshit. In the second narrative/timeline, that character is living in a mental institution.
The problem is that I don't read UF often. It's not a genre that I write or take particular interest in. As I said, I favor Science-Fiction. I won't be able to give you the advice you are looking for as I do not know much about the genre. I would advise to get someone who knows the genre better. If you want my opinion, I do like your ideas. I think they have a lot of promise.
It's just that I don't know the ins and outs of this particular genre. My Opinion: I like your ideas, but I'd advise to get someone who knows the genre a bit better than I do.
With the exception of Number 9 you just described the checklist I went down when I first started writing my book. In a lot of ways it's more like a work place comedy about a very very old monster hunter, who is still doing his job not out of a grim determination to destory all monsters but because he actually likes his job.
I kinda started with this idea of making a character that looks like your every man work a day schlub if you fuzz out the details. He is married with two kids, a house, a dog, a small group of drinking buddies and a works at a large company that doesn't really know or care he exists. Sure he is married to a Valkyrie due a misunderstanding about the precise idiomatic meaning of "marry me", the two kids are at Norse boot camp and a cross between Hogwarts and BUD/S respectively. the dog is an ancient Irish psycho-pomp the size of a Shetland pony that sometimes eats the neighbors souls, the house is sitting on a leyline that could end the world.
The drinking buddies are a vegetarian werewolf LAPD homicide cop, an ex CIA wet boy that runs a used bookstore, and a fallen greek god, and the company that he works for is a globe spanning secret military organization designed to keep monsters and mages from ending all life on the planet.
Shallow settings.
I've never been to New York, but I love books that build on the author's relationship with the big apple. 99% of my time in Chicago has been through-traffic, but it's still easy to tell when an author has never seen the skyline.
And, fuck it, I'm from Michigan. I know you've never smelled Detroit.
Urban Fantasy as a whole is really bad at portraying believable settings. It isn't just the magic parking spots and the tour guide scene lists; half of them ignore their settings entirely, or throw in a few forgettable details and miss the opportunity to treat the city (whatever city they're in) as a character.
I would pay damn good money for an Urban Fantasy series that actually captures Milwaukee. Rust, racism, and all.
You might look into Charles de Lint. His particular brand of urban fantasy is *mostly* about relationships. Between people and ghosts, creatures and creatures, and on at least one occasion I can think of, a person and a city. There is fighting, as required, but the stories are not simply vectors that lead from fight to fight.
Not all of his stuff is "urban" (The Little Country takes place largely in the Cornish countryside, for instance) but much of it is, especially his short stories.
> Where's my examination of complicated sexual politics between a necromancer and a french vampire lord with impeccable taste in shirts?
I see what you did there.
She's also the absolute *worst* example of urban fantasy, considering all she writes is sex.
I was reading those books during the early stages. And have, at least skimmed, all the way up to #22 or #24. I've kind of given up though. For a while I was sort of fascinated to watch the series go off the rails, like watching a budding multi-car interstate pile-up on ice ... but eventually even that appeal faded.
The first seven (up to *Blue Moon*) had some interest. I was younger, but Anita was kind of interesting. I'm actually rereading -- skimming actually -- some of the earlier ones now, and ... wow.
Unexceptional is the word. And even it's *awfully generous*. She got *much worse* about it, but Hamilton screeches the story to a halt to describe everything that comes on-screen. Every character's outfit and appearance, the room, the car if it's a car, everything.
Without actually measuring, I'm quite convinced a good 30%, easily, of the first seven books is "Jean Claude's shirt revealed a pale oval of his stomach, and the cross shaped scar..." and "Richard's hair fell across his shoulders in a loose mass, making him look scrumptious" and so on.
That got higher in the later books; and the description plus the sex is effectively 90% of the books post-collapse into porn. Excepting *Obsidian Butterfly*; that was an outlier after she decided she'd rather throw away all the earlier books. Where Anita repeatedly spells out out how she's a good Catholic prude girl, but is inexplicably now going to become a walking Voodoo Queen incarnation of Red Shoe Diaries.
There's little subtly in how she arranges things in the pages. Like, for example, in TKD she makes very sure the reader remembers Jean Claude only ever wears black and white by explicitly mentioning it ... about two pages before Jean Claude shows up wearing a red shirt. Nothing is ever left up to the reader; she includes position, rank, and general intentions/personality in all her descriptions when a character enters the screen. Classic tell-not-show.
In fact, every book ends with a John Grisham style two page wrap-up of "everything ended like this" in classic tell-not-show style.
At this point, skimming back through them, I'm even more ashamed and annoyed I ever read them in the first place. Because it's just so laughable. Anita had a lot of potential to be an interesting character, but Hamilton's flaws as a writer, and her desire to write passion not character, threw it all away.
I still don't understand why the fairy books weren't enough for her to get all the sex out. She had to ruin the Anita brand by turning her into a slut; she couldn't just start something new and write that slutty. She had to take a character that had been created to be a prudish ice-cold killer and wrap all the sex into her.
As for "bizarrely sexual" ... even that's quite generous. After all, one of the books' plot was brought to a climax (pun intended) by Anita giving the main villain head. That was the best solution to the plot the book offered; Anita falling to her knees and blowing him. Rather than blowing him away like she used to.
> As for "bizarrely sexual" ... even that's quite generous. After all, one of the books' plot was brought to a climax (pun intended) by Anita giving the main villain head. That was the best solution to the plot the book offered; Anita falling to her knees and blowing him. Rather than blowing him away like she used to.
Pffft, really!? That'd be a good ending to comedy story :D
Too late, that joke's already been written. Except Hamilton was going for dramatic.
What's the word ... ~~bullshit~~ irony? Ehh, it'll do. At least it's polite.
The writing was on the wall at the end of even just the first book. LKH gave an interview/wrote a blog post somewhere about how killing Phillip emotionally traumatized her and how she'd never hurt one of her characters like that again. Which, when you're writing vampire murder novels, well... yeah.
Personally, I've never forgiven her for this one scene where Jean-Claude has a carpeted bathroom.
Recently I've learned/accepted/understood/considered/etc that my book is UF, but one of the things that desperately wanted to avoid (even before thinking it was UF) was having a bunch of supernatural creatures like they have a checklist and quota to include all of them.
Vampires—check
Werewolves—check
Shapeshifters—check
Witches/warlocks—check
Demons—check
Astral/cosmic entities—check
Angels—check
Leprechauns—check
Above+ Hunter—check
If you want the character(s) to discover that there's a secret underground paranormal world going on, fine, but you don't need to include every fantasy creature (especially the popular ones).
Fully agree. Too many writers throw the entire fantasy kitchen sink into their series which isn't necessarily a problem but it comes off as gratuitous when the vast majority of those books focus and explore at most three creatures/races and the rest are just wallpaper.
And when they *do* introduce one of the above that's not the main focus, it's like they're just there to say "look! XXX are real in my book! there's nothing distinguishing about them or anything different from the same portrayal that's been done a million times before, but they exist!"
Aww. I was feeling pretty good about my story idea til this. I totally threw in all the creatures. I've got angels and demons and gargoyles and sirens and probably some other stuff I'm forgetting because I haven't looked at it in over a year. I wasn't planning on vampires or weres though! *sigh* :P
If you're feeling pretty good about your story, don't let what I, largely a non-UF reader, think stop you. Throwing in all the creatures seems to be popular and what UF readers want, so go for it.
One of the reasons I loved *American Gods* (besides of course it being written by Neil Gaiman) is because of the diversity of gods and the obscurity of many of them. If he just went with all the popular ones we all know, I probably wouldn't have enjoyed it as much.
My book (not to say that it is otherwise great or anything) has six creatures:
>A phoenix that can resurrect the dead and grant wishes
>A sea dragon that can create storms
>A time traveling fairy that can see the future
>A death god that persuade people into the afterlife
>A cat-fox thing that shows people their past and future (and is like a servant to the time god)
>A hellhound who kills people if they're afraid of it and run away (and is like a servant to the death god)
I originally only had the original four creatures and didn't want to add more because I didn't it to be something where if some creatures exist, they all exist, but the latter two are heavily inspired by Japanese mythology and aren't the typical fantasy creatures, so I allowed them into the story (and they've done a good job becoming important parts of the story and not feeling like something added just because).
Like I said, I set it aside a long time ago, but I keep having urges to go back to it. Mine is basically a demon-hunting agency run by arch angels. I'd probably expand it, now that I have more experience (and I want to steer it away from romance) and make it a supernatural enforcement agency or something because of all the creatures. I think I've only written like 10k or something of it, but so far, my heroine's fought a demon, been suspended from the agency, met... some creature for information and was sent on an errand to collect money, wherein she found a gargoyle playboy indulging himself with a gaggle of sirens. I don't remember many details of it, but I remember having fun coming up with all of that, which leads me to believe it would be fun for someone to read.
I'm working on an urban fantasy where the main characters run a sort of supernatural animal control/rescue organization, and I feel like I need to at least mention several types because even if the story doesn't focus on the rescuing a whole lot, I need to give af least a few examples of the different creatures because they can't just have rescued one type and I want to show the vastness of the supernatural world within the human world and how many different creatures are affected by conflicts with urban life. In terms of the main characters, I have two werewolves and a vampire and then a bunch of humans, and I don't want to just have werewolves and vampires as the two races being explored. I would want to bring in a few other races with speaking parts, or at least mention them. I also want the world to feel full and diverse. Does anyone have advice on how to avoid it getting confusing/feeling like I'm just cramming everything I can in? I will say that I'm trying to take different approaches to the different creatures, and they're people who have normal lives and jobs instead of being violent broody love interests for a human.
Hopefully this doesn't come off as criticism (and if it does, I apologize beforehand) but that is the sort of thing I was talking about that...I personally (out of personal preference, not out of any sort of literary judgement) am not a fan of. I think I'm just tired of vampires, werewolves, succubi, etc being the staples of UF where "they're people who have normal lives and jobs" living and hiding among humans. I don't know. Definitely don't let what I say/think discourage you from writing. I think why I'm not really a fan of UF is because it largely seems like "humans and creatures coexisting side by side with humans where the neighbor down the street is a nephilim and the baker is a witch and the teacher is a werewolf and the police chief is a demon hunter when he's off duty."
Sorry for the rant. (._.) Those seem to be the popular themes in UF, so go for it regardless of what I think.
I can understand getting overwhelmed by the variety of creatures, and getting bored of the same thing over and over. I don't actually read much urban fantasy, so I probably should! I guess it depends on how unique the rest of the story is. I don't have a lot of experience with UF, it's helpful to see different perspectives on it, thanks!
Yeah, I think "how unique the rest of the story is" is very important.
>I want to show the vastness of the supernatural world within the human world ... I also want the world to feel full and diverse.
I think where my disinterest in typical UF begins is this—they heavily emphasize the "supernatural world" and have a million creatures, but that doesn't make the world "full and diverse". It's like having 20 different types of candy for dinner and saying you have a balanced diet because of the "variety and diversity," but it's still all dessert and you're not getting all the vitamins, meat, vegetables, and minerals your body needs (regardless of how tasty and "just like like candy" it is).
That's true, although I don't want my story to be boring because it only has werewolves and vampires, and I kind of want it to be known that there are other species out there, but I don't want the reader to feel cheated for getting any information about them. What do you think is the best approach, or the best way to find a kind of balance?
I don't think that "only" having werewolves and vampires would necessarily make it boring. *The Vampier Chrinicles* (to the best of my knowledge) only has vampires and it's a pretty deep and intricate world.
Like I said, kinda by default having a bunch of creatures in the world kinda makes me dislike it, but something that would make me like it would be to not have the other species sorta like, pop in and out when they're necessary or just to show that such species exist. Perhaps think of them more like different ethnicities in a diverse city. You have people from a bunch of different countries with their own history and culture, and not every individual from a certain ethnicity is the same. You could have the humans as the "oppressive, culturally privileged" species (and of course, that doesn't mean that all humans are bad) and the non-humans having to struggle with that, but don't group them all together as the same because of their non-humanness. One species has it's own unique history, culture, and struggles, and another one has a different history, culture, and struggle. Some may be more able to get along in a world of humans, but others may have a harder time. This is probably getting more serious than you're willing/thinking to go, but recently I've been more interested in stories that go pretty deep about these sort of things.
Another thing I suggest avoiding is making the creatures episodic as in like "now this part is all about gargoyles, who we've never seen before, but they're going to be the main focus for this part, then the next part will be all about reptilians and we'll never hear about the gargoyles again." Instead of having them "pop in and out when necessary" like I said before, maybe have them...flow in and out of the story. When they're off the page, they don't disappear from existence. They're still a part of the world and (perhaps unless they're like the last/only one of their species) have an influence on the things around them. Earlier I mentioned about how I don't feel having a bunch of creatures alone makes the world feel real and diverse, I think it's how intertwined the characters and the world are that makes it real. You could write a bestiary of all the creatures in your world, but if they're separate and not really a part of the world, it seems empty to me.
I'm totally willing to go that deep, things like that are kind of what I'm trying to do.
You think kind of mentioning them in passing is good, like, "A woman that Mara knew was a satyr stared out her bakery window in horror as they drove by?" And then when characters of different species happen to become relevant, kind of hint at their culture and situation through context clues? And then they might fade back into the background, while meanwhile the weres and vamps get the most details?
Thanks for all the help, by the way! This is a story that I have 20 pages of and have to revise over the next few weeks, but am planning to maybe write a longer, more in-depth version of later. Some of the feedback I got was that people were kind of overwhelmed by how many types of creatures were mentioned even in passing, which I feel is almost necessary given the character's occupations as magical animal control, but I guess I'll see what I can do. I really appreciate your suggestions!
I definitely wouldn't suggest info dumping all the details I mentioned before when introducing a new species, so I guess mentioning them in passing like that is fine, but I would be more interested in learning more about the satyrs in your world so putting in bite sized details throughout would be my preference.
No lol
Actually, I have none of the aforementioned creatures in my book and have very little in terms of fantasy creatures of any kind. I have six creatures in total—not six species/types, but six individual beings. I originally was just going to have four and didn't want to add more, but I allowed myself the extra two.
Edit: forgot word
> You know what I'd really like to see? A shapeshifter story in which the main character is a mixed-race mechanic who can turn into a coyote. That would be pushing the envelope.
I lol'd.
THIS! it's exactly what I'm trying to avoid. Don't get me wrong, I love the genre, but even in its best examples, the vampires/demons/werewolves/etc seem like a way to have limitless villains you don't have to flesh out or come up with real motivations for. They're just bloodthirsty savages who love to kill and cause mayhem for no reason! They love evil because, well, they just do! It's a very clean, black-and-white, good-vs-evil setup that makes your hero look badass for saving humanity all the time.
In mine, the main vampire character is a mercenary who's convinced himself that money is the only thing he can count on, and whose bloodthirsty involuntarily-murderous nature caused him to destroy the only thing he ever loved. So he's running from that.
The main demon character is a little like if the prodigal son crawled back to his father's doorstep only to find they moved (John Belushi joke for anyone who is actually old enough to remember) and is REALLY pissed off about it.
The protagonist is a human-like superhuman race who thinks her race has a divine mandate to hunt and slay vampires, but discovers later in the book that it's a lie her grandmother told her to keep her from leaving the nest--and at the same time she discovers a lot about her race's sort of bloodthirsty past that's been left behind.
There is a bitter dead romance between two centuries-old characters on either side of the main conflict, and I want there to be a growing relationship between protagonist and the main vampire character that surprises them both and may or may not emerge by the end of the book.
Glad to know there's at least 1 other person interested in something along these lines ;)
Check out Max Gladstone's *Craft Sequence*, starting with *Three Parts Dead*. Although the occasional fight breaks out, the stories are mostly about exploring the ramifications of magic upon the world, and how it affects both individuals and societies.
The central premise of the setting is that a few centuries earlier, humanity more or less worked out the basic principles of magic, which eventually allowed them to war with and ultimately defeat the world's gods. Magic in this world functions more like corporate contracts than anything else, with complex, interconnected terms for how power is owed or given.
The first story is about a young sorcerer/lawyer's first case, in which she is hired by a church to revive their recently deceased deity. The trouble is, the church also has a large number of creditors who have their own ideas about what to do with the dead god, and how they might shape its resurrection to their own ends.
The series is fascinating, unique, and only gets better with each book. I can't recommend it glowingly enough.
Oh boy, you're gonna love the UF crime procedural I'm working on...
In all seriousness though, the whole implications of living with, and policing supernatural beings as citizens, not monsters, is woefully underexplored. What about the complex power-politics in ancient vampire clans? What about racism between different species? What about the moral implications of the massive security apparatus required to maintain secrecy? What about the cultural divide between traditionalist druids and scholarly wizards?
So much stuff, replaced by so many monsters of the week.
If you've ever played The Witcher 3, you'll come across a lot of werewolves. The ones that have stories (instead of random monsters) are always tragic and sad. It's made me look at them in a different light, I love how they're portrayed.
This is going to be controversial but mine is "romance", just in general. The reason for this is that, certainly in the UK, *Twilight* was so huge that at one point, most bookstores actually had a *bay* (not a shelf; a whole *bay*) dedicated to the genre called "dark romance", which was essentially shelves and shelves of stopping-short-of-erotic vampire/werewolf love stories, and this came to absolutely dominate the genre.
And the thing is, I'm not trying to be critical of the writers of their readers. People have a taste they want to satisfy, and those writers either consciously catered to that taste or just shared it themselves. Supply and demand.
Just in my case, the problem is that the line between "urban fantasy" and "dark romance" is pretty faint (and books can straddle both), which can make it tricky to tell them apart (sometimes it's easy - the cover is black, white font, has a shadowy image of a chess piece on a board with, idk, an iron nail, a key and a drop of blood - but that's not always the case).
> dark romance
Dark romance, as a subgenre, is not at all 'stopping-short-of-erotic vampire/werewolf love stories.' Dark romance novels deal with controversial, not-for-the-faint-of-heart love stories such as: getting kidnapped and falling in love with the captor; getting taken in a human trafficking ring, getting 'trained', and falling in love with the trainer; extreme Dom/sub or Master/slave relationships that go into psychological torture or breakdowns; unsafe sadism & masochism with disturbed anti-heroes that the heroine falls in love with anyway; etc.
Examples of people who write in the genre:
- Pepper Winters (e.g., Tears of Tess)
- Kitty Thomas (e.g., Comfort Food)
- CJ Roberts (e.g., Captive in the Dark)
>Dark romance, as a subgenre,
Sorry, I suppose I wasn't clear enough. I put the term "dark romance" in quotes in my original post for a reason - it's because in the post-Twilight boom, the "Dark Romance" bay at my local bookstore that *was* full of those sorts of books!
I know the genre extends pretty far beyond that basic template. That'd be suggesting that all "super-hero" graphic novels are just like Superman, or that all sci-fi is like Star Wars.
I was thinking that my story was urban/modern fantasy, but mine is actually so different from all the others mentioned here that I'm not sure it even fits into the genre.
I have those doubts too. My story features giants, elves, and humans, with magic-lite. Mostly enhanced natural abilities with a few oddballs (the guy that can absorb magical powers and keep them, and the woman who can teleport). All magic has a cost (my male lead has enhanced intuition and it gives him gut issues like heartburn and indigestion, for example). And it's a largely human world that doesn't tend to cater to the other two species. Which is deliberate and causes tension. There is a romance, of course, but these are all adults and I'm working hard to make them feel like natural relationships that would happen IRL. The focus is more on their capers and investigations than anything.
I can't think of what else it would be, because it's not a paranormal romance (the romance is important, but not the focus), and it's not in a different world or otherworldly magicky enough to be straight fantasy. There also is too much "other stuff" to justify calling it a mystery.
So yeah. I think I'm stuck with urban fantasy unless something else comes up.
I really like Urban Fantasy. I've been drawn into the worlds of heaven and hell, met with realistic angels and demons, and even questioned the identity of God himself, yet I cannot stand when the fantastic becomes mundane in Urban Fantasy novels. "Don't mind the Pegasus, hun, she comes with three shapeshifting goats." That's a trope, right? To find something incredibly awesome and take it for granted how awesome it is? I understand getting used to routine, but to normalize the characters into perfectly drab ones completely kills the genre for me.
I have to jump on the zombie hate train because this drives me nuts watching the Walking Dead. How the fuck do these zombies, ex people, who used to require 2,000 calories a day walk around for months or years without food? They are too dumb to hunt or farm. There just are not enough humans to eat for all of them. Why aren't they all dead dead not just undead within a few weeks or months? It makes no sense.
Well, if we're talking about classic zombies -- dead things, actual reanimated corpses -- then they presumably don't need food. If they're dead, they don't have a metabolism, they don't require sustenance. I've always thought that classic zombies don't eat people because they *need* to, but because they have a primal urge to do so.
With the currently popular "infected" zombies (living humans infected with a rabies-like virus) then your point stands. Though as some people have said, there are stories where these types of zombies do starve to death after a period of time.
But here's another problem with the "classic zombies": if they're dead and don't have a working digestive system, then all the human flesh they eat would just be accumulating in their stomach. After a few weeks all the surviving zombies would have huge, distended bellies, and eventually they'd eat until they exploded.
>
> But here's another problem with the "classic zombies": if they're dead and don't have a working digestive system, then all the human flesh they eat would just be accumulating in their stomach. After a few weeks all the surviving zombies would have huge, distended bellies, and eventually they'd eat until they exploded.
So... Left for Dead got it right with Boomers? :D
I've read quite a few. Most of the tropes that ticked me off were romance related. E.g. insta love, love triangles, the centuries old vampire falling in love with a mere mortal girl etc. I was just looking to see what other users in r/writing thought :)
What bugs me isn't just that an immortal falls in love; it's that this person, THIS person, who they met in 2007-or-whatever after living for a thousand years, THIS is the person. This is their everything. Their soulmate.
I can almost understand if the work makes it clear that they've fallen in love before; that each time they run out the clock on their love's life, then spend a hundred years or so alone. This makes sense to me.
Muggles ignoring blatantly supernatural events just to preserve the masquerade. My favorite urban fantasy series, the *Mercy Thompson* books by Patricia Briggs, is set in a world where the masquerade is (sorta) broken, and everyone knows the fae and werewolves are real.
I'd Say about three Key things about the tropes I hate:
Legendary Creatures: If you use one creature, then its okay to alter it. You can use the Movies/books/etc as an excuse to cover it up. If you use more than one legendary creature, then you need to stick to the old rules and not re-invent them. *Twilight* Sorry Day-walking okay... with some catch, but turns into diamond skin boy... Nope... In my book your not a real vampire, your something else that ALSO feeds on blood, and maybe your just into pedophilia... seriously 16 and he is that old and no one got in arms about it. If you want to just make it about these creatures and go for a 'thats the name you humans gave us' then okay, I can swallow that and go on. To me a 'I shine like diamonds if I'm in the sun.' it is a 1) See I'm Different, my vampires are cool, and a 2) cheap way to get out of a plot hole that you made to well get your boy toy vampire wannna-be that, angst ridden 200 year old vampire in with high school girls, that he could just as easily been 18, just graduated and moved in somewhere. He did not have to go to high school. Seriously old vampire that wants to go to high school? That is something us old folks would fight to avoid. /rant over
Detective Agencies: They were cute when it all started, but after a while its been there done that. Yes its a way to introduce a reader to your world through the eyes of a detective what ever race, witch, vampire, werewolf, waiting on a mummy detective to put a nail in that coffin. No, not iZombie but wrapped in cloth bandages type that only grunts.
Romance: Yeah I got to go with the group. Twilight isn't the only one. As much as I love the series The Hollows, seems like theres always a Romance spin on the main character. If its there and she/he is single, and its not overpowering the plot... Okay I can swallow it if I care enough about the character to put up with it. How bout a decent well written series where the Girl falls for another girl and its a positive thing or vice versa, and it NOT be the most overshadowing plot-line, or the 'angst' angle of the relationship.
What I would like to see and haven't? A UF transformation story (mainly a large novel but NOT erotica) where the Antagonist (MC) is transformed gender-wise (or could be species thing) as part of the main plot line. But instead of it being the 'I got to go back to the way I was' a ya know that (insert that plot device) that turned me into a girl\guy... being that ain't so bad so I'll stick with it. And that story line not be the MAIN plot of the story, but more of an aside plot line. It's a wish list of a Gender change plot line that the MC stays with it, that ISNT a part of the main plot. Some how I don't think I'm going to see that as a major publishing novel, but still one can hope and write.
Sorry if it took so long, I was trying to be exact. I hope this helps with your plot line and ideas.
I have to disagree with your comparison. Gravity or fishes are real things. Vampires, werewolves, ghost and Djinn are fantasy. I think we, as authors, can modify their lore, behavior, look, etc. as we please.
Another discussion would be if you like it or not. I don't like sparkly vampires either. And I love when the licanthropy is a REAL curse and not some birth gift discovered by the orphan chosen one in his fifteen.
But it's on the authors hand to respect the original place where this characters come from or not.
In the zombies shit I totally agree. That bastards have zero reasons to stand on their foots more than a couple of months.
There is where our opinions go in opposite roads. I'm totally sceptical about the existence of such creatures (and any kind of god as well), so it doesn't bother me when a writer modifiy them.
But I see where people can have their beliefs vulnerated and therefore, be offended.
And STILL I think all of us should be open to new points of views and versions about the same old and know creature/god/religion/etc. And then decide if we like or not sparkly vampires.
Anyways, nice chat :)
I agree with what you say, but to be able to break the rules and have it be of meaning, you have to know why the rules existed to start with.
*edit to add: You can't have a car magically move with some form of propulsion. It's gotta have some kind of engine or driver. It's not about what we personally believe, but about what is culturally believed and accepted as possible and offering a new explanation of it.
Your issue with arguing we stick to the real lore is just a little short-sighted in that there *isn't* a singular lore for vampires.
I did research for a project I'm working on on vampire lore throughout the world, and [the variations on vampire mythology is pretty vast](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vampire_folklore_by_region), depending on how broad you want to extrapolate it. Even vampire lore within Europe has regional variations, with several different lores being smooshed together to form what we know as 'vampires' today.
To imply that the vampire comes from a singular mythos or culture is simply misinformed. Even within that singular culture, these myths are prone to evolution (e.g., the eastern european/balkan vampires were originally considered to look ruddy/like a bruised corpse, instead of pale and bloodless as they are now.)
Similarly, the history of lycanthropy and variations in European folklore can be traced back to the Germanic Iron Age, and the broader concept of humans shifting into animals (and even a connection to the lunar cycle) doesn't stick to a singular culture. These lores span multiple continents and dozens, if not hundreds, of cultures, demonstrating that they speak to common human fears and superstitions. They don't 'belong' to anyone.
Edward sparkling in the sun wasn't a poor narrative choice because it deviated from traditional lore or disrespected European culture. It was a poor narrative choice because it was stupid.
No, my issue isn't that we stick to the Lore and that isn't what I'm saying, it is that you have to know what rules are there and understand why, then you can consider the believability of breaking them. Ever seen a kid put on crocodile tears compared to a kid sobbing because they are heartbroken that they can't find their favourite toy? Well, that's the kind of difference that I'm talking about - believability.
What are you studying that you are doing a project on vampire lore?
You're saying your argument isn't to stick to lore, but the statement that rules exist is an appeal to sticking to a singular lore.
Some vamps can't go out in the sun, but not all lores about vampires have this rule. That vampires can't go out in the sun is only a "rule" if you've internalized the classic depiction of vampires, but as someone who's consumed a metric fuck-ton of vampire media, the rules aren't consistent enough across the board nowadays that there's a single popular vampire canon that must be upheld, lest we sacrifice believability. Hell, Blade was challenging the "vampires can't go into the sun" rule long before Twilight ever did, it was just with sunscreen instead of vampires having diamond bodies. Buffy the Vampire Slayer *and* Vampire Diaries had magical daylight rings. Sunlight is a rule that writers have been playing with for quite some time.
Basically, ever since people started writing about post-Dracula vampires, people have been playing hard and fast with the vision of vampires that Stoker invented, which is fine, because vampires don't belong to Bram Stoker, and *Dracula* itself was a highly flawed novel with some interesting ideas, and some terrible ones. There's historical precedent for the existence of something that had many names, which later fell under the umbrella term vampire, (which, in a broad context, is a human-like apex predator that hunts and feeds off of humans by draining some sort of life force, and is usually,--but not always,--undead) but you can't even get countries that share a border to agree on exactly what the rules are.
So, what rules? And why do we have to follow them? Is it popular consensus at this point? If so: wait twenty years. Post-Twilight vampire consumers probably don't even know that it used to be vampires slept in coffins filled with grave dirt and couldn't cross running water.
Vampires sparkling in the sun doesn't fail to meet suspension of disbelief because it departs too much from vampire rules, it's because it was stupid. As a vampire enthusiast, I'm fine with departures from the so-called rules provided that they're intelligent departures. You're allowed to dislike when vampires depart from what you believe are the rules vampires should follow, but recognize those rules are completely arbitrary, and likely formed entirely by what vampire media you've personally chosen to consume.
Sorry, I didn't mean to imply I was studying this in an academic setting. A hobby of mine in my free time is world creation for roleplaying games. I have a 'verse focused on global vampire lore, in part because the prevalence of certain legends across multiple unrelated cultures that never interacted with one another (the bathing maiden, the flood event, the vampire, the were, etc.) is something that's fascinated me my whole life. I spend a lot of time exhaustively researching things in non-academic contexts.
To be fair, there are ways to twist a few elements of a certain creature into something unique. There are "rules" but I find those are mostly the common aspects we have applied to such creatures over the course of time. It can be changed, it's like having a new perspective on an idea.
^this ^does ^not ^excuse ^the ^sparkly ^vampires ^though
I agree with some of your points but I disagree that every queer character's story should include coming out. Good representation means multifaceted characters who are interesting on their own and just happen to be queer as well.
No, I don't think it should be about every queer character coming out, just that they shouldn't be token, that they should be embraced as more than their sexuality.
My roommate told me about a popular UF series and how pretty much every female (and some males) had been raped. I don't even know why people are still reading those books if that's the case. She said it became like an eye roll thing for her "Can't we just have *one* character that isn't brutally raped?!" but for me, that's just a straight shot to the "never to be read" pile.
I personally have a massive beef with urban fantasy because so many that I've read (mainly YA as I used to be really into them when I was a teenager) heavily focus on romance, which I am not a fan of. The romance is usually not representative of a healthy relationship. I don't think I've ever read an UF that didn't have a dark mysterious, dangerous male hero who everybody misunderstands and must be 'tamed' by some silly heroine who spends WAY to much time obsessing over his 'godlike' looks and ignoring the fact that that man is frightening her. Where are all the good guys with great personalities and badass powers? Where are all the bad guys who are actually presented as being emotionally or physically abusive? Or controlling and creepy. *Coughs*, Twilight, *coughs*. I personally, would love to read an UF that doesn't involve generic characters, romance, dead parents or a 'chosen one'. But that's just my opinion.
While fairly smutty, the (3) book series starting with Good Intentions by Elliot Kay is decent enough urban fantasy that had pretty good (as in healthy) romance, with really good characters. You could give it a try.
I'll look into it! I don't usually handle to much smut very well, but I haven't read an urban fantasy in a while. Thanks for the tip!
S. M. Reine's Descent and Ascension series have a female protagonist who is far from silly. I would say that Elise Cavanaugh's personality is more like Anita Blake's (if you've read Laurell K. Hamilton), but Elise deals with angels, demons, and a whole mess of nasty supernatural creatures. She's an angry, crass, kick-ass character. Also, sex takes a back burner to story in Reine's books. The first three books in the [Descent](https://www.amazon.com/Descent-Books-1-3-Deaths-Darkest-ebook/dp/B009YADS38/ref=sr_1_22?ie=UTF8&qid=1491495633&sr=8-22&keywords=s.+m.+reine) series are currently free for Kindle on Amazon (via the provided link).
Thanks! I might check them out. I'll add them to my reading list for sure.
>I personally, would love to read an UF that doesn't involve generic characters, romance, dead parents or a 'chosen one'. What about one with not so generic characters (at least in my opinion), the most "romance" thing being an awkward kiss between a gay boy and his straight crush, the parent (also the more or less main character) doesn't die until the end, and the 'chosen one' may or may not be the 'chosen one'? (._.)
Don't get me wrong, I think anything can be a great story, as long as the characters are fleshed out and I can really get behind them. I have read books with plots I've hated, just because I loved one or two of the characters. I believe characters are everything, but obviously, this won't be the case for all readers.
No, I get it.
The Protagonist or the Villain is always a special half-breed of sorts, just an excuse to add a special factor because 5 times out of 10, it's the only thing that stands out next to their empty personalities.
God yes, the vacuous personality half-breed curse!!!!!
The "Chosen Heroine" plot. Short description: - Normal girl, with no connection to the mythical stuff - Meets dark brooding love interest - Love interest has secret - Said secret leads both of them into trouble with mythical stuff - They fall in love - Find special item that will help them win - Big unnecessary battle - Girl and love interest go to fuck off-screen for a happy ending It's so overused that I can't bring myself to read YA fiction anymore.
You missed: Neither leads have any chemistry and their romance sparks a war
Or, alternatively: Both leads start off hating each other and end up kissing after one saves the other's life.
''God, somehow you saving my life erases all the things I hate about you!" Yeah, that's annoying too. Saving someone's life can go far, and when it's with people that you hate it can give you a reason to tolerate them more; but it doesn't erase what pisses you off.
it's the YA monomyth. It was shit the first time around, and yet it gets repeated.
Well hey now, that plot structure is not a bad one. There are almost no bad plot structures. Sure it's pretty trope heavy at this point. However, good things can still come out of it. Star Wars is about as cliched as it gets, however that does not make Star Wars bad. You feel me?
I wouldn't say Star Wars is bad, because it obviously isn't, but I will say that I do not particularly like it. I liked the original trilogy, but this completely new shit, while certainly visually impressive, I find to be just an uninspired piece of fanservice that does nothing new because it is afraid to explore the potential of the Star Wars universe after the crimes against humanity that were the prequels.
While I do agree with you, I feel like the point of my comment was lost in translation. Lol
I don't think this is a trope necessarily, but a pet peeve of mine is how UF will have a super powerful, ancient paranormal race but in a human dominated world. For example, how exactly does a super powerful vampire race allow ancient humans to develop beyond being a food source/slaves? Why do they have to hide? If vampires have always existed and in numbers of more than say 100 worldwide, why would they need to hide their existence? Why wouldn't they rule the world? Add in other powerful, supernatural races and many characters with a "I hate humans, wish we could go back to the old days of indiscriminate feasting on humans" attitude and I just can't see how it can be a mirror to our world without some explanation.
Very good point. I have read a few vampire books that made me think this. If vampires are so much faster, stronger, smarter and overall more powerful, then why are they hiding? It doesn't make much sense.
It would make sense for the vampires to rule the world but keep their rule secret. That way, humans continue to create a comfortable technological civilization and provide an abundant food source while offering no resistance, because they believe that vampires ruling the world is just an urban fantasy 'conspiracy theory.'
I like this one. If they're more powerful than humans in [almost] every way, then they'd be capable of playing longer, more patient games. Simply ruling the world and eating all the humans would be like us killing all our livestock in one go, thinking it'd solve all hunger-related problems.
This is actually a plot point in my current project. My local equivalent of vampires *did* rule the world until humans discovered magic, at which point hundreds of thousands of pissed-off mages descended on tens of thousands of unprepared vampires. Those that survived and their descendants were forced into hiding; the main protagonist is a (relatively) young vampire on a quest to restore his people's rule.
If I'm a vampire and part of the minority ruling class, how do I not notice hundreds of thousands of people being trained in the magic arts to kill me? That's a big army. Seems like way too big a number to be all secret like.
The way it happened in my world was that one (human) general in the vampires' service began a massive recruitment drive for mages once magic appeared, while simultaneously plotting with other generals to use them to overthrow their rulers. When the day came, the general and his followers offered the mages an ultimatum- fight for the vampires, or fight to destroy them. The vampires were not exactly popular for various reasons, and most of the new mages chose to rise up in rebellion. The closest comparison I can think of would be Order 66 in Star Wars.
One of my favorite UF books, Monster Hunter International, stated that if vampires ever called too much attention to themselves by the general public they wouldn't stand a chance of surviving, no matter how powerful they were.
When there are billions of humans, yes. But historically when a large village might be 50 people, not likely. Especially those authors who make their vampires magical or great diggers *and* plentiful. How is the human population of 200 bc supposed to overcome a vampire, much less have the time to become the human race as it is today? Even numerical advantage doesn't matter if you can't get close enough to kill them.
But even then they'd be killing off their food supply. I think 50 people could definitely kill a vampire. There'd be like 5 survivors, but still. I suppose it really just depends on how strong the writers make their vampires.
Definitely. Some authors just make them so strong and so numerous you just can't help but think it's too much. Everything in nature has strengths and weaknesses; I find stories that follow that kind of logic more interesting. They don't have to spell it out but some kind of logical reasons for everything is appreciated. ;)
Genetics and birth rates. They may be more powerful, but there are a lot more humans around. Numbers matter.
Sure, but there are plenty of UF novels around where the supernatural populations aren't small and have few weaknesses that humanly can exploit. So there's little to explain how these, clearly dominant, species allow humanity to develop technology to the point of being a real danger to them. Forget guns, I'm talking about tanks, missiles and nuclear bombs. In stories where there are very few vampires (or whatever) then it makes sense, but some have enough that the human birthrate doesn't explain it all to me.
There's always the World of Darkness explanation: Vampires can run things from the shadows so effectively that revealing themselves wouldn't accomplish anything other than making things harder on themselves. They don't need to openly rule when they can just put the mayor under mind control anyway.
Ha! Nice, I like this. See, I don't mind if there's *some* kind of explanation that makes sense. :)
You know, if these stories were actually realistic, the vampires wouldn't even have to do much except demonstrate their powers and the ancient humans would worship them as gods on the spot. I mean hell, ancient people, and modern people alike are known for worshiping all sorts of crazy things, or at least believing that they have religious significance with very little evidence. Like the Greeks thinking lightning was caused by Zues or people thinking that Jesus is showing up on toast and such. If there were actually walking and talking creatures with superhuman and magical abilities. They would be considered gods among men and people would blindly follow them out of fear alone.
Worked on one UF and, yeah, they pretty much do rule the world. Not with an iron fist, or anything, but the oldest ones are more or less the .1% that own most everything.
I don't thin Urban Fantasy necessarily has to have the trope of the "Vampire Hunter" (made famous in Dracula). I much preferred Frankenstein, where the doctor is chasing the monster, but also have quite an attachment to it as well. I also hate that "Urban Fantasy" often ignores the every-day life struggles. Not enough scenes set in restaurants, or people waking up in a normal bed in a normal house (not being scared awake, having fallen asleep there themselves).
Love triangle
I love urban fantasy but I hate the slipperly slope morality that seems every present (i.e. an evil demon is completely bad in book 1, but after having to work with the good guys is now boyfriend material in book 3) I hate main characters who just keep getting more powerful with no consequences or additional tensions. As a side note I hate it when MC's manage to fit into multiple roles across supernatural groups when surely they would preclude each other, i.e. being an alpha male or mate, vampire slave, voodoo priestess, Congressman/women and so forth, Finally I hate hugely built up bad guy monsters that are defeated by a brief distraction or outright stab to the heart without much fuss.
Obligatory mention of tvtropes.org. Also, as far as modern/urban fantasy goes, give Christopher Moore a look. He's... different.
I don't write or read this genre often, but I have a couple: 1. *Why does everyone seem to be in their 20's?* Can't we have a UF novel about a couple 60 year olds running around defeating evil with lawn chairs, telephones, and purses? I know the reason you barely see anyone over 50 is because the audience is commonly in the YA crowd, but it still irks me. 2. *Apparent lack of married couples*. I'm not sure if this is just me, but I've noticed a huge lack of married couples in YA fiction these days. I know people think that people in the YA crowd don't like to see married couples, but as a person who primarily writes married couples, it kind of annoys me. Why does it always have to be a story with a girl who suddenly develops magical powers and meets a brooding love interest? Can't we have a story with a married couple in their 70's vanquishing evil and complaining about kids these days? 3. *The Chosen One Trope*. I hate this trope with a fiery, burning passion. I know there are some works that do it well, however it is still a trope that irks me. It feels like a cop out. 4. *Where's the Comedy?* There is a lot of things you can do with UF fiction, but comedy doesn't seem like one. They always have to be so brooding and dark. While I do enjoy some dark fiction once and awhile, I find it to be a slog when everything is like that. 5. *Romance that goes nowhere because I do not care about the characters*. Twilight, I'm looking at you. 6. *Why do, in most UF fiction, humans just seem to passively accept that mystical creatures are running about?* There are so many things that we could do with a concept that includes magical fantasy creatures, yet we always seem to ignore religious or political problems that could pop up when these creatures are involved. Should these creatures be given rights? How would they affect major world religions? I don't know, because the author doesn't want to tell me. 7. *They often feel so trite*. Art is about being creative, not about following the most popular trends. 8. *Why are all the love interests creepy?* If you want to write horror, go for it. (Again, something that should've happened to Twilight.) If you are going to portray a love interest as creepy, make sure it is for a reason. (Maybe he is the villain? Maybe he is mentally unstable?) 9. *Why are there few characters with mental illnesses?* I love writing about mental illness and other disorders. Why don't they seem to pop up more? Maybe the main character has a personality disorder? Autism? There is a lot of inspiration you can take from the world. Why do we seem to ignore a portion of the population? Sorry for the long rant. There is just a lot of things that really irritate me about the genre. This is why I tend to stick to Sci-Fi, Noir Fiction, Lovecraftian Horror and Political Fiction. I know a lot of my complaints are either because of the genre, the audience, or they are deemed to be too demanding, but it is a shame that the genre feels so uniform.
Hi. Since you went to the trouble of typing out that long rant, I thought I'd ask your opinion on the piece I'm working on at the moment, if you're interested in giving me some feedback. Mostly I avoid the things you find annoying but there are some instances where I don't, so I'd love to hear your thoughts. **Age**: My story is told in three non-linear parallel narratives at different times of my MC's life. One is when he's a teenager, one when he's in his late 20s, and the other when he's in his 30s or 40s. **Romance**: My MC isn't married in real life... but he is in his dreams. In the earliest narrative, the only girl he's ever loved was killed, when she was a teenager. Even 10 years later he's plagued by her loss. He sees her in his dreams, where she's alive, where they've shared an entire life together. But then he wakes up and it's like losing her all over again. **Chosen One**: I *do* have a Chosen One, but it's only there to subvert the trope. The chosen one isn't my MC, but his older brother; and it turns out there's no such thing as a chosen one at all. The prophecy is bullshit. **Comedy**: No overt comedy in my story, though the narrator occasionally makes some playful observations. **Romantic Progression**: My romance does have a conflict, progression (the love interest, surprise surprise, isn't dead after all) and a resolution (but it's not a happy ending). **Mystical Creatures**: The only mystical creatures that really play into my story are monsters which are threatening the populace. People aren't really surprised to see them (they're a known quantity by the time my story begins) but they are terrified of them. **Creepy Love Interest**: My MC actually could be considered kind of creepy, but I think I'm doing a good job of making his love interest come off as endearing. **Mental Illness**: I actually do have a whole mental illness subplot -- my MC's brother has his whole identity wrapped up in the chosen one nonsense, and he doesn't handle it well when he finds out the prophecy is bullshit. In the second narrative/timeline, that character is living in a mental institution.
The problem is that I don't read UF often. It's not a genre that I write or take particular interest in. As I said, I favor Science-Fiction. I won't be able to give you the advice you are looking for as I do not know much about the genre. I would advise to get someone who knows the genre better. If you want my opinion, I do like your ideas. I think they have a lot of promise. It's just that I don't know the ins and outs of this particular genre. My Opinion: I like your ideas, but I'd advise to get someone who knows the genre a bit better than I do.
With the exception of Number 9 you just described the checklist I went down when I first started writing my book. In a lot of ways it's more like a work place comedy about a very very old monster hunter, who is still doing his job not out of a grim determination to destory all monsters but because he actually likes his job. I kinda started with this idea of making a character that looks like your every man work a day schlub if you fuzz out the details. He is married with two kids, a house, a dog, a small group of drinking buddies and a works at a large company that doesn't really know or care he exists. Sure he is married to a Valkyrie due a misunderstanding about the precise idiomatic meaning of "marry me", the two kids are at Norse boot camp and a cross between Hogwarts and BUD/S respectively. the dog is an ancient Irish psycho-pomp the size of a Shetland pony that sometimes eats the neighbors souls, the house is sitting on a leyline that could end the world. The drinking buddies are a vegetarian werewolf LAPD homicide cop, an ex CIA wet boy that runs a used bookstore, and a fallen greek god, and the company that he works for is a globe spanning secret military organization designed to keep monsters and mages from ending all life on the planet.
This sounds interesting as hell. Have you made any progress on finishing it 7 years later?
Detective agencies, detective agencies everywhere.
Shallow settings. I've never been to New York, but I love books that build on the author's relationship with the big apple. 99% of my time in Chicago has been through-traffic, but it's still easy to tell when an author has never seen the skyline. And, fuck it, I'm from Michigan. I know you've never smelled Detroit. Urban Fantasy as a whole is really bad at portraying believable settings. It isn't just the magic parking spots and the tour guide scene lists; half of them ignore their settings entirely, or throw in a few forgettable details and miss the opportunity to treat the city (whatever city they're in) as a character. I would pay damn good money for an Urban Fantasy series that actually captures Milwaukee. Rust, racism, and all.
[удалено]
You might look into Charles de Lint. His particular brand of urban fantasy is *mostly* about relationships. Between people and ghosts, creatures and creatures, and on at least one occasion I can think of, a person and a city. There is fighting, as required, but the stories are not simply vectors that lead from fight to fight. Not all of his stuff is "urban" (The Little Country takes place largely in the Cornish countryside, for instance) but much of it is, especially his short stories.
> Where's my examination of complicated sexual politics between a necromancer and a french vampire lord with impeccable taste in shirts? I see what you did there. She's also the absolute *worst* example of urban fantasy, considering all she writes is sex.
[удалено]
I was reading those books during the early stages. And have, at least skimmed, all the way up to #22 or #24. I've kind of given up though. For a while I was sort of fascinated to watch the series go off the rails, like watching a budding multi-car interstate pile-up on ice ... but eventually even that appeal faded. The first seven (up to *Blue Moon*) had some interest. I was younger, but Anita was kind of interesting. I'm actually rereading -- skimming actually -- some of the earlier ones now, and ... wow. Unexceptional is the word. And even it's *awfully generous*. She got *much worse* about it, but Hamilton screeches the story to a halt to describe everything that comes on-screen. Every character's outfit and appearance, the room, the car if it's a car, everything. Without actually measuring, I'm quite convinced a good 30%, easily, of the first seven books is "Jean Claude's shirt revealed a pale oval of his stomach, and the cross shaped scar..." and "Richard's hair fell across his shoulders in a loose mass, making him look scrumptious" and so on. That got higher in the later books; and the description plus the sex is effectively 90% of the books post-collapse into porn. Excepting *Obsidian Butterfly*; that was an outlier after she decided she'd rather throw away all the earlier books. Where Anita repeatedly spells out out how she's a good Catholic prude girl, but is inexplicably now going to become a walking Voodoo Queen incarnation of Red Shoe Diaries. There's little subtly in how she arranges things in the pages. Like, for example, in TKD she makes very sure the reader remembers Jean Claude only ever wears black and white by explicitly mentioning it ... about two pages before Jean Claude shows up wearing a red shirt. Nothing is ever left up to the reader; she includes position, rank, and general intentions/personality in all her descriptions when a character enters the screen. Classic tell-not-show. In fact, every book ends with a John Grisham style two page wrap-up of "everything ended like this" in classic tell-not-show style. At this point, skimming back through them, I'm even more ashamed and annoyed I ever read them in the first place. Because it's just so laughable. Anita had a lot of potential to be an interesting character, but Hamilton's flaws as a writer, and her desire to write passion not character, threw it all away. I still don't understand why the fairy books weren't enough for her to get all the sex out. She had to ruin the Anita brand by turning her into a slut; she couldn't just start something new and write that slutty. She had to take a character that had been created to be a prudish ice-cold killer and wrap all the sex into her. As for "bizarrely sexual" ... even that's quite generous. After all, one of the books' plot was brought to a climax (pun intended) by Anita giving the main villain head. That was the best solution to the plot the book offered; Anita falling to her knees and blowing him. Rather than blowing him away like she used to.
> As for "bizarrely sexual" ... even that's quite generous. After all, one of the books' plot was brought to a climax (pun intended) by Anita giving the main villain head. That was the best solution to the plot the book offered; Anita falling to her knees and blowing him. Rather than blowing him away like she used to. Pffft, really!? That'd be a good ending to comedy story :D
Too late, that joke's already been written. Except Hamilton was going for dramatic. What's the word ... ~~bullshit~~ irony? Ehh, it'll do. At least it's polite.
That does sound like a porno I watched once...
Richard Jeni used to say porn was Romance for men. A *beautiful* love story ... with all the boring parts thrown out.
To save the world, you must learn how to bend over backwards for it! "I don't think this is what they meant when they say life likes to fuck you"
The writing was on the wall at the end of even just the first book. LKH gave an interview/wrote a blog post somewhere about how killing Phillip emotionally traumatized her and how she'd never hurt one of her characters like that again. Which, when you're writing vampire murder novels, well... yeah. Personally, I've never forgiven her for this one scene where Jean-Claude has a carpeted bathroom.
Yeah after the first couple they were just nauseating.
Who are we talking about here?
Recently I've learned/accepted/understood/considered/etc that my book is UF, but one of the things that desperately wanted to avoid (even before thinking it was UF) was having a bunch of supernatural creatures like they have a checklist and quota to include all of them. Vampires—check Werewolves—check Shapeshifters—check Witches/warlocks—check Demons—check Astral/cosmic entities—check Angels—check Leprechauns—check Above+ Hunter—check If you want the character(s) to discover that there's a secret underground paranormal world going on, fine, but you don't need to include every fantasy creature (especially the popular ones).
Fully agree. Too many writers throw the entire fantasy kitchen sink into their series which isn't necessarily a problem but it comes off as gratuitous when the vast majority of those books focus and explore at most three creatures/races and the rest are just wallpaper.
And when they *do* introduce one of the above that's not the main focus, it's like they're just there to say "look! XXX are real in my book! there's nothing distinguishing about them or anything different from the same portrayal that's been done a million times before, but they exist!"
Aww. I was feeling pretty good about my story idea til this. I totally threw in all the creatures. I've got angels and demons and gargoyles and sirens and probably some other stuff I'm forgetting because I haven't looked at it in over a year. I wasn't planning on vampires or weres though! *sigh* :P
If you're feeling pretty good about your story, don't let what I, largely a non-UF reader, think stop you. Throwing in all the creatures seems to be popular and what UF readers want, so go for it. One of the reasons I loved *American Gods* (besides of course it being written by Neil Gaiman) is because of the diversity of gods and the obscurity of many of them. If he just went with all the popular ones we all know, I probably wouldn't have enjoyed it as much. My book (not to say that it is otherwise great or anything) has six creatures: >A phoenix that can resurrect the dead and grant wishes >A sea dragon that can create storms >A time traveling fairy that can see the future >A death god that persuade people into the afterlife >A cat-fox thing that shows people their past and future (and is like a servant to the time god) >A hellhound who kills people if they're afraid of it and run away (and is like a servant to the death god) I originally only had the original four creatures and didn't want to add more because I didn't it to be something where if some creatures exist, they all exist, but the latter two are heavily inspired by Japanese mythology and aren't the typical fantasy creatures, so I allowed them into the story (and they've done a good job becoming important parts of the story and not feeling like something added just because).
Like I said, I set it aside a long time ago, but I keep having urges to go back to it. Mine is basically a demon-hunting agency run by arch angels. I'd probably expand it, now that I have more experience (and I want to steer it away from romance) and make it a supernatural enforcement agency or something because of all the creatures. I think I've only written like 10k or something of it, but so far, my heroine's fought a demon, been suspended from the agency, met... some creature for information and was sent on an errand to collect money, wherein she found a gargoyle playboy indulging himself with a gaggle of sirens. I don't remember many details of it, but I remember having fun coming up with all of that, which leads me to believe it would be fun for someone to read.
>I remember having fun coming up with all of that That's all that matters.
I'm working on an urban fantasy where the main characters run a sort of supernatural animal control/rescue organization, and I feel like I need to at least mention several types because even if the story doesn't focus on the rescuing a whole lot, I need to give af least a few examples of the different creatures because they can't just have rescued one type and I want to show the vastness of the supernatural world within the human world and how many different creatures are affected by conflicts with urban life. In terms of the main characters, I have two werewolves and a vampire and then a bunch of humans, and I don't want to just have werewolves and vampires as the two races being explored. I would want to bring in a few other races with speaking parts, or at least mention them. I also want the world to feel full and diverse. Does anyone have advice on how to avoid it getting confusing/feeling like I'm just cramming everything I can in? I will say that I'm trying to take different approaches to the different creatures, and they're people who have normal lives and jobs instead of being violent broody love interests for a human.
Hopefully this doesn't come off as criticism (and if it does, I apologize beforehand) but that is the sort of thing I was talking about that...I personally (out of personal preference, not out of any sort of literary judgement) am not a fan of. I think I'm just tired of vampires, werewolves, succubi, etc being the staples of UF where "they're people who have normal lives and jobs" living and hiding among humans. I don't know. Definitely don't let what I say/think discourage you from writing. I think why I'm not really a fan of UF is because it largely seems like "humans and creatures coexisting side by side with humans where the neighbor down the street is a nephilim and the baker is a witch and the teacher is a werewolf and the police chief is a demon hunter when he's off duty." Sorry for the rant. (._.) Those seem to be the popular themes in UF, so go for it regardless of what I think.
I can understand getting overwhelmed by the variety of creatures, and getting bored of the same thing over and over. I don't actually read much urban fantasy, so I probably should! I guess it depends on how unique the rest of the story is. I don't have a lot of experience with UF, it's helpful to see different perspectives on it, thanks!
Yeah, I think "how unique the rest of the story is" is very important. >I want to show the vastness of the supernatural world within the human world ... I also want the world to feel full and diverse. I think where my disinterest in typical UF begins is this—they heavily emphasize the "supernatural world" and have a million creatures, but that doesn't make the world "full and diverse". It's like having 20 different types of candy for dinner and saying you have a balanced diet because of the "variety and diversity," but it's still all dessert and you're not getting all the vitamins, meat, vegetables, and minerals your body needs (regardless of how tasty and "just like like candy" it is).
That's true, although I don't want my story to be boring because it only has werewolves and vampires, and I kind of want it to be known that there are other species out there, but I don't want the reader to feel cheated for getting any information about them. What do you think is the best approach, or the best way to find a kind of balance?
I don't think that "only" having werewolves and vampires would necessarily make it boring. *The Vampier Chrinicles* (to the best of my knowledge) only has vampires and it's a pretty deep and intricate world. Like I said, kinda by default having a bunch of creatures in the world kinda makes me dislike it, but something that would make me like it would be to not have the other species sorta like, pop in and out when they're necessary or just to show that such species exist. Perhaps think of them more like different ethnicities in a diverse city. You have people from a bunch of different countries with their own history and culture, and not every individual from a certain ethnicity is the same. You could have the humans as the "oppressive, culturally privileged" species (and of course, that doesn't mean that all humans are bad) and the non-humans having to struggle with that, but don't group them all together as the same because of their non-humanness. One species has it's own unique history, culture, and struggles, and another one has a different history, culture, and struggle. Some may be more able to get along in a world of humans, but others may have a harder time. This is probably getting more serious than you're willing/thinking to go, but recently I've been more interested in stories that go pretty deep about these sort of things. Another thing I suggest avoiding is making the creatures episodic as in like "now this part is all about gargoyles, who we've never seen before, but they're going to be the main focus for this part, then the next part will be all about reptilians and we'll never hear about the gargoyles again." Instead of having them "pop in and out when necessary" like I said before, maybe have them...flow in and out of the story. When they're off the page, they don't disappear from existence. They're still a part of the world and (perhaps unless they're like the last/only one of their species) have an influence on the things around them. Earlier I mentioned about how I don't feel having a bunch of creatures alone makes the world feel real and diverse, I think it's how intertwined the characters and the world are that makes it real. You could write a bestiary of all the creatures in your world, but if they're separate and not really a part of the world, it seems empty to me.
I'm totally willing to go that deep, things like that are kind of what I'm trying to do. You think kind of mentioning them in passing is good, like, "A woman that Mara knew was a satyr stared out her bakery window in horror as they drove by?" And then when characters of different species happen to become relevant, kind of hint at their culture and situation through context clues? And then they might fade back into the background, while meanwhile the weres and vamps get the most details? Thanks for all the help, by the way! This is a story that I have 20 pages of and have to revise over the next few weeks, but am planning to maybe write a longer, more in-depth version of later. Some of the feedback I got was that people were kind of overwhelmed by how many types of creatures were mentioned even in passing, which I feel is almost necessary given the character's occupations as magical animal control, but I guess I'll see what I can do. I really appreciate your suggestions!
I definitely wouldn't suggest info dumping all the details I mentioned before when introducing a new species, so I guess mentioning them in passing like that is fine, but I would be more interested in learning more about the satyrs in your world so putting in bite sized details throughout would be my preference.
Please, please tell me that you have a grizzled leprechaun hunter in your book.
No lol Actually, I have none of the aforementioned creatures in my book and have very little in terms of fantasy creatures of any kind. I have six creatures in total—not six species/types, but six individual beings. I originally was just going to have four and didn't want to add more, but I allowed myself the extra two. Edit: forgot word
> You know what I'd really like to see? A shapeshifter story in which the main character is a mixed-race mechanic who can turn into a coyote. That would be pushing the envelope. I lol'd.
THIS! it's exactly what I'm trying to avoid. Don't get me wrong, I love the genre, but even in its best examples, the vampires/demons/werewolves/etc seem like a way to have limitless villains you don't have to flesh out or come up with real motivations for. They're just bloodthirsty savages who love to kill and cause mayhem for no reason! They love evil because, well, they just do! It's a very clean, black-and-white, good-vs-evil setup that makes your hero look badass for saving humanity all the time. In mine, the main vampire character is a mercenary who's convinced himself that money is the only thing he can count on, and whose bloodthirsty involuntarily-murderous nature caused him to destroy the only thing he ever loved. So he's running from that. The main demon character is a little like if the prodigal son crawled back to his father's doorstep only to find they moved (John Belushi joke for anyone who is actually old enough to remember) and is REALLY pissed off about it. The protagonist is a human-like superhuman race who thinks her race has a divine mandate to hunt and slay vampires, but discovers later in the book that it's a lie her grandmother told her to keep her from leaving the nest--and at the same time she discovers a lot about her race's sort of bloodthirsty past that's been left behind. There is a bitter dead romance between two centuries-old characters on either side of the main conflict, and I want there to be a growing relationship between protagonist and the main vampire character that surprises them both and may or may not emerge by the end of the book. Glad to know there's at least 1 other person interested in something along these lines ;)
Have you not read Memnoch the devil? I think it's perhaps the best urban fantasy novel I've read in a long time.
Check out Max Gladstone's *Craft Sequence*, starting with *Three Parts Dead*. Although the occasional fight breaks out, the stories are mostly about exploring the ramifications of magic upon the world, and how it affects both individuals and societies. The central premise of the setting is that a few centuries earlier, humanity more or less worked out the basic principles of magic, which eventually allowed them to war with and ultimately defeat the world's gods. Magic in this world functions more like corporate contracts than anything else, with complex, interconnected terms for how power is owed or given. The first story is about a young sorcerer/lawyer's first case, in which she is hired by a church to revive their recently deceased deity. The trouble is, the church also has a large number of creditors who have their own ideas about what to do with the dead god, and how they might shape its resurrection to their own ends. The series is fascinating, unique, and only gets better with each book. I can't recommend it glowingly enough.
If you haven't already, you should really check out the Dresden Files.
If he hasn't, he's spoiled himself several times. I mean... the FBI agents, the emotional vampire...
Have you met our lord and savior Jim Butcher? Because based off your description of what you'd like in an urban fantasy, he fits your needs to a T.
I'm pretty sure this whole comment should end with an /s.
Those are some very interesting points. Thank you for the detailed and very helpful response!
Oh boy, you're gonna love the UF crime procedural I'm working on... In all seriousness though, the whole implications of living with, and policing supernatural beings as citizens, not monsters, is woefully underexplored. What about the complex power-politics in ancient vampire clans? What about racism between different species? What about the moral implications of the massive security apparatus required to maintain secrecy? What about the cultural divide between traditionalist druids and scholarly wizards? So much stuff, replaced by so many monsters of the week.
I promise I won't let you down Dad
I'm in foreign waters here but I think a lot of you folks would really enjoy Shadowrun as a universe.
If you've ever played The Witcher 3, you'll come across a lot of werewolves. The ones that have stories (instead of random monsters) are always tragic and sad. It's made me look at them in a different light, I love how they're portrayed.
This is going to be controversial but mine is "romance", just in general. The reason for this is that, certainly in the UK, *Twilight* was so huge that at one point, most bookstores actually had a *bay* (not a shelf; a whole *bay*) dedicated to the genre called "dark romance", which was essentially shelves and shelves of stopping-short-of-erotic vampire/werewolf love stories, and this came to absolutely dominate the genre. And the thing is, I'm not trying to be critical of the writers of their readers. People have a taste they want to satisfy, and those writers either consciously catered to that taste or just shared it themselves. Supply and demand. Just in my case, the problem is that the line between "urban fantasy" and "dark romance" is pretty faint (and books can straddle both), which can make it tricky to tell them apart (sometimes it's easy - the cover is black, white font, has a shadowy image of a chess piece on a board with, idk, an iron nail, a key and a drop of blood - but that's not always the case).
> dark romance Dark romance, as a subgenre, is not at all 'stopping-short-of-erotic vampire/werewolf love stories.' Dark romance novels deal with controversial, not-for-the-faint-of-heart love stories such as: getting kidnapped and falling in love with the captor; getting taken in a human trafficking ring, getting 'trained', and falling in love with the trainer; extreme Dom/sub or Master/slave relationships that go into psychological torture or breakdowns; unsafe sadism & masochism with disturbed anti-heroes that the heroine falls in love with anyway; etc. Examples of people who write in the genre: - Pepper Winters (e.g., Tears of Tess) - Kitty Thomas (e.g., Comfort Food) - CJ Roberts (e.g., Captive in the Dark)
>Dark romance, as a subgenre, Sorry, I suppose I wasn't clear enough. I put the term "dark romance" in quotes in my original post for a reason - it's because in the post-Twilight boom, the "Dark Romance" bay at my local bookstore that *was* full of those sorts of books! I know the genre extends pretty far beyond that basic template. That'd be suggesting that all "super-hero" graphic novels are just like Superman, or that all sci-fi is like Star Wars.
Sounds like your bookstore was miscategorizing Paranormal Romance.
Good timing, OP! I'm also working on am urban fantasy. I'm glad to see that none of my story falls into any of the traps I see mentioned here.
I was thinking that my story was urban/modern fantasy, but mine is actually so different from all the others mentioned here that I'm not sure it even fits into the genre.
I have those doubts too. My story features giants, elves, and humans, with magic-lite. Mostly enhanced natural abilities with a few oddballs (the guy that can absorb magical powers and keep them, and the woman who can teleport). All magic has a cost (my male lead has enhanced intuition and it gives him gut issues like heartburn and indigestion, for example). And it's a largely human world that doesn't tend to cater to the other two species. Which is deliberate and causes tension. There is a romance, of course, but these are all adults and I'm working hard to make them feel like natural relationships that would happen IRL. The focus is more on their capers and investigations than anything. I can't think of what else it would be, because it's not a paranormal romance (the romance is important, but not the focus), and it's not in a different world or otherworldly magicky enough to be straight fantasy. There also is too much "other stuff" to justify calling it a mystery. So yeah. I think I'm stuck with urban fantasy unless something else comes up.
I really like Urban Fantasy. I've been drawn into the worlds of heaven and hell, met with realistic angels and demons, and even questioned the identity of God himself, yet I cannot stand when the fantastic becomes mundane in Urban Fantasy novels. "Don't mind the Pegasus, hun, she comes with three shapeshifting goats." That's a trope, right? To find something incredibly awesome and take it for granted how awesome it is? I understand getting used to routine, but to normalize the characters into perfectly drab ones completely kills the genre for me.
Love triangles
I have to jump on the zombie hate train because this drives me nuts watching the Walking Dead. How the fuck do these zombies, ex people, who used to require 2,000 calories a day walk around for months or years without food? They are too dumb to hunt or farm. There just are not enough humans to eat for all of them. Why aren't they all dead dead not just undead within a few weeks or months? It makes no sense.
Well, if we're talking about classic zombies -- dead things, actual reanimated corpses -- then they presumably don't need food. If they're dead, they don't have a metabolism, they don't require sustenance. I've always thought that classic zombies don't eat people because they *need* to, but because they have a primal urge to do so. With the currently popular "infected" zombies (living humans infected with a rabies-like virus) then your point stands. Though as some people have said, there are stories where these types of zombies do starve to death after a period of time. But here's another problem with the "classic zombies": if they're dead and don't have a working digestive system, then all the human flesh they eat would just be accumulating in their stomach. After a few weeks all the surviving zombies would have huge, distended bellies, and eventually they'd eat until they exploded.
> > But here's another problem with the "classic zombies": if they're dead and don't have a working digestive system, then all the human flesh they eat would just be accumulating in their stomach. After a few weeks all the surviving zombies would have huge, distended bellies, and eventually they'd eat until they exploded. So... Left for Dead got it right with Boomers? :D
Don't even get me started. I've never liked zombies (they creep me out), but these ones make no sense. The one with no body is still alive? Get real.
MAGIC.
To be fair, sometimes this happens. Have you seen the film *28 Days Later*?
I have always wondered this myself. I think 28 Days Later had them starving near the end.
[удалено]
I've read quite a few. Most of the tropes that ticked me off were romance related. E.g. insta love, love triangles, the centuries old vampire falling in love with a mere mortal girl etc. I was just looking to see what other users in r/writing thought :)
Yeah the idea that a nigh immortal being would fall in love with a fucking mall rat is really beyond the pale.
What bugs me isn't just that an immortal falls in love; it's that this person, THIS person, who they met in 2007-or-whatever after living for a thousand years, THIS is the person. This is their everything. Their soulmate. I can almost understand if the work makes it clear that they've fallen in love before; that each time they run out the clock on their love's life, then spend a hundred years or so alone. This makes sense to me.
Highlander-style romance is pretty much my ideal take on the love life of an immortal.
Muggles ignoring blatantly supernatural events just to preserve the masquerade. My favorite urban fantasy series, the *Mercy Thompson* books by Patricia Briggs, is set in a world where the masquerade is (sorta) broken, and everyone knows the fae and werewolves are real.
I'd Say about three Key things about the tropes I hate: Legendary Creatures: If you use one creature, then its okay to alter it. You can use the Movies/books/etc as an excuse to cover it up. If you use more than one legendary creature, then you need to stick to the old rules and not re-invent them. *Twilight* Sorry Day-walking okay... with some catch, but turns into diamond skin boy... Nope... In my book your not a real vampire, your something else that ALSO feeds on blood, and maybe your just into pedophilia... seriously 16 and he is that old and no one got in arms about it. If you want to just make it about these creatures and go for a 'thats the name you humans gave us' then okay, I can swallow that and go on. To me a 'I shine like diamonds if I'm in the sun.' it is a 1) See I'm Different, my vampires are cool, and a 2) cheap way to get out of a plot hole that you made to well get your boy toy vampire wannna-be that, angst ridden 200 year old vampire in with high school girls, that he could just as easily been 18, just graduated and moved in somewhere. He did not have to go to high school. Seriously old vampire that wants to go to high school? That is something us old folks would fight to avoid. /rant over Detective Agencies: They were cute when it all started, but after a while its been there done that. Yes its a way to introduce a reader to your world through the eyes of a detective what ever race, witch, vampire, werewolf, waiting on a mummy detective to put a nail in that coffin. No, not iZombie but wrapped in cloth bandages type that only grunts. Romance: Yeah I got to go with the group. Twilight isn't the only one. As much as I love the series The Hollows, seems like theres always a Romance spin on the main character. If its there and she/he is single, and its not overpowering the plot... Okay I can swallow it if I care enough about the character to put up with it. How bout a decent well written series where the Girl falls for another girl and its a positive thing or vice versa, and it NOT be the most overshadowing plot-line, or the 'angst' angle of the relationship. What I would like to see and haven't? A UF transformation story (mainly a large novel but NOT erotica) where the Antagonist (MC) is transformed gender-wise (or could be species thing) as part of the main plot line. But instead of it being the 'I got to go back to the way I was' a ya know that (insert that plot device) that turned me into a girl\guy... being that ain't so bad so I'll stick with it. And that story line not be the MAIN plot of the story, but more of an aside plot line. It's a wish list of a Gender change plot line that the MC stays with it, that ISNT a part of the main plot. Some how I don't think I'm going to see that as a major publishing novel, but still one can hope and write. Sorry if it took so long, I was trying to be exact. I hope this helps with your plot line and ideas.
[удалено]
I have to disagree with your comparison. Gravity or fishes are real things. Vampires, werewolves, ghost and Djinn are fantasy. I think we, as authors, can modify their lore, behavior, look, etc. as we please. Another discussion would be if you like it or not. I don't like sparkly vampires either. And I love when the licanthropy is a REAL curse and not some birth gift discovered by the orphan chosen one in his fifteen. But it's on the authors hand to respect the original place where this characters come from or not. In the zombies shit I totally agree. That bastards have zero reasons to stand on their foots more than a couple of months.
[удалено]
There is where our opinions go in opposite roads. I'm totally sceptical about the existence of such creatures (and any kind of god as well), so it doesn't bother me when a writer modifiy them. But I see where people can have their beliefs vulnerated and therefore, be offended. And STILL I think all of us should be open to new points of views and versions about the same old and know creature/god/religion/etc. And then decide if we like or not sparkly vampires. Anyways, nice chat :)
I agree with what you say, but to be able to break the rules and have it be of meaning, you have to know why the rules existed to start with. *edit to add: You can't have a car magically move with some form of propulsion. It's gotta have some kind of engine or driver. It's not about what we personally believe, but about what is culturally believed and accepted as possible and offering a new explanation of it.
Your issue with arguing we stick to the real lore is just a little short-sighted in that there *isn't* a singular lore for vampires. I did research for a project I'm working on on vampire lore throughout the world, and [the variations on vampire mythology is pretty vast](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vampire_folklore_by_region), depending on how broad you want to extrapolate it. Even vampire lore within Europe has regional variations, with several different lores being smooshed together to form what we know as 'vampires' today. To imply that the vampire comes from a singular mythos or culture is simply misinformed. Even within that singular culture, these myths are prone to evolution (e.g., the eastern european/balkan vampires were originally considered to look ruddy/like a bruised corpse, instead of pale and bloodless as they are now.) Similarly, the history of lycanthropy and variations in European folklore can be traced back to the Germanic Iron Age, and the broader concept of humans shifting into animals (and even a connection to the lunar cycle) doesn't stick to a singular culture. These lores span multiple continents and dozens, if not hundreds, of cultures, demonstrating that they speak to common human fears and superstitions. They don't 'belong' to anyone. Edward sparkling in the sun wasn't a poor narrative choice because it deviated from traditional lore or disrespected European culture. It was a poor narrative choice because it was stupid.
No, my issue isn't that we stick to the Lore and that isn't what I'm saying, it is that you have to know what rules are there and understand why, then you can consider the believability of breaking them. Ever seen a kid put on crocodile tears compared to a kid sobbing because they are heartbroken that they can't find their favourite toy? Well, that's the kind of difference that I'm talking about - believability. What are you studying that you are doing a project on vampire lore?
You're saying your argument isn't to stick to lore, but the statement that rules exist is an appeal to sticking to a singular lore. Some vamps can't go out in the sun, but not all lores about vampires have this rule. That vampires can't go out in the sun is only a "rule" if you've internalized the classic depiction of vampires, but as someone who's consumed a metric fuck-ton of vampire media, the rules aren't consistent enough across the board nowadays that there's a single popular vampire canon that must be upheld, lest we sacrifice believability. Hell, Blade was challenging the "vampires can't go into the sun" rule long before Twilight ever did, it was just with sunscreen instead of vampires having diamond bodies. Buffy the Vampire Slayer *and* Vampire Diaries had magical daylight rings. Sunlight is a rule that writers have been playing with for quite some time. Basically, ever since people started writing about post-Dracula vampires, people have been playing hard and fast with the vision of vampires that Stoker invented, which is fine, because vampires don't belong to Bram Stoker, and *Dracula* itself was a highly flawed novel with some interesting ideas, and some terrible ones. There's historical precedent for the existence of something that had many names, which later fell under the umbrella term vampire, (which, in a broad context, is a human-like apex predator that hunts and feeds off of humans by draining some sort of life force, and is usually,--but not always,--undead) but you can't even get countries that share a border to agree on exactly what the rules are. So, what rules? And why do we have to follow them? Is it popular consensus at this point? If so: wait twenty years. Post-Twilight vampire consumers probably don't even know that it used to be vampires slept in coffins filled with grave dirt and couldn't cross running water. Vampires sparkling in the sun doesn't fail to meet suspension of disbelief because it departs too much from vampire rules, it's because it was stupid. As a vampire enthusiast, I'm fine with departures from the so-called rules provided that they're intelligent departures. You're allowed to dislike when vampires depart from what you believe are the rules vampires should follow, but recognize those rules are completely arbitrary, and likely formed entirely by what vampire media you've personally chosen to consume. Sorry, I didn't mean to imply I was studying this in an academic setting. A hobby of mine in my free time is world creation for roleplaying games. I have a 'verse focused on global vampire lore, in part because the prevalence of certain legends across multiple unrelated cultures that never interacted with one another (the bathing maiden, the flood event, the vampire, the were, etc.) is something that's fascinated me my whole life. I spend a lot of time exhaustively researching things in non-academic contexts.
To be fair, there are ways to twist a few elements of a certain creature into something unique. There are "rules" but I find those are mostly the common aspects we have applied to such creatures over the course of time. It can be changed, it's like having a new perspective on an idea. ^this ^does ^not ^excuse ^the ^sparkly ^vampires ^though
I agree with some of your points but I disagree that every queer character's story should include coming out. Good representation means multifaceted characters who are interesting on their own and just happen to be queer as well.
No, I don't think it should be about every queer character coming out, just that they shouldn't be token, that they should be embraced as more than their sexuality.
... It really sounds like you should be reading a different genre.
Unlimited Rape Works.
My roommate told me about a popular UF series and how pretty much every female (and some males) had been raped. I don't even know why people are still reading those books if that's the case. She said it became like an eye roll thing for her "Can't we just have *one* character that isn't brutally raped?!" but for me, that's just a straight shot to the "never to be read" pile.