The Grimdark Appreciation thread III

[Puntificator]

Re YA and grimdark: Yesterday, during another AMA, I asked grimdark writer Daniel José Older why his novel Shadowshaper is considered YA, even though it takes place in the same dark "world" as his grimdark novel Midnight Taxi Tango, which is not considered to be YA but includes a 16-year-old girl, Kia, as a protagonist. His answer:

"To me, Shadowshaper's a YA because the primary crisis of the book revolves around Sierra shedding the myths of childhood and stepping towards adulthood. In contrast, while Kia is also 16 and one of the main characters of Midnight Taxi Tango, and she grows in the book, the book isn't focused on her growth so much as the larger conflict of the evil roach dudes and how all 3 main characters relate and help each other. Hope that clarifies things!" 

[peterbound]

That's fallacious reasoning and you know it is. Grimdark doesn't exist to sell e-zines dedicated to the idea of grimdark any more than fish exist to sell subscriptions to the National Aquarium. Interestingly, according to the Oxford English Dictionary, the first recorded use in English of the word "fantasy" as a genre term was in 1949 in the title "The Magazine of Fantasy and Science Fiction." So I guess, using your wet logic, I recognize the need to sell magazines dedicated to the idea of fantasy (and science fiction), but in ten years it will all be just fiction.

And the genre I follow as a hobby already is all fantasy or sci-fi (and more, actually, though you refuse to recognize speculative fiction as an umbrella term), but this misses and dismisses the point of finer categorization. Cargo trucks, fire trucks, etc. are all trucks, but I pity the fire department that buys a fleet of cargo trucks to fight fires. 

We buy cargo trucks as well, you know.

Your arbitrary categorization is one that is made up, your 'wet logic', comparing it to fish seems a little silly. Try harder.

There actually /needs/ to be a categorization when purchasing said vehicles, grim dark however, need not exist to sell the books, or help your simple mind figure out what you are buying.

[Bjornbert]

It does get pretty crazy at times but isn't really all that graphic in execution.

Hidden Content

Stuff like that make it very dark in tone at times, but it does not fit into the Grimdark genre in any way.

So being not graphic makes something not grimdark? Would you include KJ Parker or Mark Lawrence as grimdark then?

[SeanF]

So being not graphic makes something not grimdark? Would you include KJ Parker or Mark Lawrence as grimdark then?

I guess the best argument against The Hunger Games being grimdark is that the protagonist does strive to do good throughout, even as she heads to her inexorable breakdown.  She's surrounded by people who are thoroughly amoral, but she isn't.

[peterbound]

So being not graphic makes something not grimdark? Would you include KJ Parker or Mark Lawrence as grimdark then?

That's part of the problem with this silly sub genre, no one can define it with any clarity.  

 

It's still just books about dragons and shit.  People want it to be more, apparently to make their shopping choices easier, but it seems like you can just make it whatever you want.  These threads have proven that even the people that seem to really believe in its existence can't agree on what it means to be part of the grim club. 

[Puntificator]

I guess the best argument against The Hunger Games being grimdark is that the protagonist does strive to do good throughout, even as she heads to her inexorable breakdown.  She's surrounded by people who are thoroughly amoral, but she isn't.

I haven't read The Hunger Games, but assuming what you say is correct, then it underscores my previous comments that a good definition of grimdark should include something about requiring morally ambiguous or gray or antiheroic protagonists.

[Puntificator]

 

 

 

We buy cargo trucks as well, you know.

 

 

Another strawman. I wasn't saying fire departments shouldn't or don't buy cargo trucks; I very clearly said, "I pity the fire department that buys a fleet of cargo trucks to fight fires." 

[peterbound]

Another strawman. I wasn't saying fire departments shouldn't or don't buy cargo trucks; I very clearly said, "I pity the fire department that buys a fleet of cargo trucks to fight fires." 

wait, you're mad at my straw man attacking your straw man?  Seems odd.  Par for the course though when talking to you. 

[Puntificator]

 

 

 

 

There actually /needs/ to be a categorization when purchasing said vehicles, grim dark however, need not exist to sell the books, or help your simple mind figure out what you are buying.

No, there doesn't actually NEED to be a categorization when purchasing said vehicles. You could call all trucks simply trucks, and pick out which ones would best fight fires by looking through all of them and see which has the best capability, equipment, etc. to fight fires. But not having those categories would be stupid and inefficient. So the categorization is highly desirable, but not necessary. 

No one has ever said that we NEED grimdark, or any genre/sub-genre for that matter. We could search through all books category-free, as you imply, and make our choices. But for many of us, that seems inordinately inefficient and a waste of time. The argument for grimdark is not one of need, but of usefulness. Some of us find having a grimdark category/sub-genre useful. You don't. So fine, don't use the category to determine your book purchases; no one's forcing you to do so. And let those of us who want to use it do so; there's no harm done to you or to them. 

[Puntificator]

That's part of the problem with this silly sub genre, no one can define it with any clarity.  

 

It's still just books about dragons and shit.  People want it to be more, apparently to make their shopping choices easier, but it seems like you can just make it whatever you want.  These threads have proven that even the people that seem to really believe in its existence can't agree on what it means to be part of the grim club. 

And still another strawman argument. It's not true that no one can define grimdark with any clarity. Many of us have given clear definitions (clear, that is, to the same degree of clarity as definitions for other genres/sub-genres/categories); we just don't collectively agree on any of them yet. And as has been pointed out numerous times, the same is true for the definitions of the fantasy and science fiction genres, and their sub-genres. There are many different definitions for each, and fantasy/science fiction readers can't universally agree on which to use. But, similarly to the use of genres, collective agreement is not necessary, only desirable. Astronomers don't have collective agreement on the definition of "planet." But they still use the category. And planets still exist even if we can't completely agree on which astronomical bodies belong to the category.  

[Richard Writhen]

So being not graphic makes something not grimdark? Would you include KJ Parker or Mark Lawrence as grimdark then?

I regard stuff that is grimdark as grimdark. Strong overtones of hopelessness, futility, strong violence, and grey characters. However, with a capital "G," it is a sub-genre of fantasy. Never read Parker but Lawrence is definitely in that category. Hunger Games is grimdark, but it's definitely not Grimdark. So is The Road. Frankly I feel grimdark stuff that is sci-fi should either fit into splatterpunk or cyberpunk or even a new sub-genre.

I was just ruminating this morning how grimdark I feel Watership Down is. And it's also fantasy. However, it doesn't fit into the sub-genre based on the criterion on the list I have already posted on this thread.

[Puntificator]

wait, you're mad at my straw man attacking your straw man?  Seems odd.  Par for the course though when talking to you. 

Look, these boards are set up for mature discussion. Several times, against my better judgment, I've tried to engage in one with you. You are either incapable of doing so, in which case I feel sorry for you, or unwilling to do so, in which case you are just wasting much of your life trolling, and again I feel sorry for you. You live either sadly benighted or madly belligerent. In either case, I'm back to ignoring you unless and until you show either a modicum of intelligence or friendliness.

[Darth Richard II]

Yeah if KJ Parker doesn't fit under your definition of GrimDark, something is wrong with your definition.

 

[Bjornbert]

Yeah if KJ Parker doesn't fit under your definition of GrimDark, something is wrong with your definition.

 

That was my point, yes. But even if grimdark existed Sharps wouldn't fit. The others yes. The Company would be the darkest, but the Hammer was the most powerful. IIRC I've discussed the book with you and agreed on that.

For those grimdark fans: read Parker. It's darker than all those so called grimdark novels and the violence is not graphic at all.

[HexMachina]

That was my point, yes. But even if grimdark existed Sharps wouldn't fit. The others yes. The Company would be the darkest, but the Hammer was the most powerful. IIRC I've discussed the book with you and agreed on that.

For those grimdark fans: read Parker. It's darker than all those so called grimdark novels and the violence is not graphic at all.

I recently read a novella (The Last Witness) by Parker, which I thought was very well done once I accustomed myself to the style. Where would you recommend starting with his longer books? Seemed there were a few series when I looked

[AncalagonTheBlack]

I recently read a novella (The Last Witness) by Parker, which I thought was very well done once I accustomed myself to the style. Where would you recommend starting with his longer books? Seemed there were a few series when I looked

Well,you could start with his standalone novels,two of which are heavily discounted on amazon

The Folding Knife for £1.49
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Folding-Knife-K-J-Parker-ebook/dp/B004GGUGHG/

The Company for £1.49
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Company-K-J-Parker-ebook/dp/B002VK2EO2/

[Darth Richard II]

It's all good, although if you don't like economics The Folding Knife can be off putting.

The Hammer is probably my favorite, although it is a slow burn.

 

[peterbound]

And still another strawman argument. It's not true that no one can define grimdark with any clarity. Many of us have given clear definitions (clear, that is, to the same degree of clarity as definitions for other genres/sub-genres/categories); we just don't collectively agree on any of them yet. And as has been pointed out numerous times, the same is true for the definitions of the fantasy and science fiction genres, and their sub-genres. There are many different definitions for each, and fantasy/science fiction readers can't universally agree on which to use. But, similarly to the use of genres, collective agreement is not necessary, only desirable. Astronomers don't have collective agreement on the definition of "planet." But they still use the category. And planets still exist even if we can't completely agree on which astronomical bodies belong to the category.  

See, that's the problem.  We don't /need/ silly sub genres.  You want them for some reason, that I can't quite put my finger on.  Some sense of order?  Ease of purchase?  Giving you a feeling of belonging to something grander?  I'm not sure. It seems silly to me, and an exercise in foolishness. 

Also, i'm not sure you understand what a straw man is very well.  Nor should you use that tactic to rebut every argument I make.  You cannot define it with clarity.  To do should would be to agree as a majority what it means.  To reach Clarity.  Can't see how you don't get that?  And ugh.. planets?  Really?  You are, funny enough, shooting for the stars with your examples.  They may seem clever in your head, but they make no fucking sense, nor are they relevant to the conversation.  

The term exists, and was started, as a fucking joke.  It has turned into something, due in part to it's odd fans, that is taken way too seriously.  It's one that seems to have no real definition, and cannot be used in a way to market books, increase sales, or drive creativity.  it's neat-o that you are obsessed with the whole thing, but i think that obsession is clouding your judgment when it comes to adult conversation about the topic. 

 

Grimdark: Books about dragons and shit, with bad words in it, and attempts to subvert tropes*.  Nothing more profound that that.  Keep trying though.  

*I think i just defined it with clarity.  You're welcome

[peterbound]

Look, these boards are set up for mature discussion. 

You obviously haven't been here that long. 

 

Also, i'm neither sadly benighted or madly belligerent.  I just someone that can't seem to find the drive to take myself as serious as you seem to do. 

And ignore away, it's the weaker path, but feel free to do so. 

[peterbound]

Yeah if KJ Parker doesn't fit under your definition of GrimDark, something is wrong with your definition.

 

Agreed.  If any of these literary geniuses can actually agree on a definition, Parker better fit into it.