I read an article not long ago that made an interesting claim: placing constraints on an artist helps create the best art, while giving an artist total free reign, IE “the sky is the limit” often results in monstrosities.
Of course, I don’t have the article to re-read, and so I cannot remember the examples they gave. But, the idea came back to me today and I realized that in some ways, there may be truth to it.
Let’s take the most basic (or perhaps extreme) example: spelling, grammar, punctuation. If you tell a writer “no rules” you’re going to get something that’s difficult to read, if not impossible in some cases.
“OMG can u imagene readding a entire 300 pg b00k likE THis?”
…That was painful just to write! Almost as painful as reading Washington Irving’s run-on sentences!
But what about less obvious examples? As I’ve found out the hard way, there are rules about genre, and while it might not be too bad to bend those rules to make it interest, flat-out breaking them might work against the writer.
The best example I can think of is a topic I’ve already talked about: novel cover art. When I first started considering cover art for The Sword of Dragons, I remember looking at the fantasy section of Barnes and Noble and thinking, “All these covers look similar. I know! I’ll do something completely different, that’ll make my book stand out!”
Except…it didn’t. Not in the way I wanted it to. Yes, I made it look very different from regular fantasy novels. And so anyone looking to read a fantasy novel didn’t even bother to pick it up, or more likely, didn’t bother to click on it on amazon.com to see what it was about.
But there’s more than just cover art to consider…
Tropes of Fantasy
I’m a fan of taking a typical fantasy trope and turning it into something just a little different.
For instance, a typical trope about dragons is that they are fire-breathing creatures who live in caves guarding a hoard of treasure. In the first Sword of Dragons novel, there is, in fact, a dragon living in a cave, and she is indeed guarding something of incredible value, but rather than an evil beast greedily guarding gold, she is protecting the most powerful weapon in the universe.
Is it possible to take this too far? Initially I might say yes, but then I look at examples like Game of Thrones. In most fantasy novels, the heroes live and achieve their goals, and the heroes are often very clearly defined from the villains. Neither of these tropes are true in Game of Thrones.
But is that an exception? What was it about GoT that made it so popular? Honestly I don’t know, but it seems like this has created a sort of sub-genre of fantasy. I’m curious to see how many more venture into this type of fantasy, successfully.
And in all honesty, I’m not sure what rules should or shouldn’t be followed, when it becomes okay to break rules or tropes.
For my own part, I do enjoy a lot of fantasy tropes, they are why I like the genre. Dragons and magic in particular draw me in. I intend to continue to toe the line, keeping some fantasy tropes intact, while turning others on their heads.
For instance, dwarves will start to play a bigger part in books 3 and 4, but they won’t be exactly what you’ve come to expect from dwarves. You’ve already seen in book 2 that they once lived underground, as is typical for dwarves…but they definitely don’t anymore.
I also do not like the “Damsel in Distress” trope. Even if there’s ever a female character in need of rescuing in my novels, it’s usually not done in the typical way (for instance, Elaria in the first Sword of Dragons novel.) I’m all for ‘damsels in distress’ rescuing them selves, like Princess Leia did!
In any case, to answer the initial question of this blog, I think it helps to have constraints. Movie productions have shown that an unlimited budget aren’t necessarily going to create a better product. But sometimes, just sometimes, there are those that can break the typical rules and succeed.
It all depends on the circumstances, and perhaps even the luck of the draw.
What do you think?
Thanks for reading!