Anyway, if this sort of non-violent fantasy is what an “anti-epic” might be… well, someone point me in the right direction so I can read some!

Because yeah I’m kind of over violence.

Thanks for your comment!  I have loved Tunnels & Trolls since it first came out.

There’s a lot in your response to mull over, but two immediate reactions:

1) I think you’re right that epic fantasy, at its base, is about magnitude and scope.  In fact, many definitions I came across use that word specifically to name a central characteristic of the term.  That narrative hugeness is linked to the fate of a land or world, indeed.  But I think that is just the first level of definition, and there are a number of assumptions bound up with that idea (about power, the nature of conflict, how heroes figure into the story, etc.).  I think that comes out in your immediate distinction between heroic, low, and epic strains of fantasy.  As you compare the idea of epic fantasy to other subgenres, more distinctions become apparent.

2) I like this idea of “low fantasy” very much.  Most sword-and-sorcery, I think, is low fantasy, as are some other subgenres (like New Weird, perhaps?).  I haven’t read Brent Weeks’ Night Angel books, but I’ve heard that they are a fusion between epic fantasy and your idea of low fantasy, which sounds like a fascinating trick to pull off.  I am alsoquite intrigued by your characterization of Lerotra’hh’s origin as a “low fantasy,” when that has the potential to be more like an old-school epic.  But I see your point that the focus of the struggle in the story on a person is the essence of low fantasy.  That sounds like an idea that would be interesting to expound upon and explore!

3) Your last paragraph is worth a discussion all on its own, about how fantasy and actuality are blended in different genres.  I broadly agree with you.  I think that the outlandishness of epic fantasy is a combination of strength and potentially fatal flaw in the genre.

Epic fantasy also defies believability in a way that low fantasy doesn’t.  The fate of worlds, nations, peoples rarely hinges on a single individual.  The fate of individuals, however, is very often determined by individual effort.  Thus, low fantasy is more credible, less repetitive, and altogether more fun to read and write.  I say let the epics be implicit.  Give me the explicit hero sagas and survival stories of low fantasy 99% of the time.

First, thanks for the warm welcome!

Second, your comments about epic fantasy possibly being played out and the ascendence of other genres is a topic I would like to explore further at some point.  As I noted at the end of this column, I think that the idea from the WFC panel that epic fantasies need to be shorter to compete is just an indicator of a number of changes in reception, audience, and market forces.  I agree that the times are a-changin’, and I am going to talk about that a bit next week.

I’m intrigued by the idea that sword-and-sorcery’s resurgence might be a factor in epic fantasy’s decline, both in terms of popularity but perhaps also in designation?  Are there hybrid stories out there that take on the genre appelation that the publisher thinks will make them sell better?  Does that affect the readers’ reception of that work?  And, what do writers need to do to revitalize epic fantasy, if indeed we need to do so?  This is a question that I am pondering personally as I write my first novel, which dips a toes into several related genres, including epic fantasy, at least a bit.

Things happen in cycles, and sword and sorcery seems to be having a renaissance. Is it “eating” epic fantasy’s market share?–perhaps.  

Its also a matter of the epic fantasy genre having been played out, at least the moment. It’s had a several decade run.  In time, I think there will be a resurgence, with new writers revitalizing the genre.

Today seems to be the day for paranormal romance, steampunk and S&S.  5 years from now–who knows?

(really a placeholder comment while I think about the meaty topic you have raised…)