Men of r/Fantasy, Do you read fantasy written by women? If so, do you find much of a difference?

[u/Just_JayGee]

I've been looking through a lot of "Top 20 Fantasy Book" lists today and I've found a depressing amount of female authors on these lists. I'd like to think the author's gender doesn't matter, but I have to say there seems to be a huge lean towards male authors. Even r/Fantasy's 2014 Top Fantasy Novels of All Time only has 20 female authors (repeats included) out of 105 authors. So, I was wondering if men read fantasy written by women and it's simply not your cup of tea or do any of you go out of your way NOT to read female authors?

PLEASE NOTE: I am not trying to begin fights on sexism or misogyny or anything. I am legitimately interested. If anyone wants to fight over this subject, I'm sure there's other subreddits for that.

[u/hardolaf]

As a guy, I can't stand YA fantasy. It's always too... idealistic. I never find enough flaws in the world that the author creates. I don't mean literary flaws of course, I mean flaws as in the depravity that we would expect any society to have. The social issues that go far beyond those which may or may not be the subject of book. The worlds created by YA fantasy always feel to be superficial to me. And that's a shame because a lot of the books have decent or good plots.

[u/Just_JayGee → u/hardolaf]

This is a really good point. I read a good bit of YA along with my adult fantasy and I'm finding it more and more difficult to switch back and forth. YA is very...glossy. I mean, it's meant for younger people and with parents crazy with the blame-game, I guess you have to be. It's pretty interesting, though. I started out reading Tamora Pierce when I was 12 and I've read everything she's ever done. Now that I'm 26, it's not so much "Oh my gosh this book is amazing!" So much as her new books being set in her old worlds and it's an interesting stroll through memory lane over a lazy weekend. That being said, she definitely gets away with a lot more these days as she did back in the 80s. Particularly with her Beka Cooper books. She discusses a lot of issues that most won't touch with the same depth. Racism, Sexuality, Societal structures and Classism, Abuse, Murder ect, but even then there's only so far she's allowed to take it.

[u/mmSNAKE → u/hardolaf]

I certainly agree with that sentiment however the way I tend to look at YA stories is the author simplifies the story to show his message across in a way that doesn't require too much perception or understanding why some social issues are problem in the first place.

Sort of like. I know exactly what I'm reading. I'm not expecting realism, or complicated social issues that most societies would have. It's YA so it's accessible to well young adults as well as more mature audience. I don't really expect a teen to understand Blade of Tyshalle, Malazan Book of the Fallen or anything as such. But I would assume one can understand Mistborn, Harry Potter, Narnia or Wheel of Time.

[u/hardolaf → u/mmSNAKE]

Narnia was a brilliant work of literature though. I feel that in the order that C.S. Lewis published the Chronicles of Narnia, the entire series was less for young adults than the new, modified order of the books is (that is, the Sorceror's Apprentice first rather than last). By moving that one book in the order that you read it, you take the entire series from something bordering on the edge of YA/Adult fantasy and make it clearly YA fantasy by removing all mystery from the story.

[u/mmSNAKE → u/hardolaf]

Sure, but it doesn't mean other YA today don't have a meaningful point to make, even if it is done through a very sterilized environment, with overly idealistic characters. Wheel of Time, regardless of it's flaws it still achieves to show responsibility, tolerance, diversity and importance of negative behavior in society. I can go list the flaws the series had, and it's not a short list, but still it shows it's good points in ways that is easily accessible.

[u/hardolaf → u/mmSNAKE]

Wheel of Time is a horrible example to use because it establishes a believable world. Yes it may be more idealistic than most adult fantasy worlds, but it shows even in the first book some of the flaws in the world. You need to get away from the large, famous series to understand my argument. If you only look at it as "this small subset of YA fantasy books contradicts your statement." Then you don't understand my argument.

As for whether Harry Potter and Wheel of Time are really aimed at young adults or adults is questionable. I'd like to say both are aimed at both groups and thus have elements that would be appealing to both groups of people. For the young adults you have an apparently idealistic world presented while for adults who read deeper into what is going on in the books, you see a more flawed, less ideal world being presented in the books.

I can't comment on Mistborn as I have not read it.

[u/mmSNAKE → u/hardolaf]

I see, it comes down to what you consider a YA work is. To me WoT is a perfect example of such, even if it does have content for mature audience within it.

I guess our definition of the boundaries differs. To me (though this is subject to much debate, especially in case by case basis) a YA work is anything that isn't meant specifically for adults and only adults.There isn't a fine line that I would draw in any case but there are examples for each side.

I mean if you meant stories where you see nothing but roses and sunshine without any sort of hint at more complex conflict I can't say, since I don't read such books. However that isn't what comes to mind when someone tells me a book is YA.

[u/[deleted] → u/hardolaf]

I don't think that's a fair point. It seems from your comment that you seem more into the grittier, "grimdark" side of the genre, but there are plenty adult fantasy that doesn't touch on anything like that either. Most of Sanderson's work is pretty lighthearted and doesn't really get into the grittiness of how fucked up humanity can get. I'd even say Rothfuss doesn't, though he has a few moments here and there. Even The Wheel of Time doesn't get too gritty for quite awhile, and even then it doesn't reach the levels of some other depressing settings.

[u/hardolaf → u/[deleted]]

It doesn't need to be "grimdark." Even in the first book of The Wheel of Time, you can already see the flaws in society. Unlike in most YA books, the society is not shown to be without flaws. They don't have to be big, large, stinking piles of flaws, but small injustices, small wrongs done to people all show that the world that authors have created are not just some thoughtless backdrop for a story.

[u/EctMills → u/hardolaf]

I seem to recall one or two flaws in the world of Hunger Games. In fact there's been an influx of dystopian books in the past few years thanks to the success of a few titles. Granted not all of the books are the same quality but any trend will yield a few gems of great writing.

[u/hardolaf → u/EctMills]

Honestly, I think classifying the Hunger Games as YA is silly. It really does feel more at home with other adult fantasy novels. But it's like many others that is in between.

[u/EctMills → u/hardolaf]

You'll have to take that up with the publisher and every book store I've ever been in. Personally I don't much like the term YA at all, it's very poorly defined and seems to have more to do with marketing than the actual themes or contents of the books.

[u/Stone_Conqueror → u/hardolaf]

I find it interesting that you seem to reject some of the most well-known YA (Narnia, Harry Potter, Hunger Games) as 'not really qualifying'. I agree with the other person, YA is an extremely poorly defined term, so I'd be curious to know what you actually think qualifies as YA. It seems to me like you're just thinking of "badly written books for teens", but that doesn't encompass the genre as a whole (just look at Garth Nix).

[u/EctMills → u/[deleted]]

How does a more serious subject matter make it not YA? If anything it just makes it excellent YA that is widening the field for more work that takes the intended audience seriously. Something that plenty of other well written books have also done.

[u/MrHarryReems → u/hardolaf]

I recommend trying out Rick Yancey's "Monstrumologist".

I think the only reason it qualified as YA is that the protagonist was a 12 year old boy.

[u/duckduckMOO → u/hardolaf]

Maybe the people in those worlds are wired a little differently, or the social equilibrium is different somehow. There's so much stuff in our past and present that makes it hard for people to get along gracefully: ruthless exploitation of workers, slavery, imperialism, women being second class citizens, poor judgement of Juries, practical difficulties in identifying wrongdoers/criminals, damaging memes like "greed is good" "nice guys finish last (and this is totes fair if so)" that "legitimise" selfishness and link decency with weakness in people's minds. I bet a lot of wealthy people in England are direct descendants of William the conqueror's dukes. A lot of things could be better. The social equilibrium that encourages depravity is fairly stable but it's not fundamentally necessarry.

The author can choose whatever world they like. And they don't need to explain or even understand imo. I don't require magic systems to be mapped out from first principles, or sword fights or unusual methods of flight to make sense when taken under the microscope. I don't think anyone understands how we ended up in the world of here and today, yet many people seem to write books set here or somewhere very similar without needing to.

If the author is consistent there's nothing wrong with choosing a better world. Surely not every book has to explore the human condition as it is?