Fandom and writing

[Petitioner's City]

There's a really interesting thread on Trekbbs about tie-in writing and fandom. Sadly B&C seems to have losf its author posters, but Trekbbs has kept most of them (and includes figures like James Swallow who of course many people here are critical of).

 

Anyway, a decade and a half ago, Pocket published Voyages of the Imagination - a history of treklit to that point, edited by Marco Palmieri (who then went to Tor during the recession and subsequently onwards).

 

The OP noticed a lot of trek writers over the years weren't "fans" (whatever that means) with this then changing c.2000, with a fan generation writing the interconnected continuity of the next decade and a half. Then a number of authors and editors (despite all being fans) responded about actually having a "fan" approach can be difficult 

 

Anyway I have often thought about this for 40k (and other Warhammer IPs); it feels the community often struggles with takes by people they perceive to not be "fan" enough, or whose take is seen as not capturing the essence well - but other aspects of criticism arise (seen a bit in the Rafen thread, about faction favouritism, needing continuity to be worthwhile, and so on). Even Abnett, and other writers, receive this criticism on occasion.

 

But why is this sense of needing to be a fan so prevalent? Is there actually a platonic Warhammer-ness? Is Warhammer still too insular? Is Warhammer able to be different things as a adaptation? 

[wecanhaveallthree]

I think the message of 'kill your darlings' in that thread is enormously valuable, as is the warning about wallowing in nostalgia or presenting idealised versions of favourite characters. I've grumbled at length about the Lion's return for exactly this reason. We have a notoriously paranoid, insular, even murderous character - a hugely flawed one - who has all their very, very rough edges sanded off and their best elements polished to a mirror sheen. The Lion is quite literally valorised in Son of the Forest. He is, quite literally, now a mystic knight-protector draped in all the epic heraldry of Arthurian fable but without all the incest, murder and castle-crashing.

 

Compare and contrast to The Red Angel, Angron's 'return' novel, where the man himself and his whole Legion are deconstructed down to the bones (with the Grey Knights copping significant strays into the bargain). Guymer's an old hand in the setting, and he knows his stuff, but he uses that knowledge - that 'research' - to write a fascinating tale of love, need, and hate. Why do we stay in abusive relationships? Why do we seek out father figures, even if they're Angron? What need drives the World Eaters on, and furnishes them with recruits? Angron is vastly powerful, but also vastly pitiable. He is complex - his Legion equally so. But Guymer never shies away from the good and the ill, and I think that's the quintessential essence of Warhammer. It's right there in the crawl: 'grim darkness of the far future'. There are no 'good guys', but there are certainly understandable guys.

 

With that in mind, I think Warhammer is wildly successful when it is being 'different things'. I love Crime and Horror - I think we all do. I absolutely adore Peter Fehervari's work, and I think he's one of the most 'different' of the authors in the stable. He's an author who grasps that 'essence', he conveys it even in stories that are not traditional Warhammer or even featuring traditional Warhammer characters/factions. Equally so, I think Graham McNeill remains my absolutely favourite for his sheer energy and enthusiasm. He's a wonderful storyteller, even if he's more pulpy and, perhaps, 'traditional'. It's the casual campfire way he writes, I think, that sells it to me, like a guy telling stories on a camping trip where even something about a trip to the corner store becomes an epic to put Gilgamesh to shame.

 

I don't believe Warhammer is too insular, I think it's just big and sprawling and not super well-documented. There's the idea of 'deep lore', where you need to physically present the ancient White Dwarf scrolls to prove your cred or something - and maybe that's a problem. I don't think you need to be a fan to write good Warhammer. I do think you need to do your research on the setting, and approach it from the perspective of not simply offing the occasional darling but declaring Exterminatus on Darling Prime.

[theSpirea]

Josh Reynolds wasn't a big fan of 40K, especially Chaos SM. Yet his CSM novels are brilliant.

[Petitioner's City]

@Brother Lunkhead I'm not sure if you moved this thread but it's not about fan fiction, it's about the role for being a fan whilst writing licenced fiction & the reception of this (ie the writers of black library and their reception) - I think it's definitely now in the wrong forum! (Sorry to complain!)

Edited September 29, 2023 by Petitioner's City

[grailkeeper]

Aaron Dembski Bowden is a huge 40k fan. Of all the author's I'd say he is the biggest that I'm aware of. Maybe others are bigger but haven't been as public as he has. He was quite public about it for a long time and interacted a lot with the fans. It badly affected his mental health unfortunately. That's a real shame as his insights into the universe were incredible. The internet being what it is, a lot of people got into arguments with him about various things. I think the effect of this may have been to scare some BL authors off interacting with fans on social media as much as he did. Who wants to deal with that negativity? I think this may also have slowed his writing down as he is a perfectionist.

[Mechanicus Tech-Support]

sigh I miss our author posters here 

[Bryan Blaire]

I miss them too.
 

Fairly sure, much like some of the GW ex-employees have discussed, BL authors have been asked or told not to discuss GW stuff online.  It seems like the online footprint of just about every GW employee faded away, I don’t think it was just negative interactions causing people to pull back.  GW seems like it wants to manage its online presence very carefully, and that seems to include representation of the company by employees online.

Edited September 29, 2023 by Bryan Blaire

[phandaal]

Yeah, plenty of authors expose themselves to the cesspool that is online communication 24/7, and other franchises have their artists, authors, etc credited for all to see.

 

It is more likely that company policy is behind the disappearance of GW staff from the public eye.

 

That said, ADB did have some issues of his own to deal with apparently. It happens. Hope he writes more GW stuff some day.

[Rain]

There is a major and important difference between being a “fan” as in, knowing all of the minutiae and minor points about how everything in the universe supposedly works, and being a fan of the themes and feel of the universe. Specifically, those themes are stagnation, paranoia, nostalgia for a lost golden age (that may or may not have actually been that golden), and resistance of the inevitable. It’s rather dark, but it’s what separates 40k from universes like Star Wars, Star Trek, or even Mass Effect.

 

Minor plot holes and even contradictions to canon are fine if they serve the story, and if said story is engrossing and has pathos. I really don’t care if a 40k writer knows when Godwyn pattern bolters were first used, or that well akshually that pattern of power armor couldn’t turn its head. As long as the writer “gets” the themes. For an example of exactly what I mean, read the Fabius Bile books.

[Scribe]

On 9/29/2023 at 2:04 AM, Petitioner's City said:

Is there actually a platonic Warhammer-ness?

 

Yes.

 

There is a flow, a type, a feeling, whatever you want to call it, of Warhammer-ness, to use your term, and yes I want it written by people who actually get that.

 

Whoever the best author in the world is at the moment, I couldnt care less if he or she wrote for BL, if they dont actually get what the setting is about.

[RikuEru]

On 9/29/2023 at 3:32 PM, grailkeeper said:

Aaron Dembski Bowden is a huge 40k fan. Of all the author's I'd say he is the biggest that I'm aware of. Maybe others are bigger but haven't been as public as he has. He was quite public about it for a long time and interacted a lot with the fans. It badly affected his mental health unfortunately. That's a real shame as his insights into the universe were incredible. The internet being what it is, a lot of people got into arguments with him about various things. I think the effect of this may have been to scare some BL authors off interacting with fans on social media as much as he did. Who wants to deal with that negativity? I think this may also have slowed his writing down as he is a perfectionist.

 

And that's a shame.

 

And I'd say Robbie MacNieven was/is an absolut fan anyway. You knew he delved deep into a new faction every few weeks going by whatever he focused to repost in bunches on his blog (and admitted to go wiki-diving, as we all probably do every now and then)

And that then materialized into stuff he wrote later on.

 

Also one of the many authors who has/had an Account here.

 

Too bad (for us) tho that like Reynolds and some of the others he moved onto other ventures.

[StratoKhan]

14 hours ago, Scribe said:

There is a flow, a type, a feeling, whatever you want to call it, of Warhammer-ness, to use your term, and yes I want it written by people who actually get that.

Agree! I would also add that over the years that ‘feel’ has changed and mutated (and matured?) a lot, from RT to 2nd Ed to 3rd Ed and now this new M42 era.

 

Enjoying the setting is probably fundamental, but liking or ‘getting’ the setting does not mean that you are immune from making mistakes about this very vast and complex background. Some minor mistakes (for example a pretty well-established BL author comparing something to dry Tallarn desert sandals before Tallarn was even virus bombed and turned into a desert) and others more major (the multilasers and weird Eldar saga).

 

I also believe that it would be very difficult for  authors that don’t know anything about the setting, or even don’t enjoy it, to just churn something out.
But if an author that’s interested in 40k, but knows only basic facts about the setting, is asked by BL to come in, treats this like writing a novel set in WW2 or the Napoleonic era, researches it, and produces a solid novel, is that really worse than the superfan BL author that doesn’t know how to write believable dialogue between humans?

I’m just not certain that fan = getting 40k = best writing results is a linear and simple equation.

 

[grailkeeper]

4 hours ago, StratoKhan said:

 

But if an author that’s interested in 40k, but knows only basic facts about the setting, is asked by BL to come in, treats this like writing a novel set in WW2 or the Napoleonic era, researches it, and produces a solid novel, is that really worse than the superfan BL author that doesn’t know how to write believable dialogue between humans?

 

I happen to like the Gaunts ghosts books...

[Timberley]

Realistically, the author should have an understanding of the setting, but not the minutiae of things like bolter patterns and such, unless it impacts the narrative. In theory, the editor should pick that up, if required to.

As StratoKhan mentioned above - the Warhammer worlds should really be looked at as some form of historical fiction. In that case, the author has to research elements if needed, but is more interested in telling a compelling story with well-realised characters that work within the setting. 

Warhammer fans make the first part easier (they know the lore), but if they're not able to write a decent story then their knowledge is useless.

 

Tim

[Gamiel]

1 hour ago, Timberley said:

Warhammer fans make the first part easier (they know the lore),

Do they? Based on what I have seen on the net, they know some things, other things they believe they know but don't. There are lots of stuff people are saying as if they were true but are completely wrong about. And somethings the fans know but are ignorant about (or unwilling to take in) the other canon stuff that contradict that. Or they are very dogmatic bout what they know and are unwilling to think that it's possible that what they know don't apply to everything or there is contradicting information out there.

 

 

[phandaal]

Mainly, the writer should know the basics of the setting, and they should have some level of appreciation for the setting. They should also try to avoid making characters or factions do things that make no sense just because it works to advance whatever story they want to write.

 

Whether they are a fan or not a fan is just arguing over definitions.

[Xenith]

On 9/29/2023 at 10:51 AM, wecanhaveallthree said:

I don't think you need to be a fan to write good Warhammer. I do think you need to do your research on the setting,

 

Agreed there - you can write a compelling story that's set in the universe, and that doesn't neccessarily involve the main 40k characters or even space marines, however it still needs to be grounded in that universe, with elements we recognise - there's space for both the gritty real stories and the fantasy space knight stuff to co-exist - just look at Star Wars' Andor and Ahsoka, or Rogue 1 and the sequels...

 

Being a fan is not neccesarily a mark of quality, I'm sure we've seen plenty of people move from within one part of GW to try writing, and putting out pretty rough work. I think the thing that makes a better writer is...being a better writer, and then moving into the 40k genre. 

[wecanhaveallthree]

I think I mentioned Fehervari above, but I'll beat his drum again: he's the perfect example of 'story set in the universe that doesn't involve main characters'. He is an incredibly strong at showing, not telling, and if you can recognise a particular model/unit - e.g. the slabhide ogryn in Cult of the Spiral Dawn - fantastic, but he's not going to signpost anything. And that makes for stories that get right to those elements we recognise. Possibly one of my absolute favourite scenes in a Warhammer novel is that river village ambush in Fire Caste. Fehervari's construction of that whole event is masterful and draws on all the elements of the factions/characters to do something wonderful (and terrifying) with them.

 

On the flip side, I think Kyme's an excellent example of 'fan who put out rough work'. In all fairness, he's improved enormously over the years - every book he's put out in the last, what, five years has been a banger - but there's a guy who obviously is neck-deep in the IP but could barely wrangle a compelling story together for all that. Heck, I think Kyme's a good example of a fan who's too busy trying to be a fan in his writing with his Salamanders work in the Horus Heresy series. Him learning how to ease off, murder a few darlings, but keep his enthusiasm and engagement is what's foundational to his run of excellent stories.

[grailkeeper]

Here's a thought. 

 

IF you could have a game of 40k with any author (or a pint if you prefer) which would it be?

[Timberley]

10 hours ago, grailkeeper said:

Here's a thought. 

 

IF you could have a game of 40k with any author (or a pint if you prefer) which would it be?

I'd like to go for a pint with the Prime Clone (Dan Abnett) and ask him how he manages to keep his work rate so high! Though if we're including non-40k authors, I'd love to go back in time and have a swift half with Sir Terry Pratchett (PBUH). 

 

Tim 

[Guest]

46 minutes ago, Timberley said:

Sir Terry Pratchett (PBUH)

You spelled GNU wrong

[Gamiel]

3 hours ago, Timberley said:

I'd like to go for a pint with the Prime Clone (Dan Abnett) and ask him how he manages to keep his work rate so high!

Thrill-power.

[Xenith]

7 hours ago, Timberley said:

I'd like to go for a pint with the Prime Clone (Dan Abnett) and ask him how he manages to keep his work rate so high!

 

Terry Pratchett once said that he writes just 400 words a day, then stops and goes about his business. That's 2000 words per working week, and almost 100,000 in a year, which is a decent book. Pratchett also churned out like 50+ books in his life - so if you can even write 100, or 200 words a day, then you're nearly half as prolific has he.

 

The problem is the discuipline in sitting down and writing those 200 words, each and every day. 

Edited October 4, 2023 by Xenith

[Timberley]

10 hours ago, Lucius_The_Temporary said:

You spelled GNU wrong

He forever travels along the Clacks. 

[acrozatarim]

On 9/29/2023 at 10:47 PM, Bryan Blaire said:

I miss them too.
 

Fairly sure, much like some of the GW ex-employees have discussed, BL authors have been asked or told not to discuss GW stuff online.  It seems like the online footprint of just about every GW employee faded away, I don’t think it was just negative interactions causing people to pull back.  GW seems like it wants to manage its online presence very carefully, and that seems to include representation of the company by employees online.

 

As someone who started freelancing with Black Library over on the Age of Sigmar side last year, without going into the details of my contract etc, I haven't been asked to not discuss GW stuff online, and what GW have asked of me is reasonable stuff.

 

When I do chat about AoS stuff over on the Grand Alliance forums, I'm just doing so as another human being (unless I'm being an insufferable artiste because one of my works has just been published and I want to preen about it for a day or two). It'd get to be a problem for me if people started jumping on the random crap I post and going 'oh this has weight and meaning as a statement about AoS because he's a writer', but that'd be a problem for me as a forum-goer rather than for me as a BL freelancer, if that makes sense.

 

If I had to take a guess - and I legitimately don't have any actual facts here, as I don't know that many other BL authors personally as yet, but I do have somewhat related experience from my work in the ttrpg industry -  I'd imagine that plenty of folks may have retreated their online footprint in forums etc because, well, have you seen the internet lately? It's tiring, and for a creative, there comes a point where you look at how the scales balance when it comes spending energy on dealing with people online vs getting on with your work, and decide you need to focus on the latter.