[Burned Tear]

Hey Everybody, I know I don't post here often, but I have enjoyed reading many of the posts throughout the forum for years. Since I read Gardens of the Moon in 2004, I've only convinced two of my friends to read the books with me. One of them bailed when he reached Bonehunters. I am currently taking Literature at College and nobody has ever heard of Steven Erikson, and there is a considerable neglect for fantasy as a source for literary study. I find myself isolated and desparate to share Steven Erikson's greatness with the academic community. For the past two days, I've searched 3 seperate libraries and several online databases for anything that mentions Steven Erikson. I have found reviews, interviews but nothing else. As far as I can tell, no one has ever studied Erikson's writing through an academic perspective. If they have, it was not published. This offends me. Therefore, I will try to write my forty page paper on the Malazan Book of the Fallen. However, I need your help! There are sooooo many possible topics within the books. The objective of the paper to take a topic, find a standpoint to defend, and merge it with three disciplines (philosophy, literature, politics, science, etc). I have brainstormed a few things, it would be great if the community could back me up on this one!

BrainstormGardens of the Moon - Shows sympathetic viewpoints from opposing factions in all of the various conflicts

Chain of dogs - Shows how horrible the world can be, how there are no happy endings. But even in defeat, there is victory. Coltaine died a hero. Gets crucified. Resurrected.

Korbal Broach & Bauchelain : despicable heroes. Dark humour

Memories of Ice : Mhybe deals with motherhood, also touched on in Dust of Dreams

Toll the Hounds : Harllo Jr. as child labourer and orphan

Lether Empire as the worst Capitalism has to offer

Dust of Dreams: racism, genocide and extinction, K’Chain Che’Malle and T’lan Imass

Midnight Tides : Racism, Imperialism, exploitation (Indebtedness)

Cruelty and Mercy: K’rul’s gift in Capustan, Hood’s sympathy for the constable in contrast to the serial killer he’s been hunting, which was also Hood’s work.

Realism through mischance, sympathetic characters, imagery, politics

[worry]

I think the Mother and her relationship with her children -- especially children being sent off to war, but not only that -- is a recurring theme in a lot of the books. I think people who dismiss the Mhybe story are kind of wieners, to be honest (how's that for academic??). But there's also Mother Dark, Stonny Menackis, Kilava, the Matrons, various Malazan flashbacks, etc. I find it one of the more interesting threads in the story.

[Ribald]

How long do you have to research and write the paper, ie when is your submission deadline?
Also, and forgive my ignorance on this one, how long is a 40 page paper in terms of a word count? Is it roughly 15,000 words or less? Is it a long or extended essay or is it a dissertation or a mini-thesis?
If it is around 15,000 words you might consider linking three essays (of about 4,000 words each) with an introduction and a conclusion. That way you can take three separate issues or distinct arguments/approaches to a novel or the series as a whole and use the series as the linking thread of argument illustrating that fantasy can be as thought provoking and challenging as mimetic literature. That might be slightly less daunting than trying to write one argument all the way through moving from book to book, character to character and topic to topic. Three linked and mutually supporting, yet self-contained essays might be a great deal easier to manage.

Given the lack of secondary material available on Erikson, will you have to use a significant proportion of secondary material on other authors and on fantasy in general in order to get full marks, or can you focus on a textual analysis and close reading approach? If you have to use more general material then you might use your first essay or chapter on outlining a general argument about genre fantasy and genre writing such as perceived conventions, rules, tropes and how Erikson's work conforms, ignores or subverts these. The next on a thematic topic such as using fantasy as a debating ground for modern politics minus the cultural and historical associations (eg. colonialism, imperialism, history written by the victor etc). The last on a close textual approach such as recurrent imagery, integration of poetry, realistic dialogue, reliable versus unreliable narration and so on. Then your conclusion can tie these threads together.

[Burned Tear]

I have a "midterm" deadline March 17th, where the first half is submitted and marked. Then the whole thing is returned and a second, complete draft is due April 9th. I am expected to have a minimum of 10 sources and the minimum page count is 20, not including bibliography. However, the way the course is designed, a decent paper is supposed to double these requirements. The content of the paper (we call it an Integrative Project) is supposed to tie the work studied into 3 separate disciplines, so it is similar to what you suggested, as each discipline is dealt with individually and integrated to form a larger paper. Also, there is a huge emphasis on evidence and secondary sources and every quote is expected to be discussed and contextualized so the page count actually becomes a blessing. As to my sources, since there is no direct support of my topic, I will have to use other authors as you say and show how they relate, which is not a problem. Your structure sounds like a great idea, I'll definitely consider it when developing my outline.

The books I planned on using were Gardens of the Moon and Deadhouse Gates due to their relative independence from the overall story arc. Also I may want to include Memories of Ice either as a continuation of the original novel's plotline or for its insight into the T'lan Imass and the characterization of characters like Itkovian and Paran, not to mention further development of the Barghast, Tiste Andii, and the whole Tenescowri dynamic and what it says about humanity. Oh man, when I start thinking too much all the subplots come back to me, and sometimes its overwhelming. Yet, I understand the necessity of keeping a focused topic. Either way, I can't narrow it down too much until I form a thesis, and I won't do that until I've done a lot more research. Feel free to throw more ideas at me!

Again, Thanks for the help.

[zenMichael]

if you're wanting to limit it to the first couple of books, esp. w/DHG, i would think maybe there's something in there write-able about how the victors write the history books, and then even they are forgotten, as also somewhat evinced in GotM by the fact that nobody knows what the hell is going on most of the time when it comes to things like the Jaghut, etc., and then of course both Duiker & Heboric's POVs in DG. (Also, possibly, the fact that Pale's chain of events changes somewhat drastically between books. Heh)

[nacht]

I am not able to understand what this mean.

Quote

the paper to take a topic, find a standpoint to defend, and merge it with three disciplines (philosophy, literature, politics, science, etc).

Are you going to pick how the series presents philosophy (for ex.) and then somebody (maybe the professor or your fellow students) will try to question your characterization of how the topic was presented in the book (not sure how they can do it without have read it). In this case, I am not sure what "merging" means.

but I love to yak about what I don't understand (maybe I am a scholar)

I think Midnight Tides is the best candidate. It is pretty stand-alone.

SE's books abound with philosophy and some of his quotes are simply beautiful. You could list a series of these quotes and ask them to guess which genre they came from. I bet most of them wont guess Fantasy.

A lot fo SE's philosophy is about the nature of tyranny, how history repeats itself, how whole civilizations can vanish because of their own arrogance, the effects of unqualified/immature people assuming power.

[Ulrik]

I would choose MT, RG and partly DoD for theme of extensive capitalism, cultural (and military) enslaving of other civilizations and "infecting" invading culture by native (Edur after conquering of Lether) and on the other side culture devouring itself by endless spiral of brutal traditions (Barghast). You have three different types of civilization. Tribal Edur (but with capacity to accept one ruler) , capable of adapting (despite its drawbacks), Lether, local superpower, but toppling in its brutal economy rise (higher it reaches, its easier to collapse) and Barghast as completely invasing and "alien" culture, capable of ruling half of continent, but in real fragmentarized, honoring more old, itself hurting traditions, than any ruler who stands against those traditions.

Each of those three went into state of "change" and each dealt with it in other way. IMo interesting to compare...and worth of question, if is every culture predestined to destroy itself in some point of existence. Or stands before two way question - adaptation to new world or die. Lether and Edur made it, White Face Barghast didnt. and you can throw other pieces like Nerek or Awl into game:)

[T-6005]

Well, I mean, I don't know how you approach your academic papers, but you're always looking to back up your sources from as many different places as you can. Especially if you're aiming for 40 pages.

Your best bet - if you're just trying to vindicate the books - is to compare running thematic points (in the entirety of the narrative) to more theoretical works from other academics or theorists. Offhand, you could compare Erikson's approach to a soldier's attitude within the books - particularly towards their enemies - to Judith Butler's more recent work on grievability. In an ugly nutshell, she makes the case that you can't grieve for enemy combatants (or even innocents) because there are processes in place which reduce them to static 'monster' roles. This certainly applies to a mythology with a lot of fighting like Erikson's.

You could do a comparison on the treatment of judgment and crimes in the novels and how they vary between tribes and species. The Forkrul Assail and the peace of death. Letherii and the Drownings. Malazans and the gaol. You could (arguably) compare their level of societal complexity to Foucault's Discipline and Punishment on the movement of punishment from corporeal to punishment of the soul. Though on second thought I wouldn't recommend that one.

You could set it next to a ton of stuff - Hobbes' Leviathan and the necessity of a social compact between individuals to prevent chaos, and how that chaos still manages to thrive within Erikson's civilization (or get brought by Karsa Orlong).

The Lether Empire and the debate between behavioral and classical economics - how the Letherii side with the idea that people will always behave like rational maximizers and play within the rules, while several characters/nations act more irrationally and move outside of those boundaries. For a good summary of some of the more interesting examples in the discrepancy, you could check out Dan Ariely's TED talk.

Durkheim's idea of the social fact and 'forced' behavior within society and Karsa Orlong's lone contempt at the attitudes and institutions it brings about.

Alternately, you could always compare it to a history of allegorical writing wherein authors deal with particular subject matter through fantastical symbolism and representation. Ray Bradbury tackled the dangers of entertainment and the effects of broad censorship in Fahrenheit 451. Orwell considered corruption, power and oligarchy in Animal Farm. Daniel Quinn attacks the way we view the past, particularly the line between history and prehistory, in Story of B.

It all depends on what you pick as the standpoint for your paper. If it's "fantasy is a form of literature with enough depth to be academically defensible"... good luck. But I think the above topics are probably good points to start. Of course, you'd need to tie it into other allegorical tales, and specifically into other fantasy series that have managed to interest the academic community. Lord of the Rings would probably be another good starting points, just for the complex religious and linguistic mythology.

This post has been edited by T-6005: 23 January 2011 - 07:56 AM

[Burned Tear]

Hey guys, thanks for the help, I've narrowed down my topic into three subcategories.

1. Fantasy Literature
-subversion
-tropes
-conventions
-tone
-evolving genre
-epic
-modern
-realistic
-mature

2. Politics/ History
-history written by the victor
-brutal necessity
-culling nobility/mages
-Machiavelli
-Aren politics
-Assasinations
-expansion
-occupation "rule in silent ripples"
-Darujhistan politics
-Empire politics

3. Philosophy/relativism
-different points of view
-opposing sympathies
-lack of cultural association
-no narrative moral cohesion
-trying to find a good primary source for relativism

If any examples pop into your minds, or if you want to question my choices, go ahead! It's what the thread is for. Also, don't think of this is a thread for my essay, its a place to discuss the series, write your own essays! Keep it alive!

[Burned Tear]

I'm back!

I am very finished my paper, it is 35 pages long, and I am quite proud of it. If anyone wants to read it let me know so I can send it to you. I don't know how or where I could post a document of this size on the forum, but I would like to share it with as many people as possible. I have a written summary of the paper below if anyone is interested.

Steven Erikson is a modern author who subverts and paradoxically celebrates the very tropes that make up the genre of fantasy. By foregoing the classic structure of good versus evil, Erikson has set himself apart from a fantasy community largely devoted to the preservation of cultural values and beliefs. In Erikson’s fictional world, there are no obvious moral truths that rule; in this way, his world participates in the relativism observed by philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche in his book Beyond Good and Evil. Similarly, Erikson incorporates many political practices from the often demonized Niccolo Machiavelli into both his heroes and his villains. Erikson and Machiavelli both write to reach an honest, realistic, and functional description of humanity. Epic fantasy is not prominently featured in literary studies because it has been reduced, through selective publishing, to a genre focused on marketing and sales rather than originality or artistic value. Erikson dispenses with romanticism, fairy tale clichés, and even the races associated with Tolkienesque fantasy. Instead, he builds up clichés in order to subvert them. He plays off of the reader’s expectation at every opportunity. Steven Erikson challenges traditional moral values by subverting the fantasy genre’s romantic ideas of good and evil with gritty realism and diverse perspectives.

The fantasy genre is defined by its inclusion of an adventure in a fictional world - either to provide a deliberate message or simply to provide distraction and entertainment. The relationship between tradition and adventure is achieved through coming of age stories, Christian symbolism, themes of love and friendship, as well as magical implements to spark the imagination and to amaze the reader. Within this structure is the popular theme that good will triumph over evil. Christian morals are important in fantasy because they reflect the romantic and didactic origins of the genre. The allegorical nature of fantasy has continued to endure in order to make the story’s meaning carry into the real world. Historically, epic fantasy has a strong relationship with morality, tradition and mythology. This has created rigidness in the genre. It has become so popular and successful that few institutions are willing to risk their support on new authors that break the accepted categories. Many authors followed Tolkien’s template of world design, changing only minor superficial aspects without altering the underlying philosophy or attitude. There are exceptions, but most critics ignore the genre due to its apparently stagnant nature. In order to be noticed, authors need to break through the rigid confines of the genre by challenging their readers with new and exciting ideas. Steven Erikson’s writing in the Malazan series is an example of contemporary fantasy operating within the genre. He includes fantasy elements such as a secondary world and magic, but he keeps it grounded with richly detailed history, metaphysics, and politics. All of these factors communicate to the reader a sense of weight and realism to this imaginary world. By writing within the genre, Erikson has a considerable influence on fantasy and the direction in which he wants it to go. With this creative power, Erikson makes a conscious effort to subvert the genre in order to make a statement about fantasy and the traditions it represents.

Erikson incorporates the harsh pragmatism of the political theorist, Niccolo Machiavelli to create realism. The Malazan Empire, ruled by Empress Laseen, reaches its continent-spanning dominion through brutal political tactics. Erikson shows how the Malazan Empire’s policy of slaughtering conquered nobles contributes to the good-will of the conquered peasants and the effect this has on the Empire’s growth and stability. Erikson disagrees with Machiavelli when he portrays leaders that are loved above those who are feared. He shows how a soldier that fears or distrusts his or her leader will not obey difficult orders or perform as well as a soldier who loves his or her leader. At the end of the novel, the largest army of the Empire must choose to go rogue or follow suicidal orders. Instead of obeying the fear-inducing Empress, they become outlaws under their general Dujek. The moral implications of Machiavelli’s politics and Erikson’s narrative are interpreted by critics and scholars due to their portrayal of human nature. Machiavelli’s traditional understanding as a pessimist is attributed without context of the situations that involved his life. Erikson shows how characters, like people, can be misunderstood without the proper context or perspective. He often gives a partial account of a situation only to revisit it from another character’s point of view to show that vital information was missing. Erikson does not entirely disagree with Machiavelli’s view of human nature but he does not agree with fantasy’s traditional Christian morality either. Instead, he uses his multi-perspective narrative to form sympathy between opposing factions and to prove that right and wrong are dependent on a character or faction’s point of view. By using context and perspective to determine the morality of his characters, Erikson implies a relativist position that favours understanding over judgement.

Erikson rejects firm moral truths in his fantasy world as he withholds the traditional format of binary forces in opposition. Erikson does not give the reader a side to root for or a dominant expression of morality. He leaves the actions of the characters to be interpreted by the reader so that they can determine for themselves what is right. Through this approach, Erikson supports the morality described in Nietzsche’s Beyond Good and Evil. Nietzsche condemns traditional philosophers and their quest for truth, questioning both whether universal right and wrong exist and whether human beings are capable of discovering morality through reason or observation. In Gardens of the Moon, Erikson establishes the opinion of his characters who “never believed in pure evil” (104). Thus, the binary opposition typical of epic fantasy is lacking in Erikson’s work. Erikson’s inclusion of a relativist philosophy diverges from epic fantasy’s clear moral compass in order to present a more complete image of humanity. The alternative morality suggested by Erikson fits Nietzsche’s concept of noble morality and slave morality. Someone who rules their morality is a noble; someone who follows the morality of others is a slave. Tthe Malazan world resembles the real world’s moral ambiguity as Erikson presents characters that create their own path and question the value of traditional virtues. While there are many similarities, Erikson seems to use the premises of relativism and noble morality to reach a different conclusion than Nietzsche. While Nietzsche develops elitism and arrogance through this philosophy, Erikson advocates compassion even for his antagonists. Through relativist philosophy, Erikson produces an artistic commentary in an effort to guide his readers toward a deeper understanding of themselves and others.

In order to challenge romanticised notions of morality, Erikson subverts the epic fantasy genre’s tradition of good triumphing over evil. Erikson relies on real-world parallels in order to establish the believable nature of his fictional world. He uses Machiavelli’s empiricism to form politics, and Nietzsche’s morality to form characters. He uses the genre of fantasy to set up the narrative, but he subverts the genre in order to keep the narrative interesting. While dragons and magic do not exist as truths in the world, they exist within the work as representations of the unknown beauty- and danger - of the known world. Erikson follows the fantasy genre’s conventions in order to establish a framework from which to deconstruct the underlying values and clichés which have been used for so long. The Malazan political systems have functional applications and goals that also serve to enhance his world’s sense of authenticity. The characters, and the readers, have to figure out their own individual sense of right and wrong. Consequently, Erikson’s portrayal of morality and politics transcends the fantasy genre to reach an insightful commentary on humanity.

[Herc]

Hi, I was wondering about this myself, 'cause the series seems ideal for analysis, and I have only been able to find one paper on it, but it seems kinda vague (haven't read it, as far as I can see it compares Malazan series to A Song of Ice and Fire, and how they use the genre differently):
The Familiar and the Fantastic

Yours may be the official first, so congratulations! I would love to read it (though probably not until I finish the series, still halfway through RotCG). If it's a Word document, there's dozens of free file hosting sites out there, or if you convert it to PDF, I think there's some sites out there that host those with a built-in viewer as well.

[Sindriss]

What sort of school is this being written for? I don't understand how you implement sources in your text. You should definetely have a source to Nietzsche. But of course, if you do not need to use sources in your school then I guess its a lot of work for a low reward.

Other than that, it looks pretty interesting and I think that there are multiple people who would want to take a look at it. When is it due? Do you want feedback on the paper ?

[parabola01]

I'd love to read it - you could post it on scribd and post the link.

[Whisperzzzzzzz]

35 pages? Holy shit. I'd enjoy reading that.

[sappers rule]

good man/woman for doing that could u plz post it
love to read it

[Garak]

I would love to read it - also what were the reactions to this paper?

[Burned Tear]

Wow, it's good to see a quick response like this.

First, Herc, I did not know about that paper, it looks pretty awesome. I thought I was alone, good to know I am not. It seems that paper is focusing on the literary formula and narrative of those books within the genre, whereas my paper focuses on the moral implications of Gardens of the Moon. Of course, there is still so much left to analyse in Gardens of the Moon, not to mention the other nine books in the series. My paper deals solely with Gardens of the Moon, so it is spoiler-free.

I wrote this for college here in Canada. It was finished about a month ago, I got a good mark, and most of my professors were impressed.

I'll try to find somewhere and post it, I would very much like you guys to read it! Hopefully I can get this published some day, more people write about it, and Erikson gets the academic attention he deserves.

[Burned Tear]

Okay, so scribd is really easy to use. Here it is, my very own blood, sweat, and (mostly) tears:

http://www.scribd.co...n762kafersf9xj5

[parabola01]

 Burned Tear, on 19 May 2011 - 07:52 PM, said:

Okay, so scribd is really easy to use. Here it is, my very own blood, sweat, and (mostly) tears:

http://www.scribd.co...n762kafersf9xj5

Can't get to scribd from work, but I'm looking forward to reading it.

[worry]

Good essay. Sometimes reads kind of like a glowing review of GotM, albeit one with academic themes in mind. But I mean that as a compliment, since a high level book review is essentially an essay anyway. And GotM deserves all the accolades it can get.