The Three C's of Fantasy

So, for the past few years, I have sought to structure my reviews according to a 5 part matrix for assessing fantasy novels. The fantasy five I called them. They were: Character, Cliche, Scope, Magic and Theme. Unfortunately, this lead to massive reviews that take a long time to write, and that I suspect bore my readers to tears.

The Bridgeburners

So I am reducing the rubric.  I'm keeping the first two, Character and Cliche.  character speaks for itself, what is a story without great characters? And I find the cliche aspect of my work to be Very Important.  Many writers have taken a stab at identifying classic fantasy cliches but I have yet to find a really cohesive list.  And as I've said about a billion times, cliche in fantasy is necessary and good.  Why use a hundred words when one good cliche can suffice? Also, cliches are an excellent cross reference between and among the classics. They are almost like phylogenetic trees! Oh he uses halflings? Oh well, then the author probably played video games, or Dungeons & Dragons, which means that he's calling to mind the world of Tolkien. Or he uses absurd humor and zany anachronism? His work calls to mind Lewis Carol.

However, I had a bit of trouble deciding the third category.

 I love discussing magical systems in these works, but it turns out, in so many of the best novels these systems are anything but clear.  And while they may appear internally consistent, a rigorous discussion can be a dive into minutiae that just isn't necessary in a review.  I've also noticed over the last few years that i tend to discuss magic in other parts of the review, frequently when discussing characters.

Moretta, Dragonlady of Pern

Scope and Theme are important factors as well, but they are anything but clear.  What is clear is that a good novel has both in droves and that "you know it when you see it." Which leads us to the third factor: completeness.

The Eye of the World

I don't much care for the word, it leaves a lot to be desired and I may change it. But it does encapsulate a lot of important ideas: 1) the idea that the fantasy world is believable, detailed and coherent (scope) 2) that there are no major plot holes 3) that this completeness contains a palpable theme, a vision and artistic direction (theme).

So here are my reduced factors, three categories:

1) Character
2) Cliche
3) Completeness

My next review will either be Dragons of Autumn Twilight, or the sequel to Shadowdale, Tantras.

By the way, what are we thinking of my Forgotten Realms reviews? Am I bogging down on something that is ancient history? The fact of the matter is they seem to be generating a fair number of hits, so I'm inclined to continue.  But the phone lines are open, so call in!