| Interview: R.A. Salvatore |
|
|
Page 4 of 5
Here’s the thing, for me at least: this is a huge genre now. It wasn’t always so. Not so many years ago, it wasn’t so. There is a tremendous diversity in fantasy today. There are wonderful word-smiths, like Tad Williams and Connie Willis; there are authors espousing a definite political bent, even preaching their personal philosophies; there are amazing world-builders, like Robert Jordan, George Martin and Terry Brooks; there are action-adventure storytellers, yes, like me. I applaud that diversity of style; I’m thrilled by that. But fantasy has always been the ugly stepchild of science-fiction, which has always been the ugly stepchild of literature (with a big “L”). Since the day I started working in this field, I’ve heard this desperate call for fantasy to be recognized as serious literature. It’s fine that some writers want to do (or want to believe that they are doing) something monumental that will change the face of humanity. It’s a natural state for writers; if you don’t have an ego, you don’t belong in this business. I have a different take on fantasy and on what I do. Fantasy has always been entertainment for me, a way to get away from the mundane reality of the world around me. I’d rather be slaying dragons than writing out bills. Also, and this goes back to my personal story, I’ve always considered my work most important, if it’s important at all, for teenagers. My favorite letters are ones that begin “I never read a book until...” or “I couldn’t get my son/daughter to read until I gave him your book.” As someone who found the love of reading beaten out of me back in my own school years, that’s particularly satisfying.As for the Harold Blooms of the world, or the Kirkus reviewers, bully for them. I really don’t give a care about what they think of my work, or what they think about anything else for that matter. I get the feeling that many people do not understand that books have evolved into a different place in the world today. I was just reading an article that said that something around 120,000 books were published last year. Long gone are the days when one or two writers serve as the “voice of their generation.” I write my books for myself, for the fun of going on an adventure with the characters I’ve come to know as friends. I don’t publish my books for people who don’t like them; I publish my books for people who do like them. You see, I don’t WRITE for a living. I PUBLISH for a living. Writing is my love, publishing my career. That is not even a subtle distinction, as anyone in the business knows well. How different is it to write fantasy and science fiction? Extremely different, I’d expect. I wouldn’t know, however, as I’ve never written science-fiction, other than the beginning of my first book. I don’t consider Star Wars to be science-fiction; I don’t believe that George Lucas thinks of it that way. I think of it as swashbuckling action-adventure, which is far more in line with fantasy. I’ll leave science fiction to the Greg Bear’s and Ben Bova’s of the world. They bring skill-sets that I simply do not, as this time, possess (like an understanding of post-1980 science, for one small thing!). How involved in future Star Wars books do you intend to be? No involvement at all. I’m not even working for DelRey anymore. After my experience with TSR and the surprising return to the Dark Elf books, I don’t rule anything out. I’m certainly still on great terms with the wonderful folks over at DelRey, and I loved working with Lucasfilm. But really, with Dark Elf’s growing success, with my DemonWars world rolling along, with my involvement as Executive Producer of the Everquest book line and my involvement with Atari in creating computer games, I don’t have much time. What direction do you see the Star Wars universe going in now that EpisodeIII is almost here and the New Jedi Order series is finished? I’ve heard from everyone around the project that the movies take a darker turn, and this seems obvious just from the known story progression. For the novels, I have no idea of their plans. If someone asked me, I’d suggest that they go back to the “classic” era. Luke, Leia, Han - these are the strengths of Star Wars. These are the characters I think most people are truly interested in adventuring beside. What is your view on the sudden popularization of the heroic fantasy genre in movies and television? With franchises being snapped up can we believe in any chance of a Drizzt movie or series in the works? Nothing at present, and of course, I have no control over that. WotC owns the rights, not I. I have a feeling, though, that the backlash is about to begin on fantasy. I fear that Peter Jackson’s work was the high water mark. How do you top that? If Jackson does “The Hobbit” (and I pray he does), it will be wonderful and hugely successful, but honestly, I think it’s going to be hard for anyone to approach the level of success of those movies. Harry Potter is a separate phenomenon all its own, and even that seems to be losing steam in the movies, at least anecdotally. To do a fantasy movie that has any chance of satisfying the Jackson-spoiled audience, a production company is going to have to spend lots of money. Lots of money. It won’t take more than one or two busts to bankrupt the notion of fantasy blockbusters. I think we’re seeing the same thing with the comic tie-ins. Spiderman sells, but do the others? Even with that pessimistic view, I think it’s a short-term problem. I do expect that someday there will be a Drizzt movie or series. I hope so. This always goes in cycles, like a giant wave. At the moment, I think we’re on the back side of the crest. Very few writers in the genre are increasing their audience with successive books at this time, and very, very few are able to make a living unless they’re writing six or eight books a year. I would like to know if you have anymore of the world of Corona in your mind than the small portion we see in the Demon War series' or is that the only part of the planet that you've thought to create? It’s not that small! Corona is a living project. I expect to write more books set there; I doubt I’ll ever create a new fantasy world. Why would I have to, since I’ve put all that I wanted in a fantasy world right there. That was my plan all along. I wanted to write my “epic” series that defined the world, its magic system and social and political structures that could serve as a base for stories I wanted to tell in the future, and even for stories that other authors might write. Right now, Jim Lowder, a writer for whom I have tremendous respect, is working on a Corona novel, with his own characters and in a time of his choosing. He is bound only by the general systems and geography of the world. This is an experiment in a new way of franchising a world. I firmly believe that there is an audience of readers out there who don’t want to have authors re-create the wheel with each new series. Readers who like the idea of a common ground through which they can adventure. Yes, the dreaded “shared world.” Some readers want to see the single-author world-building, and for them, there’s no shortage of vibrant and detailed projects underway. Other readers might not want to be quite so invested in learning a new world, a new magic system, with each book. <i>How much would you agree or disagree with Scott Bakker's comments on epic fantasy, which we conveniently have quoted directly from our own interview with him here at Wotmania: "Unfortunately, 'epic fantasy' has even less cache than 'SF' - I would guess it's presently somewhere between 'porn mag' and 'harlequin romance.' Perhaps this will change, and 'epic fantasy' will gain something of the camp cache presently being enjoyed by, for instance, 'space opera' - afterall, the rehabilitation of the marginal and devalued is a very postmodern thing to do. Either way, the thing, it seems to me, is to be wary of the implicit judgments in the terms we use. I find it amusing that the people most likely to complain that SF&F is a 'literary ghetto' are often those most likely to devalue other regions of the barrio, particularly when it's as commercially successful as Jordan's work. It's cool to be an iconoclast, I guess. It makes us feel oh-so individual, when in fact we're simply being aristocratic." Let me repeat his last two lines: “It's cool to be an iconoclast, I guess. It makes us feel oh-so individual, when in fact we're simply being aristocratic."</i> Now that’s beautiful. I’ve never met Mr. Baker, nor have I read his work. After reading the entirety of that interview, I’ll have to find some time to remedy that. I agree with him completely. Look, I’m a plain-speaking, blue collar New Englander, educated in public schools (both high school and college). I started going for my Masters Degree in Literature, and after about three classes, I left in disgust. Honestly, if one more author starts quoting Joseph Campbell to me, I’ll choke him! I cannot imagine preparing an outline with such “theories” in mind. It’s not the way I think and certainly not the way I work. Nor do I have any plans to examine writing in that manner. To me, it defeats the whole purpose of a work by taking all the fun out of it. I remember sitting on a panel at a convention several years ago when all the other panelists were going in circles about theory, about Campbell, about deconstructionalism, about yada yada yada. My eyes were glazing over, as were the eyes of most of the three hundred people in attendance. Out of the blue, the moderator looks over at me and asks, “What do you think, Bob?” |
||||||||
| < Prev |
|---|