Cheapening Planet Stories w / Game Fiction Authors

[GVDammerung]

I know this is going to likely go over like a lead balloon. But anon.

Planet Stories is appreciably cheapened as a line IMO by the inclusion of authors like Gary Gygax, who as a novelist should not be mentioned in the same breath as Michael Moorcock, Henry Kuttner, Leigh Brackett, CL Moore, etc. By comparison, IMO, Gygax is a hack's hack, whose idea of story telling is juvenile by juvenile standards. As a game designer, EGG is great but as a novelist - he sucks - the end.

Much the same can be said for treacly Ed Greenwood, prosaic Elaine Cunningham and the workmanlike RA Salvatore. Yet, these worthies, along with Gygax are seeing print as readily as the aforementioned and far more accomplished writers.

What gives? Planet Stories has product slots to fill in the catalog and unable to reach agreements fast enough with real authors has to go slumming in the "game fiction" ghetto? That's what it looks like to me.

I very much like the idea of Planet Stories as I thought I understood it - to return to print some classic authors and tales now mainly out of print. I dislike and have zero interest in Planet Stories as "amateur hour" for the "game fiction" set.

Gygax, Greenwood, Cunningham and Salvatore all have other outlets for their work and thus Planet Stories is not providing them a forum they could not find elsewhere. You want Greenwood, Cunningham or Salvatore? You don't need Planet Stories to publish them to have access to their work. Their work is readily available from no less than that paragon literary publishing house - Wizards of the Coast - most know for their literary publishing business as a subdivision of Hasbro, also a known publisher of literary masterpieces. Not.

Planet Stories is/was a nice idea. Diluting it with othewise readily accessable "game fiction authors" is stupid and wasteful. I'm looking for Planet Stories to be more Arkham House than Wizards of the Coast, more Nightshade than Hasbro. If I want empty calorie fiction from Gygax, I can get it from the republished Gord books. One hour reads from Greenwood, Cunningham and Salvatore are all readily available from Wizards and Hasbro. Planet Stories only does me, as a reader a service, when it brings back works from noteworthy authors now out of print, particularly from the pulp era, the 60s and 70s that I can't easily find elsewhere.

Paizo started as a gaming company but those loyalties and habits are out of place if Paizo wants to be taken seriously as a fiction house. Maybe Planet Stories doesn't want to be a serious publisher but just a publisher content with "game fiction" and its authors who owe their popularity, such as it is, to games, not independent story telling.

Without D&D and Greyhawk, no one would read Gygax. Without the Forgotten Ralms, no one would read Greenwood, Cunningham or Salvatore. Demonstrably and tellingly, the latter three have all tried to break away from game related fiction to write works independent of any game - all have returned to writing game fiction because their other works did not sell. In other worlds, they need the game worlds to attract readers because without a game world connection they are not interesting enough writers on their own.

Planet Stories needs to figure out what it wants to be - 1) a publishing house that publishes good authors whose works stand on their own or 2) a publishing house that publishes authors whose only notable works are all tied to game worlds for D&D. I'm all for the former and have no interest in the latter.

The foregoing is IMHO. Some words to the wise.

[Daeglin]

Hmm. Obviously, if you don't like the author, don't buy the book. I think you kind of answered your own question,though. While Erik Mona can certainly explain the rationale behind their title selection, I suspect the authors you are not so fond of are also the ones that might generate more sales, because of their game ties and their current name value. Which the line will need to be sustainable, and that allows them to publish "the classics". I must say I am surprised by how personally offended you sound.

I just ordered The Anubis Murders from my local bookstore because a) I like Paizo and want them to succeed; b) my tastes and Paizo's seem to run in the same direction, so if they feel something is good, I'll give it a chance; and c) I want to see what Gary Gygax can do outside of the Gord series.

[Andrew Turner]

I agree with both of you; and I was a little surprised that the first book announced was a Gygax, but I think Mona's introduction to The Anubis Murders establishes that book's inclusion in the series. Certainly, I agree with the assertion that some recognizable names will sell better and faster, and will grab an audience that maybe wouldn't have much interest in Kuttner or Moore by themselves. Nonetheless, a lot of pulp sucks, a lot is hard to read, some is even downright uninteresting, but pulp fiction shares commonalities, and I read Gygax's TAM as a rather pulpy story. As long as the line continues to pump out pulp, I'm not opposed to pulp by Gygax or Greenwood or even Salvatore.

As an aside, what's wrong with game-fiction?

[KnightErrantJR]

I just find this kind of ironic considering most of these now hip pulp authors were considered to be talentless hacks by "real" authors of their day. Not an opinion I would agree with, but its funny how these things come round again.

Then again, Margaret Weis got a good chuckle out of people discussing Dune over at the Dragonlance forums when they mentioned that it was a classic, not because its not a great book, but because when she was in college her professors were deriding the book as drivel.

I'm not saying that Gygax and Greenwood are on the same level as Frank Herbert, but I'm also saying that just writing "game fiction" shouldn't relegate you to literary irrelevance either.

[Daeglin]

I think game fiction needs to be considered as a genre in and of itself. It is often... rough around the edges, compared to the "epics". They remind me of the tv and movie novelizations, mainly out there to capitalize on the fan market, who won't worry about the literary craft as long as they get their setting fix (gotta put an exception to this comparison, i think the Star Trek and Star Wars novels have evolved beyond "novelization" into craftmanship).

I like KnightErrantJR's point about pulp fiction authors. Game fiction does seem to be this generations' pulp, who knows what they'll say about it in 70 years :)

[Erik Mona]

I wouldn't worry too much about it, my good boy.

We'll be doing all of the Gygax Aerth books (that's 4, including one that's never been published) and we're doing the Worlds of their Own compilation for Gen Con. Beyond what we've announced so far we have one Gary Gygax book (Death in Delhi, the last Aerth book) signed, and absolutely ZERO game-related fiction beyond that.

When we launch Pathfinder-related fiction, it most likely will be in rack paperback size and it most likely will not carry the Planet Stories branding.

Most modern readers (and bookstore chain buyers) have never heard of C. L. Moore or Henry Kuttner. If we publish these authors alone it will take us forever to find our audience, and the line might not survive. Right now I'm trying to get the attention of the audience we _do_ have and encourage them to take a look at our other books.

We'll see if it's successful. My sense is that Worlds of Their Own, for example, will outsell most of our other books by an order of magnitude. I look at the book as an opportunity for writers who have traditionally been associated with gaming to show people what they can do on their own without being tied down to work-for-hire shared world stories.

We'll see if it's a successful test.

The main thrust of Planet Stories will continue to be republishing classic works from the likes of Brackett, Moore, Howard, Moorcock, Kline, Hamilton, Kuttner, etc.

[QXL99]

Fiction is good if it holds your attention, makes you care about what's going on, and sticks in your memory after you are done reading. Great literary style can be undermined by a terrible plot. A great story can be derailed by terrible dialogue. Any story is a failure if it is instantly forgettable or is so boring that you never finish it.

Pulp fiction, mystery, SF/fantasy, period drama, romance, action, western, war, tv/movie novelization, game related fiction--no matter the genre, it stands or falls on the three criteria I listed above. They are common to all literature that has stood the test of time. IMO, gaming fiction can succeed brilliantly or fail spectacularly, just like any other kind of fiction.

I think that pulp, SF/fantasy, romances and gaming fiction get a bad rap from critics because they are more concerned with entertainment than with elegant command of English, ennobling the spirit, or wrestling with important issues (although I disagree with such a broad generalization). However, I do think that editors of gaming and media tie-in fiction are guilty (sometimes) of giving a pass on a manuscript that other editors would not, because they assume a built-in market for titles connected to a popular shared world.

[Utak]

Erik Mona wrote:

When we launch Pathfinder-related fiction, it most likely will be in rack paperback size and it most likely will not carry the Planet Stories branding.

Is this a definite? If so, when can I expect to get my grubby hands on it?

Cheers

[Erik Mona]

Not definite yet. A strong possibility. We are growing increasingly aware that we need to make sure we are pacing ourselves appropriately and not trying to do too much at once.

[Elorebaen]

GVD,

I tend to agree with the meaning behind your post. But, Anubis Murders was a pleasant surprise.

[James Lowder]

Hi:

I thought I'd chime in here with a couple of comments.

While readers may dislike the works of Salvatore or Greenwood or other writers who do work connected to RPGs, it's incorrect to suggest that they must keep writing shared-world books because they cannot sell work otherwise. Salvatore's Drizzt books may sell better than his Demon Wars books, but several large publishers have jumped at the chance to publish that creator-owned series--Del Rey, CDS, and now Tor. They know the books will do very well and know that readers value them. Salvatore's Demon Wars books have had some very positive reviews, too. Same with Greenwood, Cunningham, Weis, Hickman, and many of the other writers who do shared world work. They return to the shared world settings for a variety of reasons, and it might be easier for them to land those contracts, but they typically can sell plenty of creator-owned work, too.

As for quality--to dismiss something because it is published in conjunction with a game is problematic. Not all "game" fiction is of equal quality, nor is it created in the same way. Take the zombie anthologies I put together for Eden Studios, marketed in connection to their All Flesh Must be Eaten RPG. Technically, these are game fiction. However, the stories are not linked in a shared setting, don't share characters, and all the stories are creator owned and copyrighted. In other words, they're just good zombie stories, published under a game-related banner for sales purposes. Reviewers were confused--since they have their preconceptions, too--but they eventually caught on. Half the stories in all three books--including one by Ed Greenwood--made the honorable mention lists of the prestigious Year's Best Fantasy and Horror anthologies, and the anthologies and different stories from the books were finalist for several awards outside the gaming industry.

Now, that's not to say there isn't a large amount of bad game-related fiction--and bad non-game-related fiction, too--on the shelves. But the only way you're going to be able to tell is to judge each book on its own, by whatever critical standards you utilize.

Cheers,
James Lowder

[Andrew Turner]

Hey, Paizo guys--James Lowder needs a moniker, like Great Plague Lord or High Lord of the Mists. To Mr. Lowder, thanks for stopping by the boards; I love your work!

[Erik Mona]

Thanks for the excellent post, James, and welcome to the boards!

[Heathansson]

I read a review of Michael Chabon's Gentlemen of the Road in Time today that reminded me of this thread.
It said essentially that he was a Pulitzer Prize winning author that was dabbling in popular genres and pulp forms usually left to authors who wished they had a Pulitzer. I think Vonnegut did the same thing, i.e. whatever he felt like writing about, he wrote about. I'm hoping this is a new trend, and "popular" genres can gain some legitemacy.
I wonder if Shakespeare would've been considered sci fi nowdays.

[Andrew Turner]

Heathansson wrote:

... Shakespeare would've been considered sci fi nowdays.

Shakey was straight-up the Stephen King/John Grisham/Tom Clancy/Danielle Steele of the 16/17th centuries. I hope our best writers of today will write whatever they want, because I intend to continue reading whatever I want.

[James Lowder]

Andrew Turner wrote:

Hey, Paizo guys--James Lowder needs a moniker, like Great Plague Lord or High Lord of the Mists. To Mr. Lowder, thanks for stopping by the boards; I love your work!

Thanks for the kind words about my work. And happy to support the boards. I've read them quite a lot, but figured this topic was one to which I really should contribute.

The comments about genre and Shakespeare are all quite good. Genre can be a creative trap for a writer, but there's also no reason why someone can't do interesting and original things with the rules and expectations of SF or fantasy or mystery or romance. And whether someone gets shelved in the "genre ghetto" section of US bookstores or the more prestigious "general fiction" section can be as much a matter of marketing as content.

Cheers,
James Lowder