Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Drib
I'd like to bring to readers of this thread the important essay, The Demarcation of Sword and Sorcery, by Joseph A. McCullough V. Here's the link:
https://www.blackgate.com/the-demarc...d-and-sorcery/
McCullough argues three cogent points that define the Sword & Sorcery genre:
1) Heroes are men [or women] of action.
2) Outsiders (barbarians) who are outside the norms of society.
3) They're scoundrels. (Think Fafhrd and the Gray Mouser.)
John O'Neill, in his Introduction to The Best of Heroic Fantasy Quarterly: Volume 1, 2009-2011, adds a 4th category, that of Setting. |
I think setting is one of the main appeals of sword and sorcery to me.
So much fantasy apes Tolkien in style, settings, characters, etc.
Sword and sorcery is very different, probably because it came first (Kull appeared in 1929 and Conan 1932).
The settings aren't typical medieval European kingdoms.
The stories don't typically rely on tropes like dwarfs and elves.
Wizards and magic in general tend to be mysterious and dangerous.
The structure of the stories tend to be less epic and 'traditional fantasy'.