Dark Fantasy v Grimdark

[eclipse]

Is there any difference between the two? and what makes a book Grimdark/Dark fantasy from standard fantasy novels?

Would the The Malazan Book of the Fallen be classed as Dark fantasy or Grimdark or just plain Epic Fantasy

[ACSmyth]

I tend to think of dark fantasy as more the supernatural/urban end of things, but I don't know if that's a general definition.

Grimdark for me is partly tone, and partly how much the author gets into the blood and guts. I'd consider Malazan to be grimdark, but I know (from the discussion of Gardens of the Moon this month, for starters) that others don't.

[eclipse]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_fantasy

From Wiki

Stableford suggests that the type of horror conveyed by fantasy stories such as William Beckford's Vathek and Edgar Allan Poe's The Masque of the Red Death "is more aesthetic than visceral or existential", and that such stories should be considered "dark fantasies" rather than the "supernaturalized thrillers" of conventional horror fiction.[5]

Karl Edward Wagner is often credited for creating the term "dark fantasy" when used in a more fantasy-based context.[4] Wagner used it to describe his fiction about the Gothic warrior Kane. Since then, "dark fantasy" has sometimes been applied to sword and sorcery and high fantasy fiction that features anti-heroic or morally ambiguous protagonists.[1] Another good example under this definition of dark fantasy is Michael Moorcock's saga of the albino swordsman Elric.[7]

The fantasy work of H. P. Lovecraft, Clark Ashton Smith and their imitators have been specified as "dark fantasy", since the imaginary worlds they depicted contain a large number of horror elements.[1]

Dark fantasy is occasionally used to describe fantasy works by authors that the public primarily associates with the horror genre. Examples of this would be Stephen King's The Dark Tower series,[7] Peter Straub's Shadowland[8] and Clive Barker's Weaveworld.[7] Alternatively, dark fantasy is sometimes used for "darker" fiction written by authors best known for other styles of fantasy; Raymond Feist's Faerie Tale[8] and Charles de Lint's novels written as Samuel M. Key[9] would fit here.

[eclipse]

Grimdark for me is partly tone, and partly how much the author gets into the blood and guts. I'd consider Malazan to be grimdark, but I know (from the discussion of Gardens of the Moon this month, for starters) that others don't.

Thats what made me ask the question 

So would  Michael Moorcock Elric be Grimdark?

[ACSmyth]

It's 30 years since I read Elric, so I really can't remember enough of it to comment. My gut instinct is that I wouldn't personally call it grimdark, though. From what I recall, it's more sword and sorcery? But like I say, this is way long ago!

And according to Wikipedia, my book is epic fantasy, but I don't regard it as such, so I'm taking Wiki's fantasy definitions with a large pinch of salt already.

[pw27]

Great topic as I just started a site last week relating to grimdark fantasy. I have a page up about defining grimdark with many links up to others writings describing it because I have not yet gotten around to writing my own essay about it. The best by far is Joe Abercrombie's article. I think all the responses in this thread are very good and add something to the discussion. There has been a lot said about Grimdark fantasy and there is also a lot of controversy surround this genre. To me, its about realism and morally ambiguous characters. In traditional epic fantasy, you know who is the bad guy and who is the good guy (obviously not always). In Grimdark, it's not nearly so straight forward and usually the person who is the "good" guy is not a good guy. Just like in real life, almost everything is a grey area in Grimdark books. Of course Grimdark usually has lots of violence because it is mostly about the darker characteristics about human nature; jealously, revenge, betrayal, etc. I learn a lot about life reading these books. So please check out my site link on the left and view the article links about Grimdark as well as any of my reviews or posts which interest you.

[Mark Lawrence]

There's a very simple rule that almost always applies.

It's grimdark if you disapprove of it.

[Arry]

There's a very simple rule that almost always applies.

It's grimdark if you disapprove of it.

depends on who you are. I like so many of the things that are labeled grimdark it doesn't phase me and if I use the term, I don't mean it in a negative way. But yeah, it is often in the context of a negative review and I have seen it applied to books that for the life of me can't figure out why. Come to think of it, all of those would be covered by your simple rule.

[ACSmyth]

I actually disagree with you, Mark. But then labels so much depend on the labeller, I think.

I wouldn't say I like grimdark; I've just given up on Gardens of the Moon. But I have read one Abercrombie (The Blade Itself), and have two more on my bookshelves waiting to be read. If I'd disapproved of it, I wouldn't have bought the other two. I loved the first three Song of Ice and Fire books, but with book 4, I felt he was sliding towards grimdark. I've just started Dance With Dragons, so I can see if he pulls himself back from where I feel the border lies. I read The Steel Remains, and thought it was OK, but not really my thing. I certainly didn't disapprove of it. And I've got Prince of Thorns downloaded to Kindle ready for a gap in my reading schedule (hopefully next month). If I'd disapproved of grimdark, I'd not have even considered reading it.

I'm still evaluating, and trying to see where my personal boundaries lie with what I enjoy reading. I don't mind a bit of grit in my fiction, but I mostly read for entertainment and escapism, and I think what tips the balance between non-grimdark and grimdark for me is whether I feel I'm being entertained, or assaulted with misery. I don't have any moral issue with reading it, or with other people reading it. I just want to spend my limited reading time on something a little lighter, is all.

[eclipse]

I didn't realise some people used the term Grimdark in a negative way ,I just thought it was a modern new term for dark fantasy

But the term/label  Grimdark seems meaningless if people can't agree what a Grimdark novel is as readers have different levels of acceptance to certain stories

[AJDalton]

Doesn't Joe Abercrombie sometimes use the handle 'Lord Grimdark'? Grimdark can't just be a negative term. I tend to think of it as fantasy that has a big dose of blood and guts horror... and either an unhappy or fragmentary ending. Certainly there's no 'glory of the chosen one'. As for 'dark fantasy', it tends to be vampire, zombie, demon, werewolf, urban gothic stuff in which the traditional baddies of horror are actually sympathetic goodies...sparkly vampires with a love interest!

[ACSmyth]

That's more or less my interpretation of things, too, AJDalton.

[Mark Lawrence]

Joe embraced the term ironically to undermine its use as a pejorative. An good, if not original, strategy that seems to have worked well.

However:

"The poorly used, excessive version is often mocked as "Grimdark" (one word), derived from the tagline of Warhammer 40,000. ("In the grim darkness of the far future, there is only war.") Sometimes justified with the phrase "Silly Rabbit, Idealism Is for Kids!". Usually shows up in Dark Fic."

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DarkerAndEdgier

[pw27]

Joe embraced the term ironically to undermine its use as a pejorative. An good, if not original, strategy that seems to have worked well

Very interesting; I did not know that about Joe Abercrombie! I have been doing a ton of research about the term Grimdark and while there are a lot of people using the term disparagingly I personally think it is a decent term and from what I have seen there are many defenders of it and a huge base of readers looking for Grimdark fantasy. I read also (I haven't verified this but it appears to be the case looking at Amazon's fantasy pages) that novels falling in this Grimdark category are by far the largest selling fantasy books now.  When I started reading Grimdark early in 2013 I had to do my own research to find books outside of the most known ones like Mark Lawrence's Broken Empire books, Joe Abercrombies books, and George R.R Martin's A Song of Fire and Ice. This included searching forums like this, Goodreads, and Google searching. I wonder if the millions of lovers of Grimdark books would have an easier time if there was somewhere they could go and easily access a huge listing of books in this category. I guess until there is some general consensus on what the term even means it would be difficult to have a Grimdark category on Amazon, Barnes and Noble, etc. But I think that there should be because people are searching for these books and a lot of authors could really blow up because of the thirst for these books. I think the tide will eventually turn against those Grimdark critics and they won't be able to use it against the authors and fans. My last thought is that maybe the authors of these books feel that if they are classified Grimdark, they will be losing a large potential audience of fantasy readers. I think that is why Grimdark should be included in fantasy lists as well the sub-list Grimdark fantasy. I think if someone is a reader and they love fantasy they will absolutely fall in love with Grimdark books. I guess I think the term should be embraced. Obviously I'm only one tiny voice among thousands or millions of voices who has an opinion on this. Most of the arguments against Grimdark have appeared to me to be weak, out of touch, overly sensitive and emotional, and very shrill.

[Gruud]

I’ve seriously debated posting in this space, as evidenced by the lag time since the last post.

As someone above said, folks can get kind of shrill on the matter …

At any rate, I think I’d like to take a pass at answering the OP’s question.

But first, let me assure, all that should sparkle in either genre is the prose and cold steel (or blood) in sun/moon/torch light. 

The dark fantasy Wikipedia definition above is okay, if a bit ambiguous, so I’d like to take a stab at (over)simplifying it: elements of supernatural horror set within a fantasy milieu

It seems a shame that grimdark doesn’t have its own topic; since I do think they are two very different things. If anyone knows someone suitable with edit rights, give them a poke?

Dark fantasy (all IMO) - the Dark tends to be external, often in the guise of a (supernatural) Other and/or any who serve it.

And with the Dark, there will be the Light to oppose it. It may not always be the bright, white Light of the pure Chosen/Savior, but whatever their moral hue, the protagonist(s) see(s) that the Dark is Evil, and seek(s) to actively confront it.

And for dark fantasy, I think ‘seeing’ is the key here. What sets it apart from similar works of epic or high fantasy is that the reader sees the Evil on the page, and the protagonist(s) experience(s) the Dark personally, and they (and the reader) know what side they are on.

((As a contrasting example for epic/high, we take Tolkien’s word that Sauron is evil, but we don’t really see him do any directly. Sure, he and the Nazgul fit the (supernatural) bill, but mostly he sends his legions out to conquer the world, a thing many mortal men have done, some in the name of good. ))

Grimdark fantasy -  the dark tends to be internal. I’ve altered case here to reflect the relative position of the word ‘dark” within the two phrases, because I think its emphasis (or lack) helps illustrate the difference between the two.

The protagonist(s)/antagonist(s) have borne witness to the evil that folks do to one another. They (and the reader) see the varying moral shades of the characters and it colors their perceptions. Sometimes the reader can’t be sure what side the character is on. Often the characters aren't even sure themselves, and who is fit to render that judgment? Many around them seem dark as well, and light may be in short supply.

This may also affect the tone of either type of work.

In dark fantasy, hope springs eternal, however long forlorn. In the end, the reader has faith that, even if the protagonist(s) has fallen to the Dark they will find redemption, and Light will prevail. And that is usually so.

In grimdark fantasy, hope may be in short supply and the reader may be uncertain who will (or should) prevail. And, the character(s) may seem beyond redemption, but if they do find it, it will seem all the more sweet being unlooked for.

And ... I think I will stop there, in hopes of additional opinions.

And FWIW, had the phrase been in literary use at the time, I think KEW might have called Kane’s stories grimdark, but I wouldn’t say the same of Moorcock and his Elric stories.