[Semi-OT] Book covers, paranormal, mythology and fantasy

[Steve Hayes]

I recently published a novel called "The Year of the Dragon" as an
ebook.

The cover has been entered in a compeition where you vote for the best
of ten book covers here:

http://authorshout.com/cover-wars/

and I hope you might be moved to go to that site and vote for it. Of
course you may think that one of the others is better, then by all
means vote for that, though I'm fairly sure the cover of "The Year of
the Dragon" is the best of the bunch.

The cover was designed by my son Simon Hayes, who is a freelance
computer illustrator and animator. I don't think it's the best just
because he's my son, but I'd be interested in any comments anyone has
on his or any of the other designs.

The competition lasts until 17 March, and you can vote once every 24
hours.

If you would like more explanations and a larger picture of the cover
(the one on the voting site is rather small), see here.

<https://ondermynende.wordpress.com/2019/03/11/judging-a-book-by-its-cover/>

One reviewer described the book as being of the "paranormal" genre,
which struck me as rather weird. It's a fairly straightforward
adventure story with Christian and African mythological elements,
which I would have thought put it in the adventure/thriller genre,
possibly borderline fantasy.

In the ensuing discussion in a book forum on Facebook it appeared that
most of the genre experts seemed to think that the "fantasy" genre
required romance, and if the romance element was missing, then it was
"paranormal".

I suppose under that definition "The Lord of the Rings" would just
make it into the fantasy bracket because Aragorn and Arwen marry. But
Lewis's Narnia stories, or Alan Garner's children's books must be
"paranormal", because the main characters are siblings and there's no
hint of incest.

To add yet more confusion, a religion scholar, John Morehead, has
recently published a book on "The Paranormal and popular culture".

When I asked him about this he said "Paranormal is not defined as a
literary genre in our text. We draw upon Jeffrey Kripal's definition
where we are dealing with phenomena rejected by mainstream religion
and traditional science. The paranormal can be expressed in a variety
of ways, including literature, but that's not our focus for
definition."

So to summarise, what I'm asking is:

1. Please go to http://authorshout.com/cover-wars/ and vote for the
best book cover.

2. Please come back and say what you think of the book covers there.

3. Say whether you think "paranormal" is a literary genre, and if so,
how you think it differs from fantasy.

4. (optional) buy my book, read it, and write a review.

[Steve Hayes]

On Fri, 15 Mar 2019 13:50:50 +0200, Steve Hayes

Post by Steve Hayes
3. Say whether you think "paranormal" is a literary genre, and if so,
how you think it differs from fantasy.

For more on this see:

<https://khanya.wordpress.com/2019/03/18/the-paranormal-in-literature-and-popular-culture/>

or

https://t.co/Om1XGpm4iW

What is the difference between myth, fantasy, and the paranormal as
literary genres?

[John W Kennedy]

Post by Steve Hayes
On Fri, 15 Mar 2019 13:50:50 +0200, Steve Hayes

Post by Steve Hayes
3. Say whether you think "paranormal" is a literary genre, and if so,
how you think it differs from fantasy.

<https://khanya.wordpress.com/2019/03/18/the-paranormal-in-literature-and-popular-culture/>
or
https://t.co/Om1XGpm4iW
What is the difference between myth, fantasy, and the paranormal as
literary genres?

A “myth” has something to do with religion or history, or at least
imitates it (“The Silmarillion”).

“Fantasy” is a broad category including just about anything that is not
wholly realistic. “High fantasy” is frequently used to describe stories
of war and court life in a world where magic works, but any religious
element is generally off-stage. “The Lord of the Rings” is the classic
example.

“The paranormal” is normally set here-and-how, and has the supernatural
rudely breaking into everyday life, often with horrible results. (Steven
King, for instance.)

[Steve Hayes]

On Tue, 19 Mar 2019 15:03:40 -0400, John W Kennedy

Post by John W Kennedy

Post by Steve Hayes
https://t.co/Om1XGpm4iW
What is the difference between myth, fantasy, and the paranormal as
literary genres?

A “myth” has something to do with religion or history, or at least
imitates it (“The Silmarillion”).

Agreed, but I think it also says something significant about life, the
universe and everything.

Post by John W Kennedy
“Fantasy” is a broad category including just about anything that is not
wholly realistic. “High fantasy” is frequently used to describe stories
of war and court life in a world where magic works, but any religious
element is generally off-stage. “The Lord of the Rings” is the classic
example.

Yes, and I would include Narnia, and Alan Garner's children's books.

But those all include myth -- at least I think Tolkien, and ptobably
Lewis thought so.

But "The Lord of the Rings" has brought forth countless imitators, who
emulate the fantasy without inorporating the myth. This genre has been
called "Sword and Sorcery". Rather dull, derivative stuff. I recently
read one of that genre, "The Sword of Shannara" by Terry Brooks. I
won't read any more of his.

Post by John W Kennedy
“The paranormal” is normally set here-and-how, and has the supernatural
rudely breaking into everyday life, often with horrible results. (Steven
King, for instance.)

Yes but... wouldn't that definition include Charles Williams?

Someone, in an Inklings mailing list (not newsgroup) stated
categorically that Charles Williams belonged to the genre now called
"urban fantasy". That would make him a pioneer, surely?

It includes people like Neil Gaiman, whose works I read in the hope
that he might be writing the same kind of story as Charles Williams,
but not quite.

Stephen King... I think his best book was "Pet Sematary". It's his
zombie story, just as "'Salem's Lot" is his vampire story, though he
doesn't use the word "zombie" in it. I suppose zombies, ghosts and
vampires belong to what is called "the paranormal". At first I thought
that Stephen King's work was purely nihilist, like H.P. Lovecraft --
some kind of malevolent supernatural creature that represents an
irrational irredeemably evil universe. But King, at least in "Pet
Sematery", goes along with Solzhenitsin's idea of the line between
good and evil being drawn through every human heart. In King's book,
the evil is just *there* -- it is how humans respond to it that makes
the story. The classic example of that genre is "The monkey's paw",
which I saw as a school play when I was 8 years old, and the memory
has stayed with me ever since.

But King's books range from good to very bad. The quality varies
enormously.

At one point I thought that Phil Rickman was the British Stephen King,
with hopes that he might develop into something more like Charles
Williams, but unfortunately his main protagonist, Merrily Watkins,
seems to be channelling Miss Marple now.


I'm still feeling my way in this conversation, trying to bounce ideas
around and see if my thoughts can become clearer, so I might say
something totally different tomorrow, when someone else has said
something different. So don't expect consistency from me. But I'm
really grateful for your contribution to the conversation.