Historical Urban Fantasy?

AlexPiper · Aug 21, 2010

So, we've all seen those stories filled with supernatural elements but set in a time different than the modern/near-future so predominant in UF. "Jonathan Strange and Mr. Norrell," for instance, or the Parasol Protectorate books.

My question is, how would you classify those sort of books? Is it still 'Urban Fantasy' if it takes place during WWII, or the Great Depression? What about WWI? Victorian times? How far back does one go before it becomes 'historical fantasy,' or is the division between 'urban fantasy' and 'historical fantasy' largely one of semantics?

I ask mostly because I got into a discussion with a friend the other day whether the story I'm currently working on -- a paranormal mystery set in an alternate version of ancient Rome -- is urban fantasy or historical fantasy. And now I'm curious how others would draw a line between the two -- or if they would at all.

(As someone who majored in archaeology before becoming a software engineer, I have a bit of trouble attaching the tag 'historical' to any tale wherein Augustus has been turned into a vampire and rules Rome as Caesar Aeterna. But that may just be me!)

Shadow_Ferret · Aug 21, 2010

I'd call it alternate historical fantasy.

Urban fantasy is generally fantasy that is set in a current urban setting.

WritingDemons · Aug 21, 2010

I think the Parasol Protectorate books are actually steampunk (at least that's what I've seen them talked about as, haven't read them myself yet.)

The problem I have with alternate historical fantasy is that it feels clunky. I'd think historical fantasy would be fine.

Oberon89 · Aug 21, 2010

AlexPiper said:
So, we've all seen those stories filled with supernatural elements but set in a time different than the modern/near-future so predominant in UF. "Jonathan Strange and Mr. Norrell," for instance, or the Parasol Protectorate books.

My question is, how would you classify those sort of books? Is it still 'Urban Fantasy' if it takes place during WWII, or the Great Depression?

Well, no...mostly these are getting classified as "punk" derivatives. The Parasol Protectorate books are commonly referred to as Steampunk, and somewhat less commonly as Bustlepunk. (The latter term was coined because her books, like some others, tend to focus on fashion and manners and contain a dash more romance, rather than the noir flavor you often get from straight steampunk.)

What about WWI? Victorian times?

Victorian times basically qualifies you as Steampunk. The interbellum years, between the World Wars, are called Dieselpunk. And WWII through the 50's is called Atompunk. Each term is understood to mean historical fantasy, but the periods are defined by the dominant tech/fashion/politics of the time.

I ask mostly because I got into a discussion with a friend the other day whether the story I'm currently working on -- a paranormal mystery set in an alternate version of ancient Rome -- is urban fantasy or historical fantasy.

I think you should call it Caesarpunk!

Sounds great, I hope it works out and I'll get to read it someday!

Shadow_Ferret · Aug 21, 2010

I thought steampunk was more a genre of Sci-Fi where you introduced modern/futuristic inventions into a historical time period.

And you're probably write about it just being historical fantasy.

Although there is an alternate history genre, too.

Flicka · Aug 21, 2010

I don't think there is anything right or wrong in this. There are probably about 5 gazillion opinions though. Strong opinions.

I think you could have Historical Urban Fantasy. I just never saw anything I'd label as that. None of the books you mention have that "urban" element. But if your book has urban Rome and follows what usually goes with the urban fantasy label, I think it's perfectly legit. Cool, even.

Punk anything is more SF than fantasy - it may have fantasy elements but they alone wouldn't be enough. For something to be -punk it would have to have a) a science/technology side (steam, diesel, clockwork, cyber - you name it) b) a punk feeling, as in slightly dystopic feel. This aspect seems to disappear more and more (see Parasol Protectorate for example) but traditionally it should be there. It definitely has to have an emphasis on technology and the sort of aesthetics inspired by the tech of your society.

"Jonathan Strange and Mr. Norrell" I would call historical fantasy.

But again, I think it's all open to debate.

AlexPiper · Aug 21, 2010

See, this was more or less what the discussion turned into offline, too!

People have very strong opinions about their particular favorites. I know people who would insist up and down that the Parasol Protectorate doesn't have the dystopic edginess needed to qualify for a 'punk' genre -- be it steampunk or bustlepunk -- and would instead call it 'gaslamp fantasy.' Others feel that anything involving a zeppelin or clockwork science qualifies as 'steampunk.' (I wouldn't go that far, but regardless of what you call it, if it has an airship on the front cover I'll probably at least pick it up and read the summary.)

It's interesting that people have really strong opinions on where the boundaries between different subgenres are, but few seem to actually have the same opinions!

Maybe Roman-era 'urban fantasy' should be 'fabula urbanus.' I actually kind of like that term.

*edit: There! Snagged 'Fabula Urbanus' as my forum title!*

Shadow_Ferret · Aug 21, 2010

I'd just like to reiterate, there is no historical Urban Fantasy. UF by definition is set in the modern world. If it's set in any other time period, it becomes historical.

profen4 · Aug 21, 2010

Shadow_Ferret said:
I'd just like to reiterate, there is no historical Urban Fantasy. UF by definition is set in the modern world. If it's set in any other time period, it becomes historical.

This.

Also, isn't Steam Punk a story that is set in a world where steam powers everything (most things) ?

Oberon89 · Aug 21, 2010

Flicka said:
For something to be -punk it would have to have a) a science/technology side (steam, diesel, clockwork, cyber - you name it) b) a punk feeling, as in slightly dystopic feel. This aspect seems to disappear more and more (see Parasol Protectorate for example) but traditionally it should be there.

But I think it's all open to debate.

I agree that it's open to debate! So I'm going to debate in an incredibly friendly way, not just with the above but with the idea in another post that we should call the Parasol Proectorate "gaslamp fantasy" instead of steampunk or bustlepunk, because the dystopian aspects are not there.

I'd respectfully argue that while Ms. Carriger treats the dystopian aspects of her society extremely lightly, they are there. Legalized discrimination/segregation based on race and sexual orientation are all throughout her books and are quite easily spotted if you peer under the humor. The "punk" is all buried under a sugary glaze of laughs, but it's still there and I think it's a mistake to pretend that humor and dystopian issues are mutually exclusive. She consciously treats these issues with a light touch (she says as much in an interview I'm posting on my blog August 31), but they also do not creep into her books by accident. Perhaps one could argue that "mere" discrimination doesn't make a dystopia in itself...but I think it sure does for the victims of that discrimination.

I know this is all sort of a meta-discussion about labels—kind of silly, I admit—but beyond being somewhat fun and something people clearly are passionate about, it's useful for writers to figure these out in order to pitch our books successfully. I have heard "gaslamp fantasy" before, but I've never heard it used by a publisher or an agent, only readers. (Has anyone else heard it used in the industry? I'd like to know.) Steampunk, on the other hand, is a term being used by everyone. My editor's into it.

Sorry about the long post. I'm a nerd.

Polenth · Aug 21, 2010

AlexPiper said:
See, this was more or less what the discussion turned into offline, too!

People have very strong opinions about their particular favorites. I know people who would insist up and down that the Parasol Protectorate doesn't have the dystopic edginess needed to qualify for a 'punk' genre -- be it steampunk or bustlepunk -- and would instead call it 'gaslamp fantasy.' Others feel that anything involving a zeppelin or clockwork science qualifies as 'steampunk.' (I wouldn't go that far, but regardless of what you call it, if it has an airship on the front cover I'll probably at least pick it up and read the summary.)

Genres are there for marketing people. Marketing people label stuff urban fantasy if it's current and alternate history/historical fantasy if it's old. I don't see anyone disagreeing with the existence of that major division.

The discussions that go on in fan communities about the exact dividing lines between genres are generally irrelevant... it won't change where it goes in the bookstore or how it's marketed.

The same thing happens with steampunk. I've seen people discuss the finer points of exactly what is and isn't steampunk... but as far as marketing goes, they see some airships and gearwheels, so they slap a "steampunk adventure!" tag on the front. The fine lines are important to fan communities, but they're not important when it comes to marketing.

ChaosTitan · Aug 22, 2010

Polenth said:
The same thing happens with steampunk. I've seen people discuss the finer points of exactly what is and isn't steampunk... but as far as marketing goes, they see some airships and gearwheels, so they slap a "steampunk adventure!" tag on the front. The fine lines are important to fan communities, but they're not important when it comes to marketing.

Bold mine.

This is true, in some respects, and I'll use Gail Carriger again as an example. Before Soulless came out, it was being advertised all over the interwebs as steampunk. So folks who were familiar with steampunk were expecting a certain kind of book, with certain features. Which Soulless, apparently, didn't deliver according to expectations. It was still reviewed well as funny, clever, etc..., but some reviewers mentioned being disappointed by the lack of actual steampunk elements.

It obviously hasn't hurt sales, as the sequel to Soulless hit the NYTimes list the week of release. But a lot of purists would not consider the Parasol Protectorate to be steampunk. They'd probably call it historical fantasy.

If you want good, recent example of steampunk, pick up Cherie Priest's Boneshaker.

ChaosTitan · Aug 22, 2010

Shadow_Ferret said:
I'd just like to reiterate, there is no historical Urban Fantasy. UF by definition is set in the modern world. If it's set in any other time period, it becomes historical.

I agree with the Ferret.

Once you remove the element that makes it urban (the modern setting), it becomes historical fantasy or even historical paranormal.

yttar · Aug 22, 2010

I'm pretty sure Marie Brennen has a historical urban fantasy series about faries. One of the books in the series is called Midnight Never Come. So yeah, it's possible to have historical urban fantasy.

Yttar

AlexPiper · Aug 22, 2010

ChaosTitan said:
It obviously hasn't hurt sales, as the sequel to Soulless hit the NYTimes list the week of release. But a lot of purists would not consider the Parasol Protectorate to be steampunk. They'd probably call it historical fantasy.

This is actually why my curiosity was roused in the first place, I admit. People seem to read a LOT into labels, and I'd disagree with Chaos; I think the fine line /can/ be important in marketing, since you are marketing to the fan communities.

As far as I know, Gail Carringer doesn't call her own work steampunk, even if the marketers do. I think some of the fans mentioned would be less forgiving of her if she did!

Personally, I tend to think of 'historical fantasy' as something dealing with historical events or people, but adding a relatively minor fantastical element (For instance, write a story about John Dee following a variant of real historical events. Only make one change: Dee's magic actually visibly works.) Given my personal take on 'historical fantasy,' I would think that turning Augustus into a vampire and letting him rule forever as Caesar Aeterna would not qualify. That's sort of a more major shift, and gets into the whole 'alternate history' area.

Other folks have told me their definition of 'urban fantasy' is anything dealing with 'fantasy that is in a city -- hidden or open -- rather than in the standard medieval or high-fantasy type setting.' (Of course, I know someone who defines Jim Butcher's Codex Alera as 'Urban Fantasy' under those grounds, where... it's just NOT. Not at ALL.)

Then again, if urban fantasy has to take place in a modern setting, is the requirement that it be modern to the /reader/, or modern to the /writer/? Are UF novels written in 1995 still 'urban fantasy' if you're reading them in 2040, or is it now UF novels set in 2030-2050 that are UF, and the 1995 ones have shifted to become something else? If someone wrote a Victorian fantasy during the Victorian era, was that 'urban fantasy' even though now we might call it 'gaslamp' fantasy? If so, does it get to keep the term 'urban fantasy' instead of 'gaslamp' by virtue of having been written when that /was/ the urban landscape, or is it the reading era that shifts the term? Are 'modern' urban fantasies in 2040 defined by some other term, and 'urban fantasy' is just associated with the ones written in today's era? Etc.

These are rhetorical questions, of course; they're just meant to illustrate that people will probably disagree on the answers to /those/, as well. The various subgenre terms clearly have strong meaning to folks, but they don't have the /same/ meaning to everyone. Even in this thread, people seem to disagree about definitions such as whether the Parasol Protectorate is steampunk or not.

The reason I thought this worth discussing is because the reading audiences we hope to reach /also/ share very strong feelings on what 'urban fantasy' or 'steampunk' or other settings are, and let's be honest... in today's internet-enabled world, at least part of what a writer /does/ is self-marketing. Does calling a book 'steampunk' help it (by drawing people who like steampunk and define it more broadly) or harm it (by turning off folks who read the story with a preconceived notion about the style, decide it doesn't really match their idea of steampunk, and dismiss future books)?

At any rate, this /is/ an interesting discussion!

(With regards to the vampire-ruled Rome given as an example at the beginning, I actually personally like the term Chaos listed, 'historical paranormal.' I've usually only seen that used for romance novels, but it seems to apply better than 'historical fantasy' for what I tend to think of historical fantasy as being. But again, people may disagree with that definition, too!)

AlexPiper · Aug 22, 2010

(Also. I apologize for the rambling. I shouldn't forum before I caffeinate!)

WritingDemons · Aug 22, 2010

I personally think people get too hung up about labels. I'm not going to NOT buy a book just because it's supposed to be steampunk, when really it's been marketed as something else. I read books for the content. It's the story that's important.

"A rose by any other name is still a rose," and all that jazz.

I understand the desire to want to pinpoint the type of book more easily, but honestly? If it's fantasy (historical, urban, steampunk, paranormal, epic, etc) I'm going to read it. Sub-genre helps prepare a reader for the tone and voice a book is written in. Everyone has their set ideas on what certain sub-genres should have, and that anything outside of their opinion is wrong.

Thing is, no one is wrong about the label they use. Some people with always refer to the Parasol Protectorate series as steampunk, gaslamp fantasy, or some other sub-genre. That doesn't change what the story is. Just where they place it in their own mental library.

Polenth · Aug 22, 2010

AlexPiper said:
As far as I know, Gail Carringer doesn't call her own work steampunk, even if the marketers do. I think some of the fans mentioned would be less forgiving of her if she did!

The reason I thought this worth discussing is because the reading audiences we hope to reach /also/ share very strong feelings on what 'urban fantasy' or 'steampunk' or other settings are, and let's be honest... in today's internet-enabled world, at least part of what a writer /does/ is self-marketing. Does calling a book 'steampunk' help it (by drawing people who like steampunk and define it more broadly) or harm it (by turning off folks who read the story with a preconceived notion about the style, decide it doesn't really match their idea of steampunk, and dismiss future books)?

It helps promotion. You'll always get a few people who'll react badly if a book doesn't match their rigid genre definitions, but most people really don't care. If they enjoyed a book, they enjoyed it. They might enjoy debating where it goes, but it won't stop them enjoying the book. (Remember that the few who react badly are likely to be the ones posting to the internet... the majority who don't care won't bother to post. They vote with their money and buy the next book in the series).

Though she didn't call it steampunk, Carriger did mention the steampunk elements right from the start. Her query described the book as:

"...81,000 word paranormal novel, SOULLESS, and I am seeking representation. It is a romantic romp through the streets of Victorian London, from high society to the steam punk laboratories of Frankenstein-like scientists."

...so she'd identified that it had elements that might appeal to steampunk fans.

You don't want to go the other way and try to rigidly define your own book. I remember a self-published author on another site, who'd written a science fiction romance. The synopsis made it clear it was romantic. It had a romance-style cover. The author wouldn't acknowledge it was a romance in any way, and kept trying to promote the book to hard science fiction fans only. She wouldn't promote it to romance readers, and got snotty with anyone who suggested it (or dared to suggest her book might be a romance).

Rigid genre definitions aren't your friend when it comes to promotion.

Shadow_Ferret · Aug 22, 2010

yttar said:
I'm pretty sure Marie Brennen has a historical urban fantasy series about faries. One of the books in the series is called Midnight Never Come. So yeah, it's possible to have historical urban fantasy.

Yttar

I looked on her website and on Amazon. No one calls it an urban fantasy, they call it a historical fantasy. One calls it a the Elizabethan faerie spy fantasy.

From a review:

CLASSIFICATION: Set in an alternate Elizabethan Age—mainly between September 1588 and June 1590—where magic and fae are as real as politics, “Midnight Never Come” is a seductive blend of historical fiction, court intrigue, fantasy, mystery and romance. At times the book reminded me of Shakespeare, Neil Gaiman, Susanna Clarke and Faust, but Marie has a style all her own. As a whole I would describe “Midnight Never Come” as a gothic fairy tale…

Shadow_Ferret · Aug 22, 2010

AlexPiper said:
Then again, if urban fantasy has to take place in a modern setting, is the requirement that it be modern to the /reader/, or modern to the /writer/? Are UF novels written in 1995 still 'urban fantasy' if you're reading them in 2040, or is it now UF novels set in 2030-2050 that are UF, and the 1995 ones have shifted to become something else? If someone wrote a Victorian fantasy during the Victorian era, was that 'urban fantasy' even though now we might call it 'gaslamp' fantasy? If so, does it get to keep the term 'urban fantasy' instead of 'gaslamp' by virtue of having been written when that /was/ the urban landscape, or is it the reading era that shifts the term? Are 'modern' urban fantasies in 2040 defined by some other term, and 'urban fantasy' is just associated with the ones written in today's era? Etc.

Well, rhetorical or not... Modern to the time it was published. That's why I said some people are categorizing Bram Stoker's Dracula as Urban Fantasy. It was modern when he wrote it.

Stacia Kane · Aug 22, 2010

Shadow_Ferret said:
I'd just like to reiterate, there is no historical Urban Fantasy. UF by definition is set in the modern world. If it's set in any other time period, it becomes historical.

I STRONGLY disagree. I've read plenty of historical UFs. I'm working on one myself. Urban fantasy by definition is fantasy that takes place in an urban setting, mixing life in that city with fantasy elements. (It can take place in a small town too; what matters is that the fantasy elements are part of the world and part of life in it.)

My agent calls it historical UF. All four of my editors have mentioned "historical UF" as a genre. A friend of mine who published a historical UF series called it that, as did her editor. Marie Brennan's books, as someone else pointed out, are considered historical UF. I suppose you could call them "historical fantasy," but IMO that sounds like a trad fantasy, not an edgier UF-style one.

Until that "This is exactly what UF is and isn't" guidebook is written by an acknowledged expert on the subject, and accepted by the UF/fantasy community, UF can take place in any period the writer damn well pleases.

JemmaP · Aug 22, 2010

Having read a good chunk of what AlexPiper's written (she's my roommate) I have to concur that what she's writing is Historical Urban Fantasy. If the city that you're writing in has an almost character-like presence in the story, and the functioning of the city and urban life is a strong part of the story, then I consider it urban fantasy.

Of course, the real question is whether or not someone who reads 'urban fantasy' would enjoy the story, but that mileage may vary pretty greatly. There's plenty of stuff that gets marketed as urban fantasy that isn't set anywhere near a city, but so be it - it's sort of taken on a new meaning as 'fantasy in a contemporary, semi-close to our world setting'.

I write straight up urban fantasy - it's a story about a mage in San Francisco. There're cellphones. Public transit features regularly. People do video chat on the computer and buy lattes - and cast spells. Very traditional urban fantasy, nary an elf to be found.

Alex Piper's story is a vampire story in ancient Rome, with the Forum and the Senate and the grittiness of an Imperial city as a feature in the story. IMO, it's historical urban fantasy. It's not traditional fantasy or sword and sandal.

-- though I do get the point of trying to draw more distinct lines around the genres, to keep things organized if nothing else. I used to work in a bookstore and shelving things in the right spot was always a challenge. We finally gave up and made an area 'Speculative Fiction' and just chucked it all in there willy-nilly. Most people found what they were looking for.

yttar · Aug 23, 2010

Stacia Kane said:
Until that "This is exactly what UF is and isn't" guidebook is written by an acknowledged expert on the subject, and accepted by the UF/fantasy community, UF can take place in any period the writer damn well pleases.

And that's why I consider the sci fi/fantasy novel I'm working on to be futuristic urban fantasy rather than science fantasy.

Yttar

JimmyB27 · Aug 23, 2010

ChaosTitan said:
I agree with the Ferret.

Once you remove the element that makes it urban (the modern setting), it becomes historical fantasy or even historical paranormal.

Uhh...urban means modern?

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/urban

urban [ˈɜːbən]adj1. (Social Science / Human Geography) of, relating to, or constituting a city or town
2. (Social Science / Human Geography) living in a city or town
3. (Music / Pop Music) (of music) emerging and developing in densely populated areas of large cities, esp those populated by people of African or Caribbean origin Compare rural

DeleyanLee · Aug 23, 2010

Polenth said:
Genres are there for marketing people.

I agree to a certain extent--what defines a genre (or sub-genre) is what the readers of that (sub)genre buy. Marketing people just try to guess what that's going to be next so they get the labels right.

If a book set in ancient Rome or Victorian London satisfies the readers of UF, then it'll be considered a UF book, regardless of what others think it should be categorized as.

Personally, I wouldn't think of a historical setting as a UF, even though I know that many historical cities were extremely urban because of what I think of when I'm in the mood for a UF story. The smart-alec, ass-kicking heroine just doesn't fit comfortably into my understanding of historical settings. Of course, I might have an out-dated/incorrect concept of UF (always possible) but every UF I've read has that element. Wouldn't work for me personally--but it might well work for the dedicated fans of the sub-genre.

My point is that it's never up to writer or publishers or marketers what a book gets called, really. That decision is out of our hands and there's no real point in dwelling on it. Describe as honestly as you can, draw whatever connections to established genres and such that you can when marketing, and keep writing what you want to write.

Historical Urban Fantasy?

Wayward Wordsmith

Court Jester

Reclusive doesn't begin to cover it

The Druid you're looking for

Court Jester

Dull Old Person

Wayward Wordsmith

Court Jester

The Druid you're looking for

Mushroom

Around

Around

practical experience, FTW

Wayward Wordsmith

Wayward Wordsmith

Reclusive doesn't begin to cover it

Mushroom

Court Jester

Court Jester

Girl Detective

practical experience, FTW

Hoopy frood

Writing Anarchist