This genius created modern fantasy but no-one has heard of him

A long time before JRR Tolkein wrote The Lord of the Rings, well before he even wrote The Hobbit, William Morris wrote and self-published his first fantasy novel set in a totally invented world, The Wood Beyond The World (left). It was 1895.
   Morris was famous at the time, a protean figure in Victorian England. He was an active socialist, painter, designer, and owner of the Kelmscott Press.
   But almost no-one knew that he had just invented a new genre, fantasy, that would spawn in later generations the work of such diverse creators as Tolkein, CS Lewis, JK Rowling, Neil Gaiman and George Lucas. He followed Wood  with The Well at the World's End (1896) and The Water of the Wondrous Isles (1897). Most likely he would have written more if death hadn't intervened.
   No-one knows why he wrote these late novels. Well is considered his masterpiece, and at the time was one of the longest stories ever written (228, 000 words). Tolkein's Lord is twice as long, but that was published as a trilogy. I've reread Well more times than I've reread Lord. It's a book to get lost in, full of characters and wonder. It's easy to see where it inspired Tolkein. In fact in one small section it includes a character called Gandolf, who does some magic... I also love his Wood and earlier The Story of the Glittering Plain. Lewis and Tolkein were members of a small literary club of professors and writers called The Inklings. They would get together and talk about literature and whatever they were working on at the time. Undoubtedly they discussed Morris. Lewis once said that after he discovered Morris he "got all the Morris he could get". You can get some here.

Omega Man/ I am Legend

Now that I've finished reading/re-reading the original 1954 novel, the relationship between the novel and the film versions is clearer:
1. elements of the novel do appear in the films, but the films are quite drastic reworkings of the original;
2. key elements, such as vampirism and eroticism, are played down;
3. the ending is altered from the original 'end of the human race' to 'a hero arises to save the human race';
4. the original bacterial warfare idea is transmuted (do you like that word?) into a viral one.

These are all significant alterations. Obviously, changing the form (novel to film) of necessity alters the content (cf McLuhan), and the original psychological approach cannot work filmistically (do you like this word?) so I'm not complaining here, just observing.

Personally, I have enjoyed all three, for all three do what good sci-fi should do-- they echo, reverberate, haunt the mind so that we keep thinking about the plot, themes, characters, and so on, long after we've watched or read the art.

Legendary Pulp Fiction

Richard Matheson, I Am Legend, 1954, published in paperback

Does a book need to be 'literature' to influence the world? Matheson's 1950s pulp novel has already been filmed 3 times and is generally regarded as the touchstone of zombie stories in the same way that Bram Stoker is always invoked whenever the discussion centres on vampires. (Ironically, Matheson apparently considered his novel to be a vampire novel.) Whatever the sub-sub-genre, like Dracula, I Am Legend has captured the popular imagination.

But it's not literature! Maybe not (whatever that means), but it has captured the public imagination.

There's a lot of snobbery in this writing/teaching/publishing/lecturing business. When I was at college, one of my Literature Professors told me that Leslie Charteris (who wrote the hugely popular The Saint novels which then became a successful TV series that launched Roger Moore's career) lived nearby. I asked if Charteris was then coming into college to talk to us. The Professor said that Charteris only wrote "pulp fiction" so no-one would ever invite him. I thought that was a pity then and still think so now. The man could clearly write and write clearly and that in itself is a major achievement. His writing caught the popular imagination. Given a chance, I would rather write one novel that captured the popular imagination than two that were praised by critics as 'literature' but inspired no-one.

Orwell had a phrase for popular pulp (which I believe he acquired from Chesterton): he called them 'good bad novels'. Into this category we can also place one of Africa's greatest, Jagua Nana by Ekwensi. I like, I like, I like.

*Download I Am Legend (pdf): http://www.filestube.com/fef7c0f782ff20b903e9/go.html

Creating EVENTS

Creating EVENTS

When I sit down to write a story, play, or novel, I begin with CHARACTERS. I put my CHARACTER(S) in a setting and watch what happens. For example, I notice that both Keith and Robert met and became friends at school and are now businessmen but no longer friends. This is because Robert's business is successful but Keith's isn't. Keith is resentful and jealous of Robert's success. There are three possible THEMES here: friendship, business success, and jealousy.

Together, the CHARACTERS and THEMES give me a list of EVENTS: for example,

1. Keith spreads rumours that Robert uses underhand business methods

2. Robert hears what Keith is doing and refuses to speak to him, ending their friendship

3. Keith and Robert both played in their high school football team

4. At school Keith was keen on Wendy Pirbright but she dated Robert instead

5. When Keith's business is on the point of being declared bankrupt Robert offers to help Keith out

6. At Robert's wedding to Wendy, Keith meets Wendy's attractive younger sister

and so on. These are EVENTS, and therefore a writing plan, but they aren't yet a story because they have to be shaped--put into a sequence; this is what we call PLOT. For instance, you might decide that the story should begin with Keith and Robert still friends at high school, or you might decide to begin with Keith losing Wendy to Robert or with Keith spreading rumours or... Whatever you choose, it means ordering the EVENTS. The order is the PLOT and when the EVENTS have been written in their desired order you have a story.