![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Grimdark: Not Cynical Enough?
Jan. 13th, 2019 09:23 pmI wrote these thoughts down about a month ago and am only now getting to posting them. I am current with the books of A Song of Ice and Fire, though that's not saying much considering the release schedule. I have no interest in watching the TV series after the first couple episodes, and I've heard that a lot of people have a hard time watching it because it’s too dark and depressing.
ASoIaF is the example critics usually give for the genre of “grimdark”, a genre whose definition is pretty loose, but is generally characterized by its relentless pessimism, or what some consider to be “realism”. Liz Bourke gives a compelling definition for grimdark in her review of The Dark Defiles by Richard Morgan: “"Grimdark" is a shorthand in modern fantasy literature for a subgenre that values its gritty realism, and that attempts to overturn long-established heroic tropes. […] for me its defining characteristic lies in a retreat into the valorisation of darkness for darkness's sake, into a kind of nihilism that portrays right action—in terms of personal morality - as either impossible or futile.” She goes on to elaborate, “I think it's a nihilism that many people find comforting: if everything is terrible and no moral decision can either be meaningful or have any lasting effect, then it rather absolves one from trying to make things better, doesn't it?” Further criticism of the genre points to its use of brutality of marginalized people as “realistic” backdrop as exploitative and catering to the fantasies of the (typically white, young, male, heterosexual, cisgender) audience is pretty damning. Because of this, genres to counter the popularity of grimdark have taken on a tone of moral crusade. First was the concept of noblebright, the exact opposite, where good can absolutely triumph over evil, and then hopepunk, which asserts that good isn't a destination but that rightness is an action that should be aspired to. Bloggers who write at length about these two genres argue that they have enough “darkness” in their lives that they don't want to see the descent in depravity that they've seen in real life reflected in their fiction, as well.
I'm going to be honest. I don't really like any of these genres. I don't like the broad pro- or anti-morality stance of either of them. And I have a probably controversial opinion:
( Grimdark is not cynical enough. )
ASoIaF is the example critics usually give for the genre of “grimdark”, a genre whose definition is pretty loose, but is generally characterized by its relentless pessimism, or what some consider to be “realism”. Liz Bourke gives a compelling definition for grimdark in her review of The Dark Defiles by Richard Morgan: “"Grimdark" is a shorthand in modern fantasy literature for a subgenre that values its gritty realism, and that attempts to overturn long-established heroic tropes. […] for me its defining characteristic lies in a retreat into the valorisation of darkness for darkness's sake, into a kind of nihilism that portrays right action—in terms of personal morality - as either impossible or futile.” She goes on to elaborate, “I think it's a nihilism that many people find comforting: if everything is terrible and no moral decision can either be meaningful or have any lasting effect, then it rather absolves one from trying to make things better, doesn't it?” Further criticism of the genre points to its use of brutality of marginalized people as “realistic” backdrop as exploitative and catering to the fantasies of the (typically white, young, male, heterosexual, cisgender) audience is pretty damning. Because of this, genres to counter the popularity of grimdark have taken on a tone of moral crusade. First was the concept of noblebright, the exact opposite, where good can absolutely triumph over evil, and then hopepunk, which asserts that good isn't a destination but that rightness is an action that should be aspired to. Bloggers who write at length about these two genres argue that they have enough “darkness” in their lives that they don't want to see the descent in depravity that they've seen in real life reflected in their fiction, as well.
I'm going to be honest. I don't really like any of these genres. I don't like the broad pro- or anti-morality stance of either of them. And I have a probably controversial opinion:
( Grimdark is not cynical enough. )
