Mythpunk

Isn't taking traditional notions of the fantastic and exploring them using new literary techniques and ideas not so much a description of movement or a sub-genre within fantasy as simply the process through which the fantasy genre naturally evolves?

It strikes me that if we were talking about SF then a fair description of most contemporary SF would probably be that it is written by people who were 'over Asimov/Clarke/Heinlein by second grade'.

I'm not actually sure that's true -- Ken MacLeod and Jo Walton aren't over Heinlein; Stephen Baxter and Alastair Reynolds aren't over Clarke -- but I agree that those three figures, while important, are less of a dominating influence on sf than Tolkien is on fantasy. By the same token, however, I'm not sure that gets us very far, and I think mythpunk is (or is intended to be) more specific than you're allowing. Both Valente and China Mieville fit your criterion, for example; I don't think I'd call Mieville mythpunk, though.

In the interview Valente suggests the punk suffix is appropriate because of the link to punk music. I'd disagree with her analysis this is what the "punk" in steampunk and other made-up suffixpunk generes is meant to convey; it seems obviously that everyone has been brainlessly riffing on cyberpunk with no underlying thought whatsoever. (It is frankly bizarre that Vanderhooft asks: "Why is -punk used to denote so many SF/F subgenres when we don't, say, have equivalents in mystery, thriller, or romance?") Ignoring that though, are we really supposed to believe there is a connection between mythpunk and punk rock? Ballet folklorica may be a horrible term but it seems much more appropriate in this context. I really don't see that postmodernism and punk are interchangeable.

Very much in agreement with Martin's comment - this has been a bugbear of mine for some time.

I really don't see that postmodernism and punk are interchangeable.

Tell that to every academic who's ever written anything about William Gibson!

More generally, I can see attitudinal, subversive commonalities, and the fact that everyone else may have been punking unthinkingly seems neither here nor there. (I don't mean that all punk is postmodern or all postmodernism is punk, of course.)

I like the idea of "punk" in your "left you feeling mythpunked," Niall, because that is often the initial experience--or rather, feeling mythpunk'd. When I first encountered, say, Goss's "The Rose in Twelve Petals," I thought I knew how the story would go, but then it didn't. And importantly, at least some of the characters in the story thought they knew what story they were in and how it would go, and then they didn't; that's generally part of the postmodern sensibility of these stories.

People inevitably seem to focus on the "punk" part of mythpunk, but I wonder about the "myth" part. Fairy tales and folk tales are more common subjects, and I don't think those are necessarily the same thing as myths.

As a critical term, it seems useful as a descriptor of history: yes, as Valente says, there have been a selection of twice told revisionist fairytales from a group of writers known to have been aware and appreciative of each other's work over the past 7-8 years--aware that they were part of a Thing, even if that Thing didn't yet have a name. But as a general critical term I think "revisionist fairytale" and "revisionist folktale" make more sense. They contain so much work with the characteristics of mythpunk, but written before there was any desire for such a label: Carter's Bloody Chamber collection, Windling and Datlow's anthologies, I know Le Guin had an influential short story in this space, etc. "Mythpunk" seems a bit like "New Wave"--it describes not just the characteristics of the texts, but the specific authors and their common sense of the historical moment in which their texts were written.

I'm not over Tolkien either. I'm not even sure what "over" means in this context.

I think there is a commonality between the writers Valente references, but the way she puts it makes my hackles rise. For one thing Gilman is still alive and writing important fantasy -- Tiptree and World Fantasy Award winning fantasy. If anyone is working with mythic roots she is, so why is she cited as an ancestor and not as part of this grouping? And while it seems to me that Taafe and Goss, both of whom I think are terrific writers, do have something in common, it's stylistic rather than the way they position themselves with reference to myth. And looking at this vague stylistic commonality I see there, I'd could put other writers there -- Sarah Monette, for instance -- who aren't working with root myth in the same ways.

And if "punk" means anything at this point it means "with attitude" and while that might fit Valente's own work, it really doesn't seem to fit the others.

But even so, I do there is value in identifying trends and circles, which is what Valente's trying to do.

Just flailing around here.

It's intersting that discussions of -punk subgenres often forget about horror fiction's very own 80s/90s Splatterpunk movement- again, the term was coined as a jokey riff on cyberpunk by David Schow. I think Valente's description of the subversive and confrontational elements of -punk subgenres is present in much splatterpunk (notably Clive Barker's early stories, which were nothing short of radical). The names most widely associated with the subgenre- Barker, Joe Lansdale, Poppy Z. Brite, Schow- have all by now moved on to different things, which seems to happen with most subgenre movements.

Matt:

People inevitably seem to focus on the "punk" part of mythpunk, but I wonder about the "myth" part. Fairy tales and folk tales are more common subjects, and I don't think those are necessarily the same thing as myths.

Good point. I thought it was really interesting that Valente suggested Charles Yu at the end of the interview -- on one level, sure, it's just an opportunity to promote a book she's enthusiastic, but "the folklore of science fiction" is a way of thinking about what Yu gets up to that I hadn't thought of before. I wonder, too, whether something like The Half-Made World would fit (hey, Abigail's review runs tomorrow! What timing), given its dialogue with the myths of the American West.

Jo:

For one thing Gilman is still alive and writing important fantasy -- Tiptree and World Fantasy Award winning fantasy. If anyone is working with mythic roots she is, so why is she cited as an ancestor and not as part of this grouping?

It's a fair point. My guess is that Matt's right -- it's a social/temporal label as well as an artistic one, and though Gilman is still writing, she's been writing long enough to seem a reference point more than a contemporary for the group of writers that Valente is thinking of. On the other hand, I suppose, M John Harrison managed to be both for the New Weird.

I'd say Taaffe and Valente share more stylistically than Taaffe and Goss, and Goss and Valente share more attitudinally than Taaffe and Valente. I'd also throw M Rickert into the mix as another important writer.

Ben:

I think Valente's description of the subversive and confrontational elements of -punk subgenres is present in much splatterpunk

Although in a rather different form, I imagine? He said, not having read any Clive Barker. So which are the -punk labels that really haven't bothered much with punking, aside from steampunk? (This would be where someone comes along to point out all the punky steampunk.)

Niall:

I'm coming from the other side of the equation, being less familiar with mythpunk than I am with splatterpunk. I think at the root of both movements are subversive attitudes having to do with the depiction of the Other in their respective genres. Valente talks about breaking down and reconfiguring depictions of women and other minorities in fairy tales and folklore. Barker's stories do much the same in terms of their depiction of protaganists coming into contact with some monstrous form of Other and being profoundly transformed. See two of Barker's most famous (and awesome) stories: "The Midnight Meat Train" and "In the Hills, the Cities" (both from The Books of Blood").

"Punk" described a moment in time that is so far in the past it makes me cringe. It's the new purple velvet loon pants of the genre, the embarrassing old uncle playing you his Fall records believing he's still with-it.

In the 80s it was more directly linked with a current fashion movement. It was significant then because it represented a reaction against something - "Up against the wall, Heinlein!" That doesn't seem to be the case now.

Is mythpunk threatening GRR Martin with summary execution? I thought the New Weird did that. The "-punk" suffix just gets affixed to any group of two or more writers working in vaguely the same territory, although I guess it helps when you're pitching an anthology.

So come on, howzabout cybergangsta, MythHop, Nu Hörrör, Space Indie? If there really is this deep connection between pop music and SF (I'm dubious) then these seem like more meaningful labels in this day and age, connected to current trends involving people below the age of fifty (well, maybe not indie...).

I have no real view on mythpunk, of course, I just wish you kids would get offa my lawn.

... Valente talks about breaking down and reconfiguring depictions of women and other minorities in fairy tales and folklore. ...

Didn't Angela Carter do all of that back in the 70s?

Appending the term punk to something tells you nothing about content.

I've not read any Valente books so won't pass judgement on their quality but use of the term "mythpunk" says much more about the post modern times we live in than the quality of her writing (and whether it's truly a subversive counter movement).

Don't forget that the punk movement was itself stage managed and, in many respects, quite cynical in its branding.