Would it bother you if Mike never wrote another fantasy...?

[Ribitt]

I must say I really love Mr. Moorcock's fantasy-works, because they first introduced me to the whole concept of the multiverse and the eternal struggle between Law and Chaos (which seems much more appropriate to describe the phenomena of daily life or politics than a plain Good vs. Evil), and had an imagery in them i often found particularly beautiful and inspiring.
But I wouldn't be too disappointed if there weren't any more straight fantasy novels, since my personal favourites remain those books which are more or less a mixture of several genres, which are only touched by fantasy and also have references to our world, historical events or introduce elements of Steampunk or Science-Fiction to "classical" fantasy worlds, like von Bek, Gloriana and the Second Ether Trilogy.
And it's a good opportunity for the reader to broaden one's horizon, after all... :D

[DeepFixer]

It would bother me a bit, knowing there wouldn't be any more.

But, it's His decision, so I accept it and respect it.

Like others have said, I'll reread the EC books, and glom onto anything else of His that I can get.

[RitaMaria]

Well, I lament, but if it is Mikeآ´s decision I will respect it.
With his books, Mike have done more for the fantasy literature than a plenty of writers, he have written wonderful books and released concepts which will continue influecing generations of authors...
Yes, I lament because Mike do not wish to write fantasy no more, but he already his part. Always there will be all the books which he wrote and we always will love his works... And he will can write good books in other genders...
So, rest, noble dreamer, the Multiverse thanks to you.

And, since the lonesome light of the hope will shine forever, even when the last star is gone, perhaps the can dream of Multiverse again some day.

Rita.

[Dead-Air]

In a sense, and Berry was kind of getting at this in his post in this thread, it's all fantasy. Seriously, none of the people or events in King of the City are real! No author for me has more clearly deconstructed the boundaries of genre and redefined them for his own purposes (Lovecraft comes close but he wasn't intentionally deconstructing so much as laying foundations for three genres at once.)

I, like the Alderian, tend to read a lot more SF than fantasy to begin with, and Moorcock, along with Mieville and Lovecraft, is one of a very small group of fantasy writers I will even consider reading. But there's a reason for that - he writes fantasy using the scientific method and refers to his own work as "science fantasy". His fantasy is in no way "removed" from reality, and consequently his "modern fiction" is inevitably still informed by his experience as a fantasy writer.

Cynic that I am, I still think everybody is taking this "Elric series concluded" stance a little too seriously. I bought that once when I was reading the last few pages of Stormbringer, but when I saw an advertisement for The Dreamthief's Daughter, and in researching it discovered I'd missed two other Elric books I realised that Michael Moorcock tended to miss his old albino friend every few years as much as his readers do. How will he stop himself in five or six years when he has that itch again, and his fanbase is quadrupled by the movie? Given that the major strength of Moorcock's writing is the humanity of it all, we shouldn't forget that he's only human...

"Not only is it the last song of the tour, but it's the last song we'll ever do..."

[Doc]

I have to agree with Dead-Air. MM has challenged the boudaries of so many genres (he just one the HORROR lifetime achievement award, remember 8O), I don't think it matters what he writes.

What makes Mike interesting (to me) is that he doesn't do what everyone else does. He doesn't rely on devices that everyone else does. Having said that, I would imagine that Mike is tired of writing fantasy because he made his name by challenging its conventions, and now his changes are part of the genre's base. His work became a little too archetypical. It's hard to rage against the machine when a big part of it is your machine. Perhaps more importantly, many genreric fantasy readers don't want him to continue challenging their comfort food.

Lilke Dee, I find the Second Ether and JC to be more adventuresome, especially in a literary sense. Is this fantasy? I don't know and I really don't care. It's good stuff. I'll keep reading. He hasn't disappointed me in over twenty years of reading.

[Dead-Air]

Perhaps more importantly, many genreric fantasy readers don't want him to continue challenging their comfort food.

I think if that were a bit more vocally the case, that Michael would be swearing to write fantasy forever! I'll agree they don't like it when he says things like that he doesn't favor world-building or that Tolkein isn't the grandmaster, but whatever fantasy fiction he writes they eat up and regurgitate back in dilluted form. If his fantasy pissed off a few more of the barbarian, hobbit, and chick in chain-mail bikini crowd he'd probably be more inclined to dish it out.

[Jules]

I'm certainly looking forward to reading the comic novels he wants to write next - Dancers At The End Of Time being one of my favourite of his fantasy works.

Like Dead-Air, I don't read a lot of 'fantasy' - having done Feist and Eddings in my teens, when I could just devour a book like 'Magician' in a few days, I kind of found they got a bit formulaic; also I started socialising with a different group of people that didn't play D&D, Warhammer, listen to Led Zep and Floyd, or know what runes even were. Which means I am way out of touch and can't pass comment.

However, having read things recently like the 'Mundane SF' manifesto, I must say that ideologically, I actual prefer 'fantasy' to an SF that tries to restrict itself to the world of real science and it's consequences. Sounds dreadfully like a manifesto for Michael Crighton books. I admire Mike's approach of 'pure' fantasy (there's never even any pseudo-science - his characters may travel through time and space by scientific machines, magic or the moonbeam roads).

[Dead-Air]

Dancers at the End of Time is arguably more SF than fantasy though! It merely applies Arthur C. Clarke's law which states that at a sufficiently high technological level technology would be indistinguishable from magic.

[Kidnero]

Nowadays I read only books in three categories sci/fi, fantasy and crime stories. I had done all Strindberg when I was 12 years old, all Shakespeare when I was 13 and Becket was what I read instead of fairytales. Not to forget The Bible (twice) The Koran and some writings of Buddha and Konfucius(sp?). So, I've done my share of "serious" litterature before turning 15. No, my friends didn't consider me as a normal kid!

Still, if MM would go over to any other category than the three mentioned above, I would absolutely follow. I must admit, that I sometimes read books that's outside these categories.

I read a lot of fantasy, some are bad I can admit, but some like the works of Tad Williams is very interesting. In many of these books there's a debate of what's good and evil. A topic that I'm very interested in.

But I've got a question, what's wrong with chicks in chain-mail bikinis? 8)

[Doc]

Perhaps more importantly, many genreric fantasy readers don't want him to continue challenging their comfort food.

I think if that were a bit more vocally the case, that Michael would be swearing to write fantasy forever! I'll agree they don't like it when he says things like that he doesn't favor world-building or that Tolkein isn't the grandmaster, but whatever fantasy fiction he writes they eat up and regurgitate back in dilluted form. If his fantasy pissed off a few more of the barbarian, hobbit, and chick in chain-mail bikini crowd he'd probably be more inclined to dish it out.

Thanks for the clarification. I was feeling exceptionally cynical yesterday (not about this topic) and couldn't find any coherence.

--"eating it up and regurgitating in diluted form" expresses my sentiment much more clearly, especially as it relates to the legions of Tolkien and Howard clones. And the clones' clones.

[Typhoid_Mary]

If a writer is "good," it doesn't matter which genre he chooses to work in.

Damn right.

I'm currently reading The Glass Teat by Harlan Ellison, and finding it as interesting and entertaining as any of his fiction.

[Furioso2012]

Good greif, I have a lot of catching up to do...

After reading Mother London and King of the City, I'd have to admit i would not mind at all if MM "moved on" from fantasy. In fact, I'd prefer it. I plan to read the three Pyat books when the fourth & final one has been published. (Ha! After Strange & Norell, Iron Council, Lord Byron's Novel, Techgnosis, Wolf's Wizard Knight, the Jerusalm Quartet, and oh buggerit, I'll get to the Pyan eventually...) 8O

[A_Non_Ymous]

If a writer is "good," it doesn't matter which genre he chooses to work in.

Damn right.

I'm currently reading The Glass Teat by Harlan Ellison, and finding it as interesting and entertaining as any of his fiction.

Wow, I haven't read that book since the early '70s. I agree it is good. It discusses the bad television of the period of roughly '68 - '70, if I remember. (The Other Glass Teat took things a little further in time; about a year.) Although the bad TV shows he discusses have long since disappeared, they've been replaced with their "intellectual" equivalent. Additionally, the stupidity and many of the trends he discussed are with us still. Ellison also discussed a lot of the ugly games that the Nixon administration played with the media, well before Watergate hit. These books are very, very entertaining -- perceptive, funny, often somewhat unreasonably opinionated, but passionate in their plea for the medium of television when Ellison seemed to harbor a small quantity of optimism for its possibilities.

(By the late '70s, that optimism had practically disappeared.)

The book is a trip in a time machine for me. I was an early teen during the period Ellison was reporting on. I remember those awful TV programs with regrettable accuracy. I still watched TV back then, although I was already appalled by what was foisted on the viewer. Fortunately, I got over any interest in TV around the time this book was published.

This brings up the question of Mr. Moorcock's essays and journalism. I gather his new book, titled Moorcock's Miscellaney, contains such things. My belief is that it'll be an entertaining book, too. If you never read Mr. Moorcock's polemical essays in New Worlds back in the late '60s and early '70s, permit me to recommend that you check them out.

It's nice to read other things besides sf and fantasy.

LSN

[Typhoid_Mary]

It's nice to read other things besides sf and fantasy.

Well, I occasionally drag myself out of Faerieland and read something else. I'm currently reading On the Road, and quite enjoying it.

[A_Non_Ymous]

It's nice to read other things besides sf and fantasy.

Well, I occasionally drag myself out of Faerieland and read something else. I'm currently reading On the Road, and quite enjoying it.

Ah, yes, Kأ©rouac. Haven't read that one since the mid-'70s, either. An entertaining book, indeed. I've wondered a bit of late how much the Beat-period writers are still read and enjoyed...

One is tempted to ask the general membership what % of the books they read are fantasy & sf. For me, it's probably no more than 5%, but that's a quick, back-of-the-envelope sort of estimate. I could be less.

People who prefer the restrict themselves to the fantasy & sf ghetto seem likely to be more perturbed than the rest of us by Mr. Moorcock's proposed farewell to that genre.

LSN