Grasping for the Wind

Classifying The King Raven Trilogy by Stephen Lawhead

TOMORROW: An Interview with Stephen Lawhead

Historical fantasy might be called the red-headed stepchild of two genres of writing. The first, historical fiction can be straightforwardly defined as a story set in a historical context, using all the strictures imposed by reality, but that has a narrative that cannot be factually substantiated. In essence, historical fiction is fiction within a known historical context. The second parent of historical fantasy is fantasy itself. Fantasy has been broadly defined, but can really be boiled down to the use of magic in fiction. That magic may take many different forms, but ultimately, fantasy has some element in it that goes beyond the borders of science into the spiritual or unknown realms. This is what we call magic or miracle, and is what makes a fantasy different from all other genres.

Historical fantasy is a mixture of these two genres. From the historical fiction side, it takes a historicity and factuality that is provable through historic writings. From fantasy, it takes the elements of magic and miracle to put a spin on the historical context.

The Arguments For:

Stephen Lawhead’s King Raven trilogy is an arguably an example of historical fantasy. I say this for three reasons.

First, The King Raven trilogy is based on legend. While most of the other elements in the story (the setting of Wales, the politics of the time, many of the characters) are real and did exist, the Robin Hood legend is itself lacking proofs at this time. Legend is itself a subgenre of myth, and while more like a historical fiction than a fantasy, usually contains enough of the ethereal to find a home in fantasy classifications. In this way, The King Raven trilogy is both a historical fiction and a fantasy, as it simply is a unique telling of an age-old legend.

Second, although some might argue otherwise, The King Raven trilogy contains elements of magic. It is subtle, but it is there, and even though its role is limited, the very fact that Hood and Scarlet contain it in them makes them fantasies by default. This is the magic evidenced by Angharad, the banfaith of the Grellon (Robin’s merry men). Banfaith is term used to describe the female Celtic oracles consulted by Druids. They were similar in purpose to the Oracle of Apollo as it was their job to provide divinations and prophecies to those who asked. Angharad provides these very services in Hood and Scarlet, and therefore add the element of magic needed to be classified as historical fantasy. Additionally, when Bran becomes King Raven, he takes a different aspect of something darker and more powerful than a human. This is a magical event as it is described by Lawhead, and William Scarlet notices the marked difference between King Raven and Bran in character, stature, and power. It is that power that adds the magical element needed. Bran becomes superhuman when he becomes King Raven and in that transition is the magic element needed to classify the King Raven trilogy as fantasy.

The final reason that The King Raven Trilogy can be described as historical fantasy is simply the social aspect of the book’s classification. First of all, the publisher has chosen to classify it as such and so the book sellers have placed the books in the fantasy section of their stores. And while some readers may not like that The King Raven trilogy has so much basis in fact and only small elements of magic, the majority of readers have classified the works as fantasies, albeit historical ones. These two subpoints then show that no matter what you may think, the most widely accepted classification among publishers, sellers and readers is as historical fantasy, not historical fiction.

The Arguments Against:

For the first, some would say that legend is just a form of historical fiction. Usually, legends revolve around a real person, for whom the stories simply got out of hand. (Some would argue that Christ, King Arthur, and Buddha are such people.) This then is not fantasy, but rather an out of proportion fiction based in reality. I would argue against this as most fantasies are based in reality, but it is where they depart from the laws of science or add superhuman characteristics to the protagonists that they become fantasies. Robin Hood’s story is debatable, as to my knowledge; there is nothing superhuman or magical about his story, so in truth we still have not answered the question.

The second point, that the depiction of Angharad the banfaith provides the necessary element of magic to call The King Raven trilogy a fantasy may be explained away by calling it common sense or intuition. Much of Angaharad’s divination may seem based in common sense, or the dreams of someone mulling over a problem. I know for me that at times I have gone to sleep with a problem on my mind and woken up with the solution in hand. Was this magic? Not likely, it was probably my unconscious mind working at the problem as I slept. It was only with the fresh dawn that I could see the answer that I already had in mind. This is a valid argument. After all, Angharad’s premonitions are logical conclusions based on the danger they found themselves in. This I cannot dispute other than to say that in creating a Celtic style oracle, Lawhead is equating Angharad with the magical and miraculous art of divination and prophecy and so seeks the fantasy designation. The argument against the superhuman nature of Bran is can be summed up simply as poetic license. Some readers might argue that Lawhead is simply trying to describe how Bran and the Grellon manipulated existing fear and rumor to their own benefit and Lawhead is giving voice to that. This is a valid point as well, but I think the careful reader will note that Lawhead makes a point to show the distinction between Bran and King Raven and in so doing makes the argument against invalid.

Conclusion:

I would conclude that The King Raven trilogy is a historical fantasy, albeit one whose fantasy elements are subtle. As to whether historical fantasy really belongs as a part of the fantasy genre, I leave those arguments to others. My opinion is that once something adds magic or miracle to a story, it becomes a fantasy, not matter the intent of the author or the classification ultimately given it. (i.e. Gregory Maguire’s books are fantasies although they are often placed in the general fiction section of most bookstores.) The King Raven trilogy, although historical in setting and time, primarily following all physical laws, has some element of the mystic and the ethereal, and therefore must be deemed a fantasy.

This post is also part of the CSFF Blog Tour for Stephen Lawhead in November 2007. Click the links below to see what other participants are saying about Scarlet and Stephen Lawhead's King Raven trilogy.

My review of Hood.

My review of Scarlet.

Trish Anderson Brandon Barr Wayne Thomas Batson Jim Black Justin Boyer Grace Bridges Amy Browning Jackie Castle Valerie Comer CSFF Blog Tour D. G. D. Davidson Chris Deanne Jeff Draper April Erwin Linda Gilmore Beth Goddard Marcus Goodyear Andrea Graham Jill Hart Katie Hart Sherrie Hibbs Timothy Hicks Christopher Hopper Becca Johnson Jason Joyner Kait Karen Dawn King Tina Kulesa Mike Lynch Margaret Karen McSpadden Melissa Meeks Rebecca LuElla Miller Mirtika or Mir's Here Eve Nielsen John W. Otte John Ottinger Lyn Perry Deena Peterson Rachelle Cheryl Russel Ashley Rutherford Hanna Sandvig Chawna Schroeder James Somers Rachelle Sperling Steve Trower Speculative Faith Robert Treskillard Jason Waguespac Daniel I. Weaver Laura Williams Timothy Wise

Posted by John on November 27, 2007 10:33 AM | Posted to Christian SF&F | Fantasy | Literature and Language
Share: