The New Weird - Ann VanderMeer [153]
Al Robertson: Would definitely rush to Weird Shit shelves, think they should be balanced with Heavy Shit also. Dictionary Weird ― "Strange or bizarre.supernatural, uncanny" Uncanny's nice ― makes me think of unheimlich, which I suppose is a v. good definition of it ― uncomfort-ing fiction.
Krishna: I'm not sure I'd go near uncanny shelves. I've seen what sort of injuries falling books can cause. "Excuse me miss, can I see the Heavy Shit librarian?"
Harrison: Nuevo Weird? [Zali], the Heavy Shit librarian, sums things up as ever. It makes that exact allusion to Weird Tales and especially the fact that, back then, in that marvellous & uncorrupted time of the world, everything could still be all mixed up together ― horror, sf, fantasy ― and no one told you off or said your career was over with their firm if you kept doing that. I heard it in conversation with China Miéville his self, and cheekily reapplied it in a preface to "The Tain" (mainly so I could use the title "China Miéville & the New Weird", which I thought was second in impact only to "Uncle Zip and the New Nuevo Tango"). He writes it. But who else? And what are its exact parameters? Indeed, do we want it to have exact parameters? Do we even want it? Is it, as Steph says, instantly rendered Old by being spoken of as New?
Stephanie Swainston: The New Weird is a wonderful development in literary fantasy fiction. I would have called it Bright Fantasy, because it is vivid and because it is clever. The New Weird is a kickback against jaded heroic fantasy which has been the only staple for far too long. Instead of stemming from Tolkien, it is influenced by Gormenghast and Viriconium. It is incredibly eclectic, and takes ideas from any source. It borrows from American Indian and Far Eastern mythology rather than European or Norse traditions, but the main influence is modern culture ― street culture ― mixing with ancient mythologies. The text isn't experimental, but the creatures are. It is amazingly empathic. What is it like to be a clone? Or to walk on your hundred quirky legs? The New Weird attempts to explain. It acknowledges other literary traditions, for example Angela Carter's mainstream fiction, or classics like Melville. Films are a source of inspiration because action is vital. The elves were first up against the wall when the revolution came, and instead we want the vastness of the science fiction film universe on the page.
There is a lot of genre-mixing going on, thank god. (Jon Courtnay Grimwood mixes futuristic sf and crime novels). The New Weird grabs everything, and so genre-mixing is part of it, but not the leading role. The New Weird is secular, and very politically informed. Questions of morality are posed. Even the politics, though, is secondary to this sub-genre's most important theme: detail.
The details are jewel-bright, hallucinatory, carefully described. Today's Tolkienesque fantasy is lazy and broad-brush. Today's Michael Marshall thrillers rely lazily on brand names. The New Weird attempts to place the reader in a world they do not expect, a world that surprises them ― the reader stares around and sees a vivid world through the detail. These details ― clothing, behaviour, scales and teeth ― are what makes New Weird worlds so much like ours, as recognisable and as well-described. It is visual, and every scene is packed with baroque detail. Nouveau-goths use neon and tinsel as well as black clothes. The New Weird is more multi-spectral than gothic.
But one garuda does not make a revolution. There are not many New Weird writers because it is so difficult to do. Where is the rest? Jeff Noon? Samuel R. Delany? Do we have to wait for parodies of Bas-Lag? [M. John Harrison,] how many revolutions have you been part of?? The New Weird is energetic. Vivacity, vitality, detail; that's what it's about. Trappings of Space Opera or Fantasy may be irrelevant when the Light is turned on.
Des Lewis: Vivid and clever, yes, and uncluttered. The text itself need not be untextured, though. Densely