This is it imo; often when I read a bad fantasy book, it gives me the impression that the author has no real familiarity with anything but fantasy, while the ones I think are good often have clear hallmarks of other genres blended in and take inspiration from the real world

This is why I find a lot of epic fantasy to be deeply uninteresting; the author isn't trying to show me anything new or weird or idiosyncratic, they're just relying on the permission structures laid down by the handful of writers they admired in their teens.

I wonder how much this can explain the success of so-called litfic authors (like Atwood, for example) when they cross over into speculative genres. Not because they're inherently better writers (which is the assumption) but because they're bringing a different set of skills and a fresh perspective

part of me wants to write fantasy so I can be like "I'm the fantasy author who has a below average familiarity with fantasy in comparison to everything else"

one million percent. I adore fantasy because I want it to thrive and grow, but then I pick up a novel on Amazon and read it cover to cover and I go "oh wow this really is just Game of Thrones fanboy's first swipe huh." It's not even that bad! But there's so much *missing*!one million percent. I adore fantasy because I want it to thrive and grow, but then I pick up a novel on Amazon and read it cover to cover and I go "oh wow this really is just Game of Thrones fanboy's first swipe huh." It's not even that bad! But there's so much *missing*!

My favorite fantasy book is a dark war-romance…thing. ITS COMPLICATED!

I read slush for a literary agency once upon a time, and this was the exact problem with the genre books that I rejected: they started with the worldbuilding first, often describing their awesome world and its five types of Elves in their query letter but completely ignoring the plot or characters.

"Telling me, an author, to read other books at all, much less other kinds of books, is actually ableist."