Just as Tolkien set the standard for fantasy for a generation, I wouldn't be surprised if Martin does the same for the next generation.
He's already done that. Lots and lots of authors are following in his wake.
I haven't actually read N.K. Jemisin, so I can't comment on her (although reading a bit of the summary of the first book doesn't make it sound particularly 'unique'), but otherwise, of those names, the only ones I can think of who might actually qualify for not following trends is China Mieville, and maybe Steven Erikson. And if Erikson qualifies, it's going to be more because of the Kharkanas thing he's doing (I've heard people say that it 'reads a lot like a play'), rather than Malazan.
Out of all the contemporary fantasy writers I've read the two that are going against trends the most are definitely N.K. Jemisin and China Mieville. If I'm mistaken I believe I said in my review of One Hundred Thousand Kingdoms that N.K. Jemisin is going backwards from any current trends. Her books look like they could have been written 30 or 50 years ago. As heavy as Steven Erikson is on dialogue and philosophical musings, it doesn't surprising me that people would say Kharkanas reads like a play. Malazan is very, very gritty, but he was writing the Malazan books before gritty got really popular. On a side I'm not sure when gritty got popular. My guess would be 10 years ago but I could be way off.
I'm not trying to question you in particular, but I don't want this post to become a mess of quotes and fragments, so I'm going to try to hit everything off of just that. Unless we are defining trends differently than I have always defined them, then authors are ABSOLUTELY following trends. An extrapolation or elaboration on something another author got big for doesn't mean someone is not following the mold, it just means they are using actual imagination to do it with. There's nothing necessarily original in KKC. Rothfuss is just presenting it extremely well. Brandon Sanderson's main claim to fame other than WoT isn't insanely original stories (although Mistborn is more creative than many), it's his cool magic systems, and the fact that the guy seems to almost literally never be not writing. And this is not hate for either of those guys. I would consider myself a fan of both.
I don't pay too much attention to trends so am not sure what other trends are out there other than gritty and magickafying everything (made up a word). Interesting and different magic systems is one such trends which hasn't been discussed in this thread thus far; a trend which both Brandon Sanderson and Patrick Rothfuss are a part of. However, there's not really anything gritty about the work of either author as far as I can tell. The same stories are getting used over and over again so I don't really classify trends based on the type of story the author uses (unless a certain story arc is more popular than others but I don't this is the case today). Instead I classify trends based on the type of content of the book - gritty, magic heavy, light heartedness etc.
I don't want to turn this into a battlefield where we stake out territory over our favorite authors, and defend their endeavors against all assaults, so I'm not going to get hella into it. But gritty fantasy is the current trend. You can call it original if you want, and it can be, but that doesn't mean that it isn't at this point becoming something of the status quo in fantasy literature. Subpar authors are making subpar stories and they are becoming disproportionately popular for their actual worth. Concepts of hero and villain, and deconstructions of character and 'traditional fantasy story' may be original at a certain point, but they stop being that way when you have how many people doing them. This doesn't mean the stories can't still be entertaining, but in this case it's giving too much credit to things that you like, confusing (purposely or otherwise) minor fluctuations for groundbreaking new ideas. It's not something you'd even consider allowing the sort of fantasy you hate to get away with. 'Farm boy with a magic sword' isn't even nearly as common a concept among professional authors as would be suggested by the amount of times we mention it.
I agree with you here. However, just because there's lots of gritty fantasy out there doesn't mean it's a norm or there isn't a lot of non grittiness in epic fantasy too. I read Lamentations by Ken Schles for book club recently and I can tell you without a shadow of a doubt that there's nothing gritty about that book and I can also tell you that this author was likely heavily influenced by George R.R. Martin. I would argue with you on that last point if I could. It also depends on how you define gritty. The world has to be very dark, bleak, and horrifying for me to admit it's gritty. Then novels that are really, really gritty might have vivid rape and frequent deaths of important characters. This doesn't have to be a battlefield. I'm not defending anyone or attacking specific authors right now.
As for where it goes next, based on the trends, it's going to go from gritty, to gritty with a very tongue in cheek sense of humor (is Abercrombie already doing this? I read a few pages of BSC and it seemed that way a little), a lot of self-referential jokes and lampshade hanging, and irony. I'm guessing this because it's where movies have gone. From here I imagine it will start to go beyond simply 'gritty' and into 'outright horrifying and terrible.' Gritty fantasy already functions in some capacity as a challenge to readers to imagine just how horrible a world can be, and maybe there's some kind of catharsis in that for us ("at least we aren't going to get eaten alive forever like people in _____ " ). If that's the case, the natural evolution would just be to take it further and further until we either hit a wall of 'it can't get any worse,' or until people become so tired of it that cheerful heroic fantasy starts to look appealing again. And then we get to do the whole thing over.
So far I've enjoyed gritty fantasy so I'm hoping it doesn't revert backwards. I don't think guys like Raymond E. Feist or David Eddings were writing with an adult audience in mind. That's not to say that gritty fantasy equates maturity because with the amount of bad writers out there, it clearly doesn't, but I think a lot of current avid fantasy readers expect graphic violence in one form or another (as long as it's not overdone).
And I was curious about that as well, Nighteyes. I can't tell if moonspawn means science fantasy, or just, like, steampunk-y sort of fantasy. Essentially Final Fantasy VII, VIII, XIII, etc. as books or something.
That's exactly what I'm saying. Never read any steampunk though. I think I need to do that.
