Maps and the Fantasy Novel

[Culhwch]

Something I've been thinking about for awhile... What's everyone's thoughts on the place of maps in fantasy novels? Are they essential, or can you live without them? Will the presence of a good map make you more likely to buy a certain book, and will a bad map make you put a book back on the shelf? Do you like a general sketching of the world, or a detailed map of towns, cities, natural landmarks, battles and what-not?

I love maps, but then I am a very visual and ordered person. I don't think they are always essential, but the presence of a good map will make me more interested in a book. I have bought books purely because of the quality of the maps. Russel Kirkpatrick's first book, the name escapes me, 'To The Ends Of The Earth' or something, is one - the maps were absolutely brilliant - the man is a mapmaker by trade, so that's probably a given - but I ditched the book after about fifty pages. Other times I've seen books in the bookstore that look interesting, but the half-assed maps in the front have caused me to put them back. Some books I think need maps, especially if landscape and travel/questing is a major factor - think LotR, Magician, A Song of Ice and Fire, along those lines. The book I am reading currently, Greg Keyes's 'The Briar King' could really use a map - I'm having trouble working out where everything and everyone are in relation to one another, and it's annoying me....

Also, for the writers amongst us, I'd be interested in knowing if you draw maps for your worlds, or if everything is from the mind. I'm a mapper, when I write, and it's generally my first or second step in world-building. If I don't have a map, I feel I'd confuse myself... 'Was that east, or west of there?'

So. Thoughts?

 

[polymorphikos]

2. Examine the Map. It will how most of a continent (and sometimes part of another) with a large number of bays, offshore islands, an inland sea or so and a sprinkle of towns. There will be some scribbly snakes that are probably rivers, and names made of capital letters in curved lines that are not quite upside-down. By bending your neck sideways you will be able to see that they say things like ‘Ca’ea Purt’wydyn’ and ‘Om Ce’falos’. These may be the names of countries, but since most of the Map is bare it is hard to tell.

These empty inland parts will be sporadically peppered with little molehills, invitingly labelle ‘Megamort Hills’, ‘Death Mountains’, ‘Hurt Ranges’ and such, with a whole line of molehills near the top called ‘Great Northern Barrier’. Above this will be various warnings of danger. The rest of the Map’s space will be sparingly devoted to little tiny feathers called ‘Wretched Wood’ and ‘Forest of Doom’, except for one space that appears to be growing minute hairs. This will be tersely labelled ‘Marshes’.

That is mostly it.

No, wait. If you are lucky, the Map will carry an arrow or compass-heading somewhere in the bit labelled ‘Outer ocean’, and this will show you which way up to hold it. But you will look in vain for inns, rest-stops or villages, or even roads. No – wait another minute – on closer examination you will find the empty interior crossed by a few bird tracks. If you peer at these you will see they are (somewhere) labelled ‘Old Trade Road – Disused) and ‘Imperial Way – Mostly Long Gone’. Some of these routes appear to lead (or have led) to small edifices enticingly titled ‘Ruin’, ‘Tower of Sorcery’ or ‘Dark Citadel’, but there is no scale of miles and no way of telling how long you might take on the way to see these places.

In short, the Map is useless, but you are advised to keep consulting it, because it is the only one you will gt. And, be warned. If you take this Tour, you are going to have to visit every single place on this Map, whether it is marked or not. This is a Rule.

Actually, it's not that bad, and I like maps, but I do find that many authors seem to use them as an excuse to avoid conveying where things are going on within the text, and then do a very shoddy job on the maps anyway.

However I would never but a book for the map. Maybe for the glossary/encyclopaedic index, but never the map.

 

[rune]

I never look at them, they dont seem essential to me

 

[Brys]

They're helpful in some epic fantasy novels, but they're not essential. Sometimes they can even be pointless. In LotR, the Malazan series, ASOIAF and the Prince of Nothing series, they do their job quite well, but in all of them I could live without the maps. Outside of epic fantasy they're usually pointless - I didn't see any reason for there to be a map for the Elric series, where clearly the actual place people were in the world was insignificant. Decent authors shouldn't need a map for you to understand what the world is like, it should only exist as a memory aid for the reader.

BTW there is a map in the hardback version of the Charnel Prince (sequel to the Briar king), but I didn't find it that useful.

 

[nixie]

I never look at maps,but then again when visiting strange places in the real world I don't look at maps either, I just follow the signs.

 

[finvarre]

Personally, I like maps very much. I just want to know where the action takes place and what places remain to be discovered (like in Malazan series, for instance - I was glad to be able to lurk and see where ie. the Pannion Domin was when still reading GoTM). Besides, I believe that not providing a map leads to authorial errors. It was the case with Glen Cook's Black Company series. Upon rereading that one, I discovered that some of the places and cities he mentioned actually switched places: what had originally been located in the East in the next volume was in the West... It happens every so often in many fantasy books and while not being absolutely essential to the book, it's quite irritating at times.

 

[Thadlerian]

Maps can be useful if they're good. And, most of all, if they're consistent. Like the maps in Earthsea, which show the island outlines and their individual positions, nothing more.
But usually, upon opening a fantasy book, I tend to think "oh jeez, not the generic map again!". Those are the maps the writer doesn't seem to know what he made them for. They're confusing and contradictory. Look, there's a ruler-straight mountain range. Does that mean those are the only mountains in the map? And there is a named forest. Is the rest of the map just one big, naked plain?
And don't forget that West=Good and East=Evil, just like in the real world.

And then there are those maps that just don't seem to make sense to me, like in Thomas Covenant the Unbeliever and Sword of Truth, where the characters seem to be zig-zagging all over the place, crossing great distances in no time, and spending eternities moving one inch other times.

The map should be placed in the end, like in Lord of the Rings. Thus the ordinary reader will have to picture the place without it, and then perhaps review it in the end.

 

[Pyan]

I enjoy believable maps - something rare in fantasy geography. Thadlerian has it right about the straight mountain ranges, etc - my pet hate is (are?) the straits that almost touch enclosing an inland sea as big as the Atlantic with a town called "Smugglers Haven" or some such at the entrance. And how many mountain ranges have you seen called "Backbone", or "Spine" or "Teeth" or similar?

The worst of all, though, are the maps packed full of detail and names that have been shrunk down from the original publishing to fit on one page of a standard-size paperback. They should carry a Goverment Health Message:

"WARNING! Attempting to use this map may seriously damage your eyesight!" ​

 

[Foxbat]

I don't find maps particularly important - if the story is well enough written, it shouldn't really need anything else. I agree with pyanfaruk - I've always felt that many maps are a bit cliched both in construction and with the same tired old names.

 

[ras'matroi]

usually i don't look at the maps but for some books they are essential. mainly in books which have multiple storylines and the differetnt characters are travelling around and crossing paths. the best example would be books like a song of ice and fire or the wheel of time.

 

[Rane Longfox]

I enjoy drawing maps when writing, but when I read, I mostly ignore them.

Occsional books make me flick back to look at the map while reading to avoid being completely confused, but apart from that, I don't find them of any use or interest...

 

[MoonLover]

I like maps. When I pick up a book, the map is usually one of the first things I'll have a look at. If it's well drawn and doesn't seem to follow the old cliched patterns, then I might consider reading the text. Similarly, a dogdy map or one with stupid sounding place names often give me the impression that the author is as equally uninspiring.

Karen

 

[dwndrgn]

Maps aren't important to me at all. I think I referred to one once, and I don't recall why or if it was helpful or not. They can be pretty, sure, but the story should hold up on its own.

 

[Culhwch]

Wow. Didn't expect such strong feelings against maps! Must say I did enjoy Poly's Wynne-Jones quote, though. Those are the maps that'll make me put a book back. But maps that are done right I think are one important component in establishing the setting in a novel that is set in a world that exists only in one author's mind. I'm not saying it's not the author's responsibility to bring that world to life in the text - a map shouldn't be a short-cut, but rather a useful accompaniment to the work....

 

[GOLLUM]

Well I'm a map lover. Having said that I won't refuse to buy a book if it doesn't have a map but I do like them and prefer my books to have them. For me they add a certain added level of credibility or depth to a world but then I'm referring mostly to EPIC fantasy series where the worldbuilding can often play a major role and a map can help alleviate some of that complexity. I really feel as if I'm stepping into that world and if I have a map to read off and imagine better the locations of the different POVs that invaribly crop up in these types of stories then the more I tend to enjoy the experience.

I agree though that if a particular story takes places in a specifc location then often maps are not all that useful....

They can however be used as a powerful literary tool if they're well drawn and conceived IMO. They also help provide in certain cases an added apppreciation of eg. a described battle strategy or Geopolitical point.

 

[The Master™]

I gotta say, from my days of being involved in Dungeons and Dragons, that maps are a good idea... It helps both sides... The writer keeps things right in their own head, and the reader can also see how things work...

(and anyone needing some maps: http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/arch/mgx)

 

[Dolorous Edd]

Maps rule.*


* Disclaimer - The author would like to offer his sincere appologies for not being arsed to right a longer, more constructive reply.

 

[kaneda]

I don't think they're essential, but they can be helpful. I prefer the book to include a map than not too, but I will still buy a book if it doesn't include the map. Especially with epic fantasy, its easier to see where people need to go than to imagine it.

 

[Jayaprakash Satyamurthy]

I'd have liked to have a map of Nehwon, but I don't think there ever was one. Didn't spoil my enjoyment of the stories though!


I'm rather impressed by the city maps in Jordan's books, but I'd rather have a tighter story than a well mapped one.

 

[Arkangel]

I like maps. They do well for an epic like LOR.

I plan to use a map from my book but i do not know how to draw. So if any one as suggestions. It will be really helpful.

My story in short is about a ruthless killer and an abducted princess. And how he, who enjoys killing others, ends up protecting humanity. It is a fantasy story. My first chapter is almost complete. And i do need map. Cause my characters tend to travel a lot and a lot of kingdoms and armies are used in my story.

I think a map will really help.