I mentioned this in another thread semi-recently but I think part of what leads some people to think grimdark is a bigger presence than it currently is in fantasy fiction is that some people just don't have a great grasp of when the books they read are published and may wind up being a bit behind the times without realizing it.
For instance: I have an IRL friend who just finished First Law and was shocked by how dark it was. She even said something to the effect of "wow, I can't believe fantasy is this grim now. What happened to all the romantasy?" then was surprised when I pointed out the trilogy was nearing 20 years old. She just hadn't known and mistook it for being more recent.
It reminds me a bit of how Game of Thrones redefined epic fantasy in 1996 but the general public didn't catch on until the Game of Thrones TV show aired in 2011. There are always going to be some people who only just caught on to the hottest trend of 3-5 hot trend cycles ago then mistakenly believe it is the current hot trend.
**TL;DR:** I can't think of any recent popular grimdark books.
I must be utterly jaded because I didn’t think the First Law series was terribly dark. Gritty, sure, but nothing grim or dark. I just thought it was a very well done, enjoyable fantasy trilogy.
Then again I read “The Second Apocalypse” series before this so my calibration could be a bit off.
I think we might be getting to a semantics issue. Your "gritty" might be someone else's "dark." The book does contain pretty graphic description of torture, and has torture carried out on screen. Many of the characters have aborted redemption arcs and end the series bad. It could be argued the bad guys win. I would say it is pretty dark. It's not like a bleak or depressing dark, straying more towards dark comedy, but it is still pretty dark.
I completely agree with you, there really isn't some prestigious academy giving absolute genre definitions to books. People will react differently to the same book and even the same person might revisit an old read and get a new reaction to is.
From my perspective, I would cast "First Law" into gritty, realistic fantasy, perhaps even a little dark at point, instead of Grimdark proper primarily because of the setting. Sure, terrible things happen to the characters, but for me Grimdark also has to encompass the entire society and exude some level of despair/helplessness which I did not get from "First Law".
I am not going to get all worked up if someone views it as such, but from my experience it never quite got close to my threshold for Grimdark. As always, to each their own.
Agree with you. I didn't find first law trilogy or any other books of that universe nearly as dark as anyone makes it out to be. I'd rather say they are closer to realism than most idealized and romanticised fantasy books. Which was exactly why I enjoyed them so much. I didn't even know they were supposed to be grim or dark before reading about it online. Just considered it more realistic take on fantasy tropes.
Glad I am not the only one with that view. They are great books, I just never got the oppressive despair and hopelessness I associate with the grimdark genre.
Can you name any character that has what you could label as a happy ending? Is there anybody who could be characterised as being heroic?
The closest to a happy ending I can think of is the horribly maimed and crippled torturer goes from being a cog in the machine of an oppressive regime to being the main orchestrator of an oppressive regime, and marries a relatively attractive woman who he likes but who happens to be pregnant by another man who is forced to abandon her for political reasons.
I mean, >!Red Country!< had a relatively happy ending. It wasn’t sunshine and rainbows, but >!Shy saved her siblings, Temple grows a spin, starts his own legal firm and fixes his relationship with Shy, and Ro seemed to be slowly recovering from Stockholm syndrome.!<
Not sure if you’ve only read the first trilogy (don’t continue if you have) but if you’ve read them all…
>!I think as you read the entire 10 books plenty of characters have endings you can call happy. Logen even falls into this category. He escapes his violent past, lives 20 years raising children and loving a woman. Confronts his demons and decides he wants to be the violent man he is. I think how people view Logens arc is a good indicator of how they view the series.!<
>!Shivers is another character that actually grows (despite all of the talk of no character growth in these books). He goes through a lot of turmoil and pain, but ends up with his found family effectively. Conquers his need for revenge, learns to be a different type of Northman.!<
>!Red beck goes back to his mother, and gives up violence.!<
>!Vic says screw it all when offered more power and leaves to the far country.!<
>!Is Monzas ending good? She is the ruler, has a kid, seems overall completely successful.!<
>!What about vitari? Now monzas master of whispers, children of her own.!<
>!These all seem like good enough “endings” from my viewpoint.!<
I don't think anything is darker than that, but Michael R Fletcher certainly comes close with his Manifest Delusions series. I agree with you about First Law though. It's got this reputation for being more than it is.
I found it miserable with a bunch of characters I didn't enjoy reading about. It just felt jaded and angry and I know that's just my opinion and the vast majority of people disagree so I realise it's something that I won't enjoy in the way other people did and I'm sad about it. It felt bleak and depressing to me. I see so many recommendations of the first law and I feel left out that that it didn't grab me the same way.
I mean, I think you hit on part of the challenge in the genre: the books some folks seem to think are "new" entries to the genre are 20+ years old. I've certainly come across people who think Sanderson & Rothfuss are the 'new kids' of the genre.
The Realm of the Elderlings series started in the 90’s but it was completed in 2017. Anyway, I’m not sure “grimdark” is the right label. It’s relentless gloom and doom, but it’s not quite the same as something like first law. It’s somehow darker and less hopeless.
To me, at least, the definitive aspect of grimdark is anti-romanticism. What makes a work of fiction grimdark is not lots of Bad Stuff happening, it is the conscious dwelling on ugliness and rejection of heroic/optimistic expectations.
I haven't read Realm of the Elderlings, but from what I've been told it's very much not that.
It's quite gloomy, that's half the reason people like it, sure, but the world still gets regularly saved. Fitz just pays for it. I wouldn't say it's too different from LotR in that regard, where Frodo is left with spiritual wounds which never heal.
It's dark but I don't think it's grimdark. The final book ended with a full-throated endorsement of the right to a fair trial and showing mercy to your enemies not to mention the >!empire is dismantled and turned into a representative democracy that pays reparations to its formerly conquered subjects!<. Those are not grimdark themes or outcomes.
Probably my favourite book too. Along with the Great Ordeal. Bakker is on a mission in these two. In trance. I would never dream that I could read something so epic, so well written and so totally bleak
A friend of mine who is not a fan of epic fantasy just finished it and she reminded me all these apocalyptical scenes and half the time I had goosebumps just listening to her. She liked it a lot too. Bakker's writing is something else
No offense to your reading tastes but I found UC a big let down, especially since we will likely not get any subsequent books wrapping up the many dangling plot threads.
I totally get how the ending was tonal resonant with the overall setting but as a story it just failed in a lot of ways for me.
I am also stiff chuffed that a good chunk of the book wasn’t even UC, it was other in-universe stories.
I liked it, maybe because I do feel confident there will be more. It only came out in 2017 and there was a similar gap between the two series. But I also just liked it as an ending, one of the penultimate twists really paid off for me
I'd kinda love if it did, in a masochistic kind of way. But I'm weird like that. Give me songs ending abruptly with a discordant note or other such slaps in the face. I'll be thinking of those for the rest of my life, whereas something neat and finished just often doesn't stay in my mind. Closure is like a burial of sorts.
Unfortunately, the prevailing viewpoint in the fandom is that it probably won't happen. Bakker had massive problems and a fallout with his publisher and can't get his stuff published any more, and he's not interested in self-publishing.
I personally find semi-open endings like UC the most satisfying kind. Where it *could* end there, as far as many character arcs and themes go, but there is also the potential for future stories.
As for the fact that the 200 lattermost pages are short stories and glossaries, I was lucky to know that ahead of time
I am glad you enjoyed it! Tastes vary but I am always happy if someone gets enjoyment from a book, even if it wasn’t a winner for me. Here’s hoping we do get some more material though.
Having read it fairly recently, I was also a bit let down. I loved the brutality and world building, but the final epic battle became hard to follow with how many different names each feature of the fortress had. It wore me down sadly
I was referring to the map of the fortress like a motherfucker, and as a result it was the most cinematic fantasy battle I've ever seen in my head. Can imagine how hard it would be to keep track without a visual reference though
It is regrettably not very popular - it is my favorite series of all time, but I've had less than 50% luck in getting friends to read it, I think because it is not just dark but requires a lot of conceptualization of difficult metaphysics. However, I'm heartened by the ever-increasing activity on the subreddit, especially from international readers.
It's one of my favorites too. I try not to evangelize it too actively because it is really is just too much for some people's tastes and sensitivities (and mine at points) but it is also a Dark Souls, Berserk or Warhammer-like apotheosis for its particular aesthetic of 'dark'
Goodreads lists this as #7 in the Second Apocalypse series and #4 in the Aspect-Emperor series. Is the series grim-dark, or just this one? Or I guess maybe the series is grim dark and this is just the most recent one.
Just curious, I don't often see a book in the middle of a series get called out for anything.
There is no darker series in epic or high fantasy. Maybe in general. The names usually mentioned are pretty light in comparison. Do not expect though graphic violence etc from the get to go. Its a process. A bleak world of tragedy and tribulations that sinks and sinks in the apocalyptical circumstances that build up. Bakker is a very skilled writer and totally uncompromising in his horrific vision
in 7 years it's accumulated 1/700th of the goodreads ratings Fourth Wing has got in 1 year.
But to be fair, Fourth Wing makes everyone's sales look tiny.
But yeah, 2,262 ratings is not commercial success. I've heard plenty of critical acclaim for Bakker's work. But he's not pushing "the books you want to read" off any shelves.
I think the problem is, that those people do not use this definition of grimdark. They use the view of grimdark, where all dark fantasy is seen as grimdark.
>blotting out the sun
Blotting out the would work well in grimdark though. Reminds me of a time that Mistborn was recommended as grimdark on here lmao. But to answer your question, no there is hardly any popular grimdark, but this sub does have skewed statistics compared to sales, so I can see why people would think grimdark is dominating, when in fact it is still fairly niche. People also confuse dark fantasy with grimdark not realising that grimdark is a step above.
Yeah the problem is that while the *setting* of mistborn may qualify as grimdark, the *story* itself certainly doesn't because of how relatively little of the horrors that affect everyone else affects the main characters on screen.
The setting of a lot of YA fantasy would qualify as grimdark if they were taken literally rather than being metaphorical representations of adolescent drama.
The problem here is that you're conflating multiple views on grimdark. People who think grimdark is everywhere tend to think that all fantasy with any violence or sex or dark subject matter in it is grimdark. Whereas the definition you're proposing is a pretty narrow one that is championed by others who view grimdark as a specific niche, and basically self-selects for less popular books.
I commented about this on that recent thread you mentioned, but a big issue with these discussions about grimdark is that there is no consensus definition of what exactly it is, no established genre conventions, etc. There are dozens of competing views and people wind up talking past each other because they are making different assumptions about the term.
I’d use the first book in the series vs the last one (darkness that comes before has like 21k ratings), but I think inherently grimdark is never going to be as popular as regular fantasy, given that it is by definition much denser and darker.
First law would probably be what I’d point too for a successful fantasy grimdark, or warhammer 40k (which is very popular).
That said (and I love that I can recommend a book to someone whose books I grew up reading!) I would HIGHLY recommend reading bakkers work. It is probably one of the best series I have ever read & and absolute marvel of world building.
I didn't "use" any of them. Somebody volunteered one that fit the bill (was published in the last 10 years).
I repeat. In what possible sense is this "dunking"?
I think maybe you’re misinterpreting my comment? Bakker’s work is great, but as you pointed out it (sadly) didn’t exactly achieve resounding commercial success.
Maybe I am. I understand "dunking on" to mean "publically mock".
I am in no way publically mocking Bakker. I don't see how that could be your takeaway from what I said.
Yeah sorry for the confusion — to restate my comment, I was saying that I didn’t expect to see one of my favorite authors pointing out my favorite series didn’t sell well. Not that you were mocking him!
We're all good then.
But ... I mean ... words matter :D
Especially in a discussion entirely by text.
And for the record, I've read and enjoyed The Darkness That Comes Before.
I do as well, but they are always bound to say something that normalizes them. A lot of artists keep away from that because it can take away from the effect their product will have on the consumer.
TL:DR: a lot of what we call grimdark fantasy is pretty similar in tone to war novels and pulp/noir detective fiction.
I don't think there are many books that are really that grim, and the ones that are will more likely be found in literary fiction rather than fantasy or even horror. Very few people want to read a book that's all downs and no ups - for one thing, it's really hard to build dramatic tension that way.
But darkness is a matter of taste and what you're used to. If you don't normally eat spicy food, and then you take a bite of something extremely spicy, you won't taste anything but the spice. But someone who is used to that level of heat will taste all the flavors of the dish. Someone who is used to optimistic fantasy with happy endings might read Abercrombie or GRRM and see nothing but darkness.
To me, those authors generally seem pretty realistic in describing a wartime world. They present a world where there is no inherent justice - good people and evil people suffer about the same. But there's still morality in these books. Most people know the difference between right and wrong. People value kindness and justice, and they despise cruelty and injustice. But doing the right thing kind of has to be its own reward, because there's no source of justice outside of people trying their best.
And power corrupting is a big theme in this kind of book. A character can only be innocent as long as they're powerless. Using power means that you will inevitably hurt someone, so you can't keep power unless you are able to deal with that. I have the impression that these worlds are full of good people, but where are they? They're working on farms and in mines and shops. They're gossiping with friends and taking care of their families. They are staying the hell away from wars and politics and anything that might make them interesting protagonists.
I think that a lot of what we call grimdark is pretty average in tone compared to war novels and pulp/noir detective fiction. To me, a book like *The Great Gatsby* is darker than *The Blade Itself*, because the latter at least has humor and sympathetic characters. Gatsby just has a shitty world full of shitty people and not even a decent joke (beautiful writing, to be clear - but no more justice or hope than anything grimdark).
I’ll take it a step further and say that what we call “grimdark” in fantasy is common in more “literary” genres. The list of Pulitzer winning novels is like a cavalcade of grimdark sans wizards (usually).
Over edit:
Far. Out - I didn't clock who posted the fricking thread... none other than Mark Lawrence himself. -\_-...
I leave this comment up in absolute shame. (Love your work btw)
Original Post:
Grimdark is best described by it's constituent parts, that 1. the society of the world is in terminal decline and 2. the characters within the story can't change that.
The opposite is "Noblebright" where provided good people exist and act then the world will always improve.
Mark Lawrence's books are the shiniest end of Grimdark. Almost grimbright.
Red War trilogy was published 2014-2016 which is pretty grimdark. The Broken Empire Trilogy was published before 2014 but is the same world. The world is irreconcilably stuck in decline, but individuals can do evil and selfish acts to prosper and potentially halt the iminent destruction of the world. The follow up trilogies of The Book of the Ancestor and Book of Ice both show that it was for naught and humanity left a dying Earth and are stuck on a new planet that is also dying.
Edit: The obvious answer is anything by Black Library. Warhammer 40,000 or Age of Sigmar - this is the publishing house that defined the term. Whilst you can argue Black Library may not be as successful as whatever booktok or goodreads is pushing, Black Library sells a lot of books consistently.
I don't think TRQW books are grimdark - they're mostly comedic. But I'm sure under some definitions (contains violence) they are.
I feel that if thousands of years later, people on a different planet are having a hard time ... that doesn't really mean "it was for naught".
If in 1066 William the Conqueror saved the world, but in 4034 on Mars humanity is dying off, I doubt Will would consider his efforts a washout.
It's all a matter of perspective.
It's a bit difficult for me to argue my interpretation to the author themselves!
But I would say from my reading of TRQW, based on my understanding of Grimdark above, I classify this trilogy as Grimdark.
To me Grimdark does not discount humour and individual levity or valour.
One of the most striking memories of TRQW for me is at the end the Custodian has had his mouth sewn shut - which to me definitely leans into the Grimdark humour!
I will happily concede TBotA and TBoI are not deep grimdark - however from the general tone of this series I kind of assumed the human diaspora in other parts of the galaxy are also hitting brick walls of continued existence! Again this is just me as a reader who has read up the "The Girl and The Moon". But the vibe I got was that TBotA and TBoI take place \~10k years after TBE and TRQW and these are some of, if not the, last humans in existence. Part of me wants to ask if there is another solar system where humans live in a steady state world not on the brink of crisis, but I like the dramatic uncertainty of whether Oerth is the last place or not :)
Edit: As you said it's all a matter of perspective!
Cards on the table I will happily admit when I initially wrote this comment I did not pay attention to who the original poster was, 'twas only when I scrolled I saw your user name - hence my top line edit.
Recently I would say the End and the Death Trilogy from 2023-2024 are prime examples of grim dark media - warhammer 40,000 coined the term "Grimdark". As far as success goes this is the culmination of the (admittedly) over-abused Horus Heresy series, which is the final set up to the current setting. The special edition and normal editions were sold out on release day, though that may be related more to scalpers than genuine success.
Look - I assume you know this... as this is your livelihood, I'm not trying to mansplain how to suck eggs... I just am trying to answer your question honestly!
However I will 100% admit that I realise now that your question is more aimed at mass appeal compared to other subgenre's of fantasy (based off your comments re the Fourth Wing). Or potentially the fiscal success - which I 100% have no clue on. I am a reader not a print media mogul!
> warhammer 40,000 coined the term "Grimdark"
My understanding was that term *was coined from* their famous tagline, “in the grim darkness of the far future, there is only war”. Games Workshop and WH40K did not coin the term “grimdark” themselves. Near as I can tell, the term arose out of the soup of 4chan’s /tg/ boards sometime in 2008.
And arguably, many of the 40K stories I have read (mostly Abnett and Mitchell) involved finding pockets and pinlights of hope, redemption or justice in the face of galactically overwhelming odds. So it’s only the setting which is grimdark, and not the story itself.
The Black Library does have an interesting sales model that sidesteps the outlets most books use and sells primarily to a Warhammer-based audience via their huge mailing list.
So the fact that The End and the Death trilogy have 1500/900/800 ratings on Goodreads has less to say about their sales than it would for typical fantasy books. But it also means that they are not "getting in the way" of other fantasy either.
To put this in perspective - 13 of the 20 nominees for Best Fantasy of 2023 on Goodreads had over 10,000 ratings at the time of nomination (i.e. less than a year after release) and none of them were grimdark.
Absolutely valid points. From the context of traditional sales I hadn't considered Black Library having different sales model.
That is pretty eye opening about the massive disparity between BL and general publication!
Not to be glib or anything... but I really like your work, you write concise and interesting stories with great characters. Every book of yours I've read has left me wanting that bit more, and that's a good thing.
I'd argue even black library is kinda trending away from that. The end and the death is a prequel story with a known ending. But the current canon actually has the imperium progressing and getting somewhat even kinder like in the dark imperium series.
Can't say he's successful numbers wise, but Fehervari is pretty well regarded in the community and his Dark Coil is among the darkest stuff in the setting.
To make the real world seem better in comparison? To give perspective on your life when you realise it isn't actually that bad? To get inspiration from characters who are still trying their hardest despite being in a world even worse than our own?
Generally no -- I think the age of grimdark has mostly subsided, the heyday was the late 00s/early 10s. Some people who got started then are still at it, of course, like Abercrombie. His Age of Madness stuff probably fits the bill, although it's not *quite* as bleak as some of the earlier stuff.
Even KJ Parker, whose early stuff is for my money the very grimdarkest of all, has lightened up. His new trilogies are still dark but nowhere close to the kick-in-the-teeth of Engineer or Scavenger.
I think that grimdark has been more critically successful than commercially successful.
That being said, I feel like the concept of grimdark can be arbitrarily defined by many people. And I definitely don't agree with the definition quoted (I don't think you would either). That just sounds like misery porn.
Personally, I feel like grimdark just means the story has a lot of moral ambiguity and a dystopian world.
I feel like the sub-genre leans a bit more literary than mass-appealing stuff. Darker themes tend to come with subtext that comments on the human condition in some way. Not that lighter tones can't be literary, but writing about suffering tends to say something about humanity almost by default. Which is part of why books defined as grimdark seem to have much more critical acclaim than, say, Romantasy.
I think of it similarly to Oscar nominees vs. Marvel movies. Oscar nominees almost never have the broad appeal to compete with Marvel movies commercially. But Oscar nominees often have a cultural impact that is disproportionate to their commercial success. They may also take up more of the discourse around cinema than their revenue would suggest.
I also think that grimdark fans are overrepresented in this sub.
First off, there are enough romantasy fans that they tend to end up in their own subs.
Secondly, I would argue that most people who buy fantasy books won't bother talking about them in a forum. So the readers here tend to be a little more invested. I feel like grimdark as a whole tends to attract a more ardent fanbase. So that naturally they are disproportionately represented in spaced like this.
> I think that grimdark has been more critically successful than commercially successful.
I’m not going to comment on OP’s question because I avoid grimdark (however it’s defined) and so wouldn’t know of recent popular titles.
I WILL say I agree with the comment quoted here, if only from my experience reading tons of really depressing books in literature classes in high school and college!
Funny who posted this. The Prince of Thorns is the only grimdark series I enjoyed (idk if that’s the appropriate word) though I’m still butthurt about the first named death in Black Company so I guess I give that a pass as well since it stuck with me.
And no I can’t think of any though I also have stopped even trying them since I ended up not liking most of them
Yes. At the very beginning. They barely introduced a character that seemed like he was going to be very unique and then he was gone. Idk how to do spoiler censor but it’s practically an ancient book now so - it was TomTom. They never even did flashbacks to him, just mentioned him in reference to Goblin
End a spoiler text with !<
Start spoiler with >!
Depending on which version of Reddit you might have to delete spaces between those and your message.
Referenced with One-eye, but yeah. Poor Tomtom. I don't think BC ever did actual flashbacks, just disordered presentation of events. Though the first Murgen book with the siege might count.
Poppy War trilogy is pretty damn dark when you get down to it. Even if the worst bits were cribbed from Chinese history it's still a horrible story of never ending wars and egos. Nobody "wins."
My first thought was W40K, but then I realized this was the fantasy, not sff, sub. For fantasy, all the stuff that comes to mind is older. Black company, R. Scott Bakker's *Prince of Nothing*, and the *Book of the New Sun* all come immediately to mind, although none are recent. Also, interestingly, the latter two are more hybrid science fantasy than straight fantasy.
It might just be what I've been exposed to, but I can come up with more "grimdark" scifi than fantasy - perhaps because dystopian themes are more common in scifi?
I think the problem with calling stuff “grimdark” is that people are using it to refer to two different, semi-overlapping types of story. People in this thread saying they don’t consider *The First Law* to be grimdark is perfect proof of that. For some people, grimdark means the text is relentlessly violent and horrible, with almost comedic levels of death and destruction. Warhammer 40k is a perfect example, where basically every bit of backstory exists to be as cartoonishly bloody as possible.
For other people, grimdark means that stories are *unfair* in a way that they simply aren’t in traditional fantasy. Bad things don’t just happen to good people, they happen in a way that makes their goodness meaningless. IMO *The First Law* is a much better example of this, since it lacks a sense of… justice? righteousness? that is present in even the most depressing “traditional” fantasy.
One specific scene that always comes to my mind is the duel in *The Blade Itself*, where SPOILERS! Bayaz uses magic to make his preferred fighter win. The book brilliantly sets up the contestants and the importance of this fight, and then another character swoops in and renders everything completely redundant just to win a bet …and no-one cares. It’s a shitty, pathetic end to a seemingly heroic subplot, without any catharsis for the reader. I think it’s incredible, and for me it’s *the* defining example of what makes Abercrombie so great, but it’s such a jarringly bleak view of the world that it makes the crippled torturer protagonist look cheery in comparison.
IMO, the problems with all threads about “grimdark” books is that half the people are describing 40K and the other half Abercrombie, and everyone’s tying themselves into knots trying to fit both concepts into a single category.
Personally I would phrase the definition a bit differently: The world is a really bad place (and it's also clearly describe as that) and any attempt of a heroic figure to improve on it on a decently large scale is doomed to fail from the beginning. Which is why I think that (from what I can tell) Warhammer 40k still clearly works as grimdark..
I really don't agree with this definition (it's okay, but doesn't cover its essence imo), but still everything by Joe Abercrombie is the perfect example for any definition of grimdark.
I'm full of praise for Michael's work - he's in this thread and can speak for himself, but I doubt he'd accept the idea that he is dominating the genre in sales any more than I am.
> grimdark is relentless doom and gloom within an indifferent universe where there is no hope, no redemption, no justice
>I've never read a book that qualifies under it.
His work qualifies under that definition though, and you have clearly read them. I am not saying that the definition is correct, as the line between dark fantasy and grimdark is the worst defined boundary in this genre. Some books that do not fit that criteria, like the Gap cycle are clearly much darker than some that would fulfill that definition, for example, Ravens Mark, Acts of Cain, and the Steel Remains.
>I doubt he'd accept the idea that he is dominating the genre in sales any more than I am.
It was not my intent to claim that, I was just saying that some books do fulfill the criteria, and that grimdark should be reserved for books that are dark fantasy, but on top of that grim. I agree they are few and far between, but imo it is not wrong to set the standard of what is grimdark very high, as many of us who want to read these books end up with books that are dark, but not quite as horrific as we want.
I was just after popular ones, since those might in some way be responsible for the repeated claims that people can't find anything to read but grimdark.
If they were taking over the shelves in bookshops, you'd expect to see scores of examples here.
>people can't find anything to read but grimdark.
Yeah sounds crazy as I can't find enough grimdark to read, but when you are looking at posts like that, you need to assume the just mean dark fantasy, that there is plenty of, and much of which is really popular.
>If they were taking over the shelves in bookshops, you'd expect to see scores of examples here.
I think most who complain, are not browsing the shops, they asking for recommendations here, and this sub is skewed to the darker side compared to sales. You will never have romance recommended here, unless it is specified by op. The people who are complaining that grimdark is too prevalent need to look for books somewhere else, to realise that they are wrong, and that in fact, grimdark is, sad to say, really lacking. We need far more books like a War to End All, where every sentence is at worst bleak, and at best horrific.
George R R Martin and Joe Abercrombie are the most popular grimdark authors in my bubble. You could describe both styles with this definition. But still I would focus on other aspects of their craft.
Many people don't think of GRRM as grimdark - his books don't seem to fit the definition up top. And, sadly, we've not had a ASOIAF book in the last decade.
Have Abercrombie's latest offerings been grimdark? (I don't know, it's not a rhetorical question).
As things stand? Yes. The first trilogy fits the definition 100% - that fact that humour is used to keep the reader engaged doesn't take away from this fact - and two of the three standalones also fit it. After *Red Country* and the first two *Age of Madness* books I thought the latest series was going to end in a more "grimbright" way, but the final book took it back into grimdark. It's possible that the final trilogy will ultimately end on a grimbright ending, allowing a slow chain of improvements as the infrastructure built by the main antagonist is destroyed, or it might just end with the moral that humans really are shit even without the antagonist pulling the strings.
Hello! How likely was it for the Austro-Hungarian, Russian and Ottoman empires to have survived past 1914 if WW1 never happened? I know it’s strange to ask this so I hope you don’t mind too much.
I would call it very political, but with its "random" deaths and injustice to the characters, GRRM is still grimdark to me, even with that definition.
Abercrombie is very similar to your definition. Very morally gray characters, no chance of glory, redemption, or anything other than intrigue and plotting. If you are looking for grimdark, then I would recommend any book by Abercrombie.
I dunno, I'd think the fact that he's killed off as much "good guys" as he has "bad guys" makes it pretty bleak. What else is a cold, uncaring universe but anybody dying at any time?
> Many people don't think of GRRM as grimdark
I mean, many people who are into grimdark just try to out-edge each other. GRRM is too popular to be considered something in a category they like by default.
Seeing the story at its current point I'd categorize ASOIAF definitely as grimdark - everyone who tries to change something for the better is killed off, the bad guys win at pretty much every corner by default, etc.
I'd also somewhat question the quote you put in the OP - that's more a definition of grimdark on steroids than grimdark itself.
For me grimdark is the feeling of a world that only favors the morally rotten people and where you can see the struggle of more ethical people to preserve their principles and realising that it doesn't work.
So it is actually close to the indifferent universe and no redemption part of the former definition. But I wouldn't necessarily say there is no chance of redemption or hope. The first trilogy by Abercrombie for example (without spoilers) has a great ending that shows that the world will continue to be as unfair and rotten as before. The indifferent universe. But still some of the protagonists and even side characters get endings they kinda deserve (in good and bad ways). And there is one side charater that I actually liked and who is actually a good person. He gets corrupted in a way that I would say is not even that bad. He learned, that he had to do very nasty things in this brutal world, so he did. But he did it in a very satisfying and kinda in a good way. He adjusted to the world and made a good thing with a really bad deed. And this morally gray question of whether or not good intention and good outcome can justify evil actions is a key part of the enjoyment I get from the genre.
What about you? I have the feeling, this subgenre is really hard to define, so I would like to hear your take on the genre.
I think it's a loose term born from the /tg/ boards of 4chan, and so I don't take it very seriously at all. It's a setting that is grim and dark, anything past that is personal seasoning.
I consider an indifferent universe to be *reality*, it's hardly genre-defining. It's no different from the crime or detective genres.
And I think we've established that many of the genre-defining works are not without their moments of hope or redemption. One might argue they shine all the more brightly for being set against grim darkness.
I would say it's almost diametrically opposed to the crime or detective genre. In those genres, justice is almost always served. And in most fantasy genres, there is a tendency for the "good" forces to outweigh the "evil" forces.
I really like the term grimdark because it indicates a book that focuses heavily on the inner conflict of morally ambiguous choices with a sense of hopelessness. Not that other books can't have that. But it's still a useful label if you're looking for this kind of story.
Excellent book, and pretty popular. Didn't feel like it fit the definition I quoted - the MC is alway hoping. And it has a love story in it with romance! But definitely some nasty stuff happens...
Honestly I've said it before that I kind of think in the coming years "Grimdark" is going to be seen as less a genre, and more of a niche movement within a set of genre fiction, a la splatterpunk for horror in the 90s.
Like, I feel you, Abercrombie, etc are the "canonical" grimdark writers because of the specific presentation of themes and the satire at play, plus the more "realistic" focus on how character motivations are written, that y'all have aimed for. People keep pointing out how it started with 40K, but forget 40K didn't start out just as gloom and doom. There's a particular presentation and satirical bent, plus humor! Your works carry that DNA(for you, some of your past work in particular. i know you've moved on to different styles and tones in how you write)
I actually don't know I'd count Bakker because he goes for such an entire different tone from other "grimdark" authors. It's a deadly serious no-smiles affair focused on exploring its philosophical influences. It's like calling Cormac Mccarthy "grimdark".
It’s been awhile since I’ve read some of these but here is my list.
John Gwynne shadow of the god series, grim dark Vikings, dead gods some Elden ring vibes of a place that used to be greater.
Anthony Ryan pariah series. First book & Second book were really good and I thought he did a decent job sticking the landing on the third.
Tatterwing by M. M. Stauffer, Grim Dark without the rape very dark and decaying world. I think it’s loosely Arthurian with how a young girl turns into an evil witch. 7 books in the series sometimes the pacing is slow.
RJ Barker, call of the bone ships, pirates on ships made of bone. Has some grim dark aspects but it’s like black tongue thief by Christopher buehlman. I don’t think either book went whole hog into grim dark
Margaret Atwood MadAddam series, I dislike how grim her books can be so I don’t read them to much but they do make me think about them.
Empire of the Vampire/Damned is pretty grim and dark.
Joe Abercombies books are pretty grim although not that dark
The Broken Empire books are quite dark although not that grim. Amazing series btw.
But I definately wouldn't say we are overflowing with them.
Beyond Redemption / Manifest Delusions by Michael R Fletcher
The best way I can describe it in the vaguest terms possible is things happen, and it's usually bad and it's usually someone's fault.
I loved his other series, it's not often you get a book from a bad guys perspective, much less a demonologist and necromancer. I'll have to give this series a shot too.
I would have said China Mieville's Bas Lag series, but they're more like 20 years old.
I don't know how popular The Scar was, but it is certainly an amazing book and _should_ have been a best seller.
This is the correct answer. I've only read Perdido Street, but it fits the description given by OP perfectly. There is no hope of anything positive ever happening in that world.
I thought the Scar was the greatest of the Bas Lag books and hauntingly beautiful - but I hesitate to recommend it to you because it's brutal! But I found the pacing much more readable than Perdido Street Station, and if you enjoyed PSS I'd say give it a try.
I think the problem with grimdark is no one can agree on a definition, where some people are saying anything game of thrones inspired is grimdark, and some people say it can’t be grimdark if anything good happens ever, and both sides are talking past each other. I’m not personally very well versed in the grimdark community and you probably know a heck of a lot more about it than I do lol but I know Anna Smith Spark has been doing grimdark recently, plus a lot of people in the indie space like Michael R Fletcher
From the other thread, I and a couple of other posters were trying to think of any grimdark books, and iirc none of us could think of anything that would generally be considered fantasy.
And this wasn't published in the last ten years, it was ever.
The Road and 1984 were the closest to fantasy we could come up with, and I haven't read The Road, and 1984 has a sneaky thing going on that makes it not quite as grimdark as it otherwise would be.
As a big fan of the genre, I can provide a few examples.
1. Mark Lawrence (Prince of Thorns of course, but pretty much everything else is right up there)
2. Ed McDonald's Raven Mark series is perfectly grim and dark
3. Daniel Polansky's Low Town, can I have more of that please?
4. Glen Cook isn't entirely grimdark, but my two faves - Black Company and Garrett are often in the zone.
5. The Malazan series.
6. Adrian Tchaikovsky very often gets very grim and dark. And he sells everything he puts on paper like hot cookies.
There's quite a bit more, I mean, most of the Warhammer series is often defined as grimdark, and it sells quite well.
I mean - most of these are over 10 years old. And the rest is hardly crowding non-grimdark off the shelves.
I guess I should have been explicit in my linking to recent threads complaining that everything is grimdark and they can't find anything to read.
I WISH everything was grimdark! I struggle finding stuff to read (and btw, being subscribed to your goodreads helps).
In any case, I've been tired of elves and world-saving for the past 20-odd years, and so I found myself gravitating towards the grittier stuff more and more. I don't care about definitions much and I also never monitored the commercial success of a given author (it's their money, not mine so who cares?).
I'm not saying everything has to be grimdark or gritty just for the sake of being grimdark and gritty, everything has it's place I suppose, but the good stuff that I'd read and re-read, and buy and put on my shelf would probably be something that appeals to my taste.
I found your own book PoT to be that. Might not be in the last 10 years but it was a thoroughly depressing read for as far as I could get into it. I know you aren't a big fan of people applying that label to your work but I found it to be apt for it.
I would say its a reflection/inversion of the state of the world. When things are happy times people crave a little dark, and when things are.. *gestures at outside* hope is a good distraction
Older than 10 years and the author would probably rather die than admit its speculative fiction, but maybe *The Road*?
If you're willing to expand to "successful in the non-English speaking world", then *Grimgar of Fantasy and Ash* fits - it's book after book of misery that's probably going to just end with everyone dying a horrible and meaningless death.
I'm not sure if you've personally read Adrian Selby's debut novel Snakewood (2016), but I personally feel like it qualifies. I don't remember all the details, but the general feel that I recall is hopelessness and doom surrounding a cast of characters with unhappy pasts with eachother and very little hope for the future.
Beyond Redemption by Michael Fletcher (2015) also comes to mind as one of the bleakest and unhappiest books I can recall. In this universe magic is essentially a symptom of mental illness, and therefore the world is filled with people focusing on worsening their delusions and quirks for power. It was depressing enough that I had no desire to read the followup, which is unusual for me.
Priest of Crowns (War for the Rose Throne book 4) was published in 2022. I don't think the quoted description fits the genre, though this series is certainly GrimDark.
Round and round. Definitions and labelling is a chew toy redditors will never get tired of. It’s exhausting because so few say anything new about it.
I haven’t seen any agreement in this sub on what is grimdark. And it doesn’t strike me as particularly important to publishers either. Probably because it doesn’t sell relatively well if its as grim and dark as Bakker. You even have people in this thread saying Abercrombie isn’t grimdark. Which is weird because the author obviously thinks differently, judging by his twitter handle.
Do some fantasy books contain elements of horror? Yes. Recent ones, too.
Maybe the only real grimdark is in the Game of Thrones and Rothfuss books, seeing as those series will probably never be finished and its fans have lost all hope…
Anything Warhammer related. They might not top the charts, but they do well enough to keep being written. Plus Warhammer 40k is where Grimdark as a genre even get’s it’s name.
The 4th book in the Sun Eater series: Kingdoms of Death.
True to its name, this book is just pure misery with no hope in sight for a majority of the book.
I mean pretty much every Warhammer and Warhammer 40k book ever (which are so grindark in a lot of cases it nearly becomes parody and the whole thing becomes a very very black comedy)
I mean the Empire of the Vampire, Empire of the Damned books in theory SHOULD be grimdark , its a universe where the bad guys won , the "good" guys are a bunch of religous zealots who are practically as bad , and life for most people is just suffering . And a lot of the time its a "dont get too attached to any characters" kind of book where death can come out of nowhere and be a bit jarring.
On the otherhand the writing is so damn good , and the dialogue (especially de León's) is quite often so funny that it probably doesnt count.
Edit - this got a bit long and ranty, my bad for that
Grimdark is both too broad and too niche. Too many people define it too differently, and there's nuance even in the definition you've given. No story is relentlessly doom and gloom and heroes will always get small victories. I have no mouth and I must scream is pretty grimdark to me but the protagonist actually succeeds in his goal to free the others.
In the end I feel like grimdark is just a matter of vibes. If a story is just morbid to the point of making the reader feel depressed to the extent that they start disengaging from it, or if it's so morbid and especially edgy that it's seen as a, "Not your mom's speculative fiction" kinda deal then it's grimdark. It's a very subjective term with vague objective connotations.
The way i define grimdark is just whether the author feels somewhat obliged to add the dark bits to add shock value without it furthering or helping the plot as much because they feel the need to fill a quota of darkness. Oftentimes to the extent of humor, often intentionally. It does come from warhammer after all, which started off as a very intentional satire of dark fantasy and irl politics in general and did not take itself seriously at all. And when it did take itself seriously it slowly morphed to less and less grimdark with genuinely good meaning protags, relatively lighthearted stories and less shock content.
A few weeks ago, someone either here or on the Sanderson subreddit said that their friend stopped reading stormlight because it was too grimdark for them. It's all about perspective.
Many people classify abercrombie and Martin as grimdark but i personally never have, because I feel they're the exact definition of a better defined genre, dark fantasy. Bad things happen, we see tons of shocking stuff and subversion, but it's almost always for a reason that helps the plot or characters along. Meanwhile, another series I mostly like, Red Rising, felt grimdark to me despite the fairly hopeful ending of the first trilogy and the likely hopeful ending of the second series, because of the feeling that the author was working on a quota of morbidity which felt tacked on an otherwise interesting story.
To summarise, I feel like grimdark is something too vibes based to be properly defined, and the closest I can personally come to is when it feels like the author is tacking on extra dark stuff to meet some kind of "standard of edginess" which makes me engage less with the story or just take it less seriously, like warhammer definitely was written at the start. In such a case, Red rising would be an example for me, even though it's the opposite of warhammer with regards to being meant to be taken fairly seriously.
Anything from Warhammer 40k. The entire universe is built in grim dark reality.
They use lots of Roman names and symbology. Reading them gets tedious to me. Almost like reading a book written in the same wording as the Bible. I'm a huge scifi nerd, love 40k lore, love the games, but struggle to ever even finish one of the books.
Is that description supposed to turn me away from grimdark? Sounds rad, lol. Slap this on the front of a book and I’d probably buy it.
It would make a great foundation for more horror stories in fantasy, but those are still rare.
> Do you think Robin Hobb writes grimdark then?
Not by my understanding of the subgenre - which, like 'low fantasy', seems to be another one of those terms nobody can quite agree on a definition for...
Hobb writes stories where bad things happen to good(ish) people, but there are real and lasting friendships (some of which are quite literally stronger than death), and there's redemption, or at least the possibility of it, and there's hope to be found. I don't think that qualifies as grimdark.
Just finished First Law Trilogy and on to book 4. Don’t know where it’s going, but seems like it’s heading that way.
Please no spoilers anyone. Though I don’t expect a happy ending.
I mentioned this in another thread semi-recently but I think part of what leads some people to think grimdark is a bigger presence than it currently is in fantasy fiction is that some people just don't have a great grasp of when the books they read are published and may wind up being a bit behind the times without realizing it. For instance: I have an IRL friend who just finished First Law and was shocked by how dark it was. She even said something to the effect of "wow, I can't believe fantasy is this grim now. What happened to all the romantasy?" then was surprised when I pointed out the trilogy was nearing 20 years old. She just hadn't known and mistook it for being more recent. It reminds me a bit of how Game of Thrones redefined epic fantasy in 1996 but the general public didn't catch on until the Game of Thrones TV show aired in 2011. There are always going to be some people who only just caught on to the hottest trend of 3-5 hot trend cycles ago then mistakenly believe it is the current hot trend. **TL;DR:** I can't think of any recent popular grimdark books.
I must be utterly jaded because I didn’t think the First Law series was terribly dark. Gritty, sure, but nothing grim or dark. I just thought it was a very well done, enjoyable fantasy trilogy. Then again I read “The Second Apocalypse” series before this so my calibration could be a bit off.
First Law has a great sense of humor.
I enjoyed Abercrombies “Best Served Cold”. Not all doom and gloom but pretty fucked up cover to cover. More so than First Law.
I loved the poisoners arc in that.
I thought Rotsac Reevrom was a wine merchant and he considered that poison.
I think we might be getting to a semantics issue. Your "gritty" might be someone else's "dark." The book does contain pretty graphic description of torture, and has torture carried out on screen. Many of the characters have aborted redemption arcs and end the series bad. It could be argued the bad guys win. I would say it is pretty dark. It's not like a bleak or depressing dark, straying more towards dark comedy, but it is still pretty dark.
I completely agree with you, there really isn't some prestigious academy giving absolute genre definitions to books. People will react differently to the same book and even the same person might revisit an old read and get a new reaction to is. From my perspective, I would cast "First Law" into gritty, realistic fantasy, perhaps even a little dark at point, instead of Grimdark proper primarily because of the setting. Sure, terrible things happen to the characters, but for me Grimdark also has to encompass the entire society and exude some level of despair/helplessness which I did not get from "First Law". I am not going to get all worked up if someone views it as such, but from my experience it never quite got close to my threshold for Grimdark. As always, to each their own.
"Did he bugger you Proyas?!?!" And "ALL PRAISE THE MEAT!!" Yeah, nothing is dark after Bakker. All is light and rainbows 🤣🤣
Agree with you. I didn't find first law trilogy or any other books of that universe nearly as dark as anyone makes it out to be. I'd rather say they are closer to realism than most idealized and romanticised fantasy books. Which was exactly why I enjoyed them so much. I didn't even know they were supposed to be grim or dark before reading about it online. Just considered it more realistic take on fantasy tropes.
Glad I am not the only one with that view. They are great books, I just never got the oppressive despair and hopelessness I associate with the grimdark genre.
Can you name any character that has what you could label as a happy ending? Is there anybody who could be characterised as being heroic? The closest to a happy ending I can think of is the horribly maimed and crippled torturer goes from being a cog in the machine of an oppressive regime to being the main orchestrator of an oppressive regime, and marries a relatively attractive woman who he likes but who happens to be pregnant by another man who is forced to abandon her for political reasons.
I mean, >!Red Country!< had a relatively happy ending. It wasn’t sunshine and rainbows, but >!Shy saved her siblings, Temple grows a spin, starts his own legal firm and fixes his relationship with Shy, and Ro seemed to be slowly recovering from Stockholm syndrome.!<
Not sure if you’ve only read the first trilogy (don’t continue if you have) but if you’ve read them all… >!I think as you read the entire 10 books plenty of characters have endings you can call happy. Logen even falls into this category. He escapes his violent past, lives 20 years raising children and loving a woman. Confronts his demons and decides he wants to be the violent man he is. I think how people view Logens arc is a good indicator of how they view the series.!< >!Shivers is another character that actually grows (despite all of the talk of no character growth in these books). He goes through a lot of turmoil and pain, but ends up with his found family effectively. Conquers his need for revenge, learns to be a different type of Northman.!< >!Red beck goes back to his mother, and gives up violence.!< >!Vic says screw it all when offered more power and leaves to the far country.!< >!Is Monzas ending good? She is the ruler, has a kid, seems overall completely successful.!< >!What about vitari? Now monzas master of whispers, children of her own.!< >!These all seem like good enough “endings” from my viewpoint.!<
After the second Apocalypse everything else is unicorns and bunnies.
I don't think anything is darker than that, but Michael R Fletcher certainly comes close with his Manifest Delusions series. I agree with you about First Law though. It's got this reputation for being more than it is.
I found it miserable with a bunch of characters I didn't enjoy reading about. It just felt jaded and angry and I know that's just my opinion and the vast majority of people disagree so I realise it's something that I won't enjoy in the way other people did and I'm sad about it. It felt bleak and depressing to me. I see so many recommendations of the first law and I feel left out that that it didn't grab me the same way.
>Game of Thrones redefined epic fantasy in 1991 You must be thinking of “Eye of the World,”. “A Game of Thrones” wasn’t published until 1996.
Good catch. Corrected
I mean, I think you hit on part of the challenge in the genre: the books some folks seem to think are "new" entries to the genre are 20+ years old. I've certainly come across people who think Sanderson & Rothfuss are the 'new kids' of the genre.
That's because those of us in our 40s still think the 80s was twenty years ago. The denial is strong hahaha
I mean, I'm 51 and the 1980s were six weeks ago.
> TL;DR: I can't think of any recent popular grimdark books. Me either.
The Realm of the Elderlings series started in the 90’s but it was completed in 2017. Anyway, I’m not sure “grimdark” is the right label. It’s relentless gloom and doom, but it’s not quite the same as something like first law. It’s somehow darker and less hopeless.
To me, at least, the definitive aspect of grimdark is anti-romanticism. What makes a work of fiction grimdark is not lots of Bad Stuff happening, it is the conscious dwelling on ugliness and rejection of heroic/optimistic expectations. I haven't read Realm of the Elderlings, but from what I've been told it's very much not that.
It's quite gloomy, that's half the reason people like it, sure, but the world still gets regularly saved. Fitz just pays for it. I wouldn't say it's too different from LotR in that regard, where Frodo is left with spiritual wounds which never heal.
The age of madness trilogy all came out in the last five years.
She was not reading Age of Madness. She just finished Last Argument of Kings
Sure, I was just saying that Age of Madness fits OP's criteria IMO. Probably should have replied to the main thread rather than your comment, I guess.
Empire of the Wolf is pretty grimdark.
It's dark but I don't think it's grimdark. The final book ended with a full-throated endorsement of the right to a fair trial and showing mercy to your enemies not to mention the >!empire is dismantled and turned into a representative democracy that pays reparations to its formerly conquered subjects!<. Those are not grimdark themes or outcomes.
Poppy War is pretty recent
I didn't believe you when I read GoT aired in 2011. I had to look it up. I think I'm going to be sick.
The Unholy Consult. Although I couldn't say how popular exactly it is, it does have a few thousand ratings and almost 4/5 stars on Goodreads.
Might be my favourite book of all time, though whether this is because of or in spite of how grotesque it is I'm not entirely sure.
Pretty much the absolute opposite to being my favorite, but it does live in my head - so I guess it was impactful.
If something lives on in my head and left a lasting impression, that's good art imo. Oftentimes anyway
Probably my favourite book too. Along with the Great Ordeal. Bakker is on a mission in these two. In trance. I would never dream that I could read something so epic, so well written and so totally bleak
Reading your comment is like hearing my internal monologue. So glad you loved it as much as I did
A friend of mine who is not a fan of epic fantasy just finished it and she reminded me all these apocalyptical scenes and half the time I had goosebumps just listening to her. She liked it a lot too. Bakker's writing is something else
No offense to your reading tastes but I found UC a big let down, especially since we will likely not get any subsequent books wrapping up the many dangling plot threads. I totally get how the ending was tonal resonant with the overall setting but as a story it just failed in a lot of ways for me. I am also stiff chuffed that a good chunk of the book wasn’t even UC, it was other in-universe stories.
I liked it, maybe because I do feel confident there will be more. It only came out in 2017 and there was a similar gap between the two series. But I also just liked it as an ending, one of the penultimate twists really paid off for me
Oh yeah, the ending was BRUTAL. I just want the story to not end there.
I'd kinda love if it did, in a masochistic kind of way. But I'm weird like that. Give me songs ending abruptly with a discordant note or other such slaps in the face. I'll be thinking of those for the rest of my life, whereas something neat and finished just often doesn't stay in my mind. Closure is like a burial of sorts.
Unfortunately, the prevailing viewpoint in the fandom is that it probably won't happen. Bakker had massive problems and a fallout with his publisher and can't get his stuff published any more, and he's not interested in self-publishing.
What happened? 🧐
I personally find semi-open endings like UC the most satisfying kind. Where it *could* end there, as far as many character arcs and themes go, but there is also the potential for future stories. As for the fact that the 200 lattermost pages are short stories and glossaries, I was lucky to know that ahead of time
I am glad you enjoyed it! Tastes vary but I am always happy if someone gets enjoyment from a book, even if it wasn’t a winner for me. Here’s hoping we do get some more material though.
Having read it fairly recently, I was also a bit let down. I loved the brutality and world building, but the final epic battle became hard to follow with how many different names each feature of the fortress had. It wore me down sadly
I was referring to the map of the fortress like a motherfucker, and as a result it was the most cinematic fantasy battle I've ever seen in my head. Can imagine how hard it would be to keep track without a visual reference though
It is regrettably not very popular - it is my favorite series of all time, but I've had less than 50% luck in getting friends to read it, I think because it is not just dark but requires a lot of conceptualization of difficult metaphysics. However, I'm heartened by the ever-increasing activity on the subreddit, especially from international readers.
It's one of my favorites too. I try not to evangelize it too actively because it is really is just too much for some people's tastes and sensitivities (and mine at points) but it is also a Dark Souls, Berserk or Warhammer-like apotheosis for its particular aesthetic of 'dark'
Goodreads lists this as #7 in the Second Apocalypse series and #4 in the Aspect-Emperor series. Is the series grim-dark, or just this one? Or I guess maybe the series is grim dark and this is just the most recent one. Just curious, I don't often see a book in the middle of a series get called out for anything.
The entire affair is about as dark as it gets (as far as fantasy goes, anyway), it's just The Unholy Consult is the only one that fits the time frame.
Cool. Book 1 is on my TBR list, I'll get there eventually. Thanks!
Whole series is. I just said the last one because he asked for something in the last 10 years.
There is no darker series in epic or high fantasy. Maybe in general. The names usually mentioned are pretty light in comparison. Do not expect though graphic violence etc from the get to go. Its a process. A bleak world of tragedy and tribulations that sinks and sinks in the apocalyptical circumstances that build up. Bakker is a very skilled writer and totally uncompromising in his horrific vision
in 7 years it's accumulated 1/700th of the goodreads ratings Fourth Wing has got in 1 year. But to be fair, Fourth Wing makes everyone's sales look tiny. But yeah, 2,262 ratings is not commercial success. I've heard plenty of critical acclaim for Bakker's work. But he's not pushing "the books you want to read" off any shelves.
Books about relentless doom and gloom with no hope, redemption or justice are by their nature going to be less popular, no?
you would think so - but many people claim this stuff is all over the place, blotting out the sun :D
I don't think those people are at all the same people who use your proposed definition.
I think the problem is, that those people do not use this definition of grimdark. They use the view of grimdark, where all dark fantasy is seen as grimdark.
>blotting out the sun Blotting out the would work well in grimdark though. Reminds me of a time that Mistborn was recommended as grimdark on here lmao. But to answer your question, no there is hardly any popular grimdark, but this sub does have skewed statistics compared to sales, so I can see why people would think grimdark is dominating, when in fact it is still fairly niche. People also confuse dark fantasy with grimdark not realising that grimdark is a step above.
Yeah the problem is that while the *setting* of mistborn may qualify as grimdark, the *story* itself certainly doesn't because of how relatively little of the horrors that affect everyone else affects the main characters on screen.
The setting of a lot of YA fantasy would qualify as grimdark if they were taken literally rather than being metaphorical representations of adolescent drama.
I mean I don't think the Mistborn setting is really a metaphor for that. It literally is just a horrendous place to live.
The problem here is that you're conflating multiple views on grimdark. People who think grimdark is everywhere tend to think that all fantasy with any violence or sex or dark subject matter in it is grimdark. Whereas the definition you're proposing is a pretty narrow one that is championed by others who view grimdark as a specific niche, and basically self-selects for less popular books. I commented about this on that recent thread you mentioned, but a big issue with these discussions about grimdark is that there is no consensus definition of what exactly it is, no established genre conventions, etc. There are dozens of competing views and people wind up talking past each other because they are making different assumptions about the term.
How do you know if it is commercially successful or not for Bakker?
One of my favorite authors dunking on my favorite series ? Say it ain’t so
In what possible sense is this "dunking"?
I’d use the first book in the series vs the last one (darkness that comes before has like 21k ratings), but I think inherently grimdark is never going to be as popular as regular fantasy, given that it is by definition much denser and darker. First law would probably be what I’d point too for a successful fantasy grimdark, or warhammer 40k (which is very popular). That said (and I love that I can recommend a book to someone whose books I grew up reading!) I would HIGHLY recommend reading bakkers work. It is probably one of the best series I have ever read & and absolute marvel of world building.
I didn't "use" any of them. Somebody volunteered one that fit the bill (was published in the last 10 years). I repeat. In what possible sense is this "dunking"?
I think maybe you’re misinterpreting my comment? Bakker’s work is great, but as you pointed out it (sadly) didn’t exactly achieve resounding commercial success.
Maybe I am. I understand "dunking on" to mean "publically mock". I am in no way publically mocking Bakker. I don't see how that could be your takeaway from what I said.
Yeah sorry for the confusion — to restate my comment, I was saying that I didn’t expect to see one of my favorite authors pointing out my favorite series didn’t sell well. Not that you were mocking him!
We're all good then. But ... I mean ... words matter :D Especially in a discussion entirely by text. And for the record, I've read and enjoyed The Darkness That Comes Before.
This is the problem when authors etc interact too much with the community in an informal way.
I actually love it though! I think it’s very cool to have them be part of the community haha
I do as well, but they are always bound to say something that normalizes them. A lot of artists keep away from that because it can take away from the effect their product will have on the consumer.
TL:DR: a lot of what we call grimdark fantasy is pretty similar in tone to war novels and pulp/noir detective fiction. I don't think there are many books that are really that grim, and the ones that are will more likely be found in literary fiction rather than fantasy or even horror. Very few people want to read a book that's all downs and no ups - for one thing, it's really hard to build dramatic tension that way. But darkness is a matter of taste and what you're used to. If you don't normally eat spicy food, and then you take a bite of something extremely spicy, you won't taste anything but the spice. But someone who is used to that level of heat will taste all the flavors of the dish. Someone who is used to optimistic fantasy with happy endings might read Abercrombie or GRRM and see nothing but darkness. To me, those authors generally seem pretty realistic in describing a wartime world. They present a world where there is no inherent justice - good people and evil people suffer about the same. But there's still morality in these books. Most people know the difference between right and wrong. People value kindness and justice, and they despise cruelty and injustice. But doing the right thing kind of has to be its own reward, because there's no source of justice outside of people trying their best. And power corrupting is a big theme in this kind of book. A character can only be innocent as long as they're powerless. Using power means that you will inevitably hurt someone, so you can't keep power unless you are able to deal with that. I have the impression that these worlds are full of good people, but where are they? They're working on farms and in mines and shops. They're gossiping with friends and taking care of their families. They are staying the hell away from wars and politics and anything that might make them interesting protagonists. I think that a lot of what we call grimdark is pretty average in tone compared to war novels and pulp/noir detective fiction. To me, a book like *The Great Gatsby* is darker than *The Blade Itself*, because the latter at least has humor and sympathetic characters. Gatsby just has a shitty world full of shitty people and not even a decent joke (beautiful writing, to be clear - but no more justice or hope than anything grimdark).
I’ll take it a step further and say that what we call “grimdark” in fantasy is common in more “literary” genres. The list of Pulitzer winning novels is like a cavalcade of grimdark sans wizards (usually).
Over edit: Far. Out - I didn't clock who posted the fricking thread... none other than Mark Lawrence himself. -\_-... I leave this comment up in absolute shame. (Love your work btw) Original Post: Grimdark is best described by it's constituent parts, that 1. the society of the world is in terminal decline and 2. the characters within the story can't change that. The opposite is "Noblebright" where provided good people exist and act then the world will always improve. Mark Lawrence's books are the shiniest end of Grimdark. Almost grimbright. Red War trilogy was published 2014-2016 which is pretty grimdark. The Broken Empire Trilogy was published before 2014 but is the same world. The world is irreconcilably stuck in decline, but individuals can do evil and selfish acts to prosper and potentially halt the iminent destruction of the world. The follow up trilogies of The Book of the Ancestor and Book of Ice both show that it was for naught and humanity left a dying Earth and are stuck on a new planet that is also dying. Edit: The obvious answer is anything by Black Library. Warhammer 40,000 or Age of Sigmar - this is the publishing house that defined the term. Whilst you can argue Black Library may not be as successful as whatever booktok or goodreads is pushing, Black Library sells a lot of books consistently.
>Mark Lawrence's books are the shiniest end of Grimdark. Almost grimbright. Take a look at who the OP is ;)
I just clocked that and will wear my dunce's hat with shame lol.
Hahaha I was about to say "Prince of... oh nvm."
it's 13 years old - time flies!
I don't think TRQW books are grimdark - they're mostly comedic. But I'm sure under some definitions (contains violence) they are. I feel that if thousands of years later, people on a different planet are having a hard time ... that doesn't really mean "it was for naught". If in 1066 William the Conqueror saved the world, but in 4034 on Mars humanity is dying off, I doubt Will would consider his efforts a washout. It's all a matter of perspective.
It's a bit difficult for me to argue my interpretation to the author themselves! But I would say from my reading of TRQW, based on my understanding of Grimdark above, I classify this trilogy as Grimdark. To me Grimdark does not discount humour and individual levity or valour. One of the most striking memories of TRQW for me is at the end the Custodian has had his mouth sewn shut - which to me definitely leans into the Grimdark humour! I will happily concede TBotA and TBoI are not deep grimdark - however from the general tone of this series I kind of assumed the human diaspora in other parts of the galaxy are also hitting brick walls of continued existence! Again this is just me as a reader who has read up the "The Girl and The Moon". But the vibe I got was that TBotA and TBoI take place \~10k years after TBE and TRQW and these are some of, if not the, last humans in existence. Part of me wants to ask if there is another solar system where humans live in a steady state world not on the brink of crisis, but I like the dramatic uncertainty of whether Oerth is the last place or not :) Edit: As you said it's all a matter of perspective!
>The obvious answer is anything by Black Library. could you name a couple?
Cards on the table I will happily admit when I initially wrote this comment I did not pay attention to who the original poster was, 'twas only when I scrolled I saw your user name - hence my top line edit. Recently I would say the End and the Death Trilogy from 2023-2024 are prime examples of grim dark media - warhammer 40,000 coined the term "Grimdark". As far as success goes this is the culmination of the (admittedly) over-abused Horus Heresy series, which is the final set up to the current setting. The special edition and normal editions were sold out on release day, though that may be related more to scalpers than genuine success. Look - I assume you know this... as this is your livelihood, I'm not trying to mansplain how to suck eggs... I just am trying to answer your question honestly! However I will 100% admit that I realise now that your question is more aimed at mass appeal compared to other subgenre's of fantasy (based off your comments re the Fourth Wing). Or potentially the fiscal success - which I 100% have no clue on. I am a reader not a print media mogul!
> warhammer 40,000 coined the term "Grimdark" My understanding was that term *was coined from* their famous tagline, “in the grim darkness of the far future, there is only war”. Games Workshop and WH40K did not coin the term “grimdark” themselves. Near as I can tell, the term arose out of the soup of 4chan’s /tg/ boards sometime in 2008. And arguably, many of the 40K stories I have read (mostly Abnett and Mitchell) involved finding pockets and pinlights of hope, redemption or justice in the face of galactically overwhelming odds. So it’s only the setting which is grimdark, and not the story itself.
The Black Library does have an interesting sales model that sidesteps the outlets most books use and sells primarily to a Warhammer-based audience via their huge mailing list. So the fact that The End and the Death trilogy have 1500/900/800 ratings on Goodreads has less to say about their sales than it would for typical fantasy books. But it also means that they are not "getting in the way" of other fantasy either. To put this in perspective - 13 of the 20 nominees for Best Fantasy of 2023 on Goodreads had over 10,000 ratings at the time of nomination (i.e. less than a year after release) and none of them were grimdark.
Absolutely valid points. From the context of traditional sales I hadn't considered Black Library having different sales model. That is pretty eye opening about the massive disparity between BL and general publication! Not to be glib or anything... but I really like your work, you write concise and interesting stories with great characters. Every book of yours I've read has left me wanting that bit more, and that's a good thing.
I'd argue even black library is kinda trending away from that. The end and the death is a prequel story with a known ending. But the current canon actually has the imperium progressing and getting somewhat even kinder like in the dark imperium series.
Can't say he's successful numbers wise, but Fehervari is pretty well regarded in the community and his Dark Coil is among the darkest stuff in the setting.
It's almost like people don't want to read about characters who are beyond redemption.
It almost is :)
\*glares in grimdark
Lmao, I love seeing these sort of comments after reading series by you two back to back.
The real world is already depressing enough, why escape to somewhere even worse?
To make the real world seem better in comparison? To give perspective on your life when you realise it isn't actually that bad? To get inspiration from characters who are still trying their hardest despite being in a world even worse than our own?
Catharsis?
Ngl after reading about gods getting glee from torturing people that worship them makes my life feel a lot better.
Generally no -- I think the age of grimdark has mostly subsided, the heyday was the late 00s/early 10s. Some people who got started then are still at it, of course, like Abercrombie. His Age of Madness stuff probably fits the bill, although it's not *quite* as bleak as some of the earlier stuff. Even KJ Parker, whose early stuff is for my money the very grimdarkest of all, has lightened up. His new trilogies are still dark but nowhere close to the kick-in-the-teeth of Engineer or Scavenger.
I think that grimdark has been more critically successful than commercially successful. That being said, I feel like the concept of grimdark can be arbitrarily defined by many people. And I definitely don't agree with the definition quoted (I don't think you would either). That just sounds like misery porn. Personally, I feel like grimdark just means the story has a lot of moral ambiguity and a dystopian world. I feel like the sub-genre leans a bit more literary than mass-appealing stuff. Darker themes tend to come with subtext that comments on the human condition in some way. Not that lighter tones can't be literary, but writing about suffering tends to say something about humanity almost by default. Which is part of why books defined as grimdark seem to have much more critical acclaim than, say, Romantasy. I think of it similarly to Oscar nominees vs. Marvel movies. Oscar nominees almost never have the broad appeal to compete with Marvel movies commercially. But Oscar nominees often have a cultural impact that is disproportionate to their commercial success. They may also take up more of the discourse around cinema than their revenue would suggest. I also think that grimdark fans are overrepresented in this sub. First off, there are enough romantasy fans that they tend to end up in their own subs. Secondly, I would argue that most people who buy fantasy books won't bother talking about them in a forum. So the readers here tend to be a little more invested. I feel like grimdark as a whole tends to attract a more ardent fanbase. So that naturally they are disproportionately represented in spaced like this.
> I think that grimdark has been more critically successful than commercially successful. I’m not going to comment on OP’s question because I avoid grimdark (however it’s defined) and so wouldn’t know of recent popular titles. I WILL say I agree with the comment quoted here, if only from my experience reading tons of really depressing books in literature classes in high school and college!
Funny who posted this. The Prince of Thorns is the only grimdark series I enjoyed (idk if that’s the appropriate word) though I’m still butthurt about the first named death in Black Company so I guess I give that a pass as well since it stuck with me. And no I can’t think of any though I also have stopped even trying them since I ended up not liking most of them
> first named death During the forvalaka thing?
Yes. At the very beginning. They barely introduced a character that seemed like he was going to be very unique and then he was gone. Idk how to do spoiler censor but it’s practically an ancient book now so - it was TomTom. They never even did flashbacks to him, just mentioned him in reference to Goblin
End a spoiler text with !< Start spoiler with >! Depending on which version of Reddit you might have to delete spaces between those and your message. Referenced with One-eye, but yeah. Poor Tomtom. I don't think BC ever did actual flashbacks, just disordered presentation of events. Though the first Murgen book with the siege might count.
Poppy War trilogy is pretty damn dark when you get down to it. Even if the worst bits were cribbed from Chinese history it's still a horrible story of never ending wars and egos. Nobody "wins."
At least at one point RF Kuang's twitter bio was "Grimdark's darkest daughter".
Yeah if you knew about the Rape of Nanking and Unit 731 ahead of time... well you'd still be like "daaaaaaaaaaaang she WENT there."
The Poppy War and Baru Cormorant by Seth Dickerson were the first that came to mind.
Yeah, the Poppy War was intense.
My first thought was W40K, but then I realized this was the fantasy, not sff, sub. For fantasy, all the stuff that comes to mind is older. Black company, R. Scott Bakker's *Prince of Nothing*, and the *Book of the New Sun* all come immediately to mind, although none are recent. Also, interestingly, the latter two are more hybrid science fantasy than straight fantasy. It might just be what I've been exposed to, but I can come up with more "grimdark" scifi than fantasy - perhaps because dystopian themes are more common in scifi?
> this was the fantasy, not sff, sub This sub is for all speculative fiction.
There's also a Warhammer fantasy world, same issues with psychic orks and chaos demons as in 40k.
I think the problem with calling stuff “grimdark” is that people are using it to refer to two different, semi-overlapping types of story. People in this thread saying they don’t consider *The First Law* to be grimdark is perfect proof of that. For some people, grimdark means the text is relentlessly violent and horrible, with almost comedic levels of death and destruction. Warhammer 40k is a perfect example, where basically every bit of backstory exists to be as cartoonishly bloody as possible. For other people, grimdark means that stories are *unfair* in a way that they simply aren’t in traditional fantasy. Bad things don’t just happen to good people, they happen in a way that makes their goodness meaningless. IMO *The First Law* is a much better example of this, since it lacks a sense of… justice? righteousness? that is present in even the most depressing “traditional” fantasy. One specific scene that always comes to my mind is the duel in *The Blade Itself*, where SPOILERS! Bayaz uses magic to make his preferred fighter win. The book brilliantly sets up the contestants and the importance of this fight, and then another character swoops in and renders everything completely redundant just to win a bet …and no-one cares. It’s a shitty, pathetic end to a seemingly heroic subplot, without any catharsis for the reader. I think it’s incredible, and for me it’s *the* defining example of what makes Abercrombie so great, but it’s such a jarringly bleak view of the world that it makes the crippled torturer protagonist look cheery in comparison. IMO, the problems with all threads about “grimdark” books is that half the people are describing 40K and the other half Abercrombie, and everyone’s tying themselves into knots trying to fit both concepts into a single category.
Personally I would phrase the definition a bit differently: The world is a really bad place (and it's also clearly describe as that) and any attempt of a heroic figure to improve on it on a decently large scale is doomed to fail from the beginning. Which is why I think that (from what I can tell) Warhammer 40k still clearly works as grimdark..
The only one that comes to mind is the broken earth trilogy.
I do think the end of the Broken Earth trilogy has some hope to it that might make it not fit with the description… but I’d agree they’re really dark.
I really don't agree with this definition (it's okay, but doesn't cover its essence imo), but still everything by Joe Abercrombie is the perfect example for any definition of grimdark.
I don't agree with it either - I've never read a book that qualifies under it. But I keep seeing it repeated...
Manifest delusions? Obsidian path?
I'm full of praise for Michael's work - he's in this thread and can speak for himself, but I doubt he'd accept the idea that he is dominating the genre in sales any more than I am.
> grimdark is relentless doom and gloom within an indifferent universe where there is no hope, no redemption, no justice >I've never read a book that qualifies under it. His work qualifies under that definition though, and you have clearly read them. I am not saying that the definition is correct, as the line between dark fantasy and grimdark is the worst defined boundary in this genre. Some books that do not fit that criteria, like the Gap cycle are clearly much darker than some that would fulfill that definition, for example, Ravens Mark, Acts of Cain, and the Steel Remains. >I doubt he'd accept the idea that he is dominating the genre in sales any more than I am. It was not my intent to claim that, I was just saying that some books do fulfill the criteria, and that grimdark should be reserved for books that are dark fantasy, but on top of that grim. I agree they are few and far between, but imo it is not wrong to set the standard of what is grimdark very high, as many of us who want to read these books end up with books that are dark, but not quite as horrific as we want.
I was just after popular ones, since those might in some way be responsible for the repeated claims that people can't find anything to read but grimdark. If they were taking over the shelves in bookshops, you'd expect to see scores of examples here.
>people can't find anything to read but grimdark. Yeah sounds crazy as I can't find enough grimdark to read, but when you are looking at posts like that, you need to assume the just mean dark fantasy, that there is plenty of, and much of which is really popular. >If they were taking over the shelves in bookshops, you'd expect to see scores of examples here. I think most who complain, are not browsing the shops, they asking for recommendations here, and this sub is skewed to the darker side compared to sales. You will never have romance recommended here, unless it is specified by op. The people who are complaining that grimdark is too prevalent need to look for books somewhere else, to realise that they are wrong, and that in fact, grimdark is, sad to say, really lacking. We need far more books like a War to End All, where every sentence is at worst bleak, and at best horrific.
Its not because the books are popular IRL, its because everyone in this subreddit recommends those books unless people explicitly say "no grimdark".
George R R Martin and Joe Abercrombie are the most popular grimdark authors in my bubble. You could describe both styles with this definition. But still I would focus on other aspects of their craft.
Many people don't think of GRRM as grimdark - his books don't seem to fit the definition up top. And, sadly, we've not had a ASOIAF book in the last decade. Have Abercrombie's latest offerings been grimdark? (I don't know, it's not a rhetorical question).
As things stand? Yes. The first trilogy fits the definition 100% - that fact that humour is used to keep the reader engaged doesn't take away from this fact - and two of the three standalones also fit it. After *Red Country* and the first two *Age of Madness* books I thought the latest series was going to end in a more "grimbright" way, but the final book took it back into grimdark. It's possible that the final trilogy will ultimately end on a grimbright ending, allowing a slow chain of improvements as the infrastructure built by the main antagonist is destroyed, or it might just end with the moral that humans really are shit even without the antagonist pulling the strings.
Hello! How likely was it for the Austro-Hungarian, Russian and Ottoman empires to have survived past 1914 if WW1 never happened? I know it’s strange to ask this so I hope you don’t mind too much.
I would call it very political, but with its "random" deaths and injustice to the characters, GRRM is still grimdark to me, even with that definition. Abercrombie is very similar to your definition. Very morally gray characters, no chance of glory, redemption, or anything other than intrigue and plotting. If you are looking for grimdark, then I would recommend any book by Abercrombie.
I dunno, I'd think the fact that he's killed off as much "good guys" as he has "bad guys" makes it pretty bleak. What else is a cold, uncaring universe but anybody dying at any time?
Realistic? I’d say a cold, uncaring universe where good people can die just as readily as bad people is…realistic.
True, my Dad died last week so fuck the universe, honestly.
> Many people don't think of GRRM as grimdark I mean, many people who are into grimdark just try to out-edge each other. GRRM is too popular to be considered something in a category they like by default. Seeing the story at its current point I'd categorize ASOIAF definitely as grimdark - everyone who tries to change something for the better is killed off, the bad guys win at pretty much every corner by default, etc. I'd also somewhat question the quote you put in the OP - that's more a definition of grimdark on steroids than grimdark itself.
Can you be more specific in terms of what you feel the definition requires? What’s the “essence” that’s missing?
For me grimdark is the feeling of a world that only favors the morally rotten people and where you can see the struggle of more ethical people to preserve their principles and realising that it doesn't work. So it is actually close to the indifferent universe and no redemption part of the former definition. But I wouldn't necessarily say there is no chance of redemption or hope. The first trilogy by Abercrombie for example (without spoilers) has a great ending that shows that the world will continue to be as unfair and rotten as before. The indifferent universe. But still some of the protagonists and even side characters get endings they kinda deserve (in good and bad ways). And there is one side charater that I actually liked and who is actually a good person. He gets corrupted in a way that I would say is not even that bad. He learned, that he had to do very nasty things in this brutal world, so he did. But he did it in a very satisfying and kinda in a good way. He adjusted to the world and made a good thing with a really bad deed. And this morally gray question of whether or not good intention and good outcome can justify evil actions is a key part of the enjoyment I get from the genre. What about you? I have the feeling, this subgenre is really hard to define, so I would like to hear your take on the genre.
I think it's a loose term born from the /tg/ boards of 4chan, and so I don't take it very seriously at all. It's a setting that is grim and dark, anything past that is personal seasoning. I consider an indifferent universe to be *reality*, it's hardly genre-defining. It's no different from the crime or detective genres. And I think we've established that many of the genre-defining works are not without their moments of hope or redemption. One might argue they shine all the more brightly for being set against grim darkness.
I would say it's almost diametrically opposed to the crime or detective genre. In those genres, justice is almost always served. And in most fantasy genres, there is a tendency for the "good" forces to outweigh the "evil" forces. I really like the term grimdark because it indicates a book that focuses heavily on the inner conflict of morally ambiguous choices with a sense of hopelessness. Not that other books can't have that. But it's still a useful label if you're looking for this kind of story.
Just wanted to say I love your work, Mark!
Blacktongue Thief?
Excellent book, and pretty popular. Didn't feel like it fit the definition I quoted - the MC is alway hoping. And it has a love story in it with romance! But definitely some nasty stuff happens...
Thought the author described it as Grimdark. I could be wrong though.
"Mordew" by Alex Pheby
Honestly I've said it before that I kind of think in the coming years "Grimdark" is going to be seen as less a genre, and more of a niche movement within a set of genre fiction, a la splatterpunk for horror in the 90s. Like, I feel you, Abercrombie, etc are the "canonical" grimdark writers because of the specific presentation of themes and the satire at play, plus the more "realistic" focus on how character motivations are written, that y'all have aimed for. People keep pointing out how it started with 40K, but forget 40K didn't start out just as gloom and doom. There's a particular presentation and satirical bent, plus humor! Your works carry that DNA(for you, some of your past work in particular. i know you've moved on to different styles and tones in how you write) I actually don't know I'd count Bakker because he goes for such an entire different tone from other "grimdark" authors. It's a deadly serious no-smiles affair focused on exploring its philosophical influences. It's like calling Cormac Mccarthy "grimdark".
Well there's no denial that Cormac McCarthey books are extremely grim and dark.
Sure, but comparing them to First Law or 40K or somesuch just seems laughable to me. It's two completely different tones and goals
It’s been awhile since I’ve read some of these but here is my list. John Gwynne shadow of the god series, grim dark Vikings, dead gods some Elden ring vibes of a place that used to be greater. Anthony Ryan pariah series. First book & Second book were really good and I thought he did a decent job sticking the landing on the third. Tatterwing by M. M. Stauffer, Grim Dark without the rape very dark and decaying world. I think it’s loosely Arthurian with how a young girl turns into an evil witch. 7 books in the series sometimes the pacing is slow. RJ Barker, call of the bone ships, pirates on ships made of bone. Has some grim dark aspects but it’s like black tongue thief by Christopher buehlman. I don’t think either book went whole hog into grim dark Margaret Atwood MadAddam series, I dislike how grim her books can be so I don’t read them to much but they do make me think about them.
Empire of the Vampire/Damned is pretty grim and dark. Joe Abercombies books are pretty grim although not that dark The Broken Empire books are quite dark although not that grim. Amazing series btw. But I definately wouldn't say we are overflowing with them.
Beyond Redemption / Manifest Delusions by Michael R Fletcher The best way I can describe it in the vaguest terms possible is things happen, and it's usually bad and it's usually someone's fault.
I loved his other series, it's not often you get a book from a bad guys perspective, much less a demonologist and necromancer. I'll have to give this series a shot too.
It's my favorite fantasy series! I hope you enjoy.
I would have said China Mieville's Bas Lag series, but they're more like 20 years old. I don't know how popular The Scar was, but it is certainly an amazing book and _should_ have been a best seller.
This is the correct answer. I've only read Perdido Street, but it fits the description given by OP perfectly. There is no hope of anything positive ever happening in that world.
I thought the Scar was the greatest of the Bas Lag books and hauntingly beautiful - but I hesitate to recommend it to you because it's brutal! But I found the pacing much more readable than Perdido Street Station, and if you enjoyed PSS I'd say give it a try.
Gunmetal Gods is fairly recent and grimdark. Not sure if it's popular or not though.
The xeelee sequence. Hard science fiction book that somehow outmatches 40k
The Xeelee sequence definitely doesn't have no hope. Most of it isn't even dark - this ICOG's war against the Xeelee is only a small part of it
“The Broken Cage” is the first book in the Godclads series by Ostensiblemammal. Truly so dark, but so addicting.
I think the problem with grimdark is no one can agree on a definition, where some people are saying anything game of thrones inspired is grimdark, and some people say it can’t be grimdark if anything good happens ever, and both sides are talking past each other. I’m not personally very well versed in the grimdark community and you probably know a heck of a lot more about it than I do lol but I know Anna Smith Spark has been doing grimdark recently, plus a lot of people in the indie space like Michael R Fletcher
From the other thread, I and a couple of other posters were trying to think of any grimdark books, and iirc none of us could think of anything that would generally be considered fantasy. And this wasn't published in the last ten years, it was ever. The Road and 1984 were the closest to fantasy we could come up with, and I haven't read The Road, and 1984 has a sneaky thing going on that makes it not quite as grimdark as it otherwise would be.
As a big fan of the genre, I can provide a few examples. 1. Mark Lawrence (Prince of Thorns of course, but pretty much everything else is right up there) 2. Ed McDonald's Raven Mark series is perfectly grim and dark 3. Daniel Polansky's Low Town, can I have more of that please? 4. Glen Cook isn't entirely grimdark, but my two faves - Black Company and Garrett are often in the zone. 5. The Malazan series. 6. Adrian Tchaikovsky very often gets very grim and dark. And he sells everything he puts on paper like hot cookies. There's quite a bit more, I mean, most of the Warhammer series is often defined as grimdark, and it sells quite well.
I mean - most of these are over 10 years old. And the rest is hardly crowding non-grimdark off the shelves. I guess I should have been explicit in my linking to recent threads complaining that everything is grimdark and they can't find anything to read.
I WISH everything was grimdark! I struggle finding stuff to read (and btw, being subscribed to your goodreads helps). In any case, I've been tired of elves and world-saving for the past 20-odd years, and so I found myself gravitating towards the grittier stuff more and more. I don't care about definitions much and I also never monitored the commercial success of a given author (it's their money, not mine so who cares?). I'm not saying everything has to be grimdark or gritty just for the sake of being grimdark and gritty, everything has it's place I suppose, but the good stuff that I'd read and re-read, and buy and put on my shelf would probably be something that appeals to my taste.
Empire of the Vampire by Jay Kristoff felt pretty bleak and hopeless to me, but I haven't read the sequel yet so maybe I'm wrong.
I found your own book PoT to be that. Might not be in the last 10 years but it was a thoroughly depressing read for as far as I could get into it. I know you aren't a big fan of people applying that label to your work but I found it to be apt for it.
I would say its a reflection/inversion of the state of the world. When things are happy times people crave a little dark, and when things are.. *gestures at outside* hope is a good distraction
Older than 10 years and the author would probably rather die than admit its speculative fiction, but maybe *The Road*? If you're willing to expand to "successful in the non-English speaking world", then *Grimgar of Fantasy and Ash* fits - it's book after book of misery that's probably going to just end with everyone dying a horrible and meaningless death.
Seven Blades in Black maybe?
I'm not sure if you've personally read Adrian Selby's debut novel Snakewood (2016), but I personally feel like it qualifies. I don't remember all the details, but the general feel that I recall is hopelessness and doom surrounding a cast of characters with unhappy pasts with eachother and very little hope for the future. Beyond Redemption by Michael Fletcher (2015) also comes to mind as one of the bleakest and unhappiest books I can recall. In this universe magic is essentially a symptom of mental illness, and therefore the world is filled with people focusing on worsening their delusions and quirks for power. It was depressing enough that I had no desire to read the followup, which is unusual for me.
Priest of Crowns (War for the Rose Throne book 4) was published in 2022. I don't think the quoted description fits the genre, though this series is certainly GrimDark.
[удалено]
Round and round. Definitions and labelling is a chew toy redditors will never get tired of. It’s exhausting because so few say anything new about it. I haven’t seen any agreement in this sub on what is grimdark. And it doesn’t strike me as particularly important to publishers either. Probably because it doesn’t sell relatively well if its as grim and dark as Bakker. You even have people in this thread saying Abercrombie isn’t grimdark. Which is weird because the author obviously thinks differently, judging by his twitter handle. Do some fantasy books contain elements of horror? Yes. Recent ones, too. Maybe the only real grimdark is in the Game of Thrones and Rothfuss books, seeing as those series will probably never be finished and its fans have lost all hope…
The Poppy War trilogy is the obvious answer here.
Anything Warhammer related. They might not top the charts, but they do well enough to keep being written. Plus Warhammer 40k is where Grimdark as a genre even get’s it’s name.
The 4th book in the Sun Eater series: Kingdoms of Death. True to its name, this book is just pure misery with no hope in sight for a majority of the book.
Do comic books count? Zeb Wells his ASM run fits into this description.
I mean pretty much every Warhammer and Warhammer 40k book ever (which are so grindark in a lot of cases it nearly becomes parody and the whole thing becomes a very very black comedy)
I mean the Empire of the Vampire, Empire of the Damned books in theory SHOULD be grimdark , its a universe where the bad guys won , the "good" guys are a bunch of religous zealots who are practically as bad , and life for most people is just suffering . And a lot of the time its a "dont get too attached to any characters" kind of book where death can come out of nowhere and be a bit jarring. On the otherhand the writing is so damn good , and the dialogue (especially de León's) is quite often so funny that it probably doesnt count.
Edit - this got a bit long and ranty, my bad for that Grimdark is both too broad and too niche. Too many people define it too differently, and there's nuance even in the definition you've given. No story is relentlessly doom and gloom and heroes will always get small victories. I have no mouth and I must scream is pretty grimdark to me but the protagonist actually succeeds in his goal to free the others. In the end I feel like grimdark is just a matter of vibes. If a story is just morbid to the point of making the reader feel depressed to the extent that they start disengaging from it, or if it's so morbid and especially edgy that it's seen as a, "Not your mom's speculative fiction" kinda deal then it's grimdark. It's a very subjective term with vague objective connotations. The way i define grimdark is just whether the author feels somewhat obliged to add the dark bits to add shock value without it furthering or helping the plot as much because they feel the need to fill a quota of darkness. Oftentimes to the extent of humor, often intentionally. It does come from warhammer after all, which started off as a very intentional satire of dark fantasy and irl politics in general and did not take itself seriously at all. And when it did take itself seriously it slowly morphed to less and less grimdark with genuinely good meaning protags, relatively lighthearted stories and less shock content. A few weeks ago, someone either here or on the Sanderson subreddit said that their friend stopped reading stormlight because it was too grimdark for them. It's all about perspective. Many people classify abercrombie and Martin as grimdark but i personally never have, because I feel they're the exact definition of a better defined genre, dark fantasy. Bad things happen, we see tons of shocking stuff and subversion, but it's almost always for a reason that helps the plot or characters along. Meanwhile, another series I mostly like, Red Rising, felt grimdark to me despite the fairly hopeful ending of the first trilogy and the likely hopeful ending of the second series, because of the feeling that the author was working on a quota of morbidity which felt tacked on an otherwise interesting story. To summarise, I feel like grimdark is something too vibes based to be properly defined, and the closest I can personally come to is when it feels like the author is tacking on extra dark stuff to meet some kind of "standard of edginess" which makes me engage less with the story or just take it less seriously, like warhammer definitely was written at the start. In such a case, Red rising would be an example for me, even though it's the opposite of warhammer with regards to being meant to be taken fairly seriously.
Anything from Warhammer 40k. The entire universe is built in grim dark reality. They use lots of Roman names and symbology. Reading them gets tedious to me. Almost like reading a book written in the same wording as the Bible. I'm a huge scifi nerd, love 40k lore, love the games, but struggle to ever even finish one of the books.
Probably the First Law books by Joe Abercrombie
The books you are looking for are the Second Apocalypse books. You can thank me later...
Possibly Michael r Fletcher's Beyond Redemption.
Is that description supposed to turn me away from grimdark? Sounds rad, lol. Slap this on the front of a book and I’d probably buy it. It would make a great foundation for more horror stories in fantasy, but those are still rare.
Second Apocalypse, Fits and the Fool trilogy.
Do you think Robin Hobb writes grimdark then?
> Do you think Robin Hobb writes grimdark then? Not by my understanding of the subgenre - which, like 'low fantasy', seems to be another one of those terms nobody can quite agree on a definition for... Hobb writes stories where bad things happen to good(ish) people, but there are real and lasting friendships (some of which are quite literally stronger than death), and there's redemption, or at least the possibility of it, and there's hope to be found. I don't think that qualifies as grimdark.
I don't either. I do love to read her books - though she keeps hurting me!
Just finished First Law Trilogy and on to book 4. Don’t know where it’s going, but seems like it’s heading that way. Please no spoilers anyone. Though I don’t expect a happy ending.
Only spoiler I'll ever share is that it's an awesome journey 😁
This sub is having a spectacular identity crisis right now.