Well, it depends on what you're looking at. On the more "literary" or "artsy" end of fantasy—the kind of stuff that ends up in Lady Churchill's Rosebud Wristlet
, for example, or the theme-based book series Leviathan
—the rules are far less obvious or set in stone, though one can
easily make jokes about the stereotypical writing style
of such works, just as one can for a lot of published "literary" or "experimental" short (and long) fiction. High and urban fantasy in their classical senses, however... yes. They have a bigger market, ergo more of a formula for success, so there's a bit more of an obvious "following the leader" character to certain writers.
Science-fiction has a different set of expectations attached to it now, especially after all the madness that happened in the genre in the late '60s, which really didn't
happen to the same degree in fantasy: Where science-fiction had any number of luminaries and ushers into, alternately, "respectability" or "the cutting edge," fantasy... hasn't had them, at least not on the scale of a Bradbury or an Asimov. (And no, I'm not forgetting that Bradbury wrote basically every
kind of sf; rather, I am saying that in one corner of it, he became a god rather than a hero.)
Another good point, though perhaps not universally true.
edited 19th Mar '12 6:36:28 PM by JHM