Once more into the breach!

I just finished listening to Tarzan of the Apes by Edgar Rice Burroughs on Audible.com. It reminded me of King Soloman's Mines by Sir. H. Rider Haggard which my mother had recommended to me a could years ago, which is also on my list to read. These stories fit under what is commonly referred to as adventure fiction. Written in 1885 King Soloman's Mines is considered the first English adventure novel, but it was by far the last. Even today, our cinema has a rich tradition from The Thief of Baghdad (1924) to Indiana Jones(1981-2008), Prince of Persia (2010), and The Adventure of Tintin (2011). Most of these are based on works of literature, notably the first and last. The Thief of Baghdad was based on One Thousand and One Nights also known as the Arabian Nights Tales (published in English in 1706) while Tintin was originally published in French in 1929. So adventure stories have been going on for well over 100 years.

It occurs to me that there may be confusion about what constitutes an adventure story as opposed to a thriller, action, or other broad genre. While doing a search for "Adventure novels" I came across this list from  The Art of Manliness blog of "essential adventure novels." I've read 11 and am familiar with 19 others. I was grateful to see Kipling, Tolkien, Verne, Cussler, and Crichton which again shows the century long span of the genre. But does it answer our question about what constitutes adventure over other genres? Not really as Jurassic Park is considered a great work of science fiction and The Lord of the Rings is used as a common definition of fantasy. I googled "Adventure genre definition" and liked this particular one from Writer's Digest University:

Adventure Story: A genre of fiction in which action is the key element, overshadowing characters, theme and setting. ... The conflict in an adventure story is often man against nature. A secondary Plot that reinforces this kind of conflict is sometimes included. In Allistair MacLean's Night Without End, for example, the hero, while investigating a mysterious Arctic air crash, also finds himself dealing with espionage, sabotage and murder.

 Because adventure stories are based on action and adventure they are highly susceptible to genre blending. I think many people would not actually think of their being an adventure genre as much as they think of adventure stories within a genre. However, there are some stories out there that are best described by Adventure - Indiana Jones being at the top of the list. It's not a war story, it's not horror or even rally paranormal/supernatural. Mystery doesn't cover it either. There may be elements of those troupes but really it is all about the adventure with everything else being secondary. For instance, does the character of Indiana Jones ever really develop over the course of the movies? At the end of The Last Crusade is he really any different then at the beginning of Raiders of the Lost Ark? Not really. Yes, he has accomplished some things, reconciling himself with his father being one, but has he reached a higher level of self. Nope! He's still the same kick-butt, wicked smart, super awesome guy from when he ran away from the boulder and shot the guy with the big sword. It's all about the adventure!

This idea that the adventure reigns supreme and that character development is not as critical gives us our classic, iconic, heroes. These are the people who are good at what they do. If they fail it is because the circumstances, perhaps even the Gods, are against them. But despite failure, their competency and consistency helps them rise again and overcome whatever it was that denied them victory the first time. They may overcome flaws and weaknesses along the way, but their inherent nature is unchanged. They are heroic because that is who they are. I recently finished listening to Dodger by Terry Pratchett, one of my favorite authors. As I listened to the story (slight spoiler), I started to become surprised that everything Dodger did worked. Everything he put his mind to he was able to accomplish. He did develop in other ways and I believe that you could say there was some character arch, but everything worked out. It didn't make me care about his character any less, nor did it significantly diminish the tension, it simply made the story about the adventure and less about the character. I believe this is what is often called a plot-driven story. Many think that plot driven stories are not as good as character-driven stories, but I believe that's a matter of taste. The classic and popular  adventure stories seem to have done a good job of it though. So kick-back, get comfortable, and enjoy the ride.