tinyjo: (Default)
Emptied of expectation. Relax. ([personal profile] tinyjo) wrote2009-08-31 11:55 am
Entry tags:

(no subject)

Is magic the defining element of fantasy? Discuss.

[identity profile] coalescent.livejournal.com 2009-08-31 11:01 am (UTC)(link)
If it is, where does that leave Gormenghast?

[identity profile] grahamsleight.livejournal.com 2009-08-31 11:03 am (UTC)(link)
You've been reading too much Clute! :-p

[identity profile] coalescent.livejournal.com 2009-08-31 11:14 am (UTC)(link)
Did you just have "track comments" on this post on the off-chance? :-p

[identity profile] grahamsleight.livejournal.com 2009-08-31 11:15 am (UTC)(link)
No, believe it or not.

[identity profile] tinyjo.livejournal.com 2009-08-31 11:07 am (UTC)(link)
Haven't read it but I'm happy to take it as a counter example. I was thinking of ways to group fantasies for the kids in my class and realised I couldn't come up with any which didn't have some form of magic in them.

[identity profile] tinyjo.livejournal.com 2009-08-31 11:24 am (UTC)(link)
Interesting. That in some ways mimics the categories we came up with and in some ways not (mainly because the display is for a different purpose and a very different audience than the book, I think).

[identity profile] grahamsleight.livejournal.com 2009-08-31 11:02 am (UTC)(link)
Impossibility-within-currently-known-laws-of-nature is the defining element of fantasy, and magic is the most prominent (but not the only) presentation of that.

[identity profile] coalescent.livejournal.com 2009-08-31 11:14 am (UTC)(link)
I think that's probably what my sleep-addled brain wanted to say.
ext_36143: (Default)

[identity profile] badasstronaut.livejournal.com 2009-08-31 11:15 am (UTC)(link)
I'd always thought fantasy was about the setting, in that the setting was an imagined context. That may or may not involve magic. I'm also inclined to think science fiction is a subset/flavour of fantasy though, and lots of people have disagreed with me on that.

[identity profile] tinyjo.livejournal.com 2009-08-31 11:25 am (UTC)(link)
I waver between that view and not. It is interesting that one of the things that I've noticed tends to happen when trying to put a book on either side of that line is that the supernatural elements are examined as to whether they're magical or scientific and that's used as a divider.
ext_36143: (Default)

[identity profile] badasstronaut.livejournal.com 2009-08-31 11:30 am (UTC)(link)
Tricky though, because sometimes the only difference between magic and science is whether or not you understand how it works.

[identity profile] pomma-penses.livejournal.com 2009-08-31 12:23 pm (UTC)(link)
The Anne McCaffery books dragon books don't have magic, just giant telepathic dragons.

[identity profile] elyssa.livejournal.com 2009-08-31 04:29 pm (UTC)(link)
I was just thinking about that.

[identity profile] twic.myopenid.com (from livejournal.com) 2009-08-31 10:29 pm (UTC)(link)
I am developing a theory, in much the same way one might a gallstone, that fantasy is different from science fiction in that it doesn't try to convince you its world is plausible. Or at least doesn't have to.

It's not that fantasy worlds aren't plausible, it's that a fantasy can just dump its world in front of you and go "there it is". An SF story has to earn your belief.

SF is tackled with a hovercraft of disbelief; fantasy gets a flying carpet.

This is not helpful.