Am I the only person in this forum....

Sure. And so-called literary fiction often has elements of the mystical or fantastic, that people would associate with genre. Look at 2666 or One Hundred Years of Solitude. When elements of fantasy and magic occur extensively in literary fiction, it's just called magic realism instead of fantasy.

And let's not forget that the early great epics of human literature and poetry are fantasy.

 

Salman Rusdie too. Great writer who mixes the Literary with the fantasy.

 

I love to read fantasy novels, but I haven't been able to write them very well, I prefer to write mystery stories that take place in bygone years. Lately I have been toying around with some sci-fi ideas.

Again, your story is only as deep and complex as you wish to make it. You don't have to create a language or fictional age (See also : Conan the Barbarian, Lord of the Rings) to give your story, fantasy or otherwise, depth, but the choice is yours if you choose to make it.

 

/slowclap
We all can access previous posts too, thank you.

Depending on the story they want to tell, fantasy writers can choose freely whether or not they want to do any research.

What's the problem?

 

Yes.

Angela Carter as well, who was a friend of Rusdie's (he wrote some nice things about her in a volume I have). Literary genres are convenient, but let's not forget they are artificial categorizations. The body of human literature is not so easily categorized.

 

Good to see another Bolaño fan around here - you might see from my avatar that I'm quite taken with the man. That said, I wouldn't classify 2666 in the magical realist category at all, because it doesn't really fit with the genre's conventions and the elements of the fantastic are really barely present. Also, it should be remembered that Bolaño despised magical realism as a movement.

Now, while I think there's a little silliness to the idea of magical realism as its own genre (in that, as I said, I believe genre should simply be ignored), I also think that there's a clear difference between most magical realist works and fantasy works. In most fantasy I have read, magic is to one degree or another systematized - it's something a particular academy of wizards can do, sometimes behaving almost like a natural force. In magic realist works, magic is magic, if that makes sense.

But yes, basically, I agree with you.

 

I agree that 2666 is not magic realism. I was using that as an initial example and then moving to a separate point, and did not mean to tie the two together. I enjoyed 2666 a great deal, and I just started The Savage Detectives.

I thought that was who was in your avatar, but I wasn't entirely sure.

I agree with what you say about magic realism here, but there are also works of genre fantasy where magic is approached in the same way, as a natural force and not part of some human system. Some of these works end up classified as magic realism, some as fantasy. In some cases it seems to depend simply on who the author is and whether they are considered a writer of "literary" fiction or not.

 

And how do you make the "n" with the tilde?

 

My writing is set in the modern-day world, but there are a few surreal aspects in my stories. I prefer to read literary fiction.

 

The Savage Detectives is just about my favorite novel ever (and a great deal more readable than 2666), so I think you're in for a treat.

I don't know if this would work with Windows, but on a mac, you hit the alt key and n at the same time, then take your finger off the alt key and tap n again.

 

On windows press the windows logo key + R; this brings up the run dialog box, then type in 'charmap' may you fly~

Assuming you are using non-windows, try finding one online or for your OS.

 

Don't knock sci fi. I'm huuuuge fan of Doctor Who. I have been since I was three!

I don't write fantasy. I primarily write historical fiction and modern day fiction. The one I'm working on now is modern day with a slight twist to it.

I enjoy writing about things that would (most likely) never be possible in real life. I find it exciting.

I also enjoy historical fiction because it's fun to put my own spin on the past and delve into the rich history of mankind.

As for sci fi. I just love it. I always have always will. It's fun to have free reign to imagine the impossible.

 

I have no problem with fantasy. I write science fiction a lot, and historical fiction sometimes - anything, in fact, other than the here-and-now. I'm bored with the here-and-now.

But I think this point needs to be made: A great deal of fantasy is simply a variant of earlier fantasy. I see people in this thread saying that fantasy gives the writer infinite possibilities, and of course it does, but then why do so many fantasy writers want to write about the same things over and over? Why do so many fantasy stories involve elves and dwarves, or vampires and werewolves, or dragons, or other done-to-death beings? Why do we have so many members of this forum asking questions like "is it ok for dwarves to not live underground and be miners?" or "is it ok for vampires to survive sunlight?" or some such? Why does everybody think that fantasy must involve heroes with swords? Higher technology is not allowed? Why does all magic have to involve waving a wand and saying a couple of words in a language nobody understands?

I have no problem with fantasy. I have a problem with fantasy that's the same damn thing over and over. Sure, you can say fantasy has infinite possibilities, but if nobody exploits them, it's dull. If every writer uses the same possibilities, it's dull. If everybody imitates Tolkien or Rowling or Meyers, it's dull.

Fantasy writers, PLEASE dazzle us with original creations!

 

^ totally agree!

I find pretty much all the fantasy books I read entirely predictable. Which actually I guess is a reason I write it - so that I can do something more original and unpredictable in a genre that is overrun with similar stories.

 

Stergeon's Law: 90% of fantasy is crap, but 90% of ANYTHING is crap.

Exactly.

I understand not being interested in fantasy. I don't understand disparaging it as being inferior, or somehow indicative of less love or appreciation of the real world.

To create a truly wonderful fantasy world, you have to find the real-world fascinating.

And a work set in a purely fictitious world can take even more.

If it's set in the real world, you just need to research how things are/were at that place and time.

In a fictitious world, you need to research deeply enough so that you can make the differences make sense, while keeping the world's logic internally consistent.

 

Actually, I would say a lower percentage of published literary fiction is crap, simply because it's harder to get a literary novel published (one is expected to have prior writing credentials).

And it's Sturgeon.

One thing that always bothers me: why are science fiction and fantasy lumped together? I mean, I can't see any similarities between the works of, say, Phillip K. Dick and those of Tolkien.

 

I don't know but nerds keep going on about both.

 

Well, give how obsessed some people (particularly those who bash both genres) seem to be about whether something is set in the real world or not, it doesn't surprise me that they get lumped together.

 

Honestly though. I think it's because the fans are so closely linked.

 

Plus, is there anything wrong with writing a fantasy with sci-fi sprinkled in and vice versa?

 

^ How can you do that?

 

What surprises me is that it seems that fantary is more popular among writers than readers...

 

It's difficult. Very.

 

And among the young. A lot of amateur writers seem to think it is they who will write the next Lord of the Rings, or Dark Tower, or Generic Fantasy Series #7.

 

Ambition is not a sin.