OK, I guess I have to argue for you guys, myself. Logic and reason are hard for most people to use properly, and the arguments thus far are just not persuasive enough to sway me. Has any of you thought of trying pathos? "123...., you're assuming that most people have profound issues dealing with the technicalities of reality. This couldn't be further from the truth. They recognize adding fictional elements make the story fantasy and not reality, but its not important when we consider the prime benefit, which is not the convenience of getting to make the rules, but rather the following thing. Most people who like fantasy simply find reality tiresome, on occasion, and would prefer to read their preferred dramas in a fictional setting. They care about the same exact things you do, they just need a break. Fantasy is about getting a fresh of breath air, not really escapism." If any of you had said something like that, I would just feel bad and even apologize, regardless of how true it is.
Hi, I think the divide between sci fi and fantasy has become less certain over the years. In essence they are both very imaginitive fields of fiction allowing the author great flexibility, and the key difference has been that sci fi has always attempted to premise its stories on some form of scientific basis. Not always well though, it must be said. But authors have been pushing the bounds in both genres. For sci fi the most fantastical it has become has been in Star Wars in my view. Which can easily be seen as a war of wizards and magical kingdoms. There is no science at all in the explanations for how things happen. And there are few explanations. As for "The Force" and the laughable speech about mitichlorians - can anyone else mispronounce mitochondria and then call it magic? But equally all the sci fi works about mutants with magical powers seem to span this same divide. Fantasy has been pushing the boundaries in two distinct areas, the first being steampunk (and the associated gunpowder punk etc) where Victorian science aquires some sort of non-sensical magical properties. The other area it has been pushing it is in urban fantasy where writers have been steadily trying to overlay magical realities on the real world and marry the two. Personally I don't find the overlap bothersome. I think it comes down instead to deciding what genre a work really is on an author by author and sometimes book by book basis. Hard science fiction and traditional fantasy are still going to be worlds apart, Tolkein and Asimov separated by a divide that cannot be spanned. But I'll read them both happily. (And write them too.) Cheers, Greg.
I suppose it was human error to leave the theme and metaphorical idea completely out of the second example, even though you intentionally included them in the first...? When you cook the books like that, of course there's going to be a difference - one you made by not comparing two stories of equal intention. Because you haven't presented any argument to validate that point. That's why we can't understand it. You're just repeating blanket statements instead of explaining why you believe in them. Fantasy is not real. We all get that. What we don't get is why you think a work of fiction has to be as true-to-life as some cold algebra equation. Why write fantasy if I want to deal with serious issues? Because they can be expressed in subtle ways that addressing them head-on simply cannot produce, for one. As an example, I could write a story about bigotry, racism, homophobia, or any social prejudice...or I can write X-Men. Same themes. Same message. COMPLETELY different levels of subtlety, as well as pure entertainment value. One would be on-the-nose and preachy, the other would actually be fun to read. Yet both deliver the same exact message and tackle the same exact ideas and themes. You are only devaluing one of the two because it has mutants and mutants aren't real. The story without mutants works perfectly fine, but ceases to function once you tell it with mutants as a metaphor, even though the themes, message, and ideas remain unchanged. That is literally your whole argument, which is completely and utterly absurd.
This might be far-fetched, but here I go: There has been a highly motivated neo-positivist movement occurring in the past several years (decades perhaps) that the younger generation has taken to heart and blocked out everything else. Religions are for the ignorant, Science is king and Evolution the queen. Why do we write? Why do we tell stories? To Escape! We are so entrenched in the ontological aspects of metaphysics that we ignore the rest. There is no more Santa, Easter bunny, God, or monsters under your bed. Everything in a younger person's mind has a scientific equation tacked to it. If everything in life an be explained away by math and science, where else are you going to turn for escape? A world all your own. A world where you are free of the shackles that bind you. Shackles that take away your being and replace it with an algorithm. Humans yearn to be free; to be unique. With that uniqueness being explained away, I see no other outcome but an explosion into the unexplainable.
I like that explanation, the escapist one. We can see this in the schools today, where the push is for STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics), with the implication being that the humanities are inferior. While we can argue about the merits of that thrust in education to great lengths, the focus of school, and testing, has shifted to a basic understanding of reading as a method (FACT based texts mostly), writing with a purpose (non-fiction, opinion about a serious real world issue) and of course the science and math courses. Since kids spend inordinately large amounts of time bored in school doing those things, they may yearn to escape to the realm of fantasy. And it helps that so many books are catering to that desire today, complete with movie versions for the less literate, who get to share in that joy as well.
Why must every serious issue be tackled seriously? I agree that many fantasies are pure escapism, but that doesn't mean there cannot be a serious subtext to them. Someone could write a story about the abject poverty of a fantastic realm, and the ridiculousness of fighting with knights in shining armor and shields against other knights when everyone is starving, and have that stand as quite a comparison to a modern day country with abject poverty still willingly participating in elaborate and overdone wars. A serious issue tackled in a creative way, without making anyone feel like it picks on them individually. For the simple minded, they get the knights with their quarrel. For the more complex, they see it for what it shows.
Most young writers have little life experience e.g. of working, changing emotions, observing children grow up, the passage of time etc; their memories are just of childhood years. They are easily swayed by current fashion and TV/computer games--at the moment, fantasy dominates heavily. On the downside this might result in fantasy-style writing which lacks depth, and cancels out the advantage they have in being "of the market" he or she is writing for. I'm not saying that no younger writers have had significant things happen to them, I'm just making a very general observation. Also, I think writers who spend a significant amount of time on the internet may be more interested in computers, sci-fi etc, but less likely to get down to the actual grind of producing a publishable manuscript, so there is a higher proportion of writers interested in fantasy on forums. I think instead of jumping on a bandwagon young writers should read--extensively--good writers from every era and remember that Harry Potter was original in its day. They would be better off doing something different now, or at least trying to find a different angle. Agents must be growing so sick of yet another 3 million word fantasy trilogy hopeful.
I write fantasy/science fiction for exactly the reason debated here on the last couple of pages. I see the world as a hellhole. And I want to make a difference. I want my writing to provide an escape into a different world, one where things happen that could only happen in dreams here on Earth, but I still want to tackle the issues we are plagued with on our planet today. A global economy in decline, pollution, greed, poverty, racism, sexism, questions of abortion, euthanasia, drug use, suicide, death. These are all important and serious issues, but I want to tackle them in a different environment, one where the reader will understand the issue without being biased with their own, often narrow, view of the real world, but rather view it with fresh eyes through my characters to see other viewpoints, and perhaps even understand them. I personally think fantasy or science fiction is a great way of promoting thought that would otherwise not occur when we are all trying to be serious and appeal to logic and reason to get our viewpoint and ideas across.
You're thinking like a philosopher, I can't help that. Considering x-men, maybe if mutants existed, we should be scared of them, rather than accept them.I dont know. It's absurd to think that that would be a good case for racism in the real world. Sorry, its my opinion to treat topics in the flesh, considering things case by case, rather than turning them into philosophical abstractions, where lines are blurred and ideas are muddled. Again, its fine if you want to provoke. But if you want to prove, you're using the wrong genre. I believe in seeing data and coming to my own conclusion. Writing a story that mirrors racism in reality allows me to take my own look and form my own conclusion. Writing a story about men with claws and lasers shooting from their eyes does not allow me that same serious look. How could it? Its not EXACTLY the same thing... You want to cover all problems into simple, gross, ideas. I believe in subtleties. Every issue is different, and should be treated cases by case. I have seen nothing but blanket statements, with no backing, from the other side, in fact, I think I brought up that accusation (maybe not against you), first.
[MENTION=35652]123456789[/MENTION] You're just repeating what you've said before time and time again. So let me save you some time by summarizing your arguments. 1. Fantasy isn't real 2. Fantasy isn't credible, because it isn't real 3. Two works (one fantasy, one any other genre) featuring the exact same story with the exact same level of writing and addressing the exact same themes will show the non-fantasy work to be better...because it's real. The problem with your views, as pointed out by sherrif woody and several other users on this site, is that NO FICTIONAL STORY IS REAL. Hence why it's called "fiction" (you should look up the definition). Lizard people and time travel are no more real than dragons. The ONLY difference is your preference. But you don't view it this way, you honestly view your opinion as if it's fact. You view your reading fantasy once before as proven evidence that it's inferior. Sorry, but I've read sci-fi once before (as a child. Was a huge fan of Michael Chrichton) and have not gone back to it since. This does not prove the genre is inferior, it only proves that I do not prefer it. You're reminding me of an ignorant high schooler trying to prove why a certain genre of music is inferior to another. You cannot prove preference.
[MENTION=54545]archerfenris[/MENTION] Let me suggest that continued argument on the point will be fruitless. As you said, you can't prove preference. You also can't expect someone who insists on framing preference as some kind of objective proof to be swayed by anything you say. At some point it makes more sense to move on (my own opinion being that the time for moving on has been reached and exceeded).
It occurs to me that it is the overlaps between sci fi and fantasy that make the adherents of one so prickly toward those of the other. I can't imagine devotees of any other genres having at one another in the way that we've seen in this thread. I'm reminded of a line from one of my favorite films, "Pastime" - "It doesn't matter how good somebody else is; it doesn't make you any better, it doesn't make you any worse." Feel free to continue the discussion, but I want to thank everyone who probed the question that I initially asked. Food for thought.
I'm sorry Ed but I don't think that's true. I'm a big fan of the horror genre, and that overlaps with both fantasy and science fiction at times, and I've never seen horror fans and fans of the other two genres here named being anywhere near as antagonistic. Lovecraftian horror, for instance, is a unique blend of sci-fi and fantasy. Psychological horror can also be found in sci-fi, such things like the film Event Horizon. I agree that there is something about both sci-fi and fantasy that causes their fans to be ... like this, but the overlappings, sorry, can't see it myself.
How dare you disagree with me, you miserable, sniveling, unrepentant vivisectionist!! I know I'm right because it is impossible to use objective evidence to conclusively prove me wrong!! Oh...sorry. Don't know where that came from. Think I'll have a nice lie down...
Woah, guys ... I'm sensing hostility. Really I didn't mean to upset anyone. Maybe you're frustrated because you think Im failing to back up my points... I say likewise to you. The difference is, I'm not upset, so I'm sorry to all who are( don't say you aren't..look at the tone of your posts ) . You guys have enough to worry about, like the majority of the literary world, without my nonsense. Bowing out.
I like science fiction and fantasy both. And horror as well. Actually, I like anything from classics to modern-day thrillers to literary novels, if done well. The overlap between science fiction and fantasy doesn't both me. There is clear overlap between the genres, and not just between those two genres. The lines are fuzzy rather than clearly delineated, which shouldn't be surprising.
No need. archerfenris said all that needs to be said. There's nothing more you could add from where your views currently stand. It's okay to not understand the appeal of the genre, but to place that fault on the genre itself is plain ignorance. That fault lies within yourself. You are the one who cannot understand. Best to think on that before attacking the credibility of the genre next time.
Which leaves us who are interested in actual life in advantage, doesn't it. I definitely agree with you; life is far from being a fantasy in any way. Imagery and imagination is great, though. I do hold this hope that the "I'm not reluctant to write in any genre as long as I have a good, genuine idea/approach and something to say" will actually make it possible for me to be published one day. It is only now that I'm getting older (maturing) that I value some real prominent literary figures, as well as the reasons why they are such. Mostly, they write about real world. Real experience. Real emotions. Values. As you said, those were of little importance to me when I was young, now they're gaining in importance by every day I spent living.
I'm sure 123 understands the appeal of the genre very well - he said he used to read it. Let's not start calling ourselves ignorant and faulty, okay? I just think what happened is that 123's tastes changed. That doesn't mean fantasy is childish. A great many adults (intelligent, mature, grown-up adults, not just kids in big bodies) love fantasy. No reason not to. And I don't see much of a discord between sci-fi fans and fantasy fans. They're very often the same people. Many excellent writers happily work in both genres, as well.
Sure thing. I only said that because his presented argument was not sound, which is a reflection of his own erroneous description of fantasy and not of the genre itself. I feel that if someone is not seeing every piece of the puzzle, yet arguing that their stance is the correct one, keeping quiet instead of shining a helpful light in their direction is a wasted learning opportunity for all parties involved. If I'm presenting faulty arguments from an ignorant viewpoint, I would want someone to show me why I am wrong, and that is all I have done for this individual.
When I first took interest in writing fiction (12 years ago) I wrote fantasy. I switched to writing more realistic stories in 2007 and haven't looked back. For me, I was inspired by video games. More specifically, I started out writing fan fiction about a dragon-related PS1 game that was released in the 90s.
I'm old (Or I've said it many times in the last few years) and I can (even at this age) remember there being tons of fantasy books out there. I do not remember all being as spectacular, but some truly were. I do not see where one thinks fantasy is being written more now than say... 10, 15, 20 years ago. Even now, for the third of fourth time I've re-read Jane Yolen's Pit Dragon series.. and I remember reading it when it first came out and it is very much fantasy, sci-fi'ish and I was not yet 10. It is a "Head in the clouds" thing, at least for me. I've always dreamt up little tales about unicorns and dragons when I was young and sadly.. not so much these days. I mean... there are moments, the IN thing to write about.. elves, wizards, ... sci-fi... vampires, werewolves.. zombies.. 50 shades (That I did not like at all. and not for the reason some may think) What I see is.. there are fewer and fewer Great Works. There are spin offs. Great beginnings and the end is as if the writer became bored and tired at the end and gave a half "ass'd" ending.
