Material basis for fantasy?

[Huitzilopochtli]

Hello

I am doing some research on what might be termed the material basis for fantasy.

If we consider, say, The Lord of the Rings, Alice in Wonderland, etc we are able to relate to them because of the realist elements they contain: Alice's 'common sense', for instance; The Shire which, in England, we can all identify with as places in middle-England, the Yorkshire Dales, maybe Wales, and, for Wordsworth, the Lake District.

I wanted to ask, though, why is it that we prefer, or sometimes prefer one mode of literature to another through which to convey a message?

Thanks.

Huitzil

[Nossa]

It depends on the author's point of view, and then the readers' acceptance to it. I'm personally not a big fan of fantasy, I prefer realism in writing actually..because in fantasy I can't relate or identify with anyone or anything..it might have a moral lesson or a good message, but conveying it through an imaginative story, just doesn't do it for me.
So basically it depends on what the author likes, and what the reader are expecting...that's what I think.

[Lote-Tree]

Hello

I am doing some research on what might be termed the material basis for fantasy.

If we consider, say, The Lord of the Rings, Alice in Wonderland, etc we are able to relate to them because of the realist elements they contain: Alice's 'common sense', for instance; The Shire which, in England, we can all identify with as places in middle-England, the Yorkshire Dales, maybe Wales, and, for Wordsworth, the Lake District.


And what do you we identify in Star Wars?

[Niamh]

And what do you we identify in Star Wars?

Politics.

[Lote-Tree]

Politics.

I was thinking of Jar Jar Binx :-)

[Inderjit Sanghe]

I guess this is a matter of personal choice. Can I really relate to stories set in Victorian England more than stories set in Middle-Earth, just because they are set in the "real world"? Some would argue that a novel such as Pride and Prejudice is more "realistic" not only because it is set in the real world but also because it contains "human" characters. Such as argument has some merit, of course, but it is limited in that people confuse "non-human" with "unhuman"; non-human characters can and do have 'human' characteristic and Kafka's novella "The Metamorphoses" is an example of this in that the protagonist, Gregor Samsa, finds himself transformed into a giant insect and yet still retains his human qualities. Some people would argue that characters in fantasy books, such as Lord of the Rings, tend to be painted in a simplistic "black-and-white" image of "good and evil". Such an argument, however, is grounded in ignorance, using the example of "Lord of the Rings", Tolkien intentionally painted "Elves" and "Orks" as being 'good and evil' because he wanted to show us the divergent sides of human nature, or "the humane" as he put it-in my opinion this is as a legitimate assessment of human nature, good and evil etc. as the notebooks of the Underground Man, Roquentin or Malte Laurids Brigge or the stories of Proust, Tolstoii or Joyce. We also mustn’t ignore the fact that sometimes authors can blend "fantasy" with the 'real-world'-Don Quixote is an important example of this (though in this case the fantasy existed only in the mind of the half-mad protagonist.) 'Magic Realism' is another example of this-Latin America has plenty of "magic realist" writers, such as Asturias, Allende and Marquez, and they use "fantasy" (partially) to represent the archaic, wondrous and somewhat childlike world of Latin America in comparison to the logical, methodical Western world which slowly began to take over Latin America during the 20th century. Authors such as Bely and Bulgakov also used the fantastical to rebel against the "socialist realism" that was being enforced by the Soviet Regime, Nabokov's Ada is another example of this (though he only briefly resided in Soviet Russia), he created another world, or in his words "an anachronistic world" in regards to the Earth, a kind of harking back and amalgamation of his childhood and adult life.

This question could also raise interesting objections as to what "reality" and "fantasy" are exactly, but as a famous literary character once said, that is too vast a subject....

[Lote-Tree]

This question could also raise interesting objections as to what "reality" and "fantasy" are exactly..

Easy.

Reality = does not bend to our Will
Fantasy= bends to the limitlessness of our imaginations.

[Niamh]

I was thinking of Jar Jar Binx :-)

:lol: I think hes just there to represent everthing that annoys us!

[nps_marina]

When going through adolescence (I am 23 at the moment, not that I've left that era of my life light ages behind), I loved fantasy. It was a good mid-step from children's literature, where I wasn't finding anything truly mind-boggling anymore; to more adult literature, where I still didn't know how to pick my books.
I still love fantasy, but not on that crazed level of then, where I knew that I would like the book just as long as there were knights and dragons and all that jazz.

But I like fantasy for the same reasons for which I like victorian (and romantic, as of the romantic period, not the genre) literature. And now I am going to quote the reason from a book which I recently read, which didn't drive me particularly crazy... The Thirteenth Tale by Diane Setterfield-
I read old novels. The reason is simple: I prefer proper endings. Marriages and deaths, noble sacrifices and miraculous restorations, tragic separations and unhoped-for reunions, great falls and dreams fullfilled; these, in my view, constitute and ending worth the wait. They should come after adventures, perils, dangers and dilemmas, and wind everything up nice and neatly. Endings like these are to be found more commonly in old novels than new ones, so I read old novels.

To me, it's not such a strict preference, but it could very well explain my liking for that period of literature.


but as a famous literary character once said, that is too vast a subject....

What famous character, Inderjit?

[Nossa]

Easy.

Reality = does not bend to our Will
Fantasy= bends to the limitlessness of our imaginations.

I agree to a certain extent. Fantasy maybe an imaginative story, that has nothing to do with reality in the 'form'..but it , supposedly, has a hidden meaning which has to do with real life. Or else what's the purpose of writing it in the first place if it doesn't convey a certain message that people can understand and relate to. Did that make sense? lol

[Hyatt07]

I like fantasy because it paints a completely different world for us. It lets us see things through the eyes of someone that doesn't and will never exist. It lets us use our imaginations. Something that we take away from our young now-a-days with an overzealous ammount of television.

[Nossa]

I like fantasy because it paints a completely different world for us. It lets us see things through the eyes of someone that doesn't and will never exist. It lets us use our imaginations. Something that we take away from our young now-a-days with an overzealous ammount of television.

In fact, I personally regard this as a disadvantage. In order to change the world around you or draw a moral lesson or whatever, you need to 'get real' and work through what 'IS' in order to get to what 'should be'....doing this through a fantasy story doesn't do this...but that's just my opinion.

[Lote-Tree]

I agree to a certain extent. Fantasy maybe an imaginative story, that has nothing to do with reality in the 'form'..but it , supposedly, has a hidden meaning which has to do with real life. Or else what's the purpose of writing it in the first place if it doesn't convey a certain message that people can understand and relate to. Did that make sense? lol

Fantasy is about getting away from Truths of Reality. Truths of Reality as they say in America - sucks! It may carry a message about "Reality" but it is the Imaginitive Experience that we relate to in Fantasy.

[Nossa]

Fantasy is about getting away from Truths of Reality. Truths of Reality as they say in America - sucks! It may carry a message about "Reality" but it is the Imaginitive Experience that we relate to in Fantasy.

I agree on that...It IS a far-from-reality story..but it's 'supposed' to have a message..this is what a literary work should have in my opinion, whether it's fantasy or not. And the part of getting away from reality is actually the part that I refuse, cuz I beileve that yes reality sucks, as you stated, but it IS reality after all..and we're living it...we HAVE to face it at a certain point. If a literary work works as an escapist, then it's not useful, that's what I think.

[Lote-Tree]

I agree on that...It IS a far-from-reality story..but it's 'supposed' to have a message..this is what a literary work should have in my opinion, whether it's fantasy or not. And the part of getting away from reality is actually the part that I refuse, cuz I beileve that yes reality sucks, as you stated, but it IS reality after all..and we're living it...we HAVE to face it at a certain point. If a literary work works as an escapist, then it's not useful, that's what I think.

Is Imaginitive Experience about Escapeism?

Is it not that the Imaginitive Experience makes "reality" of life bearable?

[Nossa]

Is Imaginitive Experience about Escapeism?

Is it not that the Imaginitive Experience makes "reality" of life bearable?

I'm a little confused here whether you're with or against fantasy writing, but no I don't think that imaginative experience is what makes like bearable...I'd have told you Faith, if I didn't know what many people stand from it.
And yes I believe that imaginative experience is about having an escape...when you use your imagination to create a world that's not there just cuz of the fact that you don't like the world that exsists, then yes you are looking for an escape. To me, being real is what makes a story or a literary work worth reading, what's the point in reading a story that I already know didn't/won't happen? What good would it make me? You can argue with me that through this story you're conveying a message, a solution or whatever, but if you can't relate to any of the characters, situations or anything for that matter, that takes place in the story, how on earth are you gonna feel that whatever solution in the story would fit your REAL life?!

[Lote-Tree]

I'm a little confused here whether you're with or against fantasy writing...


I am for Fiction Writing :-)



but no I don't think that imaginative experience is what makes like bearable...I'd have told you Faith...


So why do you read books? Faith is all you need - why the need for books?

We have only one life - through books and hence through the imaginitive experience we explore other lives we would never live or hope to live - the Life Past, Life Future and Life Present. Life Alien, Life Bizzare, Life Downright Stupid :-)

Reality is Restrictive. Truths of Reality is just that - Restrictive. It is through the Imaginitive Experience that we overcome this restriction.



And yes I believe that imaginative experience is about having an escape...when you use your imagination to create a world that's not there just cuz of the fact that you don't like the world that exsists, then yes you are looking for an escape.


When I read Cairo Trilogy by Naguib Mahfouz - am I escaping reality? or am I having an Imaginitive Experience of what it is like to live like an Egyptian?

When I read Lord of the Rings - do I really escape reality? or am I again having an imaginitive experience of what is is like to live like a Hobbit?



To me, being real is what makes a story or a literary work worth reading...


Fair enough. That is your choice.



what's the point in reading a story that I already know didn't/won't happen?


Imaginitive Experience is about exploration of that possibility of the "Road Not Taken"...what is the point of reading Star Wars or Lord of the Rings because they won't happen?




What good would it make me?


Good? Perhaps nothing. What good do we drive from watching movies or reading a book? Perhaps nothing - but we find these things enjoyable.



You can argue with me that through this story you're conveying a message, a solution or whatever, but if you can't relate to any of the characters, situations or anything for that matter, that takes place in the story, how on earth are you gonna feel that whatever solution in the story would fit your REAL life?!


You have misunderstood what I meant by the Imaginitive Experience.

[Nossa]

I'm afraid you don't get my point, and I obviously can't understand yours.
If you read about Cairo through Naguib Mahfouz then you ARE reading something REAL. I read books to learn about life, people and other cultures. Stars Wars, Lord of The Rings and anything like that isn't read to me, cuz it doesn't include real people, events, in the sense that it doesn't symbolize real life experiences and such. The story doesn't have to be a real life story to be real, but I don't consider Fantasy to be appealing cuz I like it more real if I may put it this way.
So for me Imaginative Experience is anything that takes you places and worlds that don't really exsist. For you, it's everything that's been written, anything that's regarded 'fiction' which is pretty much everything.
I hope I got my message across.

[Lote-Tree]

I'm afraid you don't get my point, and I obviously can't understand yours. If you read about Cairo through Naguib Mahfouz then you ARE reading something REAL.


How so? Those people never existed? That is why it is called fiction.



I read books to learn about life, people and other cultures.


You don't need books for that. You live life and visit people.



Stars Wars, Lord of The Rings and anything like that isn't read to me, cuz it doesn't include real people, events, in the sense that it doesn't symbolize real life experiences and such.


What the Force (symbolising faith, God, etc), Love, Father and Son relationship, Friendship, Heroism and Sacrifice, Freedom - not "real" experiences? :-)

Is it because it happened in a Galaxy Far Far away and thats why its not "real"? :-)



The story doesn't have to be a real life story to be real, but I don't consider Fantasy to be appealing cuz I like it more real if I may put it this way.


Fantasy does not have to be Fantasy to be Fantasy :-)



So for me Imaginative Experience is anything that takes you places and worlds that don't really exsist.


Imaginitve Experience is just that - an Imaginitive Experience whether it happens in a Galaxy Far Far away or at the end of your cornershop...



For you, it's everything that's been written, anything that's regarded 'fiction' which is pretty much everything.


Fiction is something that is made up. Fantasy is something that is made up.



I hope I got mey message across.

I hope I got mine too :-)

[metaho_donor]

I think that a fantasy author (as every other, by the way) don't need perforce to "convey" a message.
But, if so, why fantasy should be in disandvantage?
It depends on the message, of course. Sometimes a fantasy tale is not helpful to convey a certain message, sometimes is.
1984 or animal farm don't convey perfectly Orwell's message? Are they real stories?

[cows]

I'm surprised at the responses to this post. Those who believe that you can't relate to fantasy plots or scenes, perhaps it takes a little more imagination.

I don't read fantasy much, but I think when Lote-Tree said, "I am for fiction writing," he hit my point in the throat. Fantasy as a genre can be tiring and pointless because there are hundreds of books that repeat the same damn plot using elves and wizards etc., but that’s not the entirety of fantasy. There is a middle ground being discussed, but it needs to be put bluntly. Many stories have elements of fantasy, especially if you read classical literature, but are not considered fantasy writing.

Any story with a ghost, a Mephistopheles-like character, or a distortion of reality could be considered fantasy. It’s a natural part of the writing process. Not up for argument!

Nossa, you act as if fantasy is an unfortunate element in literature. Do you mean to say that from Mythology on, imagination is something that should have been controlled or curbed? Just for one course of this literary arguemnt, look at E.T.A. Hoffman's The Nutcracker and the Mouse King. It had a massive ripple effect in European literature that argued that losing your imagination drains your ability to live as a writer. (I believe someone mentioned Nabokov… yes it hit him through Dostoevsky and Schiller). Are these writings (also Shakespeare, Kafka, Marlowe ect. it goes on) lost in your opinion?

Why read about things you can go do yourself? Go do them...

In the original post, I believe the question proposed was: why do we prefer fantasy as a vessel for certain messages?

When making social commentary or trying to deal with topics that you don’t know how to deal with bluntly, fantasy can be useful. Some authors prefer to use fantasy elements to exaggerate their message, usually juxtaposing embodiments of good and evil, sometimes featuring deception and manipulation (represented with necromancers and magic). Others just enjoy the fantasy model. It’s a break from the "realistic" fiction.

Thats all I have right now. :yawnb:

[Nossa]

I don't mean to say that Fansasy is an 'unfortunate element in literature', and I do read fantasies, because it is a part of literature. All I'm trying to say here, which I obviously can't get across, is that just the fact that there are some irrational or illiogical elements in a story, makes it not applealing to me. Now I really want to stress here that this is MY opinion, it can be wrong, but for me, this is what is right. I don't like Fanasty writing, while you like it, isn't that what's meant by differences in tastes?! The thing with Naguib Mahfouz, and let me get this quite clear since you analyse every singel word in the post, is that it's right that these people didn't exsist persay, but the triology tells of REAL events that happened and actually still happeing. That's what I mean by a novel or a literary work being 'rea'. Now you're gonna tell me how Star Wars is real cuz it talks about Frienship, love and so forth, well good for them, but that STILL doesn't make it acceptable to me, cuz I just can't relate to it...I don't know if you understood me, cuz I don't feel like I'm expressing myself quite well here. And again I don't mean to day that Fanasty is a bad genre in literature, that's far from what I mean.
And just to make my point clear, I think you can check out wikipedia.com and see thier definition for Fanasty which would be:
Fantasy is a genre of art that uses magic and other supernatural forms as a primary element of plot, theme, or setting.
And I really don't think I have anything further to say about what I think.

[Lote-Tree]

I don't mean to say that Fansasy is an 'unfortunate element in literature', and I do read fantasies, because it is a part of literature. All I'm trying to say here, which I obviously can't get across, is that just the fact that there are some irrational or illiogical elements in a story, makes it not applealing to me. Now I really want to stress here that this is MY opinion, it can be wrong, but for me, this is what is right. I don't like Fanasty writing, while you like it, isn't that what's meant by differences in tastes?! The thing with Naguib Mahfouz, and let me get this quite clear since you analyse every singel word in the post, is that it's right that these people didn't exsist persay, but the triology tells of REAL events that happened and actually still happeing. That's what I mean by a novel or a literary work being 'rea'. Now you're gonna tell me how Star Wars is real cuz it talks about Frienship, love and so forth, well good for them, but that STILL doesn't make it acceptable to me, cuz I just can't relate to it...I don't know if you understood me, cuz I don't feel like I'm expressing myself quite well here. And again I don't mean to day that Fanasty is a bad genre in literature, that's far from what I mean.
And just to make my point clear, I think you can check out wikipedia.com and see thier definition for Fanasty which would be:
Fantasy is a genre of art that uses magic and other supernatural forms as a primary element of plot, theme, or setting.
And I really don't think I have anything further to say about what I think.

Go in peace Nossa.

Shalom, Salam, Shantih and Peace

Regards,
Lote.

[Huitzilopochtli]

Hello

I can see that the post has generated quite a few replies.

I sympathise with Mistress Acaia’s view that:

if you can't relate to any of the characters, situations or anything for that matter, that takes place in the story, how on earth are you gonna feel that whatever solution in the story would fit your REAL life?!

Sometimes, we feel we cannot ‘get the message’ because the characters seem so obscure. On the other hand, some realist novels emphasise patience and doggedness in pursuit of life’s aims (as opposed to the ‘smash and grab’ approach. Yet what better story to emphasise this than the tale of the ‘Tortoise and the Hare’? I don’t think, then, that I understand Mistress Acaia, with all due respect to her, when she says that she ‘can't relate to any of the characters’.

I like Inderjit Sanghera’s distinction between ‘non-human’ and ‘unhuman’: it goes far too unnoticed, and one of the features of the hobbits which many, I think, find attractive is their ‘human’ side.

Mistress Acaia suggests that ‘escapism’ is ‘not useful’, but is it not the case that many things we do, supporting England, lying back and thinking of England, boozing, fighting and all the other things we might do on a Friday evening, are ‘escapist’? She says that The Lord of the Rings ‘doesn't symbolize real life experiences’. And yet, in that it confronts good and evil is this really true and, if so, can we really call it ‘escapist’? Are these not challenges which we face daily?

Cheers

Huitzil

[Taliesin]

Not trying to argue with Nossa or anything, but in defense of speculative fiction and things that are not realistic these points:

1)Sometimes the point can be more effective when you use fantastical elements. Take Vonneguts Kilgore Trout - we think that the story about the alien who tried to communicate using step-dancing and farting and say that a house was on fire and was shot shows better than most realist stories the gaps between people, how they don't understand each other
2)Fantasy has wider elements, less is forbidden, allowing for more narratives.
3)Mythological thinking and subconcious - We editored a book lately on the effect of fairy-tales on children through the perspective of Freud *shudders*. "Uses of Enchantment" by Bettelheim. It showed how fairy-tales were essential in the process of children growing up as mentally healthy individuals.
We may conciously be hard-core realists but really, what we feel in our subconcious might accept magic.