For the purposes of this thread, I’m acknowledging that science fiction is a type of fantasy, but that’s not the fantasy I’m talking about. I’m talking about the form of speculative fiction that often involves magic and supernatural abilities - though it doesn’t always. (I wrote a fantasy novel without magic, so I know it’s not required.)
Anyhow, I love science fiction, but I have never been able to “get” fantasy. If you asked me what science fiction does, I would say it holds up a mirror to the present moment and asks profound existential questions about what it means to be human.
So using that framework, what does fantasy do? What larger issues does it concern? What is its purpose? I’d love to hear from people who love it. Like what, generally, is the deal? Feel free to use illustrative examples of your favorite stories. I’m here to learn!
As I see it, fantasy is mainly about expanding the envelope of “How would humans behave if things were different?” Within the real-life constraints of the real world, we operate within a narrow limited window, but if someone asks, “Ok, what if someone COULD read minds, how would things be different?” It’s thought-experimenting.
And I don’t mean that flippantly; Rrichh Burlew, author of Order of the Stick, said something very similar to your post above about what writing fantasy means to him.
Fantasy is such an incredibly wide and broad genre, including things from Harry Potter to A Song of Ice and Fire to Narnia to Outlander to King Arthur and much more, that it can do everything sci-fi or most (maybe all?) other genres can do. It can just tell fun stories or it can explore the challenges of being human or even being a sentient being. And a million other things.
Epic Inspiration of where even small and insignificant people like a child (Dorothy or Harry Potter) or a Hobbit or even a slave can rise up and exceed all expectations. This is a type I seem to especially like. Frodo was not a standard hero, he broke expectation and in doing so Professor Tolkien moved Fantasy away from Sword & Sorcery or Might makes Right. In the end Frodo actually failed to overcome the power of the Ring and only succeeded thanks to the mercy he had shown to a most hateful creature, Gollum. Meanwhile Aragon and the like were doing great deeds, but the most important characters in the Lord of the Rings are Frodo Baggins and Samwise a mere gardener.
It can be just a ripping tale like Conan where a strong guy and friends win against others. This is mainly just fun.
It can be an urban fantasy like Charles DeLint has done so well. Modern Day with classic fantasy creatures from Fae or Native Spirits to Vampires that look surprisingly similar to David Bowie. These extend the idea of the unexplained in our boring, mechanical and now computerized science oriented world.
Please don’t hijack the thread this early. Start a new one or drop it here at least. This one is about fantasy. Considering what she wrote in the OP, this is kind of a threadshit.
Are you open to the idea that fantasy can also fit this explanation? Or are you stating that it specifically cannot be “a mirror to the present moment [that] asks profound existential questions about what it means to be human”? Because I would say this description fits both genres. They both concern larger issues and both can serve the same broad spectrum of concerns. I can’t imagine there exists any profound existential question or concern that could not be addressed equally by a fantasy or sci-fi story.
A sci-fi story could be about a sub-class of beings created in a laboratory to serve the broader population, and signs of their sentience and free will are suppressed by the authorities and wealthy to keep those beings in servitude. A fantasy story could be about a sub-class of beings created by magic to serve the nobility, and signs of their sentience and free will are suppressed by the authorities and nobility to keep those beings in servitude. The parallels in these stories to the real world and history are blindingly obvious.
I mean, I did write a fantasy novel. It was mainly because I wanted to explore certain ideas, like economic and social oppression and intersectionality, and war, and what it means to be an ally of a just cause, without the baggage of reality. But I remember someone asking me why I write such dark worlds and I felt like saying, “Do you understand the world you’re living in right now? Do you understand that all of these things are happening right now?”
But my book didn’t have any magic in it. I guess that’s the part I have a hard time with. What does magic do? Okay, like I just finished Penric and the Shaman by Lois McMaster Bujold, and it’s this whole thing where you can sacrifice animals to put their spirits into other animals to eventually layer up all these animal spirits which can then be put into humans and give them special powers. I think it’s an interesting idea, but I don’t understand the point of it. Like is there some theme this is supposed to be illustrating? Does this mean something beyond what it appears to be on the surface?
I’m not trying to be difficult. I guess I should have made my OP more narrow because maybe what I really don’t understand is the purpose of magic.
What do laser guns do? It’s mostly just that some people like the aesthetic of a magical world, so they explore scenarios in a magical world, while others prefer scientific explanations (or vaguely sciencey sounding explanations) so they explore scenarios in a sci-fi world.
I will say, a lot of fantasy authors seem to like creating magic systems - basically alternative laws of metaphysics that govern how magic works - and then tinkering with their logical conclusions. So in the Eragon series, there’s a whole bit about how magic takes energy and effort based on how difficult what you’re trying to accomplish is, and therefore novice mages kill people with flash fire or lightning or by dropping rocks on you, but smarter mages can do something really small (like pinch shut a major artery) and kill you nearly instantly with very little energy expended. I think the motivation for that kind of exploration is very similar to the motivation that leads scifi authors to come up with the inventions at the center of their stories.
Some assumptions are commonly made about fantasy that bother me. These assumptions may be made by the author, or by the packagers of the book, or both, and they bother me both as a writer and as a reader of fantasy. They involve who the characters are, when and where they are, and what they do. Put crudely, it’s like this: in fantasy, 1) the characters are white, 2) they live sort of in the Middle Ages, and 3) they’re fighting in a Battle Between Good and Evil. […]
Assumption 3: Fantasy by definition concerns a Battle Between Good and Evil. This is the one where the cover copywriters shine. There are lots of fantasies about the Battle Between Good and Evil, the BBGE, sure. In them, you can tell the good guys from the evil guys by their white hats, or their white teeth, but not by what they do. They all behave exactly alike, with mindless and incessant violence, until the Problem of Evil is solved in a final orgy of savagery and a win for the good team.
Many fantasy movies and most interactive games go in for the BBGE, which partly explains the assumption about books. And it’s true that in fantasy, character is often less important than role (also true of Greek tragedy and much of Shakespeare, where role and character can be the same thing). Carelessly read, such stark stuff may appear to be morally simplistic, black-and-white. Carelessly written, that’s what it is. But careless reading of genuine fantasy will not only miss nuance, it will miss the whole nature and quality of the work.
I agree with @iiandyiiii that Fantasy is such a broad category that there are many different things it can do (and any given Fantasy will probably only do some of those things).
Here are a few things that some Fantasy can do:
It can tell large-scale stories, where the fate of the whole world is at stake, and where great heroes are called upon to perform great deeds that have momentous importance.
It can allow us to vicariously visit strange and wondrous places.
It can embody mythic qualities or archetypes or allegorical characteristics in specific characters or places or objects, and can thus explore or play with those qualities in ways that aren’t really possible in realistic fiction.
I may have more to say after I’ve had a chance to reflect on the question some more. Some wise and thoughtful people (such as Tolkien and Le Guin) have had some important things to say on the matter, and I may be inspired to review and, if possible, summarize some of the things that they have had to say.
I dunno, every genre seems to be better at certain things than others. Romance is excellent at exploring the emotional and sexual fulfillment of (mostly) women. Noir exposes the ugly underbelly of corrupt societies. Western portrays the drama of man vs. society. So I’m interested in the kinds of stories that fantasy is best at telling.
Interesting question. It can tell stories about stuff that can’t exist in other genres - fate and prophecy and curses, ancient powers and ancient knowledge and heroes holding the fate of the world in their hand. It’s genre where the intangible (morality, honor, faith) becomes tangible, and can have a direct impact on the world. Most of all, fantasy is not subtle - it’s where subtext becomes text. For instance, in other genres, you can talk about temptation, and how power corrupts; in Lord of the Rings, you have an object that literally temps and literally corrupts. That sort of directness appeals to some people. It appeals to me.