On Magic

At the beginning of the semester, the Major Authors course studying Tolkien, Donaldson, and Pullman did a little survey in which we asked each other, “What makes a fantasy book?” Many people talked about different races, such as elves and orcs; fantastic creatures, like dragons and wargs; or a group (or fellowship) trying to save the world. One thing that everybody agreed on was that a fantasy book or series has got to have magic. What is interesting is how the three series we have read each have a different outlook on magic.

The Thomas Covenant series mostly takes place in a world that is “leaking” magic. The society was once chest deep in magic, or “lore.” When the main chunk of the story takes place, people have mostly forgotten or lost their magical abilities. Thomas Covenant, who is supposed to be the bearer of a magical ring, doesn’t even know how to use it for most of the series. This trilogy sees magic as being an ancient, mystical, and deadly force that only a handful of people are able to wield.

In His Dark Materials, magic is a religious phenomenon. Almost everything that happens that is “magical” is explained using Dust. A person’s daemon, which we would consider to be some sort of magic (a shape-shifting pet) is actually an outer reflection of the person’s identity and/or soul. But the people in this world also are in awe of the witches, which they regard as magical because of their ability to fly and perform spells, though one which, Serafina Pekkala, explains that her invisibility spell is little more than a psychological trick.

I think one of the coolest outlooks on magic comes from The Lord of the Rings. The Hobbits and Men can’t wield magic, but Elves and the wizards can. These wizards are like the traditional wizards most people are familiar with: They have flashy magic, beards, robes, staves, etc. The Elves, however, are completely different. The Elves have magic so ingrained in their lives that they hardly even acknowledge it’s existence. The Elves have rope, but to other races, it’s magical rope that never breaks, is extremely fine, and can burn the skin of servants of the Enemy (Sauron). The only reason the places the Elves live are beautiful is because of their magic and the magic of the rings they acquired, but they pay no mind to it. When the Fellowship passes through Galadriel’s forested nation, they are in awe of it’s beauty and splendor, and it seems like the Elves take it for granted. I’m not saying this is necessarily bad, but I think it’s cool how it’s just no big deal to them, and it’s so deep in their bones and society that they don’t need all the flash and bang lightshow like the characters in, say, Harry Potter.

These three series represent only a few magical points of view that fantasy writers use. Some are more traditional, like these series tend to be; some, like The Dresden Files by Jim Butcher, but magic in a modern setting. I’d like to think that our class was right about magic being a key part of all fantasy books. Whether magic lies in a ring, a wand, or in blood, wherever you find fantasy, magic will surely follow.

Bring Fantasy Back to the Classroom

Many English teachers face the widespread misconception that if a work of fiction is enjoyable, it cannot be good, or, conversely, if it is good, it cannot be enjoyable. Critics of fantasy, for example, would likely argue that better reading materials are available for students to read. The inclusion of materials other than the “classics” into the curriculum, however, should not depend only on “literary worth” but also on what benefits the adolescent reader gets from the reading experience.

Typically when teachers consider using fantasy novels in the classroom, they do not envision it being used at the secondary level as it is typically dismissed as “childish” and unworthy of serious literary criticism; in fact it is questioned how a novel about dragons and magic can convey any of the same themes and ideas as Shakespeare or Dickens. Fantasy tends to be ignored by teachers, parents, and administrators who feel that certain classics from the typical literary canon should be read. When students are prepared for the Eleventh Grade NYS Regents ELA, the canon of works that will help them in the critical lens portion of the exam range from Arthur Miller’s The Crucible to John Steinbeck’s Of Mice and Men and from Nathaniel Hawthorne’s The Scarlet Letter to Harper Lee’s To Kill a Mockingbird. Of course we are not forgetting any of the great Shakespearean works such as Hamlet, Romeo and Juliet, Macbeth, or Julius Caesar. Each of these works is indeed a masterpiece about tragedy, triumph, and the inner conflict of humanity. However, the genre of fantasy can address these deep human issues as well as many others such as the impossibility of certainty, the complexity of action, and the coexistence of good and evil.

It is helpful to come to a definitive definition of fantasy as a genre of literature in order to understand why it is so beneficial. This is no easy feat in and of itself. Many authors and critics have developed various definitions of the term but a common thread in them all is that fantasy must include an element that is removed from reality. Fantasy is often characterized by a departure from the accepted rules by which individuals perceive the world around them; it represents that which is impossible (unexplained) and outside the parameters of our known reality. For the sake of argument we will be looking at the most comprehensive and inclusive definition. It comes from the classic reference text in order to best provide the broadest sense of this misunderstood genre. From the Encyclopedia of Fantasy, by editors John Clute and John Grant, sets the definition for fantasy as we know it. “A self coherent narrative that when set in this world tells a story that is impossible in the world as we perceive it; when set in an otherworld, while it is impossible in itself, stories set there may be possible in its terms”. Clute and Grant go on to further define subgenres and types of fantasy showing that the genre is more complex than misconceptions allow. In a nutshell, fantasy is any departure from reality and within can contain many elements ranging from other worlds to supernatural powers to fantastic creatures.

It is important to note that characteristics of fantasy fiction and its many overlapping sub-genres are the subjects of debate among some critics and writers. Although all fantasy stories are unique, there are some characteristics that are typically common of the genre. Fantasy brings many elements to the table that will help students prepare for the Regents ELA exam. In general, the conflict in fantasy novels is of good vs. evil. Usually, the protagonist and supporting characters set out to conquer this evil, although this is often played out through a series of books, rather than just one. Most fantasy fiction also features great details, with settings, creatures, words and names that are often created by the author. Fantasy novels require their audiences to read carefully, for their settings and characters are not familiar in everyday life. In recent times, the term 'fantasy', when regarded as part of an individual genre, generally brings to mind tales of dragons and castles and knights in shining armor - but in truth, the genre as a whole encompasses so much more. Some examples of sub-genres are: romance, fairy tales, alternative history, dark fantasy, epic fantasy, and high fantasy to name a few.

Fantasy literature allows the reader to consider and speculate about central and sometimes painfully realistic themes, in a way that is more palatable than in realistic fiction. One thing is certain: there is something timeless about stories that pit motivating heroes who face long odds against dynamic villains. The fantastic nature of the characters and the setting provides readers with emotional distance that gives them room to consider sensitive and important ideas more objectively than any other genre. An irony about fantasy is that despite the fanciful characters, strange imaginary worlds, and bizarre situations encountered, it has the power to help us better understand reality. Who wouldn't want something so powerful to be included in curriculums?

Streets Paved in Gold..The Stuff Fantasy is Made Of

American pop culture has evolved in many strange and unique ways over the years. From hula hoops to pet rocks, Jane Fonda to Tae-bo, fads come into favor as quickly as they burn out. One thing that stays popular year after year are fantasy novels.

From vampires to magic and everything in between, fantasy writing is one of the few genres that can appeal to virtually every person. All you need is a subject you enjoy and the ability to suspend your disbelief and you are on your way to enjoying all the worlds of fantasy.

If you can dream it up, you could create a fantasy novel about it. Grab any New York Times bestseller list from any week over the past ten years, and you will find at least one fantasy novel listed. With all the rigors and stresses of day to day life, being able to take some time away and immerse yourself into a fun and exciting world brings joy and comfort to millions every day.

So what is it about fantasy novels that allows them to maintain their popularity year after year? While there are as many answers as fantasy fans, the universal trait common among all fantasy novels is great storytelling. As a writer, if you are going to create an entirely new world, one that can have a few or many physical laws that do not apply in the real world, you have to be able to be able to convey those laws in words alone. All of the greatest, epic fantasy works do a great job of conveying unusual concepts while not losing track of the flow of the story. Robert Jordan was one of the masters of this. Being able to describe a group of characters who have the ability to control the basic elements (air, fire, earth, water, and spirit) and still being able to move the story along without losing many readers, creates a world that is far enough of a departure from reality to allow the reader to be whisked away and leave their cares alone. Anne Rice created her supernatural world of vampires which introduced an entire generation to the underside of society and the dark corners of the human soul. David Eddings successfully combined fictional theology with his "the will and the word" to create a world that was both pure fantasy while still grounded in reality. Anne McCaffery brought us a new insight into humanity on the backs of dragons.

Given enough time, every person can get bogged down with their routine in such a way that it seems mundane. Fantasy novels give them an escape. A chance to dream like a child again. A chance to imagine themselves as a cast member in the theatre of the mind that a great fantasy novel creates. For this reason, as long as there are books to be written, fantasy is a genre that will be at the forefront of the publishing world, because America was built on fantastical dreams.

Tolkien and Binary Power

I have read almost all of Tolkien's work prior to the Lord of the Rings, saving his crème del la crème for a rainy day. Boy I was not disappointed! The plot may have moved slow and the dialogue/characters may have felt out of place at times, but other than that I had a very enjoyable reading experience. Maybe even too enjoyable to think critically about the text. So I took some time to look over my notes, gage the general flow of the plot one more time, and sort out the argument I have in my head regarding Tolkien. 

Lets speak of the way that Tolkien portrays women, my main irk. There were a couple conversations regarding the way women are portrayed in LOTR and they are all correct in their own right. The lack of any powerful female characters, aside from Eowyn and Galadriel, is naturalizing the idea in fantasy to associate power and heroism with the masculine. Spot on interpretation, I understand that point of view. Yet the absence of female characters does not show that female power and presence is unimportant. Yes, he may be playing into conventions (Hell, at the time he was writing, he may even be creating them) that place power in a masculine role but that does not mean women are written out of the equation. When looking closely at the characters and the plot, Tolkien may in fact be doing the exact opposite of what most believe. 

Tolkien's feminine characters serve as a counter to the traditional use of power, epitomized in Boramir and Faramir. Traditional power, seen in the Gondorians, is used in an effort to stifle evil in a physical way; they are characterized as brutish warriors who have a mastery over weapons and can kill Orcs, who are the epitome of evil, by the hundreds. Ultimately hubris, or pride, is tied with the traditional use of power; the more you kill the more powerful you become in the eyes of others. Pride bolsters the hero's power personally and publically, thus making the traditional use of power more associated with those characters that embody these masculine traits, which most of the time are men. 

Tolkien's feminine characters critique the physical, masculine power. Instead of pride and physical combat, the feminine qualities of the characters focus on love and healing. These characters offer an alternative that can be summed up as creation over destruction. Love and health are ultimately more important than the traditional power models relied upon by Aragorn or Gandalf. Frodo can only complete his task through the constant love and companionship of Sam and the health/nourishment provided by Galadriel in the form of the Lambas bread. Remember the plot of the novels: the big four (Gandalf, Aragorn, Gimli, and Legolas) must distract Sauron so that Frodo can bring the ring to Mount Doom and destroy it. When looking at the plot this way, the masculine power model is subservient to the feminine power model. 

So in the end, it may not be correct to say that Tolkien is sexist or promotes male over female. Tolkien may in fact be creating a binary power structure, one of traditional male qualities and one of female qualities. If in fact this is the case then we are left to wonder, why has fantasy seemed to use the masculine power structure more than the feminine? 

Escapism and Fantasy

In discussing Fanatasy I've come across a lot of claims that the genre promotes escapism. This seems to be sort of a heated debate surrounding the genre. In one camp you have the people that say all fantasy is escapist and therefore worthless. It rots the supple minds of young children and corrupts otherwise normal productive adults and we should probably just burn all works of fantasy in a giant communal bonfire. In the other camp are those who think that there are important lessons and themes addressed in works of fantasy that are applicable to everyday life and real life situations. These individuals read works like Tolkein, become well versed in the Elvish languages and the lore of Middle Earth and often become so delusional that they end up convincing themselves that they must go on quests of some kind. These quests typically involve roaming around inner city neighborhoods and dark alleyways dressed as Wizards and Elves searching for discarded cans and placing them in old rickety shopping carts that they believe possess magical powers.




I think that there are some problems with both sides of this argument. First of all I have a hard time with claims that fantasy is less legitimate then other genres because it promotes escapism. Escapism as I understand it and as defined by the Compact OED is "the seeking of distraction from reality by engaging in entertainment or fantasy" (http://www.askoxford.com/). According to this definition all fiction promotes escapism to some extent because it engages the reader in an imagined set of circumstances often for the purpose of entertainment. Even in the most staunchly realist fiction the reader is creating a world out of the text that is seperate from the real world. This argument can even be extended into the realm of non fiction. History and Biography texts use techniques and structures akin to fiction writing in order to construct and interesting and comprehensable story. This allows readers who are interested in the subject matter to immerse themselves in the stories that are created and temporarily escape the circumstances of their everyday reality. Escapism is something that readers can concievably do with any kind of text so to say that the promotion of this act devalues the genre is to devalue all coherent forms of narrative.



If escapism is an act that a reader can do with any text then the claim that fantasy promotes that act more than other genres becomes increasingly complicated. I've seen first hand that fantasy does not promote escapism for everyone. Since I am in both the American Studies course and the Major Authors course I got to see a wide range of reactions to Tolkien's Fellowship of the Ring. In the Major Authors course it is safe to say that at least some of us were able to temporarily escape from reality through Tolkien's elaborate flowing prose into the world that it constructs. It's a class full of English Majors, thats pretty much expected. In the American Studies class it seemed that the only escapism that Tolkien promoted was the escape from reality through dreams after the book's painfully long descriptions put everyone to sleep. So the so called escapist literature worked well with one group but not another. In order to press the connection between the fantasy genre and escapism it seems you would have to make the claim that the genre attracts a readership that is more inclined towards escapism. There could be some truth to this claim and to similar claims that some fans of fantasy tend to over-indulge in escapism to the point where they become detatched from reality. There could be interesting work to be done here but it seems to fully support these claims there would need to be some extensive research that is more focused on the psychology of individual readers and the culture of the general readership of fantasy.



It seems to me that there are also some problems with arguments in defense of fantasy. When faced with a claim that fantasy is illegitimate because it is escapist, advocates of the genre quickly point out all of its other redeeming qualities. It may be escapist but it is legitimate because it is well written or influential or because (as Armitt suggests) it is really a part of an elaborate and long standing literary tradition. All the while the actual question of escapism is largely ignored. I think a stronger argument would be that all texts perform the function of escapism to some degree and that fantasy does it exceedingly well for certain types of readers. Escapism does not make the genre illigitimate but is instead just one way in which the text functions. This among other functions make fantasy intersting to read and worthy of study.

Grandfather of Fantasy

Whenever I think of the genre of fantasy, the first thing that I think of is the Lord Of The Rings series and the Hobbit. This series that was created by J. R. R. Tolkien sets the bar for the entire genre. A great way to judge new fantasy would be to compare it to Tolkiens stories. If they can hold their own, then chances are they will last generations. Im not saying that each new story should replicate the LOTR series, but if they book can compete with it, then chances are its a good story.

Good fantasy fiction creates a world where the reader does not question the world and the rules that exist within it. In the LOTR, the reader does not question that there are elves, dwarves, or even hobbits; the reader understands that this works for middle earth. The reader may question why it takes so long for the fellowship to progress or why Tolkien decides to spend an entire chapter on Frodo and Sam climbing some stairs, but never about the world.

Perhaps it was stylistic of Tolkien to write very long narratives, but in doing so he creates this fantasy land of Middle Earth that makes sense in its own wierd way. The reader does not question the world or its inhabitants because Tolkien so carefully created this universe. Everything belongs and has its own purpose.

Perhaps I am just being biased about the genre, maybe nothing can compare to the triology for me, but I do stand firm and believe that Tolkien is the grandfather of the genre. He set the bar high for others to compete with. There are several great fantasy writers in the genre, they just have big shoes to fill.

If all authors thought out their worlds and myths that they are creating as delicately as Tolkien has done, hopefully they will be able to hook readers. The story should be able to hold its own and be able to answer any questions that the reader may have while reading. "Why are there elves, dwarves, and hobbits living in Middle Earth?", "Oh yeah, duh! Its because thats their home and they have to live there because they dont live in our world!"

The Lord of the Rings at Radio City Music Hall

For my birthday this past weekend, my girlfriend and I went to New York City to have some fun. I figured we'd do the standard clothes shopping, pick up a fake Rolex in Battery Park, pay respects at Ground Zero, and see a show on Broadway, you know, the usual NYC experience. But my girlfriend gave me a surprise present; she bought us tickets to go see Howard Shore's score to Fellowship of the Ring performed live at Radio City Music Hall. Pretty sweet, right? Well that's not all, because the score is performed live while the film is being played on a huge movie screen behind the musicians!

This really was the ultimate performance for any Lord of the Rings fan, especially those who have a large interest in music. Maestro Ludwig Wicki lead Switzerland’s 21st Century Orchestra, the Collegiate Chorale and the Brooklyn Youth Chorus wonderfully. The kind of sound you get when you have musicians of this caliber combined with a legendary venue like Radio City Music Hall is almost indescribable. From the moment the opening note was struck until the conductor set down his baton, it was truly incredible. The mix that was used for the film was done specially for this concert. All dialogue is still intact, and the sound effects are muted slightly. This allows the music to take center stage, and boy did it.

The silences were more pregnant, the strings more playful, and the brass section, oh MAN! The brass section was absolutely ridiculous! Most of the fight scenes while the fellowship is in Moria relies on strong, thunderous trumpets, trombones, and percussion to really get your blood pumping; I don't think I've ever been so psyched up because of music in my life. I swear I could feel the Orcs nipping at my heels and sense the heat from the Balrog!

It is unfortunate that this was only a one weekend event, because I would love for more people to be able to experience this film as we were able to this past weekend. However, when the credits finished rolling and the screen went black, the audience was greeted with this advertisement: "Howard Shore's score for The Two Towers, performed live October 10th and 11th, at Radio City Music Hall. Come join us next year and continue the journey!" So if this is something you'd be interested in, keep an eye out for when tickets go on sale! I think I know what one of my birthday presents will be next year.

More information:
The Official Lord of the Rings Concert Website


The view from our seats (slightly zoomed in):


The marquee:


-Andrew Garvey

A Fantasy 'newbies' reactions and speculations to Armitt

Without prior background knowledge on the fantasy genre and without ever truly indulging in the genre itself, I found myself struggling to get through Lord of the Rings, The Fellowship of the Ring, as well as Armitts disorganized (emphasis on disorganized) and intensely opinionated critical analysis of the fantasy genre.

When picking up the 35 dollar copy of Fantasy Fiction: An Introduction at the bookstore, I figured that I would be getting an "introduction" to something that I really knew nothing about. Perfect! Now, granted I am a newbie at this type of reading, but to me an Introduction would have been worth the 35 dollars (especially if it at least taught me some interesting aspects or literary elements of fantasy). However, after reading the seven lengthy chapters in which Armitt twists and turns every fantasy novel to fit her criticism, I gained from it only one thing; a headache.

I feel that half the problem with my reading of this particular criticism, is that I cannot relate to anything that Armitt discusses. I have never read Gulliver's Travels, Animal House, and I had never owned (or planned on owning) a copy of Lord of the Rings, The Fellowship of the Ring until I registered for this class. Now, I will say for anyone who is actually reading these things, that I did enjoy The Fellowship of the Ring with a little help from the movie :)

Apart from my unknowledgeable self (at least on this topic), I felt that Armitt presented her views and opinions in a way that was particularly hard to understand. She was very disorganized, presenting a term and discussing it for one to two paragraphs, then leaving it in the dust. Other times, Armitt would bring up such opinions in one chapter, only to rediscuss them again in a chapter later in her analysis. This typically annoyed me because I am used to reading in chronological order. Any story has a beginning, middle and an end, but Armitts was all over the place.

The one aspect of Armitt's criticism that left me hanging and far more confused then ever was her topic of Utopia in fantasy. Her establishment of the 'Utopia' definition was first 'the desire to go beyond' and a page later it was 'no place'. This was confusing to me because she gives two definitions that are dratstically different, and she doesn't support either with examples from the 'best known fantasy texts' she uses as resources for all of her 'critical information'.

I do believe that fantasy fiction is a type of genre that questions what happens beyond the horizon, do these thing really happen beyond earth? Probably Not. But in Lord of the Rings The Fellowship of the Ring, Tolkein creates 'Middle Earth', a place that cannot be found on any map (besides the one in the book). Along with the creation of such a place, Tolkein creates languages, monsters, 'superhuman characters' and a powerful plot that lead us to a place of no return for thousands of pages. The interesting thing that Armitt claims is that fantasy is reaching for blue sky. I think it is a good way of characterizing fantasy, because when I think of it, I think of What if? What if these things could really happen? But that is all part of how I read fantasy, fantasizing about the story an author creates for you.

I cannot say that I completely disagree with Armitt, because I simply didn't understand half of the things she was saying. However, for me as a reader, I would have appreciated a more rigid structure to her writing. This POSSIBLY would have helped me in wanting to read her work, and maybe could have pushed me along to understanding and connecting with it.


Hopefully there are others out there that feel the same?

Welcoming New Student Authors to sf@SF

This semester I'm teaching 2 courses that are going to stretch the boundaries of this blog's "science fiction at SUNY Fredonia" focus. American Popular and Mass Cultures looks at fantasy, comic books, video games, tv, and film in addition to science fiction, while Major Writers: Tolkien, Donaldson, Pullman focuses primarily on fantasy. In both courses, I'm requiring a certain number of blog posts from everyone--whether here or on their own blogs (which I'll link to)--and expecting everyone to be reading, commenting on, and responding to each other's writing. The dialogues that I hope to see emerge here will be the public face of what goes on in class discussions and on our ANGEL discussion forum, which are for class members only, but will hopefully go beyond the limitations of the 50-minute class meeting or the quick-hit nature of a discussion board. Our common text to start the semester, J.R.R. Tolkien's The Fellowship of the Ring (and the Peter Jackson movie based on it) should give us enough of a common ground to get some discussions going. Let's see what comes of them!