Questions about Fantasy Fiction, Fall 2014

My students in my Fantasy Fiction course have generated questions about fantasy fiction that they are interested in trying to answer this semester.  Feel free to compare them to the questions and answers my students from Fall 2010 generated.  I'll post this semester's answers here as I receive them, so be sure to check back over the next few months.

General Questions About Fantasy Fiction

Formalist

• What is the most important element in a work of fantasy?
• Does fantasy fiction take longer to set up because you have to explain the world, the characters, etc.?
• How does the story move along?

Structuralist/Intertextual/Intermedial

• Is the phrase "No book is original" from How to Read Literature Like a Professor actually true or not?
• What actually makes something fantasy fiction?
• What are some of the structures and conventions of fantasy fiction?
• Where do many of the concepts and ideas of fantasy fiction come from?
• What are the most important elements that define a work of fantasy fiction?
• Can a story be considered fantasy if it does not include magic?
• Are heroes and villains necessary for a story to be considered fantasy?
• How do the main characters in fantasy novels relate to each other?  What makes some of these characters heroes?
• If all fantasy novels were compared using the hero formula (separation/initiation/return), would they all relate?
• Is there a difference between male and female heroes?
• What novels outside of the class could be considered fantasy fiction?
• Can short stories be considered fantasy fiction?
• Are there fantasy plays and poems, or are they all novels, tales, and prose?
• Does there have to be a form of "magic" to make it a fantasy?
• Do fantasy books tend to stay within the confines of "old earth but with magic and monsters"?  Is that part of what fantasy is?
• What "types" of fantasy fiction are there?
• What types of fantasy worlds (portal/secondary/alternate history) have been invented?
• Do the best works of fantasy need their own universes (Wonderland, Middle Earth, Fairyland, Oz, Westeros and Essos, Narnia, etc.) or do/can great works of fantasy take place in the world we know?  Does good fantasy require world-building?
• What is the range of fantasy fiction?
• What are the limitations of fantasy fiction?
• Is fantasy fiction limited to only specific conventions, tropes, and other stereotypical scenarios?
• How widespread is fantasy fiction and what makes it so different from the rest of the world?
• Is there a distinction between fantasy and broader unrealistic fiction?
• Is there any work or subgenre that could be argued as realistic fantasy fiction?
• What makes fantasy fiction different from other forms of fiction?  What dictates it to be fantasy?
• Where is the line between fairy tales and fantasy fiction?
• Where is the line drawn between fantasy fiction and science fiction?
• How well can fantasy fiction and science fiction mesh together?  Must they reject each other?
• Could magical realism and fantasy ever be combined or connected?
• Can't all genre fiction fit into the fantasy fiction genre?
• Is there such a thing as mainstream fantasy (e.g., Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter) and, if so, how is it different from non-mainstream fantasy?
• Does fantasy translate better from book to film than any other literary genre? If so, why? If not, why not?
• How progressive can fantasy fiction be?

Reader-Response/Cultural Studies

• Why haven't I received my Hogwarts letter yet?
• What is it about magic that is so appealing?
• Will we learn a lot from the readings, both intellectually and emotionally?
• It is said that any fantasy stories are good for children's education--what aspects of these stories affect them or appeal to them?
• How does fantasy fiction keep the reader interested?
• While reading should one take into account the time and culture during which the piece was written, even if one is supposed to be engulfed in "the fantasy"?
• What do you expect of a fantasy novel to consider it "good"?
• Do I truly enjoy fantasy fiction or are Harry Potter and Lord of the Rings just the best out there?
• Should these works be taken on their own merit or must we analyze what symbolism and other devices are used to make commentary on the real world?  Does this analysis ruin the magic?
• How far detached from "real life" is it safe to become while reading these works?
• How can we compare the worlds of fantasy with the worlds of religions?  More specifically, how readers and followers truly believe that maybe someday they will get a Hogwarts letter, or that if they worship a certain god, they'll achieve a paradise after life?
• Why do some people prefer fantasy fiction over science fiction, and vice versa?
• Why is fantasy socially acceptable?
• The resurgence of fantasy (books, tv shows, movies) in popular culture is due to what, exactly (economic issues, social issues, etc.)?
• Is it fair to say that fantasy is the most popular literary genre today? If so, why?
• Does escapism have anything to do with the current wave of fantasy fiction fans?
• Would fantasy fiction be as popular or socially acceptable if most of these books weren't adapted to successful motion pictures/television series?
• How does censorship and pop culture come into how fantasy books are adapted into film?
• Some fantasy novels or series have been adapted into films that are either less adult (Eragon) or more adult (The Hobbit) than the audiences for which they were originally written.  Why?
• How have fantasy fiction affected audiences all over the world?
• Why are so many people involved in reading fantasy fiction?
• Where do you believe fantasy fiction is headed?

Mimesis/Representation/Reality/The World/Truth

• How do the expectations of society impact the fantasy genre?
• Where do many of the concepts and ideas of fantasy fiction come from?
• How can fantasy fiction apply to the real world?
• How do characters in fantasy relate to us in real life?
• Can fantasy fiction really be considered plausible?
• Literature can be read as a whole bunch of allusions/symbols meaning something different that the literal text, so are fantasy "worlds" literary devices or meant to be believed as truth?
• Can fantasy still have morals and points?  Do all fantasy works have them?
• Does fantasy always examine morality?
• Does good fantasy always need to tackle moral issues?
• Does religion play a huge role in these novels, and why?
• How progressive can fantasy fiction be?
• Why is there such a male dominance as role characters in fantasy fiction?  (Even though there is a slight rise in female lead characters, it still seems the male protagonist is the dominating role.)
• Why different worlds?
• Dreams vs. reality vs. magic realms:  what defines the difference between them? is it subjective?
• What do dreams tell about a dreamer?  Do they have meaning?
• What is life?  Is it real, or an invention of someone?
• What is real?

Authorial/Historical/Genetic

• Why do fantasy fiction authors use their initials in their names?
• Would all the authors of the works we're going to be reading consider their writing fantasy fiction?
• Where do many of the concepts and ideas of fantasy fiction come from?
• Is "escaping" a popular reason why fantasy fiction is continually being written?
• How do authors refine a story from ideas of monsters and magic into fantasy fiction?
• How do authors make up a world?  Is it all imagination or influences from other stories, real life, etc.?
• Do fantasy writers translate what is happening in their world into their novels?
• In a lot of fantasy fiction there is this battle of good vs. evil that tends to repeat itself, so does the time period influence the writer into setting the storyline in a war-immersed setting?  (For example, Tolkien influenced by WW I...)
• Are there any great fantasy fictions influenced by the colonial era?
• What is the history of fantasy fiction?
• How old is fantasy fiction?  How did it begin?
• Is fantasy just a continuation of mythology?
• Were the origins of fantasy based more in medieval times or that of fairy tales?
• Why is fantasy fiction more often based in the medieval era instead of modern times?
• Does fantasy fiction share elements of Enlightenment, Romantic, and/or Victorian fiction?
• When did fantasy fiction become mainstream?  Which books/series started the fad for fantasy films?
• When was the transition when fantasy fiction became pop culture?
• Do you think the large focus on fantasy has to do with the rise of gaming and video games in the last 30-40 years?
• How does fantasy fiction evolve between writers?
• What have various fantasy writers done to make their work stand out/expand upon the fantasy genre?
• How progressive can fantasy fiction be?
• What has Disney done to the original stories that now seem to be forgotten compared to their Disney movie versions?
• J.R.R. Tolkien has been referred to as the "father of fantasy"--is this a fair statement, and if so, why?
• How have other authors responded to C.S. Lewis's works?
• What were some of the biggest influences on the most prominent of recent fantasy writers (J.K. Rowling, George R.R. Martin, etc.)?
• How visible is George R.R. Martin's science fiction background in Game of Thrones?
• Can you combine science fiction and fantasy fiction?
• How does one go about writing fantasy fiction?

Alice in Wonderland and Through the Looking-Glass Questions

• How is a raven like a writing desk?
• The baby turned into a piglet?  Why?  How?
• Is Wonderland a different view of our world or a new world?
• Was all of Wonderland just a dream or actually real because Alice believed it to be?
• How does Wonderland work?  What are the rules of its universe?  Can you even have a world when the laws of existence seem fluid at best and everyone is a raving lunatic?  Can you ever have meaningful change without consistency?  Is Wonderland just forever stagnant and repetitive?  Are all the characters stuck in this mad loop forever?  Are they all so mad as to stay on their one-track moebius strips?
• Wonderland is obviously a legitimate fantasy world--why else would it have a name?  (I guess I'm just intrigued by the logistics of a fantasy world that is fundamentally nonsensical.)
• How does Wonderland relate to other fictional realms/worlds/universes? Particularly with respect to concepts of time...?
• After Wonderland, it will be interesting to see how different novel "universes" respond to rules/chaos--more or less structured?  How does it matter to each plot?  Defining factors of each?
• Do each of the characters control time through their own perception?
• Does the food chain apply in Wonderland?  Is there any kind of animal hierarchy?
• Why do all the problems that occur in Wonderland seem to get solved almost instantaneously?
• Is this really a dream?  Whose dream?  Is everything a dream?
• What would great thinkers like Plato think about Alice?
• How old is Alice supposed to be?
• What is actually happening to Alice in Through the Looking-Glass?  Is she wandering through her estate, talking to flowers?
• Doesn't it seem strange how quickly Alice abandons her life in the real world?
• Did Alice have some kind of disorder?  Or is she just an imaginative child?  If she does have a personality disorder, how can she recognize, as a child, differences between her and people in her life?  Was this child a very imaginative and open-minded person, or does she suffer from any disorders such as multiple personality, schizophrenia, or depression that allows her to accept her fates?
• Is Alice's main issue with identity or growing up?
• What made Alice have this wild dream—the book her sister was reading, her imagination, or what?
• How does Alice perceive reality if she keeps living and learning in dreams?  What is Alice's reality?
• How is Alice so smart and resourceful for a child?  Is she an important person's daughter to be so educated and opinionated?
• Was there any inconsistency with her cleverness and lack of it?
• Would you classify Alice as a heroine or a ditzy child?
• Do you think Alice is strange or does she act the way a typical child does?
• Alice never really freaks out about the fact that she's in another dimension and hardly questions the talking animals or disappearing cats with grins.  Does her acceptance make her more delightful or somehow frustrating?
• Why is Alice an effective character, one who experiences such bizarre circumstances with mostly comfort and ease?
• Why does Alice focus so much on being crazy?  Is she questioning her own sanity?  Or everyone else's?
• Is Alice actually mad or does being in Wonderland make her mad?
• How is Alice choosing who/what to believe in Wonderland?
• Why does Alice start to forget things (rhymes, things she's learned in school, etc.)?
• If I were Alice the story would not go smoothly because I have no courage to walk forward.  What characteristics made Alice get through Wonderland?
• I feel like Alice should have been scared, especially around the queen.  But her fear was mild, and that was disconcerting.  To her, in the space of time, everything that happened was real.  Was she not afraid of being stuck there?
• Why does Alice spend most of her time avoiding drama?
• Were the characters simply there to get Alice thinking?
• Was Alice supposed to have learned a lesson from all the events that happened in Wonderland?
• Do things going on in the magical world have something to do with her real life?
• Were Alice's sister's similar experiences of Wonderland while sleeping significant at all?
• Does the story have any meaning?  (It seems to have no direction.)  How do you find any significance in a book like this?  What is the point of the novel?  (It all seems like nonsense to me.)
• Why does the story go around in circles?
• Is the narrator unreliable?  Can you have an unreliable narrator?
• Was Alice in Wonderland a political allegory or satire?
• Who/what is Alice supposed to represent?
• Does Alice's view of the world represent that of a young girl or does it refer to an ignorant, unchanging adult?
• Is Alice's adventure of going down the rabbit-hole a metaphor for something else?
• When Alice is "drowning in her own tears," could it be a metaphor for depression?
• Do some of these characters directly correlate to an aspect of Alice's life/struggles?  Do they function as metaphors or personifications?  What do they represent or symbolize?  Are the characters symbolic of pure nonsense?
• Was there any sort of significance as to why Alice kept changing sizes?
• What metaphors are there to real life/society in the novels, if any, and how can we identify them?
• Is there any allegory for the focus on playing cards and chess?
• Why do all the characters seem to have such an absurd attitude?  What was the significance of all these odd characters?  What did they symbolize?
• Are there antagonists?  (The Queen is likely the best example, but when it comes to those giving Alice a hard time, there is certainly no shortage.)
• Are the animals used as a form of symbolism?  Why are they all small animals?
• Could the animals represent the adults in Alice's life?
• What is the significance of it being a rabbit that Alice follows, the creature that leads Alice to Wonderland?
• What can birds represent in the novel?  Is Alice's experience with the birds supposed to be an analogy of sorts for multiculturalism and stepping into an unfamiliar culture?
• Why does the caterpillar smoke if this is a children's book?  Does this start controversy?
• Because the novel ends with Alice discovering it was all a dream, do you believe it made her entire journey of shrinking and growing, arguing, and such irrelevant?
• What happens after?!
• Do the novels actually have nothing to do with the real world or logic?  Is it simply meant to be a dream-like sequence?  Can it be as much about daydreaming, making believe, and pretending as dreaming?
• Is there a real-world connection?
• What does this book reveal about its time and our time?
• Is there a connection to morality or reason?
• What defines nonsense?  What is real if you are gifted with an imagination?
• What is madness?  Is it anything that strays from conventional logic?  Is it an objective state, or dependent on the person?
• What if this were how children actually feel and think of things in their everyday life?  How can we say it's madness when children can't accurately convey how they feel and think?
• Who controls language?  Decides what is acceptable?
• Does any part of the story have something to do with what was going on in Lewis Carroll's world at the time he wrote it?
• Is this a statement of her individual self-realization or a statement on Victorian society?
• Is the story tackling more than one issue, or is it more of an overview of the Victorian era? (cf. caucus race, potions and cakes, executions...)
• Are these works an exception to the rule that rules/laws and consistent, logical, structured world-building are necessary to create really good fantasy fiction?  Why do the Alice stories work with so few rules/laws, but Game of Thrones and Harry Potter need so many to flourish?
• Was the book considered fast-paced for its time?
• Who was the target audience of Alice in Wonderland?  Is this supposed to be geared for children or adults?  Or trying to entertain both at the same time?
• What prompted Carroll to write these novels?  What was his motivation?  Why did he set out to write such a dream-like, non-sensical story?  Was it intended to be an allegory at all?
• Should Carroll's relationship with Alice define the books?
• How did Carroll get inspiration for the scenes in the novels?
• With the education scenes with the Gryphon and Mock Turtle, was Carroll making fun of a specific educational system?
• Could Carroll have been using nonsense to attack some math ideas, challenging the validity of ideas by testing its premises and taking them to their logical extremes?
• Why Wonderland?  Why involve a little girl in a world of talking animals and nonsense?  Is it to contrast with conventional education?  To challenge traditional logic and deduction?  Why does Alice become a voice of reason to many characters?
• Is the use of nonsense a way to bring back the confusion of childhood, or a manner of questioning reality and the universe?
• Does Carroll understand the use of a transition?  How can he expect flow?
• Besides the beginning and end I felt like the middle didn't have an inherent order and scenes changed sort of rapidly.  Was this on purpose?  Did the author have a reason for having events play out in the way they did?
• Did Carroll think of Alice as a sympathetic character?
• Why did the author constantly manipulate Alice's knowledge?
• What drugs was Carroll on?
• Why is this story still so popular?
• How did Carroll leave readers with such a lasting impression of characters after introducing most only once or twice in a seemingly orderless universe?  Is it their pure creative nature that is memorable, or perhaps the unique personality of each and how they antagonize Alice? 
• If you were in Wonderland, which character would you trust most and why?
• What can/should we as readers do with the themes of dreaming and reality in Carroll's novels?
• Is Wonderland supposed to make the reader mad?
• How do we relate Alice in Wonderland to our lives?
• Wonderland makes us think a child's favorite question:  why?
• Do the black-and-white drawings add anything to the book?
• Why are the film adaptations so morbid for a book that, I felt, was entirely light-hearted and whimsical?
• Why does Tim Burton's film adaptation include so much lead-up to Alice following the rabbit to Wonderland?

The Hobbit Questions

A Wizard of Earthsea Questions

Questioning Fantasy: A Guide to My Students' Response Essays from ENGL 299

Here are the questions my Fantasy Fiction class generated at the start of the Fall 2010 semester, along with links to their response essays that addressed specific questions:

BOUNDARIES OF FANTASY

Defining Fantasy

• What is fantasy? Samantha Brethel, Alexe Brode, Steve Grzybowski, Derek Herzog, Christy Hewitt, Luke Hider, George M., Victoria Rader, Casey Takacs, Steph Ward
  
• How ought fantasy to be defined? Steve Grzybowski, Luke Hider, George M., Victoria Rader, Casey Takacs
  
• What characteristics/features must a work have--what conventions must it adhere to or expectations meet--to be considered fantasy? Samantha Brethel, Derek Herzog, Christy Hewitt, Luke Hider, Victoria Rader
  
• What's the "recipe" for fantasy? Victoria Rader
  
• Do the plots make up the genre or is it more on the style of writing chosen that makes a work belong in the fantasy genre? Derek Herzog
  
• Does there have to be some sort of supernatural element for it to be considered fantasy? Samantha Brethel, Steve Grzybowski, Luke Hider, George M., Victoria Rader
  
• How do we define the difference between the ordinary and fantastical? Christy Hewitt, Victoria Rader, Steph Ward
  
• When is something not considered to be fantasy? George M.
  
• How inclusive/exclusive should our definition be and how rigid/flexible should we be in applying it? Steve Grzybowski, Luke Hider, George M., Victoria Rader, Steph Ward
  
• Is the genre of fantasy subjective? Alexe Brode, George M., Casey Takacs, Steph Ward
  

Fantasy's Varieties, Relatives, and Neighbors

• What kinds of fantasy are there (sub-genres)?
  
• How does fantasy relate to science fiction, horror, myth, epic, romance, magical realism, and so on? Samantha Brethel, Alexe Brode, Steve Grzybowski, Christy Hewitt, George M., Victoria Rader, Lizzie Reid, Zain Syed, Steph Ward
  
• What is the line between fantasy fiction and genres like horror and sci-fi? Can this line be blurred? Samantha Brethel, Alexe Brode, Steve Grzybowski, Christy Hewitt, George M., Victoria Rader, Steph Ward
  
• Why do so many border disputes arise and what's at stake in specific ones? Casey Takacs, Steph Ward
  

Origins and Development of Fantasy

• When did fantasy start?
  
• What author embodies the start of the genre fantasy fiction?
  
• What distinguishes fantasy per se from its predecessors, influences, and so on?
  
• How did fantasy develop?
  
• What are the key turning points or transformations in the history of fantasy?
  
• Will fantasy, as a genre, ever die out or become dated?
  
• Do genres have life cycles?
  

VALUE(S) OF FANTASY

Quality of/in Fantasy

• How is quality measured in fantasy books? Gabrielle Fletcher, Kayleigh Witkowski, Erica Yunghans
  
• Who are the best fantasy writers and why?
  
• How do they stack up to the best writers in other genres?
  
• What exactly distinguishes "good fantasy" from "bad fantasy"? Gabrielle Fletcher, Adam Glasier
  
• What attributes make up a great fantasy fiction story?
  
• What medium is fantasy best suited for (if any), and why?
  
• Why is fantasy on the lower/lowest rung of the literature ladder? Matt Pisarski
  
• Who decided that plays written in the Renaissance are much better and for the intellectually elite than a novel about witches and dragons? Is it because the prose used is generally more simple? Is it because the plots are "different"?
  
• How does fantasy stack up against other genres? Brittany, Zain Syed
• What are the stereotypes/preconceived notions pertaining to fantasy fiction? Brittany, Kristian Everett, Derek Herzog, Matt Pisarski, Audrey Putney, Zain Syed, Casey Takacs
• Is fantasy necessarily regressive, nostalgic, conservative, reactionary, irrational, escapist...? Christine Botham, Kayla Carucci, Kristian Everett, Derek Herzog, Christy Hewitt, Matt Pisarski, Audrey Putney
  
• How do readers of fantasy get around the stigma that comes with the genre? Brittany, Derek Herzog, Matt Pisarski

Fantasy's Functions, Purposes, Uses

• Why does fantasy fiction exist? Lizzie Reid
  
• What is fantasy good for (if anything)? anonymous, Mike Bayba, Christine Botham, Kayla Carucci, C. Dunn, Eli, Eric Ellison, Kristian Everett, Christy Hewitt, Josh Jerome, Matt Pisarski, Audrey Putney, Lizzie Reid, Zain Syed, Casey Takacs, Kayleigh Witkowski, Tiffany Wood
  
• What is the purpose or role of fantasy in our culture? anonymous, Christine Botham, Kayla Carucci, Eli, Eric Ellison, Kristian Everett, Matt Pisarski, Audrey Putney, Lizzie Reid, Casey Takacs, Tiffany Wood
  
• What functions, uses, stakes might fantasy have for authors, readers, critics, institutions, society at large? anonymous, Mike Bayba, Christine Botham, Kayla Carucci, C. Dunn, Eli, Eric Ellison, Kristian Everett, Christy Hewitt, Josh Jerome, Hannah Morris, Matt Pisarski, Audrey Putney, Lizzie Reid, Zain Syed, Casey Takacs, Kayleigh Witkowski, Tiffany Wood, Erica Yunghans
  
• How have early fantasy writers affected today's society? C. Dunn
  
• What do responses to and debates over fantasy reveal (about society, present or past, at large or in particular groups or institutions)? Erica Yunghans
  
• Why do writers choose the genre of fantasy fiction? Eli, Eric Ellison, Adam Glasier, Lizzie Reid
  
• Is fantasy fiction meant merely as a means of entertainment or is it meant to be something deeper? anonymous, Mike Bayba, Christine Botham, Kayla Carucci, Eli, Eric Ellison, Kristian Everett, Josh Jerome, Hannah Morris, Matt Pisarski, Audrey Putney, Lizzie Reid, Zain Syed, Casey Takacs, Kayleigh Witkowski, Tiffany Wood, Erica Yunghans
  
• Can fantasy fiction be used as a platform for political, social, or cultural statements? Eli, Eric Ellison, Kristian Everett, Hannah Morris, Matt Pisarski, Audrey Putney, Erica Yunghans
  
• What messages are authors of fantasy fiction trying to convey? anonymous, Mike Bayba, Eli, Eric Ellison, Kristian Everett, Hannah Morris, Erica Yunghans
  
• What messages/attributes are typically included in fantasy books? For example, do they often include philosophical elements? anonymous, Mike Bayba, Eli, Eric Ellison, Josh Jerome, Matt Pisarski
• What is fantasy fiction able to teach us? anonymous, Mike Bayba, Christine Botham, Kayla Carucci, Hannah Morris, Matt Pisarski, Audrey Putney, Kayleigh Witkowski
  
• Why are some of the key conventions of fantasy (world-building, good vs. evil, quest, coming of age, rise and fall of civilizations) so enduringly popular? anonymous, Kayla Carucci, Tiffany Wood
  
• Why do we retell previous stories through fantasy? Lizzie Reid
  

Studying Fantasy

• What is the state of the art in fantasy criticism?
  
• What value can scholarly study of fantasy bring to the university, to the industry, to fan communities, to regular readers? Matt Pisarski
• How is the study of fantasy fiction viewed?
  
• What can scholars learn about fantasy from those outside academia?
  
• Are we really learning anything relevant by studying fantasy fiction? anonymous, Mike Bayba, Christine Botham, Kayla Carucci, Eli, Eric Ellison, Kristian Everett, Gabrielle Fletcher, Josh Jerome, Matt Pisarski, Audrey Putney, Casey Takacs, Kayleigh Witkowski, Tiffany Wood
  

HOW FANTASY WORKS

• Is magic in fantasy analogous to science/technology in science fiction?
  
• What role does religion play in the writing of fantasy fiction? Mike Bayba, Josh Jerome, Hannah Morris, Casey Takacs, Steph Ward, Erica Yunghans
  
• Are modern authors as heavily influenced by religion as Tolkien and Lewis were? If not, is that a product of our times? If yes, could it be argued that since so many were influenced by Tolkien and Lewis as forerunners of the genre, who were themselves heavily influenced by religion, modern authors are just as heavily influenced by religion, whether they realize it or not?
  
• Why is identity (especially the quest for one's identity) one of the most common themes in fantasy fiction? anonymous, Kayla Carucci, Josh Jerome, Tiffany Wood
  
• How do fantasy fiction stories relate to their time period and culture? Kristian Everett, George M., Hannah Morris, Matt Pisarski, Erica Yunghans
  
• How many new ideas and stories can a fantasy author come up with, without repeating a story?
  
• There are only so many mythological creatures, and it seems like the good v. evil story is getting redundant. How do fantasy writers stay original? Gabrielle Fletcher
  
• What is the process of writing a fantasy fiction novel? How much time and commitment goes into fabricating a new world? Adam Glasier, Tiffany Wood
  

Everything in Our World Is Subjective (Middle-Earth Is Another Story)

Steph Ward explains:

Everyone believes in different things. Some people may say that they believe that eating meat is wrong because it is cruel to animals, and some people may say that they believe ghosts exist because they saw one. Who is the average individual to question the beliefs of others? The concept of fantasy is very fluid and difficult to pin down when one takes into account how truly subjective it is. Depending on the beliefs of an individual a work of fantasy can easily be considered to be a work of speculative fiction. A majority of fantasy is completely subjective, based upon the personal beliefs of the individual, there are some exceptions to this subjectivity, depending on the way that the novel is set up. A novel that takes place in our world is much more difficult to classify as fantasy than a novel that is set in another world.

A belief can come from anywhere. Some sources of beliefs that may affect what we see as fantasy may come from places like our own experiences, our culture or our religion. Since so many fantasy novelists pull ideas from religions (whether it is Paganism, Christianity or otherwise) it only seems natural that beliefs in religion may alter our perception of what fantasy is. Take the novel Good Omens by Neil Gaiman and Terry Pratchett: this novel gives you an eschatological tale in which the AntiChrist has been born and will bring about the end of the world. The concepts of the Apocalypse, angels, demons and the AntiChrist are things that are very real to many groups of people because of their beliefs. So the classification of this novel becomes subjective. One’s religious beliefs may dictate that this is not fantasy at all, merely a speculation, a possible course of events about something that will inevitably occur. On the other side of the coin, if you are an atheist and do not believe in anything religious then this book becomes a work of complete fantasy, as you have no beliefs to ground it. Therefore, whether you consider this book to be fantasy or not is a completely subjective thing. There is no way to do it without disagreement from some groups.

Good Omens is particularly subjective because it deals directly with religion, something that people already have extreme beliefs about. The debate of “Is this fantasy?” does not always have to be this heated. It is hard to find an individual who does not believe that The Hobbit by J.R.R. Tolkien is a fantasy novel. This is not to say that it is not a subjective belief. Certainly, some may claim that Middle-Earth does exist but these beliefs seem much less rational to us than the claim that angels exist. Why is this? This occurs because The Hobbit does not take place in our world. This novel takes place in another world entirely, one that the author admittedly made up. It is much easier, and much more rational, to have subjective beliefs in our world than it is to have subjective beliefs about another world. In Middle-Earth, we have only what we are told by Tolkien to form our beliefs on. In Good Omens, which takes place on our Earth, we have all of our personal experience and beliefs about our world to take into account before we can make a decision.

Much of Good Omens is supported by other tangible things, things that we already know exist. The novel makes mention of the Bible, of the Satanist and Christian faiths, of Nostradamus and other prophecy makers, things that we know actually exist or existed. On top of that it adds things that could exist, things that many people do believe exist such as angels and demons. The novel also takes place in our world. We have enough information, from our own life experiences and from those things the novel makes reference to that we know exist to be able to make a subjective judgment on the things that could exist. When Gaiman and Pratchett say, “Many phenomena--wars, plagues, sudden audits--have been advanced as evidence for the hidden hand of Satan in the affairs of man...” (15), it is easy for me to make a subjective call on whether this statement is fantasy or not. That is because it is based in my world and I have experience with all of those evil things listed. I may have been told by the Bible, or by my parents or a hundred other outside sources that Satan causes evil in the world. Since I already know this it is very easy for me to subjectively say that this is not fantasy at all, this novel is actually taking a set of beliefs from outside sources and building a story out of them. However, if I had been raised to believe that neither God nor Satan exist and that the Apocalypse is a bunch of bologna I would say that this is a fantastical concept that is imaginary only. But, if we look at The Hobbit, which takes place in another world, the classification of the novel is much simpler because we have no influence from outside sources. When Tolkien explains that hobbits are “a little people, about half our height, and smaller than the bearded Dwarves. Hobbits have no beards. There is little or no magic about them, except the ordinary everyday sort...” (2), I do not have to decide whether a hobbit is a fantastical creature or not because this novel does not take place in the world that I live in. I cannot have a rational, subjective belief about a world that I have no experience of. Good Omens references things that I know, and a world that I am familiar with, so I can make a subjective judgment based on my beliefs about the world as to whether I think this novel is fantastic or speculative. The Hobbit does not allow me to do such things. I have been told that Tolkien created Middle-Earth. This is not my world, so this is fantasy.

Whether something is fantasy or not depends on our beliefs. Our beliefs depend on our experiences and influences from our world. A novel that takes place in our world is open to much debate as to whether or not it is fantasy. That is because people have such varying beliefs on our world. Any novels that take place in our world can never definitively be called fantasy, or anything else. There will always be debate because the human experience and beliefs vary so greatly. However, if a novel does not take place in our world it is much easier to simply slap a fantasy label on it and be done with the whole ordeal.

Fantasy Is Ambiguous

Alexe Brode explains why:

The question of "what is fantasy" is really hard to define. First, it is relatively ambiguous, meaning it has many meanings. Secondly, there are so many genres in the world, how does fantasy not fall under something else? These are just many questions that need to be answered to better understand what fantasy is in all actuality.

The word fantasy can mean anything from a mental image, imagination, a visionary idea, to even an illusion or hallucination. Fantasy is so ambiguous it is hard to come to one definition. If one was to sit down and conquer this definition it would take years. This is one genre that could fit really any type of book one reads. For example, take the definition of a mental image; reading anything can give a person a mental image if the use of figures of speech is used properly. I could read something a five-year-old wrote and probably get some sort of mental image from it.

Fiction, science fiction, horror, children's literature, each and every one of these can fall under fantasy because most if not all can lead you into a separate world where everything written in the book comes true. Would these be considered sub-genres? Or is there really a major difference between fantasy and these? Fantasy seems to deal more with dragons and magic, as the above do not. Is this the difference? Then one looks at "Snow White" or "Cinderella"--are they considered fantasy or is that children’s literature still?

In all actuality, coming up with an answer about what is fantasy is relatively hard. I guess it depends on the reader or mainly on what others think. The reader could just make up their own classification for what is fantasy, or just stick to what the editor says the genre is. Fantasy is such a broad and ambiguous term that the answer will be just as broad and ambiguous.

My idea of fantasy is one that just transports you completely into a separate world where you can't really distinguish between reality and fiction. The Jhereg book did this to me. I want more after reading the first, even more after the second, and I'm dying after the third. Now I just wish the world was like the book so I could be an assassin and not deal with school and such and just get paid to kill people. It's like an escape into a better life it seems, somewhere that someone feels safe because they know they can’t get hurt but they enjoy all of the action.

Fantasy is ambiguous. It can't be defined into a set definition. It can be one genre or many as far as we know. It is hard to tell fantasy apart from other genres because it all contains the same content and there isn't a special ingredient that separates them. So the question of "what is fantasy?" seems to still be left unanswered, because in all reality anything can be fantasy if you set your mind to it.

Defining Fantasy--and Science Fiction

Samantha Brethel breaks it down:

The fantasy genre is very interesting because of the discrepancies people have in assigning the criteria a book must have to be considered a work of fantasy literature. However, after discussing it in class, I have come to the conclusion that for a novel to be considered fantasy, it must have a few of the following elements: some form(s) of supernatural elements or mythological creatures; have a character-driven plot; and incorporate some sort of journey or mission. J.R.R. Tolkien's The Hobbit incorporates these elements fully, making his novel one of the most famous fantasy books. And the entire Chronicles of Narnia by C.S. Lewis is also a series that fully incorporates the elements necessary to make a novel belong to the fantasy genre, and to really keep this genre separate from science fiction, where the lines become blurred.

The plot of The Hobbit is indeed character driven; the dwarves and Bilbo go on a journey to the Lonely Mountain to take back their treasure that was stolen from them by the dragon Smaug. The entire novel consists of their journey getting to Smaug's lair, and then the battle to get back their gold. You follow the fourteen of them, and occasionally Gandalf the wizard and a few others, until they do actually defeat Smaug.

The same is true of The Magician's Nephew, the first (though written next-to-last) in the Narnia series. The two main characters are Digory and Polly, the children who first enter the world that is to be Narnia long before Lucy, Edward and their siblings go through the wardrobe. The readers follow the kids as they go into Charn and Narnia and meet Jadis, the soon to be White Witch, and Aslan the Lion. We follow them between our world and the other worlds until they finally get back to their world and get the apple to cure Digory's mother. The story ends with a nice little conclusion about how the children grow up and live happy lives.

Both novels incorporate a number of supernatural elements and made-up creatures, something all fantasy novels must have. Tolkien's story has not only dwarves and a wizard, but goblins, giant spiders, hobbits, wood elves, river elves, a Necromancer, a super-powerful giant man, a dragon, and a strange hobbit-hybrid creature named Gollum. Each one of these creatures has its own history and own culture; hobbits are specifically creatures of comfort who eat several times a day and never do anything exciting. That is their own specific culture, which is very different from that of, say, a dwarf, who lives underground and tunnels for treasure and loves adventures. The wizard Gandalf is a good wizard, and later on in the series you meet another wizard who is evil. Not every creature of every race is the same in every story, and the same is true of the creatures within this specific story. Bilbo breaks the barriers of hobbit normality by going off on the adventure with the dwarves.

The creatures invented with Lewis's story also are specific to his creation. While witches were not invented by Lewis, he invents her powers to make her unique to his story. Aslan, the talking Lion who creates the land of Narnia is also tailored to specifically meet the needs of this story. Of course Lewis didn't invent lions, but he did create this specific lion. In later stories in the Chronicles, other magical creatures are introduced (though most of them are talking animals).

Science fiction and fantasy are two separate genres, but often it is hard to differentiate between the two. I think Tolkien and Lewis help to make that distinction very clear; if there is an absence of technology (i.e. something invented by man, or seemingly futuristic) it belongs to the fantasy genre. If it's in a more futuristic setting or incorporates technology like spaceships, aliens, or otherworldly inventions, it definitely falls into the science fiction category. Other novels that incorporate some of the same things found in Middle-Earth and Narnia can be considered fantasy because of the absence of science-fiction elements.

Both of these fantasy stories have their main characters going on journeys to get something and get back home, and their treks through the magical lands with the fantasy creatures are what drives the plot. We read these stories to see what will happen to the characters and their friends on their journeys; will they make it back alive? Will they accept that there are magical worlds and mythological creatures that can help them on their ways? These very elements justify these novels as belonging in the fantasy genre. They aren't science fiction, nonfiction, romance novels, or coming of age (though The Magician's Nephew might fall into that last category). Tolkien's The Hobbit and Lewis's The Magician's Nephew both embody these characteristics and define the genre that is fantasy literature.

Creating Borders in Fantasy

With any genre, the question that comes to mind right away is one of borders. Where does one genre end, and another genre begin? No genre has as much controversy surrounding its borders as fantasy. There are numerous works that can be seen as fantasy, but could also be seen as Sci-fi or Horror, or even a detective story. However, in the case of fantasy, I think it is actually a needless argument.

The word fantasy has been corrupted through usage for thousands of years. If you look at the origins of the word Fantasy, it comes from the greek phantasia which means imaginary visions or perceptions. This is the basic definition I will be using for fantasy, as I find it eliminates many of the arguments about what is and isn't fantasy.

Science fiction is a genre that likes to be held separate from fantasy, especially by critics. It is often seen as being of greater value, despite the fact that it becomes dated so quickly. There are two things that make science fiction just another form of fantasy to me. Firstly, to quote Arthur C Clarke, “Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.” For example, does it matter if it's magical healing pixie dust, or advanced medical nanite dust? Not really. In science fiction, technology serves the same purposes in a plot that magic does in any kind of fantasy. Additionally, the science used in Sci-fi is not usually real, or even possible by the technology of the era in which it is written. At that point, the plot is relying on something imaginary to function.

That right there is what makes it possible to classify a broad range of works as fantasy. I believe that for any kind of fantasy, the main criteria is that it relies on something that does not, and more importantly, to the best of our knowledge could not exist in our world. Through this system, it is easy to classify other things as fantasy as well.

For example, horror that is not of the psycho-killer du jour variety is pretty clearly fantasy when using this criteria. Dracula for example relies on the existence of a creature that eats people's blood to live much longer than humans. The same criteria of relying on imaginary things can be applied to the wolfman, and everything written by H.P. Lovecraft.

Lastly, and most unpleasantly, there are the godawful supernatural romances. These things sadly rely on magical creatures like vampires and werewolves to push their poorly written, often somewhat pornographic narratives ahead. It almost makes me regret making the fantasy categorization so broad, as it includes a lot of godawful rubbish. Examples of this style of fantasy include the Twilight series and the Anita Blake series.

Fortunately, this classification system does have a redeeming feature, and it is that it brings in the classic epics and romances, such as The Epic of Gilgamesh or the romances of Chretien De Troyes. These works are considered classics, and are taught heavily at many academic levels. The ancient epics nearly always feature magic and gods, with few exceptions, while the romances feature evil witches and wizards and love potions. These epics and romances are actually the foundation for what most people refer to when they think of fantasy.

The idea of classifying things is so prevalent in modern society, especially with things like books. Part of this came about as a result of the publishing industry trying to make it easier for people to find books they like in a bookstore. However, this systemic categorization by publishers has left a great deal of things poorly sorted, and does a great disservice to the name of fantasy. It is by looking back in time that we are able to see that many of the distinctions we create are just that--created. When the wisdom of the ancients is consulted, it becomes clear that any attempt to divide fantasy up into smaller categories like science fiction and horror and romance are just that--fantasy.

How Have Tolkien and Lewis Affected Today's Society?

Here's C. Dunn's overview:

To begin with, Tolkien and Lewis, writers of The Hobbit and The Chronicles of Narnia respectively, did influence some well-known and not-so-well-known stories, almost all of which are of the fantasy genre. One example of Tolkien's influence is Dennis L. McKiernan's Iron Tower trilogy which "was intended to be a direct sequel to The Lord of the Rings but had to be altered" [1]. The Harry Potter series by J. K. Rowling "mirrors some themes from ideas from The Lord of the Rings" [1]. A couple of examples of Lewis's influence include A Series of Unfortunate Events (Daniel Handler) and even the Harry Potter series. In addition to works of prose, there were also the film adaptations of The Lord of the Rings and The Chronicles of Narnia's The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe, Prince Caspian, and The Last Voyage of the Dawn Treader.

Video games based on The Lord of the Rings and The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe have also been made. While the video game based on The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe has only been made based on the movie, The Lord of the Rings has had video games based not only on the film adaptations, but also the novels--and even games just based in the world of Middle-Earth. These games weren't the only ones based on The Lord of the Rings. It had a much greater influence on games in today’s culture. Because of its influence on fantasy, the late Gary Gygax was driven to create one of the most prominent role-playing games of the '90s: Dungeons & Dragons. This game was based on Tolkien's concepts of elves, dwarves, humans, and even hobbits (even though Gygax called them Halflings, they have very similar characteristics to those of the hobbit race). Dungeons & Dragons is still in production today, on their 4th edition of the game (which many avid Dungeons & Dragons players have come to shun). Dungeons & Dragons, in turn, had a large influence on the most popular MMORPG (Massive Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Game) of today, World of Warcraft. The great Dungeon Master, Gary Gygax, passed away on March 4, 2008 at the age of 69. On March 25, 2008, Blizzard Entertainment, the makers of World of Warcraft, released patch 2.4.0 of the game, which was dedicated in memoriam to Gygax with this paragraph from the patch notes:

Blizzard Entertainment would like to dedicate the patch in memory of Gary Gygax. His work on D&D was an inspiration to us in many ways and helped spark our passion for creating games of our own. As avid D&D players and fellow game developers, we were all saddened by the news of his passing; we feel we've lost a true adventuring companion. Thanks for everything and farewell, Gary. You will be missed. [2]

So, if it weren't for Tolkien's influence on Gary Gygax, Dungeons & Dragons would likely not have been made, or at least been very different, and if Dungeons & Dragons hadn't been made, then World of Warcraft could very well have been excluded from the history of games as well. It should also be noted that, while Dungeons & Dragons has been and still is a game with a large fan base, World of Warcraft, as of October 2010, has 12 million subscribers.

Several music bands have been influenced by Tolkien, ranging from one or two songs to the whole band's theme. Some examples of this include such songs as "Elvenpath" (by power metal band Nightwish) and a few songs by the rock band Led Zeppelin. Examples of a greater influence by Tolkien in music include: "Gorgoroth take their name from an area of Mordor, Burzum take their name from the Black Speech of Mordor, and Amon Amarth take their name after an alternative name for Mount Doom" [1].

To summarize what I've explained here, if it weren't for Lewis and Tolkien's stories, Harry Potter and other stories who were influenced by Lewis and Tolkien would likely be quite different, if they even still existed; a handful of video games wouldn’t exist; Dungeons & Dragons, if it actually existed, would likely be radically different; World of Warcraft probably wouldn't exist, at least not how it is today. Lewis and Tolkien were very influential writers on not only the works of fantasy literature today but games that have over 10 million people playing.

Bibliography
[1] Works Inspired by J. R. R. Tolkien. Wikipedia. 10-15-2010. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Works_inspired_by_J._R._R._Tolkien#Literature
[2] World of Warcraft Patch Notes 2.4.3. Blizzard Entertainment, 7-15-2008. 10-15-2010. www.worldofwarcraft.com/patchnotes/patch2p43.html

What Is Fantasy?

Christy Hewitt
ENGL 299

What is fantasy? A question we have all tried to decipher. As we read these novels there seems to be a distinct formula for what makes up a fantastical novel. Their ‘out of this world’ plot and completely different character complexes challenge the reader to think outside of the box. In The Chronicles of Narnia we are introduced to what we see as fantasy that takes place through the real world. Throughout this essay I will attempt to discover what fantasy is and how it is different from the ‘real world.’

There are many different definitions of the word ‘fantasy.’ Some people define it as ‘a creative imagination’; others see it as ‘an invention of the mind.’ When entering this class I had no idea what to expect. I am not someone who is very into reading fantasy books because of their material. I define fantasy as ‘an escape from the real.’ The reason I define it that way is because that what I thought every book in the fantasy genre was doing. As I read these novels I am beginning to see it as something deeper.

In The Chronicles of Narnia, you are introduced to the Pevensie children. They live in the real world and happen to stumble into a world full of adventure, a world full of fantasy. As C.S. Lewis writes this series he gives life to every child’s imagination. Like in every genre, there is a protagonist (the children) and an antagonist (the white witch). It is a tale of how the Pevensie children band together to save the world of Narnia.

This has been one of my favorite fantasy novels to read because I was able to fully indulge myself into the reading. I found myself diving into the plot and reading for hours on end. I was in the best sense of the word, escaping. Just like the children did in the novel I was leaving my world of stress, college, work, and more work to join a world of Narnia.

The best part about this novel was that the children were faced with a huge obstacle; they had to save the world. I found myself thinking, “Why don’t they just go back to the real world where their only responsibility is being a kid?” Then about ten pages away from the end of the book it hit me: they want to be in this world. They wanted to be in that world just as much as I wanted to keep reading, as much as I wanted to be in that world. Escaping to the world Lewis had created was easy for them to do and they had so many ‘real world’ things to escape from. There was a war going on and people were dying, really dying because of the war and the children knew it (at least the two oldest did). The house they were in was, for lack of a better word, boring. Being in this brand new world was an escape from the turmoil of the real world. Being in control of their own destiny was something they may not have been able to do in the real world because they had other people making decisions for them but in this new world they were able to make their own choices and choose their own fate (even if that meant returning to the real world).

The world Lewis had created was everything a young child would want to be a part of. There were strange animals that talked, a massive lion with love in his heart, and an evil witch who wanted to control the world. Even though there was a war going on in their ‘new’ world, they were at the epicenter of this war and they had a say in being involved with it. They could save everyone in Narnia (and in the real world this would not have been considered possible). This is what drew the children deeper and deeper into this world.

There has been a fine line between fantasy and reality, a line in which many people can see distinctly. In this novel it is a line between the real world and the world of Narnia, and personally, I think the world of Narnia trumps earth any day. The point of being able to read fantasy is to read about something that is out of the norm, something that you don’t read about in the newspaper, something that you rarely see on TV, something that you don’t read in all the teen drama novels. Fantasy is meant to be read as ‘different.' This genre is something unlike any other genre out there. These authors, Lewis especially, created these worlds and wait for the readers to jump into them.

Now begs the question, well what makes fantasy different from science fiction. My answer, science fiction doesn’t go there. What do I mean by ‘there’? It delves on science and out of the ordinary phenomena. Fantasy fiction brings life to something never before thought of. The syfy channel on TV has all of the crazy out there shows but they don’t have shows about world warping wardrobes and broomstick like soccer games. Fantasy fiction goes even farther into the world of the unknown and thus attracts many fans to its stories.

The Chronicles of Narnia help define fantasy by being a novel about a new world that these children escape into. Not only do the children escape but the readers do as well. The only difference is that when Peter, Susan, Edmund, and Lucy return to the real world nothing has changed and time barely passes. When I return to the real world, 2 hours have passed and I still have to finish the rest of my homework before class the next day.

Fantasy versus Other Genres

Brittany sizes up fantasy's chances:

When it comes to comparing fantasy fiction to most other popular genres it just does not stack up very well. There are several factors that have an effect on why fantasy does not stack well up against the most popular genres. A few of those factors are how well readers actually know the fantasy genre, sales and fan bases.

There have however been a few very successful fantasy fiction books, such as The Chronicles of Narnia, Harry Potter, The Lord of the Rings, and Twilight. For example as of November 21st Twilight was number seven on the list of Top 10 Children's Series for the New York Times and has been on the list for 170 weeks while Harry Potter is at number nine on the same list and has been on the list for 232 weeks. Each of these four series had major success and include well-known books to many readers.

Although the above seems great, when measured on a larger scale based on what is sold and highly marketed in stores the fantasy genre is not what is at the top. For example when you go to Walmart and look at the book section you see authors such as Patricia Cornwell, John Grisham, Tom Clancy, Nicholas Sparks and whatever new celebrity has written a book. Also when I asked friends and family who some of their favorite authors were I got some of the names just listed along with Mary Higgins Clark, Jodi Picoult, Lisa Jackson, and James Patterson. These both further support my statement even more that fantasy fiction does not stack up well against other popular genres.

Another reason why fantasy does not stack up well is because even though fantasy has had the above-mentioned big successes most people do not identify those books with the fantasy genre. With the exception of Twilight because it is a newer book the rest of those books are classics and most people have read them but since a lot of people do not have background on the fantasy genre they do not classify them as fantasy fiction. I think if people had better knowledge of fantasy fiction, what it was and what books fell under the category it would help the genre to become more successful. For example people reading these classic fantasy fiction books without knowing it have boosted the fan base for fantasy fiction but if they liked these books and actually knew what genre they were reading they would probably be more apt to go out and buy more fantasy fiction books. This in turn would help fantasy stack up better to the more popular genres.

As previously mentioned I think that a lot of the problem is people not knowing much about the genre along with their many misconceptions. For example, as a new reader of fantasy fiction my thoughts on what the genre was were completely wrong. I thought fantasy fiction was about magical lands which ended up being correct but I also pictured it more like a Disney movie which was completely incorrect. Recognition of a genre is important in order to build a strong fan base which then moves into the genre becoming popular. Once those two things become stronger then fantasy fiction can better stack up to other genres.

I think that having more mixed fantasy would really help to boost it, for example using humor and romance. I know that we read a few good books this semester that did have humor in them but that was not used to help promote the book which I think may have helped. I also think adding in the romance would help too as long as it is not like Twilight. It would have to be actual romance, heartbreak and so on not the cheesy romance used in Twilight. Including these different aspects and using them to help promote fantasy fiction may attract more readers, such as readers who may never have picked up a fantasy book before. Which in turn could interest a lot of new people in this genre which would make it more popular and then the genre would stack up better.

Writing Styles Do Not Define Fantasy Fiction

Derek Herzog argues:

There seems to be a stigma associated with the fantasy genre which makes people hesitant to pick up a book labeled fantasy. A big part of this has to do with what first comes to someone's head when they think of fantasy. For many, the term fantasy brings to mind a long, tedious work of escapism which is weird and unapproachable. They might think this because they associate fantasy with a particular style of writing, one that is slow, straight-forward, and not innovative. To think like that though is a misconception, and it could be what has given fantasy a bad rap for so long.

The truth is, fantasy is not limited to one particular style of writing; if this was the case, it really would have no hope. I've read fantasy works from six different authors recently, and one of the coolest things I've learned is how varied fantasy authors are in their approaches to their work. Fantasy is by no means limited to one style of writing, and coming to this realization not only removes the stigma associated with the genre but it reveals the potential for how many new and innovative things could be done with it, as well.

To begin my recent fantasy escapade, I started with two authors whose books could be considered the roots of fantasy: J.R.R. Tolkien's The Hobbit, and C.S. Lewis's The Magician's Nephew. They both tell their stories as if they were Grandpas dictating an old tale to their Grandsons; this is why I have deemed this style the "Old Man Narrative." Consider how The Magician's Nephew begins: "This is a story about something that happened long ago when your grandfather was a child" (Lewis 1). The whole book goes along with this sort of feel. While I'm reading it, I actually even read in my head in the voice of an old Grandpa. The Hobbit is told in a similar way. Consider this line, for example: "The Mother of our particular hobbit--what is a hobbit? I suppose hobbits need some description nowadays, since they have become rare and shy of the Big People, as they call us" (Tolkien 12). Both of these novels are written in these distinctive narrative styles, which are quite different from other authors in our class. Could you imagine if every fantasy novel were written like this? Sure, both books are good reads, but after being exposed to a style for too long it quickly goes stale. The "Old Man Narrative" helped pave the way for future fantasy fiction, but fortunately other authors moved beyond this--or regressed from it.

Speaking of regressed, this brings me to the next two authors: Piers Anthony and Anne McCaffrey. Both authors have a writing style which is fairly simplistic. The stories also move along quite slowly. I think the novels by these two would be better received by younger readers, not only because of their coming-of-age themes, but also because of their slow and steady writing styles which probably make the books easier to understand. In both books, a lot of time is spent talking over what is going on in the protagonist's head. As an older reader, this can seem tedious and unnecessary, but to someone who is younger, the repetition might really help them understand what's going on. It is unfair of me to label these two as lesser authors, but their writing styles definitely do not appeal to me that much. Whether I enjoy it or not, though, these authors possess a distinctive writing style which adds validity to the notion that it is not what solely characterizes the fantasy genre.

Sheri Tepper makes up another category of writing styles. Unlike many other fantasy authors, she writes her prose in a more creative, even poetic way. She really gets inside of her protagonist's mind, and this makes her book, The True Game, seem more realistic, and it also allows the reader to become more immersed in the story. Take, for example, just a random line from the text: "How so many could find power to exist, she did not say. We did not ask. It was only a tall tale, we thought. Hum of bees, quiet sough of wind. Then, suddenly, as we climbed a high ridge of stone, a cold gust from above, chill as winter, without warning" (Tepper 39). She presents the information to the reader in a way which emulates the flashes of thought and sensory information going through Peter's mind; this technique is effective, highly creative, and unique. I would argue that Tepper's style proves the great potential for evolution within the genre.

The last fantasy novel I read was Terry Pratchett and Neil Gaiman's Good Omens, which can definitely be set apart from other authors. Being an apocalyptic satirical novel which aims to make the reader laugh and think, a writing style which is similar to any of the ones discussed above would not suffice. Rather, Pratchett and Gaiman tell their story in short, inter-weaving fragments which keep it fast-paced and upbeat. The prose is also casual, witty, conversational, and laid-back. Take a look at this line from the first page: "By the same token the earth itself is generally supposed to be about four and a half thousand million years old.... These dates are incorrect" (Pratchett & Gaiman 13). It is not serious, or boring, or enormously creative, or condescending--it is just natural. By natural I mean the pacing just feels pretty leisurely, if you know what I mean. The effect this style has on the reader makes it one of the most enjoyable books I've ever read, and I don't just mean fantasy fiction. This style is a departure from the others we've seen, and not only proves that fantasy is not defined by a style of writing, but it also shows just how entertaining fantasy can be.

It will be the best thing to happen for the fantasy genre when it loses the stereotype attached to it that all fantasy books are boring and stale. There are so many cool and creative things that have been done with it. Look at Sheri Tepper: she did something that was completely different and innovative, which arguably rivals writers in other, more acclaimed genres, and yet she is relatively unknown because she chose to pour her efforts into a stigmatized genre. This must stop. Fantasy has so much potential but if it continues to be disregarded because of a false definition of it then it will never go anywhere.

Works Cited

Anthony, Piers. A Spell for Chameleon. New York/Toronto: Random House, 1977. Print.
Gaiman, Neil, and Terry Pratchett. Good Omens. New York: HarperCollins, 1990. Print.
Lewis, C.S. The Magician's Nephew. New York: HarperCollins, 1955. Print.
McCaffrey, Anne. Dragonsong. New York: Aladdin Paperbacks, 1976. Print.
Tepper, Sheri S. The True Game. New York: Penguin Group, 1996. Print.
Tolkien, J.R.R. The Hobbit or There and Back Again. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Print.

Narnia, Pern, and Religion

The Role Of Religion in Fantasy Fiction

Or, "What Kind of Question Is That to Ask the Jesus Allegory Lion?"

Fantasy fiction and religion have long gone hand in hand, whether said religious element forms a subtext or takes on a more didactic tone. It could even be said that religious lore itself contains some of the foundations of modern fantasy--good versus evil, fantastic creatures, miracles, and the creation of worlds. Monsters, intimate objects coming to life, and a healthy amount of sacred artifacts hidden away. Depending on the mythology, you even get tales of mystical weapons.

Just why fantasy and religion share so many similarities isn't clear. It does seem that humanity possesses an explicit need to believe in something; if not some type of religion, than at least some shred of decency that remains in the face of hardship. That good ultimately triumphs over evil. This is why societies value such things as courage, kindness, camaraderie. All of these things are present in fantasy.
However, the exact shape religion takes within the story is a matter of who is writing and who is reading. By creating an entire world or race, a fiction author becomes, in a sense, a small god. Through their creation, we can often glean a sense of their perspective on religion in reality, and from there consider the impact it has on our own world.

Sometimes religion is not about a specific, named deity, but a general belief in right and wrong despite all the shades of gray that are present in life; a general sense of something greater; the promise of an afterlife. These are some of the ideas present in writings such as Tolkien's. Opposite would be C.S. Lewis's Chronicles of Narnia, where there is one omniscient, powerful (if not all powerful--I'll touch on that in just a moment) deity and a choice of whether or not to follow it...but only one right answer. There are atheists in Narnia, but their punishment is usually specified and they're all obliterated by the end of the series. This tends to be the case with our own monotheistic religions, especially in the middle east and west--their followers tend to be quite content with this arrangement, much like Narnian dwellers.

An interesting thing about life in Narnia is that, while its creator speaks face to face with the inhabitants, he offers so little information about himself and the world that one has to wonder, why does he bother? It's implied that there are limitations on his power, but no more. Who set down the rules, who enforces them, and just what they are remain a mystery. More than that, the answer is almost irrelevant on an individual level. Aslan may not be able to do certain things at certain times, but he created the world and he can end it; he can ultimately save you if he wants to, and if you're compliant--and smite you just as easily. Whatever the fates of the "shadowland" denizens may be, the ultimate decision lies in the hands of a single otherworldly judge and the unseen, silent being he answers to.

Where religion goes, so does the absence of it. According to Anne McCaffrey, author of the Pern series, it is something she thought the story could do without.

I also don't have organized religion on Pern. I figured--since there were four holy wars going on at the time of writing--that religion was one problem Pern didn't need.

Rather, Pernese people form an agrarian society that gives little to no thought to the otherworldly, remaining focused on their own salvation from above--the dragons. Yet they still have moments where they experience the profound, whether in a beautiful dragon's eyes, a piece of song, or the mysteries of between. Their's is not a nature-based religion, but a general healthy respect and occasional awe at the world they struggle to survive in. They could be classified as atheists or agnostics, but only if a distinction was forced to be made at all.

It's worth nothing, however, that most real world agrarian societies do have some sort of spiritual belief system. Pern is rather unusual in this sense.

But it's one thing to renounce religion--it's another to do away with spirituality all together. It's nice to think that there's something beyond death than oblivion and a hole in the ground (or a trip to the bottom of the sea, if that happens to be where circumstances take you). That our struggles in life are rewarded. That the worthy are taken care of. It's for that very reason that McCaffrey wrote the short story "Beyond Between," in which a dragonrider and her partner find themselves in the afterlife.

Fantasy fiction is rarely as blatant about its religious subtext, when it has any, as Narnia. Likewise, it doesn't often go out of its way to avoid connotations with organized religion the way Pern does. Rather, fantasy fiction tends to be made up of a comfortable balance of good versus evil (except when it isn't), likeable protagonists (except when they aren't), and lessons offered on our own morality. Meanwhile, religious texts continue to bring us stories of talking snakes in magical gardens, women who fall from the sky to live on the backs of turtles, beings who give birth to eggs and leech children, and dynasties of gods and goddesses living on top of a mountain. Religious lore and fantasy offer stories to entertain us and stories to guide us towards being better people.

Which accomplishes which is purely subjective.

Work Cited

Jamneck, Lynn. "An Interview with Anne McCaffrey." Welcome to Writing-World.com! 05 Oct. 2010. Web.