[estranghero]

Wanted to open this thread on the matter of whether or not fantasy can have aspirations of high art or should be purely for entertainment as being debated on in another thread. (Or something like that...)

Just wanted to help out the moderators *snicker* http://www.sffworld.com/ubb/wink.gif in leaching off the debate there as it was kinda off-thread already.

So, in my self-proclaimed role of throwing fire into gasoline (instead of the other way around), fire away people...!

http://www.sffworld.com/ubb/smile.gif http://www.sffworld.com/ubb/smile.gif http://www.sffworld.com/ubb/smile.gif http://www.sffworld.com/ubb/smile.gif http://www.sffworld.com/ubb/smile.gif

I just love putting these smiley-faces on! http://www.sffworld.com/ubb/smile.gif

[This message has been edited by estranghero (edited January 02, 2002).]

[Alucard]

Well, I've said it before, and I'll say it again, there's a place for everything. Sometimes I like a novel that's strictly entertainment, sometimes I like a real thought provoker. By reading both types, I appreciate each of them much more.

Sometimes it's nice to sit back and read some sword wielding adventure stories full of comic book heroes. It's nice to have that incredibly ideal hero that you can strive to be like. Sometimes it's nice to read a book full of grey characters that seem very human. It's easy to relate when they make mistakes. And sometimes it's nice to have a novel that will be packed with amazingly new and inventive ideas that will open your eyes to new possibilities in literature, and otherwise.

In other words, variety is a good thing. Without it, I'd get sick of almost any style. My only requirement for a novel, regardless of it's type (or genre for that matter), is that it keeps me interested. I'm interested in many different types of subjects and styles, so many different novels will be enjoyable for me.

So, as for the question "High art or entertainment?" As long as they're good, I'll take both.

[SusF]

Both is the best way to go, but if I have to chose just one, I'll choose entertainment.

Susan

[wastra]

Fantasy is no different than any other genre...

Fantasy has its more serious writers (Tolkien) and its less (Brooks/Eddings).

Poetry has the artistic heavyweights like Frost, Elliot, etc, and the more entertaining types like Dr. Seuss.

[Ancalagon the Black]

For the most part Fantasy just doesn't seem to keep up as well as pure real world fiction when it comes to high art. I read quite a bit of fantasy, and most of it revolves around the same magic swords/elves/dragons stuff that has been around since LOTR... the fact that the author is trying to go for interest and has to meet certain criteria to be a fantasy story (fantasy readers expect there to be magic swords/elves/dragons in their novels)
means that the genre is more stagnant when it comes to thought provoking concepts than others.

[Bardos]

I usualy find other genres less thought provoking than fantasy. They too have their cliches, and are far most difficult for the writer to bend them.

[Llama]

>>the fact that the author is trying to go for interest and has to meet certain criteria to be a fantasy story (fantasy readers expect there to be magic swords/elves/dragons in their novels)
means that the genre is more stagnant when it comes to thought provoking concepts than others

But that's only because you are using an extremely narrow definition of fantasy. I consider myself a devoted fantasy reader and I only occasionally pick up anything with "swords/elves/dragons", as you put it. I would argue that a significant portion of the world's great literature, past and present, contains fantasy elements.

[Qin]

*twitches*

I tried reading Evermeet: Island of the Elves last night. Pain.

*twitches*


[This message has been edited by Qin (edited January 02, 2002).]

[Llama]

The fact that the title was enough to make you break out in hives should have been a clear warning....

[Bond]

Can someone differentiate for me "high art" as opposed to just "art" or "high fantasy" as opposed to just "fantasy"? Cannot ignore Socrates' advice.

Why cannot authors "bend" stuff? Are they writing for themselves or for someone else? Aren't authors being encouraged to extend genres more than to conform to them? Are they thinking along the lines of "I'll put in a dragon just to make sure everyone knows that this is supposed to be a fantasy"? Well if that's what it takes to put food on the table I guess it is forgivable.

BTW just how many pieces of fiction can you undoubtedly say have had a significant material effect on your life? From what I can deduce the effects of "entertainment books" and "high art books" with a message have generally been the same for me. Someone could say I just don't realize it but then again who are they to say it had a substantial effect on me? They can only give conjecture and speculate.

[This message has been edited by Bond (edited January 02, 2002).]