[Alucard]

A quick question.

Which of the two major types of fantasy do you prefer (and, yes, I am generalizing here)? Would you rather read the swords and sorcery, psuedo-medieval, dragons and elves kind of fantasy? Or do you prefer what's often labeled as speculative fiction, which is your urban fantasies and stories that take place more on the borders of reality?

For me, I prefer the latter over the former. With a lot of the contemporary or urban fantasy novels, you usually get a much more creative story that isn't so heavily strung with formulas and cliches, in both the settings and concepts . . . and even the characters themselves, often times. They're usually much more imaginative and, in turn, make me stop and think "what if?" Not to say that I don't like the more traditional fantasy, because at times I do. But not nearly as often as with the borders of reality kind of stuff.

So what about you? Which do you prefer and why?

[Mithfânion]

Would you rather read the swords and sorcery, psuedo-medieval, dragons and elves kind of fantasy? Or do you prefer what's often labeled as speculative fiction, which is your urban fantasies and stories that take place more on the borders of reality

Without a shred of doubt, the former, High Fantasy. Which is why you like Neil Gaiman much much more than I do. I'll take Martin, Hobb, Tolkien, GG Kay, Erikson, Williams, Elliott, JV Jones any day over guys like Gaiman, Charles De Lint and many other Urban Fantasy writers.

For instance, I'm reading what is supposedly one of the very best urban fantasy books in years (and Gaiman's best, supposedly), American Gods, and I find myself vastly underwhelmed. Sure it's a nice travellogue sofar, which must be nice if you're an inhabitant of the US, but the Gods have failed to impress me sofar. It's all very weird and doesn't provide reading enjoyment. Urban Fantasy really isn't my thing.

[ezchaos]

I usually prefer the dragon and elf kind of fantasy to the urban or modern kind. To me, the whole point of reading these books is to escape from the real world. The more unlike the real world, the better. I don't usually get that type of escapism when I read a story that takes place 'right now' on our own Earth.
However, I still enjoy reading urban fantasy if it's written well. I liked 'American Gods' and would much rather read that then most high fantasy crap by authors like Goodkind, newer Feist & Eddings, etc.

[Qin]

Being the history buff that I am, I'm more inclined to read the 'high fantasy' novels, due to their inclination to "borrow" from history.

[Penumbra]

Although I love Tolkien, I can't see myself writing that way. My fantasies tend to deal with mythology, except for one dragon story. But I tend to bring my mythological creatures into the present. I guess I enjoy reading the classic stuff more than writing about it.

[Alucard]

I understand where you're coming from, Mithfanion. I've been let down in a similar way with a lot of high fantasy. I heard a lot of high praise for William's trilogy, and it was decent, but it was also very formulaic and, in my eyes, like any other fantasy trilogy, just with different names. He's not the only example.

I do like both, but with the classic fantasy I need to have some sort of kink in the formula (which is why I enjoyed Authors like Hobb and Martin). If I can predict what will happen after the first chapter, and there's an entire set of books to get through before I find out I'm right, then I probably won't stick around for the ride.

But this is just my preference. In fantasy, I tend to either enjoy the bizarre, or the books intended for young adults (creepy combination, eh?). I'm not sure why, but these are the books that usually have me turning pages whether I want to or not, and are also my greatest inspiration for writing.

But that's enough from me. I'm going to go put on lipstick, play liebestraum on repeat for a few hours, clean shotguns and think about bizarre things.

[Alucard]

By the way Mith, you might want to give Gaiman's Neverwhere a shot, even if you aren't crazy about American Gods. It's much easier to swallow, and a friend of mine who thought American Gods was too bizarre really enjoyed that one. So you might like it.

[Cygnus]

Mostly I also prefer the high fantasy. I find it a lot easier to lose myself in a story that has no relation to my reality. Even so, over the past month I have been reading more of the speculative fantasy than high fantasy. They do tend to be much more creative.. or at least I don't have to deal with the same kind of cliches that high fantasy always has. They also tend to make me think harder than high fantasy.. along the same lines as Alucard's "What if?"

I second the suggestion for Neverwhere. I just read it and I found it to be interesting and fun to read. Also anything by Jonathan Carroll mixes the real world and "unreal" world together with amazing results.

[Ladijen]

I have no preference, actually. I can get into either one, depending on my mood and on how well the story is written.

[Hobbit]

'I have no preference, actually. I can get into either one, depending on my mood and on how well the story is written'.

Ditto, though if pushed for all of the above probably High Fantasy - the stuff on the top of my bookshelves! http://www.sffworld.com/ubb/smile.gif

Hobbit