View Full Version : Fathers of fantasy

Home - Discussion Forums - News - Reviews - Interviews

New reviews, interviews and news

New in the Discussion Forum

Pages : 1 2 3 4 [5] 6

September 1st, 2003, 06:28 PM
My point here is that Fantasy is fiction and fiction is fantasy. When we get down too it, isn't me thinking about going to the toilet when I need to whizz a fantasy? I havn't gone to the toilet, I still need to whizz, so isn't this a fantasy of mine?

Madonna kissed Britney, that was a fantasy of mine, but now its true. Is this SCi-Fi?. The probability wasn't there, yet its happened. Can't be fantasy anymore.

September 1st, 2003, 06:38 PM
Originally posted by Erfael
Julian, I didn't mean some of the things you thought. If you're not a native English speaker, I should have worded a couple of things differently so as to not confuse you.

And I, it seems, should have been a little less succinct. But then, I didn't realise you got confused so easily... ;)

September 1st, 2003, 06:52 PM
Now we're getting somewhere. Fiction is fantasy. Fantasy is fiction.

All of our categories merely describe the ways and amount something deviates from our real world. Without the categories, it would all be rather more difficult to narrow searches, say, at the bookstore or even in discussion. If it deviates in a certain way, it's fantasy, another way, horror.

The difficulty we're getting into is when it deviates in ambiguous or multiple ways. In those circumstances it's sometimes difficult to put it into one category, and we get debates over what things are.

I think in your statement, "Fantasy is fiction, and fiction is fantasy" is a little misleading. Looks like "genre is descriptor, and genre is descriptor," meaning that Fantasy as a genre is fiction, and fiction as a genre is a deviation from reality. I agree with that.

I think you were meaning it as a tautological statement, though, which I don't necessarily agree with, that the fantasy and fiction genres are one and the same in both directions. I don't agree with this. I think that there needs to be some extra element, an extra deviation from pure fact(usually considered a magical one) to make something fantasy other than lack of probablility.

September 1st, 2003, 07:22 PM
Which is why we have sub-genres. For me (in that magical of Internet terms - IMO) all fantasy needs is some sort of side step from reality. Urban fantasy is a great example here. It's a misnomer that fantasy is some sort of differentitation from reality. All fantasy is, is reality askewed. A smile instead of a frown could cause the universe to fold upon itself, adn this is why it is fantastical. You could prove this with some sort of formula, maybe an interpretation of an interpretation, which makes the physics of the world make sense. As this had never been proven, it is still a fantasy, whether it be of the person that came up with the unproven therom, or the person reading it.

We could get philosphical and say what is truth, what is reality? Is what we are seeing just a figment of a figment? Thus we have a fantastical thought, a question within a question. IMO, that's all it takes to be fantasy. Whether it be ones persons truth v another's question? Is this fantasy or reality?

And its here we find that genre is a personal perspective, based upon belief adn self-imposed structure.

If I say its fantasy, to me its fantasy, yet to you it may not be. Truth is not a definite, its an implausable concept that we use to define reality. If fifty people say its true and one questions it, is there not the possiblitlity that just maybe its not true?

Is fantasy reality? Is reality fantasy? What is fantasy? What is reality.

These questions and more will be answered on the next episode of the price is right.

I do believe the above is a complete load. I'd apolagise for making you read it, yet I do believe it was your choice. Or maybe it wasn't. Maybe it was fate, a chosen course that forced you to believe the fantastal to be truth, or truth to be fantastical?

September 2nd, 2003, 12:14 AM
Well, as I've pointed out elsewhere before, "science fiction" and "fantasy" are more marketing labels than any sort of worthwhile descriptive tag.

I'm for the umbrella term, "speculative fiction", even though that doesn't quite nail it either.

But I'm in the vast, vast minority that doesn't need a label on a spine to tell me if I'm going to read a book.

--gabe chouinard
hyper machine interfaces (http://hypermode.blogspot.com)

Soon Lee
September 2nd, 2003, 01:34 AM
It's a continuum.

There is no 'Father of Fantasy'. Even Tolkien himself was inspired by the Finnish Kalevala. Writers are informed by the culture and literary traditions of their day. What Tolkien did was a high water mark of its type which is why he is regarded as the 'Father of Modern Fantasy' but what we're discussing here is an arbitrary drawing of the line; and opinions will vary. One good thing such discussions do is to demonstrate that Fantasy did not begin with Tolkien, something people are all too likely to overlook in these days of the 10 second soundbite and goldfish-like memories.

It's a continuum.

All fiction is fantasy in that the writer tells tales of things that did not happen. It doesn't matter if it's by Hemingway, Steinbeck or Jordan, it's still fantasy. The rest is labelling. That is not to say that labels are completely bad; they serve to point the reader to other works of a similar 'type' that they may like. But labels too, are arbitrary.

September 2nd, 2003, 08:42 AM
But I'm in the vast, vast minority that doesn't need a label on a spine to tell me if I'm going to read a book.

But those labels that others decide on can sure help you find it in the big stores they have now...

I have nightmares of going into my local B&N and having them take away all the genres and then mix things up so they're not in ABC order anymore. It makes me shudder to think how hard it would be to find things in there.

September 2nd, 2003, 07:24 PM
Originally posted by Erfael

I have nightmares of going into my local B&N and having them take away all the genres and then mix things up so they're not in ABC order anymore. It makes me shudder to think how hard it would be to find things in there.

This sort of reminds me of the first time I stepped into Foyle's of London, years back. At that time it was the largest bookstore in the world. And I was thinking: oh, this going to be the best thing ever.

And then I found out that all these books were categorized , not alphabetically or by genre, but by publisher. And then by author, regardless of genre.

The horror!

Alas, I'm not even sure Foyle's still exists, but Hobbit should know.

September 3rd, 2003, 06:32 PM
LOL..... don't visit London too often, Julian (Sammie's a better bet! :D) but I did go to Foyles about 18 months ago. The Sf and Fantasy was in a section of it's own, if I remember right. I bought Connie Willis's To Say Nothing of the Dog.

I tended to buy more from specialist shops like Forbidden Planet - smaller but more of what i wanted... :)


January 31st, 2008, 06:50 AM
Why not take it back to the old testament?

That'd be the Great, Great, Great, Great Grandfathers of SF. As for Dads.. How about Douglas Adams?