What do you consider to be fantasy?

[Miller]

Well since Stephen himself said if it HAD to be classified, then it's fantasy. But really he just thinks of it as fiction himself. The link I gave you on Hard Fiction was a hell of alot bigger than the quote you pulled out. Which defies the point of tearing out a paragraph to suit a need, given there was other relevant information in there as well. Oh well. Hard fiction to me would be basically exactly what The Dark Tower series is. A genre bender, unclassifiable. It has a little of everything.

edit- Here is an example of how you try and pull sentences out of paragraphs and milk your point out of them, not really benefitting the conversation at all. I'm going to include the part you left out of that paragraph just to show you what I mean.

"There are really two parts of science fiction. The first is called "hard" science fiction, and the other is called fantasy. Fantasy makes no pretense at being real science. It's really just using science as a device. "Hard" science fiction claims to be based on somewhat "real" science with a few natural hypotheses. Almost everything we read in this course is "hard" fiction. What you find, though, within the genre of "hard" science fiction, is that much of the science is really fantasy."

 

[Erfael]

Miller, it seems that that quote you're pulling out about hard SF versus fantasy (SF) is relating strictly to science fiction, works that presume to have a basis in science. And furthermore, the hard SF is the science fiction that he's saying would be able to stand up to scientific scrutiny. In other words, hard sci-fi is the science fiction that a scientist would be able to look at and say, "We can do that. It makes sense, is scientifically sound, and with proper resources, we can or will be able to do it." Moreover, it's not up to US to dream up ways that it could be possible, but it's on the author to show us that he's crafted the world in such a way as to be based in science.

This isn't even how we really use the terms now. Generally hard sci-fi is based on physical sciences like physics, astronomy, tectonics, biology, something like that. Soft SF are based in more social sciences--psychology, sociology, economics, things like that. So I think in some degree you're pulling a very specific definition that someone seemed to be using for his argument that people are apt to believe everything they read in magazines or books (or on the net, say in an article that one googles and reads a little piece of) and trying to apply that to the field of fantasy literature.

And you still haven't given me a definition of hard fiction, which is what you're describing some books as. I can't find hard fiction on the net at all (aside from a porn site that came up on google). So feel free to coin a term, but do tell us what you mean so that we can have a conversation about it. As for a definition, Eventine's definition seems to be a good one, that hard fiction holds as fast to the real world as it possibly can, only deviating in order to create a few elements on which to build a story, accepting that it's not a real term that I've ever run across. We could all just make up words to call things and not tell anyone else what they mean, but we wouldn't get very far that way (which seems to be in some degree the gist of the article you posted....funny that).

Now, if we're still talking about Dark Tower, I could send you a list of spoilers that are things that no amount of science should be able to explain (hard or soft). But, yeah, they're big spoilers, and I don't want to ruin anything for you, as the books are quite good.

So how far did you get in the series? I know it's been a long haul (almost 30 years) from beginning to end, but it's awfully good.

 

[Jack]

We could all just make up words to call things and not tell anyone else what they mean, but we wouldn't get very far that way.

I've been reading a lot of Lightthread Gavel Punk SF lately.

It's my favorite genre.

 

[Yobmod]

I've also never heard of Hard Fiction, and even the piece on Hard SF / fantasy seemed like more of a rant than an informed article.

Hard SF = seemingly scientifically explicable
Soft SF = concerned with soft sciences (anthropoly / psychology etc)
Space opera = Scientific realism is unimportant as long as the story is exciting, but uses common SF tropes.

None of these could be used for the dark tower.

Fiction just means a story thats made up, so Dark Tower is of course fiction. But in the context of discussing genre, Mainstream Fiction means the story sticks to the real world except in the discusion of particular characters / events.

So if the Dark tower is not mainstream fiction (doesn't stick to real world scenarios), nor SF (as theres no science explanation) it is perforce fantasy.
King admits that it should be categorised as fantasy; I suspect the reason he says he would prefer it to remain unclassified is that it does not use many of the typical fantasy tropes - but that just means it doesn't easily fit into any fantasy subgenres. It's still fantasy tho.

 

[Yobmod]

Damnable double post

Edit: So its not a completely wasted post;

Castle? It's been too long for me since I read the first books of the 'Dark Castle Series' I guess.

Was this a mistake? or a typo? or sarcasm?

The series is called the Dark Tower. Roland grew up in some kind of medieval castle. He was on a quest to find the Tower. Books are allowed more than one location and type of building.

 

[KatG]

You're doing fine Miller, but you don't have to devil's advocate any more than you want to.

Science fiction does, actually, have to have a science explanation for its story. Science fiction are stories of imagined realities for which there is a scientific basis. (Hence, the science in the title.) Of course, quite often that basis is pretty shaky and speculative, but the important thing is that it is there. There are a number of areas where people seem to get confused over sf versus fantasy, such as:

1) Psychics -- we don't know if psychic abilities such as telepathy are possible. Currently, they are not and there is no scientific proof of their existence, though many people believe they exist. It is conceivable, however, that alien life forms might have psychic abilities or that it might one day be possible to genetically, chemically or otherwise scientifically develop such abilities in humans or other creatures. Therefore, you can have a science fiction story about psychics, if the psychic abilities are due to scientific speculation. You can also, though, have a fantasy story about psychics who have their abilities from magic or the paranormal.

2) Vampires, werewolves and the like -- vampires are a fantasy legend and usually have their abilities and behavior controlled by magical or supernatural forces, such as an aversion to Christian crosses and such. But it is also possible to turn vampirism scientific, by casting it as a disease, an alien life form, or a genetic mutation. If the vampires are given a scientific explanation for existence, then you have a sf story. If not, it remains a fantasy story. Same for werefolk and all the rest.

3) Time travel/alternate dimensions -- there is a whole sub-genre of sf called alternate history which postulates alternate timelines and sometimes travel between timelines. There are also stories about time travel through the use of machines or drugs. These stories are based on speculation from quantum physics, string and chaos theories and such. Though we don't know that any of it is possible, and indeed, it may be impossible, it is scientific speculation, and as such, sf.

There are also, though, fantasy stories in which a person moves through time or alternate dimensions by means of some form of magic, a system that is magical or mystical, like a handy dandy crystal. Fantasy stories in which a person from our current world is transported to a fantasy realm where magic works, for instance, were extremely popular in the 1980's and still come up today. Merlin, the most famous wizard, lived life backwards. King's Dark Tower series is a fantasy story in which the characters move through magic from one realm to the next, including regular modern realms and, I believe, futuristic ones. In the fantasy stories, though, there isn't a scientific basis present for being able to move through time, space or dimension. King meant the stories to be considered fantasy, but did enjoy throwing in sf-like elements. There are also of course many fantasy stories that take place in imaginary worlds, especially many of the epic fantasies. These can be seen as the equivalent of alternate dimensions, but since no scientific explanation is given for their existence, and most of them contain magical or paranormal phenomena, they cannot be sf.

4) Traditional elements -- If a fantasy story has machines in it or is set in a futuristic setting, people tend to confuse it with sf. But really, there isn't a sacred law (written in diamond on Mt. Creativity,) that says a fantasy story can't have trains, spaceships, science issues, robotic polar bears or anything else like that. Likewise, a sf story can be set in a historical period, involve swords, talking animals, and the like, as long as there is a science-based explanation for the elements of the story. There is a sub-genre of sf that is called, badly, science fantasy, meaning sf stories that have the look and feel of fantasy, but give it a science basis, such as Anne McCaffrey's genetically engineered dragons on a colony planet (with psychic powers no less.)

As long as the story has magic, the supernatural or the unexplained fantastic, it's fantasy. If all phenomena is science-based, however theoretical, it's science fiction. SF has a number of sub-genres in the market. Hard sf features stories involving hard sciences such as chemistry, biology and physics, whereas soft/sociological sf features social sciences such as anthropology and psychology. Space opera are adventures set in a sf imagined future.

There is apparently a movement called mundane sf which feels that the only really worthy sf stories are those that do not involve space travel or alien life forms but concentrate only on a future Earth, only on very non-speculative, hard science elements. And so that may be what was meant by hard sf versus fantasy sf. Or it may be that they don't like the science fantasy sub-genre, though it seems a rather big brush to tar everybody with. But it's a separate issue from the fantasy genre which has its own parameters and its own sub-genres.

Essentially, fantasy can have science in it, (and westerns, mystery, romance,) but must have fantasy in it. SF has no fantasy in it, only science. Stories that are historical but have no fantasy or scientifically imagined realities such as alien life forms are historical.

 

[Miller]

Well basically, when I stated Hard Fiction, what I meant was just a work of serious fiction. One that is hard to classify, and is a mix of alot of genres. The Dark Tower series has western/sci-fi/fantasy/romance/etc undertones to it, and really should not be burdened with a classification at all, especially considering this is a peice of work that took like 30 years to produce, and is his pride and joy. King himself said he thinks of it as fiction, while I myself have decided it's Hard Fiction.

IMHO, if I were looking for a fantasy book to read, I would not be satisfied with the series. Yet if I was looking for (hard) fiction, then it would fit the bill perfectly.

What part of the bookstore does his series reside in anyways? The fiction area? I would have to go look.

edit- Oh, and in reply to Erf's question about how long and how much. I think I read the first 3 books? Maybe more, totally forget now. Plus, we are talking like 15 years ago I bet. Probably more cause I think I read the first one when I was like 12, and I'm 29 now.

 

[Yobmod]

Here (UK) it's shelved in equally often in fantasy and Horror. I definately don't consider it horror, so that's not much help tho

 

[Miller]

Here (UK) it's shelved in equally often in fantasy and Horror. I definately don't consider it horror, so that's not much help tho

Horror, heh, I would imagine the clerk hadn't even read the series, and just assumed it was another King horror book.

If it was my bookstore I would make up a 'Hard-Fiction' sign, throw that series underneath it, and be done with it. Then when someone asked wtf was hard fiction, I'd tell them to read the damn books and find out.

edit again- Yes, it's time to coin that phrase. Hard Fiction. I did notice it was used in referance to other books using google, but finding an actual definition is impossible. Maybe it could be as simple as a book of fiction that uses 3 or more of the sub-genres of fiction, I dunno? But once we all decide on it, it should be put in the Wykopedia.

 

[Rob B]

edit- Oh, and in reply to Erf's question about how long and how much. I think I read the first 3 books? Maybe more, totally forget now. Plus, we are talking like 15 years ago I bet. Probably more cause I think I read the first one when I was like 12, and I'm 29 now.

Here I am clipping something somebody said to suit my needs, but...

Let me get this straight. You were trying to argue about something you haven't even completely read through, with a number of people who have?

 

[Miller]

Here I am clipping something somebody said to suit my needs, but...

Let me get this straight. You were trying to argue about something you haven't even completely read through, with a number of people who have?

I stated that quite awhile back here, in multiple postings. You here for the witch hunt?

edit-
Lemme quote myself a few times here-

2nd post- "It has been a looong time since I read the begining books of that series, but I seem to remember them jumping back and forth between our realm and one of fantasy, which became apparent as the future at a much later date didn't it? I forget."

4th Post-"It's been too long for me since I read the first books of the 'Dark Castle Series' I guess. I really don't remember much of it now."

?th Post-"I am tempted to read that whole series now, even the first ones again. Just to get an idea of it."

Again another- "Well if it's only been a year since you read them, then I am going to take your word on it. Cause it has been a looong time for me to be remembering anything."

And your favorite- "Oh, and in reply to Erf's question about how long and how much. I think I read the first 3 books? Maybe more, totally forget now. Plus, we are talking like 15 years ago I bet. Probably more cause I think I read the first one when I was like 12, and I'm 29 now."

**Did I mention that I don't remember much of the book now? Or is it easier just to get angry at someone because they don't want to share your opinion of a book classification.**

-Was I arguing or having an opinion? Maybe that needs classification?

 

[Miller]

First question asked in this Thread-

Wolfa Jones-- "What do you consider to be fantasy? Does fantasy need to have certain themes and characteristics for you to consider it as fantasy?"

Somewhere along the lines I think that was forgotten .

My reply, which spurred the anger of some of the moderators on this site, was this-- "Hmm, yet to me the Dark Tower series would be fiction."

Sorry for having an opinion...especially since it actually closely matches Stephen King's own opinion of the books. But regardless, that is still only OUR opinions, which is what this was all about.

 

[Eventine]

Well since Stephen himself said if it HAD to be classified, then it's fantasy. But really he just thinks of it as fiction himself. The link I gave you on Hard Fiction was a hell of alot bigger than the quote you pulled out. Which defies the point of tearing out a paragraph to suit a need, given there was other relevant information in there as well. Oh well. Hard fiction to me would be basically exactly what The Dark Tower series is. A genre bender, unclassifiable. It has a little of everything.

edit- Here is an example of how you try and pull sentences out of paragraphs and milk your point out of them, not really benefitting the conversation at all. I'm going to include the part you left out of that paragraph just to show you what I mean.

"There are really two parts of science fiction. The first is called "hard" science fiction, and the other is called fantasy. Fantasy makes no pretense at being real science. It's really just using science as a device. "Hard" science fiction claims to be based on somewhat "real" science with a few natural hypotheses. Almost everything we read in this course is "hard" fiction. What you find, though, within the genre of "hard" science fiction, is that much of the science is really fantasy."

Erf has summed up what I was trying to say in the following post - that article seemed to be about Hard SF, not Hard Fiction. Sorry if you felt I was milking a point by pulling that particular part, but I felt it showed you were misinterpreting the article.



Well Miller, it looks that the definition which I provided of hard fiction:

There are two types of fiction: hard fiction and soft. Hard fiction takes place in a reality that is as true to science, engineering, and history as possible with drama and characters added to make the story

doesn't particularly gel with your definition:

Well basically, when I stated Hard Fiction, what I meant was just a work of serious fiction. One that is hard to classify, and is a mix of alot of genres.

Not that I'm saying I'm right, I was more interested to see where you were coming from, and if that definition was what you were trying to explain. Thanks for the discussion though - it's always interesting to see another perspective.

 

[Erfael]

We're really not picking on you, Miller. And I don't think any of us have our hackles up about any of this. We're just trying to get to the bottom of it so that we can all understand each other.

Incidentally, I do completely agree with you, 100%, that Dark Tower is fiction...happens to be fantasy, as well, but definitely fiction.

 

[Rob B]

Obviously, Miller, your meter for detecting sarcasm is as strong as your meter for determining fantasy.

That was sarcasm. As was my earlier post.

Witch hunt? I don't think I or any moderator was getting *angry* with you at all. Simply asking for clarification why you held an opinion that seemed rather different (and not necessarily wrong) than what most here hold.

Like Erfael said, we aren't picking on you. You are just going through the normal newbie hazing!

 

[Miller]

Hmm, yet to me the Dark Tower series would be fiction. Although, if he had been carrying a sword and not a gun, then I guess it could be fantasy. Swords and midieval settings definately have a fantasy type genre about them in any book, unless it's an actual historical fiction I find. Somehow the line between the two gets fuzzy- fiction and fantasy I mean. Which I find somewhat annoying really. What about a book section called Hard Fiction? Or something like that?

Hehe, Hard Fiction was just something I had thrown out there as a possible classification system in the first post. To me it didn't exist as of yet, until I actually googled it after to see if it was a real genre, coming across my link to the 70's Course on Hard Fiction itself, which as you said, hardly was a meaning I was trying to make in the first place. Yet really, it was just something I had suggested as a possible name for a book section, LoL.

I completely understand your point on it being fantasy, but to me, it just doesn't have a fantasy ring to it. I know, I know, it fits the criteria, but just not to me. If I read it expecting fantasy I would be dissapointed. Hence why I am still obliged to kick it into the fiction/whatever section.

edit- kick is a harsh word for the holy grail of postings, how about wrap it in velvet, and tiptoe my way over to the fiction section, making sure no one takes notice of me in the process.

 

[Miller]

Obviously, Miller, your meter for detecting sarcasm is as strong as your meter for determining fantasy.

That was sarcasm. As was my earlier post.

Witch hunt? I don't think I or any moderator was getting *angry* with you at all. Simply asking for clarification why you held an opinion that seemed rather different (and not necessarily wrong) than what most here hold.

Like Erfael said, we aren't picking on you. You are just going through the normal newbie hazing!

LoL, I'm not daft! I know sarcasm when I see it, but after 2 pages of defending whether or not 'I' think The Dark Tower series is fantasy or not, and then having you pop into the conversation at it's end, I really didn't feel like pointing out the fact I knew you were being sarcastic in the first place.

But trying to defend a point half-heartedly while I have two little kids destroying my house as I'm not looking, and a phone ringing non-stop all day, it becomes a little less and less important to try and google up actual definitions to words I had (obvious to any who read it in the first place) made up only as a suggestion.

Determining Fantasy inside the boundaries set by publisher's you mean? Or determining fantasy in MY mind as I think it should be, which once again was the initial question.

There was no clarification wanted, rofl, there was annoyance because I would not change my opinion on it. But yes, you are right, in a book store it would most definately go in the fantasy section. Start another thread about that and I will put that there.

 

[Eventine]

OK, now that we're all on the same page I'd be interested in seeing who else you'd be stocking on the shelves of your Hard Fiction section Miller?

 

[Wulfa_Jones]

Whoa! It seems I opened up a whole can of worms!

I've never read the Dark Tower series, while it sounds interesting I'm not a fan of Kings writing so have never attempted them. However, from what I've heard it does sound like fantasy.

It is quite hard to classify genres in a board way and even worse when it comes to sub-genres. As KatG pointed out – what is the difference between a thriller and a murder mystery? They all end up in the same section in the bookshop but is there a difference? It was also pointed out with horror, which is another genre that often contains elements of others.

It’s really quite messy! For example I was thinking, when writing this post how to classify Sci-Fi. Initially I had it as being a fictional story that is set in the future, contain elements of futuristic technology or set on another planet. But I thought of a number of books that I considered to be fantasy that where set in the future of this world or set on another planet. In fact you could go as far to say that the majority of fantasy is set on another planet!

Fantasy… a few years ago I would have said that fantasy is easy to classify – I considered fantasy to basically be sword and sorcery. But since I have expanded my reading I don’t consider that be the case. I would now personally consider fantasy to be a fictional story that contains an element of the fantastical but can’t be classified as Sci-Fi… or horror!

 

[Yobmod]

Yes, it's time to coin that phrase. Hard Fiction. I did notice it was used in referance to other books using google, but finding an actual definition is impossible. Maybe it could be as simple as a book of fiction that uses 3 or more of the sub-genres of fiction, I dunno? But once we all decide on it, it should be put in the Wykopedia.

Sound a bit like Slipstream or Instistitial fiction.

About a decade ago at a Sycamore Hill Writing Workshop I [not me!] attended, Bruce Sterling asked the participants to name books and stories that they thought might fit into a category of fiction Bruce had invented — "slipstream fiction." This term was intended by him as a temporary marker in the forever evolving literary world to reference works that were specifically extra–genre, but which were borrowing shape, voice, tropes, and structures from inside the genre while continuing to be recognized and published on the far side of that road. The list included Days Between Stations by Steve Erickson, some of the works of Paul Auster and Don DeLillo, Margaret Atwood's The Handmaid's Tale, etc.

Ms. Sherman defines interstitial fiction as follows: "Interstitial fiction defies categories and laughs at expectation; Interstitial fiction breaks the rules. Interstitial novels lurk near or on the borders of two, three, or more genres, owing allegiance to no single genre or set of conventions."

Neither are very fashionable or useful (except for the authors who make them up), as they seem to get applied to whatever the critics think are good. But the latter fits the Dark Tower very well i guess.