What is fantasy?

E

Eventine

Uh,
Staff member
Joined
Apr 30, 2000
Messages
3,397
What is fantasy? What seperates a fantasy book from sci fi? From run of the mill fiction?
In another topic, AzureHero stated that Anne Rice's vampire books weren't fantasy.
Why not? They have fantastical elements don't they?
But is that enough for it to be fantasy?
Just because it is set in the real world doesn't exclude it, there are several examples of fantasy being set in the real world (Brooks' Demon books is one).

There's a few questions to che on, so lets see what everyone thinks fantasy really is.
 
Imo, fantasy is what can never really happen and that's the main difference between sci fi and fantasy. Sci Fi can and may happen sometime in the future, and many sci fi books predictions did come true.


About Anne Rice's, some call that genre of fantasy Urban Fantasy, fantasy that happens in our world, in modern cities and such. Laurell K. Hamilton's books are in that category too. Some call it Horror, but what is Horror? i say Horror is anything that can scare us, and it doesn't have to contradict other definitions, you can have a horror book in fantasy, in sci fi or in gardenning.
 
I always thought that fantsy is different from sci-fi because it has it's own world in which ours doesn't exist. Unfortunately it didn't work for some books, but I still think that the idea of fantasy is idea of another world. And I don't take other planets in sci-fi as other worlds even if they are, because there still an option that ours are among them.(And usually it is so)
 
Few examples of the simplistic differences:

1.) In fantasy, when people travel long distances, they either use horses or boats VS in science fiction, when they travel, they use space ships.

2.) In fantasy when people fight they use swords and magic VS in science fiction when people fight they use lasers/guns.

3.) In fantasy powers are harnessed and utilized through magic VS in science fiction powers are harnessed and utilized through science/technolgy.

Essentially, though I think most of you guys have it right, science fiction is what we believe that can happen or proved (science) in our world/universe and fantasy is what, for the most part, cannot happen and occurs on a word SIMILAR (magic) to our own.

Then there are writers like C.S. Friedman who blend the two genres (Coldfire Trilogy) who blurr the lines of categorization.

I think the best fantasies take extrodinary settings and use the settings to highlight human struggles and ideals in a more literal sense; taking the human element and placing it in a fantastical setting & using the fantastical elements as a metaphor for real life struggles.

That said; I think Heinlein or A.C. Clarke, can't remember which one right now, said something like "Advanced science and technology would be so complex that it would be indistinguishable from magic." that is not an exact quote, just a paraphrase.

And no, Anne Rice maybe considered borderline urban fantasy, but she has really been classified (bookstores, magizines like Locus, etc.) as horror.

When I think Urban fantasy, I think of Charles de Lint and Neil Gaiman not Anne Rice.

---Then again that's just my opinion and I could be wrong
 
I think this whole conundrum is analagous to the question asked in biological circles "How do you define a species?". SF is not actually plausible....for example, faster than light travel cannot happen in the real universe to the best of our knowledge. Is choosing to believe this becomes possible really any different than suspended disbelief when it comes to magical powers? What's the difference between many magical powers and esp, telekinetic, empathic powers in SF books?
Personally I think the only real distinction that can be made is fiction and non-fiction. Thereafter you're into shades of grey. If you imagine the various genres of fiction forming a 2 dimensional plane and that the location of each genre is represented by imaginary points on that plane, then it's fairly easy to see that individual books can be located at any position on that plane. Sometimes they fall close to a particular genre (eg typical fantasy), sometimes they fall between 2 or more of these imaginary genre centers (eg the part fantasy, part SF books we can all mention). Essentially, fiction is a continuum and to try and partition it is probably a futile effort. Though heavens knows we humans love pigeon-holing everything we can get our hands on. Maybe our drive to label and know the mystical and unknowable drove the magic from the earth millenia ago
wink.gif
 
Slightly off topic, but,
Giarc - didn't you hear they made light go 300 times faster than it normally would???
But that was a great analogy with the planes. I believe Herbert also said something about the distinction between high technology and magic being only understanding as well.

Lani, if you think of fantasy as being seperate wrolds, what do you think of books like Brooks Shannara series that are set in a very post apocalyptic Earth (1000's of
years on), but which are obviously fantasy novels. Does this change your classification of them to sf?

I have to disagree slightly with FitzChivalry though, I think Horror does slightly have it's own genre, and lends itself out to others. Thus you get Horror-SF, Horror-Fantasy, Horror-Gardening. Horror is a book written with the intention to create fear.

But as Giarc showed us, there is no neat pigeonhole we can put everything into. Genre are just broad stereotypes that we use to try and categorise books. Thus Anne Rice is Horror (although could be fantasy), Brooks is Fantasy (although could be sf) and Herbert is sf (although could be philosophy)
 
Eventine
It doesn't change my clssification.
a) I said in my reply that it doesn't work for every book.
b) I have never read Shanara series, but I heard a lot about it and I understand so that their world in that far future doesn't resemble much to our world or our world in forseen future. You already can consider Shanara world as something else.
c) My definition of the world doesn't only include the planet itself, but also people and some other things. I definetely don't see magic as part of our world.

Overall, I think that some books are a little more difficult to categorize than others(that doesn't include Shanara). There are books that so close on the border line it is not possible to decide, but other books have their features, so lets stop on categorizing only them.

P.S. After all I don't really believe in categorizing
wink.gif
 
The use of magic is probably the thing that most distinguishes fantasy from science fiction. In science fiction we may not be able to travel faster than the speed of light, but the unexplained possibilities of worm holes or black holes causes many to believe the potential to move through space is there. Plus much science fiction just has traveleres put to sleep during a voyage.

So I guess science fiction is any higher technology atmosphere that does not have magic. That would be my definition. And I consider Star Wars more fantasy because it has magic. But that is a clear case of mixing the two genres.
 
Well, that's pretty much what i said. what's the name for what will never happen on our world?
Magic.
Fantasy without magic is not fantasy.
 
Eventine, *grin* for the sake of quibbling, they made /light/ go faster than it normally would...I was, however, referring to faster than light /travel/. Meaning you and me reaching the distant galaxies faster than light can travel there. Anyhow, glad you liked the analogy
smile.gif

Pluvius and Fitzy...please explain how magic is objectively any different than extreme high technology? For example, McCafffrey's Tower series is considered to be SF. They use 'talents' such as telekinesis, and telepathy. Why couldn;t this be considered 'magic'?
Lani, I'm not saying that the use of genres isn't sometimes helpful, all I'm saying is that the attempt to pigeonhole every book is fatally flawed. Sure some books are 'typical' of a genre, but other fall between genres. It will be impossible to assign neat little categories for every book.
Just an opinion
smile.gif
 
Sorry for not elaborating more Giarc, I thought I'd just point out an interesting fact.
When the science becomes possible, science fiction becomes just plain science.
Look at Jules Verne - he came up with some corkers of ideas, and a lot of those we take for granted these days. I'm still waiting for flying cars though...

Another question:
What would we read if magic (and thus fantasy by FitzChivlary's definition) were real?
 
Well, Giarc, as i see it, when you use high technology you still need to make it somehow based on our current technology and to assume that will be the advancement of that technology.
Magic is like having no rules, magic doesn't have to be in any way close to our reality, it can do whatever you want and it doesn't need no explanation.
High technology in sci fi books does seem sometimes like magic, but can you give an example for a book that has high technology that isn't explained whatsoever and does not based on anything we know today?
Also, magic doesn't have to follow the physical laws of the universe. After all, it's magic.

I see it as the main characteristic of fantasy because other worlds and other sentient races you can find in sci fi too and medieval settings you can find in sci fi books that happen on plaents with low civilizations or in historical romances.
 
FitzChiv.... I thought I did give an example of a SF book where technology isn't based onthing that actually exists today....or are you saying that ESP, telekinesis etc are scientifically accepted phenomenon? And, I maintain that the distinction you're making between magic and high-tech is entirely subjective. You state that magic has no rules (which is debatable anyways
wink.gif
) and that it isn't based on anything we know today. Well, there are plenty of physical laws broken in SF....the most obvious being FTL travel....also artificial gravity without using acceleration.....on what current scientific method is this being based? I could make the argument that magic is based on a long tradition of spiritual/mystical powers which, while not scientifically proven, certainly have a very large base of believers. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying there's no difference. Just that the difference is a subjective one. Both magic and high tech violate several known physical laws, both can claim some very vague, dubious roots in the present and past.
If pressed, I would suggest the following distinction. SF is based on humanity's reliance on itself and the things we can build, Fantasy is based on humanity's struggle with itself as well as higher powers and beings that can't be fully understood. The former assumes the ability to know all, the latter assumes that mysteries exist which humanity can never quite resolve. *shrug* McCaffrey's Rowan/Tower series is generally considered to be SF...this is probably because ESP etc are powers of the brain...a power internal and controlled by the humans. On a purely technology versus magic criteria I personally think ESP etc should be more closely aligned with magic. Which would make it Fantasy.
Of course, what is the real difference between ESP being something driven by humanity, and someone born with the ability to channel the One Power (Jordan)? Um, perception I'd say. Again, we're back to an entirely subjective call.
wink.gif
Perhaps we should just say that if it has spaceships it's SF and if not, well, then it's fantasy
wink.gif
(j/k)
 
Most well thought out fantasies have t magic systems with explicit rules. Whether these rules can be measured in our world is another thing, but believable magic in these novels are governed by the worlds that they exist in. Again, I say most. This magic usually does have some kind of explanation, too.

Yeah, Giarc, like I said previously
Science Fiction-Space Ships
Boats/Horses-Fantasy
 
Well, of course there are specific magic systems in fantasy books, by no rules i meant that it has not base on physical rules as we know them. While futuristc high tech is usually based on the assumption that one or more physical rules or limitations that are known today were proven wrong (light speed limit), which still can happen, for example, relativity proved that alot of what were considered to be the laws of nature before that were wrong.

About sci fi is spaceships and fantasy is horses and swords... what about time travel sci fi? sci fi is not only space operas.
And consider star wars, many consider it to be fantasy although it has spaceships.

I suppose the right definition of fantasy will include a totally different world than our own too although what was previously said about the Shannara world.

I think dividing books into genres is to help you find books more easily in books stores but i suppose every book has some elements of each genre in it. Some more and some less.
 
Hmmm... I've noticed that many posters have put forward plenty of 'technical' arguments as to what the difference is btw 'fantasy' and 'science fiction' literature. To me, the answer is very simple and uncomplicated: Fantasy authors derive many of their ideas and inspiration from our culturally rich history, whether Germanic, Celtic, Greek, Roman, Chinese etc. Sci-fi authors on the other hand, look to the future of 'what-could-be', often basing their speculations on exisitng levels of technology and/or culture.

Simple. No pseudo-scientific theories or self-indulgent reasoning.

IMHO... ^_^
 
FitzChivlary, where does Arthurian Legend fall in your definition of Fantasy? I have read numerous authors who included the use of magic in the telling of their tale, but the absence would not have reverted it to historical fiction.....Or would it? I personally have always looked opon it as any other work of fantasy with mabey a hint of fact, but your limitation is too broad. I believe that the ability of the book to let you ecape the limitations of this world or this time would be more descriptive and would not limit what we enjoy. Fantasy, Science Fiction, Historical Fiction, Horror, and other categories are only the loctions in a book store where I would seek out what I intended to read next.
 
Well, the arthurian legend has magic in it so it has no problem to fall into my definition of fantasy.

But i must correct something, for those who understood me that way, magic is not the only criterion for deciding of a book is fantasy or not, but it's a main one.
If you want to decide if a book is fantasy or not you can usually ask if there's magic in it, if the answer is Yes, it's almost certainly Fantasy, if not it's almost never is, there are exceptions though.

[This message has been edited by FitzChivlary (edited November 11, 2000).]
 
I think Fitzchivalry hit it on the head about books divided so you can better find what you want. When it comes right down to it, the publishers tell us what they think is fantasy and science fiction, depending on how they market it and what imprint it is published under.

It is all a marketing scam...
HMMM...
 
Well,I think that the biggest differense between fantasy and sci/fi is the magic.The
magic is not only telepathy,empathy etc.-it
is a weapon,enemy...You say-look Shannara.It is post-apocaliptic world.But Elves destroy "our" world-with magic.You say -look
the One Power in Robert Jordan.But where is the True power?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Sponsors


We try to keep the forum as free of ads as possible, please consider supporting SFFWorld on Patreon


Your ad here.
Back
Top