The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum - View Single Post

Kalessin · 01-08-2003, 04:10 PM

Littlemanpoet [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img]

I am sympathetic to your (and Tolkien's) evocation of faerie as an archetype of the surreal, super-real, unreal, quintessential beauty of art.

And again, in your subsequent more technical analysis, I think there is some resonance, certainly in my own personal preferences.

But it seems to me there are two key points relating to this -

Firstly, that bad writing is not rescued, lifted or illuminated simply by being "in the genre" or by encompassing the thematic elements of faerie or myth. It is the quality of writing, the inspiration, imagination and craft in the narrative that actually elevate a work of fantasy to the heights you describe.

I would argue this validates my assertion that the individual work and the mindset of the reader are more significant in that sublime experience of art and its potential for depth and meaning. Just because, say, Of Mice And Men is not a work of fantasy (although it is arguably a work of allegory [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img]), it certainly operates on a higher plane of art than, say, Dragonsearch Chronicles III : The Mountains of Nagrath (Episode 2), featuring Muscly Argoth and Pneumatic Rhiannon (for want of a true-life example ... I'm sure you can provide a few [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img]).

The second (somewhat related) key point is that precisely the sense of myth and dream that can resonate with such poetic truth is definitively achieved by much literature that is clearly not "in the genre". I would cite the magic realism of Latin America along with Borges, Joyce's Ulysses, Ray Bradbury, JG Ballard etc. etc. ad infinitum. And there are many examples within the genre of Science Fiction that I could name too - having just read the very moving Flowers for Algernon as an example.

The technical quality of poesis is not intrinsically or necessarily linked to the fantasy genre. Now, it may be that some writers with a creative will to produce works that can be described in that way may themselves feel that fantasy themes offer them a fertile ground for such creations. And equally, it may be that many readers feel that fantasy readily resonates with them on that level.

But this preference is a double-edged sword. In our postmodern world, the conception of fairy tale and fantasy is as familiar and banal as any other literary context. It is not what it was in Tolkien's day, when his own work was such a groundbreaking example. It is not mysterious, a return to essential truths - it is simply another backdrop for any modern author. Which is why the quality of the work and attributes of the reader are so crucial.

Personally, I am both attracted and repelled by the label fantasy. I know I can find in there works of sublime beauty and depth, little gems off the beaten track, and great masterpieces like LotR and Earthsea - and despite my irreverence I do indeed have a sneaking predisposition towards swords and loincloths. But that doesn't make the genre itself any better, or me somehow more deep and meaningful as a person. And, fortunately, the dire spinoffs and endless chronicles provide a regular dose of sobering mediocrity [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img]

Peace

Kalessin

[ January 08, 2003: Message edited by: Kalessin ]

01-08-2003, 04:10 PM	#24
Kalessin Wight Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Earthsea, or London Posts: 175	Littlemanpoet [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img] I am sympathetic to your (and Tolkien's) evocation of faerie as an archetype of the surreal, super-real, unreal, quintessential beauty of art. And again, in your subsequent more technical analysis, I think there is some resonance, certainly in my own personal preferences. But it seems to me there are two key points relating to this - Firstly, that bad writing is not rescued, lifted or illuminated simply by being "in the genre" or by encompassing the thematic elements of faerie or myth. It is the quality of writing, the inspiration, imagination and craft in the narrative that actually elevate a work of fantasy to the heights you describe. I would argue this validates my assertion that the individual work and the mindset of the reader are more significant in that sublime experience of art and its potential for depth and meaning. Just because, say, Of Mice And Men is not a work of fantasy (although it is arguably a work of allegory [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img]), it certainly operates on a higher plane of art than, say, Dragonsearch Chronicles III : The Mountains of Nagrath (Episode 2), featuring Muscly Argoth and Pneumatic Rhiannon (for want of a true-life example ... I'm sure you can provide a few [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img]). The second (somewhat related) key point is that precisely the sense of myth and dream that can resonate with such poetic truth is definitively achieved by much literature that is clearly not "in the genre". I would cite the magic realism of Latin America along with Borges, Joyce's Ulysses, Ray Bradbury, JG Ballard etc. etc. ad infinitum. And there are many examples within the genre of Science Fiction that I could name too - having just read the very moving Flowers for Algernon as an example. The technical quality of poesis is not intrinsically or necessarily linked to the fantasy genre. Now, it may be that some writers with a creative will to produce works that can be described in that way may themselves feel that fantasy themes offer them a fertile ground for such creations. And equally, it may be that many readers feel that fantasy readily resonates with them on that level. But this preference is a double-edged sword. In our postmodern world, the conception of fairy tale and fantasy is as familiar and banal as any other literary context. It is not what it was in Tolkien's day, when his own work was such a groundbreaking example. It is not mysterious, a return to essential truths - it is simply another backdrop for any modern author. Which is why the quality of the work and attributes of the reader are so crucial. Personally, I am both attracted and repelled by the label fantasy. I know I can find in there works of sublime beauty and depth, little gems off the beaten track, and great masterpieces like LotR and Earthsea - and despite my irreverence I do indeed have a sneaking predisposition towards swords and loincloths. But that doesn't make the genre itself any better, or me somehow more deep and meaningful as a person. And, fortunately, the dire spinoffs and endless chronicles provide a regular dose of sobering mediocrity [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img] Peace Kalessin [ January 08, 2003: Message edited by: Kalessin ]