Channeling Ann Swinfen

As in, In Defense of Fantasy. Great book.

Well things are progressing nicely, over here. The tree is up and abundantly festooned, clearing much of the living room floor of decorations; I finished book two of six of my reading list this morning, and the next book should be done by Wednesday; and my friend/mentor has completed the first pass through my novel, and given excellent feedback in a number of areas.

So the first two books I’ve read this break – fantasy books, too – have gone, I suppose, as well as could be expected. One was a Christian fantasy, the other a genre fantasy. Interesting divergence; both were marked by bad romances – the Christian because of how clichéd and unrealistic it was, and the genre because of how much suggested sex there was – and both had their moments of unashamed fantastic elements. Which isn’t necessarily a bad thing, it just is. Dragons of Chiril by Donita K. Paul, a Christian fantasy, had dragons whose sole and primary purpose was to make traveling faster. They were, in essence, fantasy aircraft. I don’t know if the fear was in making it too fantasy, and appearing escapist and deceitful. Then there was Wulder, Chiril’s version of God – also rather transparent, possibly probably again to avoid appearing deceitful. There is, too, the good chance the book is intended for younger crowds, and the author and publisher don’t want to confuse the poor tykes further.

Dragons of Winter Night by Margaret Weis and Tracy Hickman is a D&D novel. Need I say more. Okay, it has the kender who thieves, loves adventures, is horribly inquisitive, and – to be absurdly blunt – is a bit Peregrin Tookish. There are the reclusive elves who hate humans, the human men who appear weak and yet have a certain strength – it’s Lord of the Rings, okay? Different names, different places, but LotR through and through, in a D&D environment.

It reminds me of the woman’s struggle, against which Ursula K. Le Guin spoke at Mills College, back in the 80’s I think. Whether women submit to men or stand in opposition to them, they are still defining themselves by them. Le Guin argued women need to define themselves by themselves.

It seems like fantasy has taken a similar route, only it defines itself by Tolkien – whether in submission to it, or in opposition to it. Fantasy books so often are trying to duplicate LotR, or refute it, instead of defining itself by itself. Or, like Paul, are trying to use fantasy to reach people just because it’s popular.

I would like to see respect for fantasy as a genre. I understand I’m biased, since it’s the genre I write. But we do books a disservice first by noting it only in how it relates to Tolkien, or by noting only its popularity – and not on its own terms. There is a fine yet distinct line between fantasy and allegory, and while I agree fantasy is a perfect realm within which to discuss concepts that may be unapproachable in “reality,” I do not argue that fantasy should be allegorical. In fact, I vehemently oppose it. The elements within a fantasy novel should be there to support the framework of the fantastic world, not to support the framework of some outside world – and yet, the fantastic framework can be used to suggest an outside, real framework for “hypothetical” consideration. For instance, R.A. Salvatore suggests – firmly within the framework of his own D&D-based works – that the “god” a person chooses is based on their own characteristics: a war-like god for warriors, a benevolent god for healers, et cetera. Fine idea, and somewhat true – those with high intelligence are likely to make reason their “god,” that is, the thing that will “save mankind” from the evil we see in the world. (The American public school system is somewhat predicated on that notion as well – that, with enough knowledge – boys and girls will grow up into well-functioning adults.)

But that’s an aside. The point is, fantasy in today’s skeptical society is a perfect avenue to open the possibility of something outside the world which we can put an instrument on and test. If you think that’s ludicrous that anything exists outside scientific study, take a look at psychology and social psychology for a couple minutes: measurable electronic impulses only tell us so much; there are yet parts of human psyche and emotion that cannot be accounted or predicted for. Just ask Lieutenant Commander Data.

See you tomorrow.