Monday, July 13, 2009

Fantasy vs. Reality

I've done no editing on this. I just up-chucked it as you see it here.

Friend of mine asked what up about me and the Fantasy genre. So I decided to really slow it down (my thinking) give it a good stir, and consider. No flippant remarks, no matter how tempting.

Why do we like the genres we like? And why do we not like the ones we do?

I think… I think I've always been a realist. I think that there are aspects about my life that I figured out early in life that I would not ever be able to control. So I think that I decided to identify those things which I could in the interest of providing as much stability, safety, I dunno…. I think I realized early on that the way to control as much as I could about my life was to go about it rationally. Cause and effect, A+B=C, the Scientific Method… these are constants. Follow them and you can’t go wrong. No surprises.

I don’t like surprises. I don’t like twist endings, I don’t like things that I could not have foreseen. So I don’t like Fantasy. Too many variables. If a writer can conjure up a dragon, there’s no line that’s going to be respected. Seven-eared geese-monkeys are next, and clearly, no good can come of that.

I don’t want to be lied to. I don’t want my information sugar coated. I can take it. Life is gritty enough on its own. Give it to me straight. Even as a six-year-old, “happily ever after” smacked of cop-out for me. Like the writer just got tired of thinking and decided that this was a good place to end the story. Everything got wrapped up very quickly and in a pretty pink box with a bow. I always wanted to know what happened next. Did Snow White have a hard time training Prince Charming to put down the toilet seat? Did Rapunzel decide that a pixie cut was far more practical and less painful on her neck?

I tried reading the Hobbit when I was nine and all I could wonder was what was so important about some rock? Actually, my memory is fuzzy, so I'm not sure what it was they were after. But whatever it was, it couldn’t have merited half the crap they put themselves through.

I tried reading Bradbury (Something Wicked This Way Comes) and was completely disinterested in what should have been some terribly eccentric characters.

I tried reading the Lion, The Witch, and the Wardrobe in 5th grade and couldn’t tell you a thing about it to save my life. Except that apparently there was a lion, a witch, and a wardrobe.

I was never a fanciful child. I was a daydreamer, yes, but my fantasies were more along the lines of real-life adventures. I liked the concept of the Swiss Family Robinson. I liked stories about nature, survival, and adventure. I liked history, documentaries, learning about real people and their trials and tribulations. Real people that had gone through real journeys, which meant that I could do the same. A promise of possibility. These fantasies were reachable. This was something within my grasp. All that other stuff just seemed like a pile of lies. And I always felt like someone was trying to pull one over on me. Let’s see how gullible she is….Let’s see if she buys it. No thank you. You can take your little gremlins and your flying monkeys with you on your way out, thank you very much, I’ll stay here with my tales of journeys around the world.

I think that there were aspects about my life that didn’t let me harbor any ideas about magical solutions. My solutions were always hard won. I earned them. I would not have them dismissed or undermined by some silliness. I liked my books tragic, real, challenging, hopeful, promising, and instructive. I like finding tools for myself in them. Not metaphoric tools. I had no time for symbolic puzzles. I wanted real life tools. Strategies I could put into place immediately.

I think Fantasy was like a religion to me. A religion I wasn’t buying. I resisted it, actively, versus tolerating it and dismissing it. I openly taunted the premise of so many books that I came across. They felt like silly things, meant to distract me from what was real. And I could never really afford to lay down my guard that way. I lived in a very real world and had to stay there.

I think that today, as an adult, I have a combined reaction to them. On the one hand, they continue to be these senseless adventures, but now, from my limited experience, they are also terribly unfit to compete in the big leagues that I've been accustomed to. I grew up with the classics from around the world. Epics, stories of entire generations and tales of strife and persistence. Told in poetic cadence. These writers of the classics knew how to weave the music of words. They are not just a venue, they are to be enjoyed, themselves. Used capably, they were their own reward. I don’t find this distinction in Fantasy writing. Words are cold, meant only to narrate, not so much to be heard. I can’t bond with such a use. I need my words to reach me, to envelope me, to make me feel. I need good writing.

For me, reading Fantasy is like reading a Harlequin novel or watching reality TV. I have to wonder why these characters should exist. They serve no purpose.

That’s just me, though.

3 comments:

  1. Okay, I have to come clean. For me, it's all about women in chainmail bikinis. You can dig that, can't ya? Well, okay... what about buff warriors in loincloths?

    All right, seriously. This was very well written and gets your feelings across excellently. I appreciate that you spelled it out for me. But I have further thoughts on the matter, especially after ruminating over what you wrote.

    Firstly, I really think it's a matter of temperament. I have no difficulties facing reality. I love reality, even with all its warts and deformities. When I was a child, I hung out with elderly folks more than I did kids my age. I would listen to them for hours and they would happily recollect things from years before and how things have changed and tell it to me. I would watch them and imagine everything they said just as I would do while reading an Orson Scott Card novel. I remember feeling fear, fascination and finally empathy as a homeless man told me his story. And from then until today, I simply love people. I love their stories. I love their virtues and their flaws. Sure, they can piss me off, but ultimately they're people just like me.

    But I enjoy a good fantasy, too. I told you that I don't read it any more because most of the fantasy genre is filled with amateurs and hacks who have no business being published; whose books have no redeeming value. But that's just the majority. It's not universal. A fantasy author can have just as much insight into the human condition as any other, and they can use fantasy elements to make stark the very subtle nuances that make it what it is. Not to say they can't be subtle about it, either. A dragon in one book can be the big baddie that give the heroes something to do, in another, it can represent oppression or the inner darkness of the soul. In fact, though we must keep in mind that The Hobbit was generally written for the young, the dragon (that's what they were after) did represent oppression. He invaded a kingdom, chased its people out and would terrorize the town on a whim or in retaliation for some perceived slight.

    And what of fairy tales? And nursery rhymes? Did they not often convey certain lessons about the culture from which they came or were kept to retain the story of some person important to that culture as a kind of oral history? These kinds of stories were (and still are in some areas) so important to the development of human culture.

    Did you know that most of the first fantasy novels were written as satire? For instance, take Jonathan Livingston Seagull. And Gulliver's Travels. And what of Flatland? Especially the last two, both of which portrayed small minded ignorance with an eloquence not seen since Benjamin Franklin's satirical parodies. Perhaps even better, because in that fantasy form, people read them more readily. They were less likely to throw the books into the fire than they would with more direct and accusatory prose and yet, by the end, the point was thoroughly hammered home.

    But I don't think one view is greater than the other. I know that you have a brilliant mind and a beautiful imagination.

    So what's the difference? All I can come up with is temperament. One likes it, the other doesn't.

    So thank you for giving me your perspective. You're a wonderful writer and thinker.

    ReplyDelete
  2. By the way, put a damn feed link on your main page. I want to keep up when this blog is updated.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Yes, clearly, it's about temperament. Isn't darned near everything?

    Your points are taken. Of course there is a place for every genre. Of course fantasy and fables have a legitimate history and tradition. I would never suggest otherwise. That's like saying vanilla ice-cream is crap because I happen to be partial to chocolate. Which I am, but that is neither here nor there.

    My preference for reality is just that. A preference. Fantasy doesn't interest me by comparison. I definately understand the symbolic and satiric depths that are inherent in these tales. And I can appreciate them. But when I was 5 and discovering Aesop and the Brothers Grimm in beautiful books with exquisite renderings of faraway lands... books sent from Mexico from my loving aunt...Even then, I never missed the message. It was never lost on me that there was a message to be learned: Don't talk to strangers (Red Riding Hood), slow and steady wins the race (Tortoise and Hare), etc. I was never one of those kids in the circle at reading time that you had to spell out the message to. If anything I was always annoyed that we had to sit and discuss it. I was ready for another book. And Jonny was still struggling with identifying the characters.

    I know wolves don't talk. Next time just tell me not to talk to strangers and we'll leave it at that. Now hand over the Judy Blume.

    ReplyDelete