Attebery listed a lot examples, and explained very well to show readers what does Fantasy really means. "Fantasy is a game of sorts, and it demands that one play whole-heartedly, accepting for the moment all rules and turns of the game." (Attebery, 1980) Attebery indicated that, any narrative which includes as a significant part of its make-up some violation of what the author clearly believes to be natural law. There are a lot of ways to figure out whether the book you're reading, or a movie you're watching should be categorize into Fantasy or not. For example, different creatures appearing and all the impossibles happen. Attebery also stated that, whatever the material, extravagant or seemingly commonplace, a narrative is a fantasy if it presents the persuasive establishment an development of an impossibility, an arbitrary construct of the mind with all under the control of logic and rhetoric. Characters in a Fantasy story can always do things that human are enable to do, and the main character is usually at the top of using some kind of power. According to Attebery, Fantasy needs consistency, readers and writers are committed to maintain the illusion for the entire course of the fiction. By this I think it means that there are always surprises in the Fantasy fiction.
Personally, I think the main difference between Fantasy and Science fiction, is Fantasy can be anything impossible, but for Science fiction, people always have to explain, in order to convince somebody that the fact is true. About the definitions, I really think those are personal opinions. I think what Attebery has said is true, which a lot of fantasy genre works like this, but sometimes there are exceptions. Sometimes it's the usual plot makes audiences feel bored. I think the Scientific genre usually goes with a background in the future, but fantasy also go with the past. As far as I've concerned, it is because those scientific inventions are still impossible at present.
Personally, I think the main difference between Fantasy and Science fiction, is Fantasy can be anything impossible, but for Science fiction, people always have to explain, in order to convince somebody that the fact is true. About the definitions, I really think those are personal opinions. I think what Attebery has said is true, which a lot of fantasy genre works like this, but sometimes there are exceptions. Sometimes it's the usual plot makes audiences feel bored. I think the Scientific genre usually goes with a background in the future, but fantasy also go with the past. As far as I've concerned, it is because those scientific inventions are still impossible at present.
References
Attebery, B. (1980). Locating fantasy. In The Fantasy Tradition in American Literature: From Irving to Le Guinn (pp.2-9). Bloomington: Indiana U P, 1980.
Le Guinn, U. (1993; 1968). A Wizard of Earthsea. In The Earthsea Quartet (pp.13-167). London: Penguin
Very clear and answers the question!
ReplyDeleteHi Winny,
ReplyDeleteAnother good post.
What do you think of these definitions - relating to your own reading of fantasy?
Check your in-text referencing please.
Esther:)
Also, you could have referenced the primary text :)
ReplyDeleteHi Esther
ReplyDeleteLe Guinn, Ursula K. (1993, 1968). A Wizard of Earthsea. In the Earthsea Quartet (pp. 13-167). London, Penguin.
↑Isn't this the primary text? A Wizard of Earthsea.
Yeah, I do agree that science fiction needs an explaination to convince the reader that it exists, but to that end as long as it can be explained the idea can become as impossible if not more impossible than fantasy as long as it is explained by the writer. Although fantasy does not have to explain as much for the existance of characters and creatures it still relies heavily on familar idea to the human condition and ideas we hold true to our own earth world. And in that sense can become limited.
ReplyDeleteGreat post I enjoyed reading it.
Trev