![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
A more pleasant subject
May. 8th, 2004 10:20 amRather sour of me to start off with such an angry topic. Here's something I can talk about much more cheerfully: Fantasy.
I am a firm believer in the value of fantasy literature and film. And I don't buy the almost universal assumption that fantasy needs to be apologized for or justified since it's less "valid" than realism. I fundamentally disagree with that idea. In fact, I think fantasy (and other speculative fiction, though I'm personally most fond of fantasy) can have not only just as much value as realism, but in fact more value, at least as far as universal truths and themes are concerned. And the widely touted danger of escapism is, in my opinion, much more likely in realism than speculative fiction. Think about it - how many people lack the discernment to realize that hobbits or the Force are not real? Not many, I assume. On the other hand, how many people have trouble figuring out which parts in Titanic really happened and which came solely from the mind of James Cameron? I would think a good deal more. Now, I'm not saying, by any means, that writers and filmmakers ought to make fantasy because their audience is too darn stupid to be safe from getting sucked into anything but sheer make-believe. I just think that we need to admit that ALL literature and film is fantasy in one form or another, however it's disguised. Fiction is fantasy. What we specifically call fantasy, of course, is fiction with moral and mythic undertones, and that's another reason I prefer it above other genres. It can unabashedly explore the nature of good and evil without too many people claiming to be offended (except for ridiculous incidents like the Gungan racism allegations, but I sincerely pity the people who really saw racism there). In realism and historical fiction, the details of what really happened or could happen all too often obscure the underlying themes and truths. Fantasy is no less complex for getting rid of all that, of course. In fact, the fact that it takes place in another world allows for multiple layers of metaphorical interpretations. Non-fantasy can certainly have many layers of interpretation, but unfortunately people don't usually try to look beyond the superficial semblance of reality or historical fact. Fantasy doesn't have that pretension of fact; its goal is exploring truth, not fact.
I remember a literature teacher of mine once attempting to explain to our class that fiction could be true even though it wasn't real. How he bewildered most of my classmates! I remember their confused questions - "But it didn't really happen, right? So how could it be true?" And I remember that his explanation just clicked for me - how I wished more people could comprehend that, and stop saying that non-fiction is more based in truth than fiction and realism more than fantasy! It's not the details or the facts, it goes far deeper than that. And I believe that fantasy cuts through all the specious arguments and the miresome simulacrum of reality, straight to the heart of truth.
Stepping off my soapbox now...
I am a firm believer in the value of fantasy literature and film. And I don't buy the almost universal assumption that fantasy needs to be apologized for or justified since it's less "valid" than realism. I fundamentally disagree with that idea. In fact, I think fantasy (and other speculative fiction, though I'm personally most fond of fantasy) can have not only just as much value as realism, but in fact more value, at least as far as universal truths and themes are concerned. And the widely touted danger of escapism is, in my opinion, much more likely in realism than speculative fiction. Think about it - how many people lack the discernment to realize that hobbits or the Force are not real? Not many, I assume. On the other hand, how many people have trouble figuring out which parts in Titanic really happened and which came solely from the mind of James Cameron? I would think a good deal more. Now, I'm not saying, by any means, that writers and filmmakers ought to make fantasy because their audience is too darn stupid to be safe from getting sucked into anything but sheer make-believe. I just think that we need to admit that ALL literature and film is fantasy in one form or another, however it's disguised. Fiction is fantasy. What we specifically call fantasy, of course, is fiction with moral and mythic undertones, and that's another reason I prefer it above other genres. It can unabashedly explore the nature of good and evil without too many people claiming to be offended (except for ridiculous incidents like the Gungan racism allegations, but I sincerely pity the people who really saw racism there). In realism and historical fiction, the details of what really happened or could happen all too often obscure the underlying themes and truths. Fantasy is no less complex for getting rid of all that, of course. In fact, the fact that it takes place in another world allows for multiple layers of metaphorical interpretations. Non-fantasy can certainly have many layers of interpretation, but unfortunately people don't usually try to look beyond the superficial semblance of reality or historical fact. Fantasy doesn't have that pretension of fact; its goal is exploring truth, not fact.
I remember a literature teacher of mine once attempting to explain to our class that fiction could be true even though it wasn't real. How he bewildered most of my classmates! I remember their confused questions - "But it didn't really happen, right? So how could it be true?" And I remember that his explanation just clicked for me - how I wished more people could comprehend that, and stop saying that non-fiction is more based in truth than fiction and realism more than fantasy! It's not the details or the facts, it goes far deeper than that. And I believe that fantasy cuts through all the specious arguments and the miresome simulacrum of reality, straight to the heart of truth.
Stepping off my soapbox now...
