Fantasy Is Not REAL Literature!?
Vložit
- čas přidán 16. 07. 2024
- Let's talk about whether fantasy is real literature! Thanks to @PhilipChaseTheBestofFantasy for joining the discussion!
Also thank you to @DanielGreeneReviews for making a video on this topic I found helpful! Please give it a watch! • Fantasy isn't REAL Lit...
Join the Viking Clan and get access to the Viking Book Club⚔️
🢚 / libraryofaviking and get access to exclusive benefits!
🢚 JOIN THE DISCORD: / discord
🢚Get 5% off at The Broken Binding using the code LIBRARYOFAVIKING7
🢚 Get 5% off at Inkstone Books using the code VIKINGOFFER5
Other links!
🢚Instagram - / libraryofaviking
🢚Blog - www.libraryofaviking.com
🢚Goodreads - / library-of-a-viking
🢚Twitter - / libraryofaviki1
🢚Amazon Wishlist - www.amazon.co.uk/hz/wishlist/...
Contact me? (Review requests allowed but not likely to get reply)
libraryofaviking@gmail.com
0:00 - Intro
1:20 - Harry Potter "bad" impact on me
3:32 - Criticism of fantasy as literature
4:58 - Brandon Sanderson's perspective
6:06 - Genre fiction vs literary writing
7:03 - Sanderson's argument
8:13 - How my perception has changed
9:45 - Professor explains if fantasy is literature
12:13 - Benefits of reading fantasy
Music by Music Goreng - Summer Battle - thmatc.co/?l=07CC01A1
Music by Naomi - Osaka - thmatc.co/?l=233D63DB
Music by Mark Generous - Orange And Pomegranate - thmatc.co/?l=13F71691
Music by Damien Sebe - Goodmorning, My Love - thmatc.co/?l=A052F6D6 - Zábava
Wonderful video, Johan! I love that you are speaking out on what fantasy has given you and can give others who engage with it. Thank you for including me as well!
Thank you for inspiring me to explore this genre and for everything you've taught me!
@@libraryofaviking You're both legendary booktubers !!! :)
My favourite rebutle to the "Fantasy isn't real literature" argue is to say, 'uuuh what do you think the Odyssey is? Paradise Lost? The Book Thief? 100 years of solitude?" If they come back with "well thats just mythology" or "thats magical realism", "speculative fiction" I remind them that the word magic is in that genre title, that gods monsters don't exist, and that animals that live on farms don't speak like humans to where they could create stalinism.
When I walk around the fiction section of a book store, I'm always amazed by how many of the so called "realist" books have fantasy elements, whether magical realism or legit straight up fantasy. When I look at the Arts and Letters section I see how many of those books are just straight up fantasy. So this whole "fantasy is for kids" or "fantasy isn't real literature" is stupid because so much "real literature" includes or just is fantasy.
It's all marketing at the end of the day and branding and where to shelve something so people will pick it up. Once you remove those barriers to entry, reading becomes way more fun. (that said, I don't begrudge anyone who has a hard time getting into epic fantasy or YA fantasy, totally cool, I get it. No worries. I ask them just to not to belittle it as lesser just because THEY struggle with it.)
Yeah, but fantasy fans don't like those literary books. Just having magical elements doesn't make it non-literary, it just means they plumb depths, have literary writing and deeper ideas than the simple, myopic escapism of "fantasy"
@@Majesticon I wasn't saying "fantasy elements = non-literary." I said many literary classics pundits oft put down fantasy due to their fantasy elements, despite the literary classics themselves having quite bold fantastic elements. I can't speak for fantasy fans because we're all individuals with individual taste (to be fair, so are the pundits!), but to say "fantasy fans don't like those literary books" is unfairly reductionist, because not only do I personal believe it to no be true, but there's enough examples just here on booktube proving it not be true.
I will add though, and I don't mean to say this is what you implied, so forgive me if I misinterpreted, but your statement does come off snobbish in opposition to my point and the point of the video, and only serves to prove the point of the video and my comment. Again forgive me if I'm mistaken, but your comment reads as "fantasy is just escapism and has no depths or deeper ideas that literary writing has." Which, well frankly just isn't true, again as proved by not only this video but a myriad of others found even here on youtube. But again, forgive me if I misinterpreted!
Yes, my argument to "fantasy isn't literature" is to point out the amount of fantasy by that "old hack" 😊 William Shakespeare - fairy kings and queens, witches, etc. And that the snob before me better go wash their brain out if they've been reading it. Oh and that Dickens bloke too, unless you really believe that ghosts visit people at Christmas 😊😊. And how come "Alice in Wonderland" is considered "literature"? Amusingly, when it was published it was considered to be fantasy trash until Queen Victoria decided she liked it.
To be honest, Proper Literature appreciation is pure classism and comes from when ordinary people were allowed to learn to read but weren't allowed access to "books for proper gentlemen".
@@6ixpoint5ive Fantasy is genre fiction, it includes fantastical elements due to market demand for stories with fantastical elements where literary fiction includes fantastical elements to realize the author's themes and commentary, if the only examples of good fantastical literature are the ones with nothing to do with fantasy as a genre that means your defense has nothing to actually do with said genre. They aren't marketed as fantasy because they're good enough to stand on their own merits instead of pandering to the endless demand for fantaslop.
The most annoying thing about that article is that the person literally admitted that they’d never even read anything by Pratchett. How on earth would they know whether he’s a literary genius or not if they’ve never even read him? Seems like a ver strong opinion to have about something they didn’t actually know anything about. Why would anyone take that article seriously?
Seems like an awful lot of hate to spend on something that isn't and was never a part of that article's author's life.
Like most elitists they’re just going by the popular “expert” opinion lol
When I was 13 I was reading The Lord of the Rings until my English teacher told me I was too smart for that and I needed to try more advanced books. I was so embarrassed and believed she knew better than me. I started reading more "respectable" literary fiction/classics and didn't touch fantasy for years. I went from reading multiple books a month to a couple of books a year because I just didn't have the love anymore for reading. It wasn't until my mid-20s that I finally gave in and picked up Malazan. I have been reading primarily fantasy since then, with some sci-fi or literary mixed in.
I completely agree that Fantasy can be a conduit to teach people about real human issues in our world. Many of the best fantasy books I have read are able to do this in a way that allows you to think for yourself rather than preaching to the reader.
That’s kind of sad. She shouldn’t have phrased it that way. She could have encouraged you to read some other things she thought you might like not denigrated your liking of TLOTR.
Wow. That teacher sounds terrible. Lord of the Rings is a classic.
This is me but with sci-fi, school discouraged me from reading it and now I love it.
What literary fiction books were you reading that you disliked reading? I felt so drained by reading fantasy that I started reading literary fiction and classics, now it has become my favourite genres along with fantasy. I think it’s important to read a variety of genres to stimulate the brain.
It's so sad that people think this. Just enjoy what you enjoy and be happy.
Ok, i am almost 65, and i have been an avid reader as long as i can remember. I never read any fantasy at all. Yup, i was in that narrowed mindset. Thanks to CZcams channels like yours, i have been reading mostly fantasy since last year. I am LOVING it! I have a huge TBR pile, i needed another bookcase juse to house all the fantasy i picked up. Absolutely loving Brandon Sanderson. I am now on Oathbringer. Thank you for your wonderful channel. I am a PROUD nerd! I also own that Nerd Poetry magnet kit (from B&N) and having a blast with making up my own epic nerd poetry!!
And last summer, my Mom had knee replacement, and a lot of stuff going on with her recovery (she is all good now). I spent a lot of time at the hospital and rehab center. I carried with me "Fourth Wing." Being new to fantasy, I was able to escape mentally, it was wonderful. Yes, reading fantasy has expanded my mental gymnastics, I love all these new worlds embedded in my imagination!
Awesome.Hope you will love Oathbringer and Rhythm of War.Can't wait for Stormlight 5 personally ! :))
"I've never read anything by Pratchett and I'm not going to" is basically saying "I have no idea what I'm talking about, so my opinion has no merit"
I'd be kinda angry at people like this but I can't help but pity anyone that won't ever try Pratchett. Not every reader will love his writing, but I don't think I've heard people say "I read it and hated it, it's just not good at all"
And it's not like it's even hard work. An avid reader could get through a Discworld novel in a couple days without even trying. They could have spent a week reading the three highest rated books and they'd at least have something to talk about.
I don't give a damn what other people think about my book choice, especially in a world where so few people do read at all.
I've read a hefty amount of fantasy books, and some 'classic' literature, and what I've found is that the 'classic' literature has often been analysed to death where people have forgotten why it exists in the first place. A great example is Shakespeare. He was quite clearly a populist author, writing for the masses, with rude jokes, bloody violence, etc (part of the reason I believe Baz Luhrman's Romeo + Juliet is a great adaptation, is because it leans into this, and translates the popular of the 15th century into the popular of the 20th). The type of author I think literary snobs would sneer at if he were writing today.
We tell stories, first and foremost, to entertain. If the story does that, it can be considered a success. If we can learn something from it, then it can attain greatness. But that education can come in many forms. Most of the time though, it is about the interaction of various characters who have different points of view, clashing with others. Fantasy allows us to envision a world that is different from our own and put thought exercises into practice by way of the characters. It opens up so many possibilities.
Ultimately though, I don't feel I've gotten anything more from reading 'classic' literature than I have with reading fantasy. I've read good and bad stuff from both.
People who look down on other genres....makes you wonder what else they look down on. Just read, what you want, what you love, just don't stop reading. And do not let anyone kill your love of reading, because nowadays we need a little more love in this world.
I’m so passionate about this topic. Thank you for making the video, Johan! Great work.
Thanks, Tori!
Wonderful insights…thank you.
Great video everything you said is so true. That being said we’re out numbered!! 😫
I think many people equate fantasy with pulp fiction, they are under the impression that fantasy cannot have complex themes or deep characters.
To be fair most genres have if not still been look down on in so call literature cicrles. Horror, romance, science fiction and even mysteries have been looked down at one point or another. Sobbery is still a big thing in literature.
"Fairy tales are more than true: not because they tell us that dragons exist, but because they tell us that dragons can be beaten."
- Neil Gaiman, Coraline
Honestly, a statement like "Terry Pratchett isn't a literary genius ... I have never read anything by Terry Pratchett ..." - which tells us nothing about Terry Pratchett but way too much about the person who made it - is such a desperate attempt to get a reaction out of the reader.
I have a hard time taking that seriously because in today's media landscape all that matters is engagement and negative attention is measured in the same way positive attention is. A click is a click. A comment is a comment. Doesn't matter why you clicked the article.
I feel that journalism used to be more nuanced and a lot smarter than it is these days.
Great video addressing something that I have felt throughout my life and never understood.
Genuine question though: why is there a need for more acclaim and recognition? The genre is already winning big in terms of readership and sales -- in a way the demand and its ubiquity makes it already essential as a genre of literature.
Hi there. Fantasy like Harry Potter and Naruto, helped me to keep on trying to overcome obstacles that, as a partially blind teenager, was facing and how to not give up. One of the dilemmas that I came across in the Lord of the Rings is Tolkien's criticism of technology, since he preferred nature, whereas for me, technology makes life easier and more accessible. Also, gaining a vivid imagination allows you to get more creative in solving problems too.
I always pity folks like that person that wrote the Pratchett article. It must be tough to go through life so close minded and insular you're incapable of challenging yourself. But then again this is the Internet, they were probably extra vitriolic hoping they'd get a few more website hits and make a couple extra pennies . . .
Great Video 😊 Fantasy is the best literature as far as im concerned the time and effort that goes into the world building 😮 I sometimes feel like i need a PHD while reading it and im sure i sometimes dont fully understand some of the deeper meaning stuff. All books are amazing no matter what the genre. ❤❤❤❤ 😊😊😊
Sorry but no one can tell me professor Tolkien’s works aren’t “real” literature.
All fiction is fantasy. The writer creates characters that don’t exist in reality. Then that character and story become ‘real’ when someone reads the book. I’m assuming literary fiction still includes characters.
I find this amusing because the literature kids were the nerds and the si-fi fantasy crowd were talking books in the smoking area, and taking the AP-lit kids' lunch money when I came up.
Interesting video 🎥🎥🎥
'Fantasy' can absolutely possess literary merit. Unfortunately, popular fantasy writing is mostly trite pap. Le Guin, Wolfe, Butler simply aren't representative of what sells to the masses.
I think Lord of the Rings is technically a romance, which is very much medieval in character, similar to Orlando Furioso by Ludovicio Arriosto, or the Fearie Queene by Edmund Spencer, and the like, or other works about the Arthur-Lancelot cycle. Medieval romances have been looked down upon for 400 to 500 years, much thanks to Don Quixote, and I think that at least LOTR is put into the same kind of "loser" cathegory.
My 6th grade teacher did the same as your teacher. He chose a word or phrase to describe each of his students on the last day of school. He told me “Crystal, when I see you, I see Star Wars.” Because I ALWAYS carried a Star Wars book with me. Instead of playing at recess, I read Star Wars books.
In the Goodreads Choice Awards, the winner in 2023 was R F Kuang for Yellowface, a writer who has also written in the fantasy genre (The Poppy War), I don't think on Booktube people look down on fantasy. Harry Potter was a gateway book into reading for many readers, even though it is very derivative of other fantasy books. Magic Realism is a kind of fantasy and writers of that are often lauded like Garbriel Garcia Marquez and Orhan Panuk. Merphy Napier made a great video about Gatekeeping in Booktube.
Fantasy and horror are both my favourite genre to read (and watch as well!)! ❤
I never understood why fantasy was looked down on but Steven King's horror books were talked about in such high regards C.S Lewis changed the world with his Narnia books when i was writing my portal fantasy one of the points i made was God will never leave even if you go to a place were he wasn't invited because were you go he goes too i heard someone make the point that mid summers night my Shakespeare was really a fantasy but i never read it so i don't know
I think we need to be honest though: Part of the definition of (high) literature in academic circles has to do with the mastery of words and language and the way language is used to achieve and artistic effect. And if that is what you want to see in the books you read, an awful lot of fantasy (especially the most popular ones) fall flat in that respect. Brandon Sanderson might be a great storyteller, a great writer he isn't (and he admitted that he's not even trying to be one). And I would say the same about a lot of other very successfull fantasy writers. Of course there are exceptions to that and always have been, but they are generally not the ones that get talked about. And the rise of Romantasy made things even worse.
That article about Pratchett still was complete rubbish, of course. First, Pratchett is absolutely one of those exceptions. Second, that writer even went on to say that he never read a single book written by TP, so they don't even know what they are talking about. And third, what they fail to understand that our lives actually are way too short to waste it only on non-fun things instead of enjoying the time we got.
Which is why I read, in the end. For enjoyment, mostly. And while I can also read and enjoy "high" literature, interestingly enough, most of those I really enjoy have also fantastical elements in their works (Shakespeare, Goethe, Paul Auster, the latin-american proponents of "magical realism" like Borges and Garcia-Marquez, Salman Rushdie, Toni Morisson, the list goes on and on). And all those examples show that the claim that fantasy can't be literature (even if you base that claim on a narrow academic definition of literature as "high" literature) is still complete rubbish.
I think fiction is literature. This includes Sci-fi and Fantasy. They are a newer and unique type of literature. Reading for entertainment is great for becoming a faster reader, excersizing the brain, learning new vocabulary, destressing and visiting a different reality.
I'm not a fantasy reader. I spend my time reading literature. Historical fiction. I like to watch unhauls on book tube. Many of these Young people have shelves upon shelves of fantasy and YA. I've never heard of these books and I find it frustrating that these books are all they read with a spattering of horror, mystery and romance. Usually these kids unhaul hard covered brand new never read books. I wonder how much they spend on these never read hard copies. Fantasy can be what it wants to be. Who am I to judge what others read?
This is an interesting topic. I have a degree in English, and in addition to creative writing, I concentrated on modernist and post-modern literature - in other words, the weird and difficult stuff. The weird and difficult stuff is also what I like to write, but I see no problem with using fantasy or science fiction themes in literature that messes with the underlying structures and conventions of language and stories. It is true that the academic community tends to look down upon genre fiction. It's not just fantasy - romance, science fiction, action/adventure, westerns, and the nebulous category of "young adult novels" also attract academic disdain. This is widespread, but it isn't universal. I think genre fiction should be taken more seriously, and it is a worthy subject of academic study. It can tell us a lot about the conventions and assumptions upon which the structure of literature is built, and it can be interesting to study within its broader cultural context.
Academics have found a way to make fantasy acceptable. If fantasy elements are included in a work that they approve of, they simply call it "magical realism" and then it is cleansed of the negative connotations of fantasy. Also, ancient, medieval, and non-western literature get a pass. I guess if I ever bother to finish the fantasy project I've been working on for a long time, all I need to do is label it as "magical realism" and it might be acceptable as literary fiction. It is too weird to work as genre fiction - I like to mess with page structure and sentence structure, come up with custom designed points of view, and use confusing and garbled stream of consciousness narration. (Stream of consciousness with magic is really fun to write, especially when magic goes awry.) I think I've been influenced a little too much by James Joyce and Virginia Woolf, but I'll never be anywhere near as talented as they were.
A major distinction between genre fiction and the weirder side of literary fiction is that genre fiction tries to be structurally transparent. It uses conventional small scale and large scale structures that readers learn from an early age. The sentence structures, grammar conventions, page layouts, points of view, story arcs, and overall packaging draw from a narrow range of familiar styles. To academic and literary types, this can seem boring. However, it serves a purpose. It allows the story to pass to the reader effortlessly, provided that the reader has been well trained by the culture to accept these structures as defaults. A talented genre fiction writer makes these structures as invisible as possible to allow the story to shine on its own. Readers of genre fiction aren't looking for a linguistic and interpretive puzzle to solve. They are looking for an engaging story, and the complexity they seek is found within the world building, the lore, the characters, and the progression of the narrative. I don't read a lot of conventional fantasy because I am usually looking for difficult books that give me obtuse puzzles to make my brain hurt. (I do, however, play a lot of fantasy video games - I think that medium is ideal for fantasy.) Sometimes, however, I just want a good story and don't want to have to work hard to drag it out of the book. One of my "guilty pleasures" here is obscure pulp science fiction novels from the middle of the 20th century. They are quick, easy reads, and they are a lot of fun. As a general rule, genre fiction writers may not be masters of the finer details of language, but at their best, they are master story tellers, and I think those who are more academically inclined could learn a thing or two from them.
While I agree with the conclusion, there's a point academics and critics bring up that wasn't mentioned here directly.
I actually had a professor who explained one of the biggest issues to me in clear concise language.
Fantasy allows for victories and spectacle that are too easy to generate and contrive. Need tension? Add a dragon. Need spectacle? Cast a spell or have said dragon flame.
He was right. This is a pitfall of fantasy. What is Lord of the Rings without the ring? Well, we would have to think of real things to temp characters besides the magic jewelry. That might actually strengthen the narrative, though it would also curve it and twist it into something different. However, a lot of the dramatic moments in the series still work if it were historical fiction instead. It is a well written novel.
The point is, I believe the best of fantasy is just as good if you took the fantastic out. Everything Sanderson said, for example, still holds for books that are not fantastic. When they payoffs could theoretically be earned whether there were magic or not.
Terry Pratchett is a literary genius! Why would someone say he isn't without reading his work?
As someone who only got into books because of Terry Pratchett and is in the middle of rereading the witches series i find that article very disturbing.
Sit Pratchett is quoted as saying “i never had a university education but i have sympathy for those who did” and im staring to see what he meant. In his books several people believe what they think instead of what they see.
I very much agree with Prachett.
I went to school for the sciences. I have spent the last 5 years undoing all the bs I learned while in university. University has squashed my passions and a childlike curiosity that I used to possess. I picked up reading again after almost a decade of barely reading a book. I used to be an avid reader until college, and since getting back into it, my passions and curiosity are returning. I am dreaming again, and I have restarted my arthropod journals I started in elementary of my observations and research of any given insect, arachnid, and crustacean I have had the pleasure of encountering and have a moment to take notes on it.
How university is structured is very cut and dry, and I feel for a lot of people it sucks the color out of what you are learning. It amazes me how such interesting topics like physics, chemistry, biology, history, literature, etc can be taught in a way that will crush people's passions and that is encouraged to do so to weed people out. Sure, there is a lot of complexity that can make any of these subjects difficult and frustrating, but I think more people would be able to get through it if their education was cultivated and their curiosity encouraged. It would also be nice to have labs that actually promoted experimentation and more hands on experience.
This is why I believe there is such snobbery in academics. People who get degrees, masters, and phds aren't always there for their love of the subject. A lot of the snobs are there for the status of completing a vigorous and exceptionally dry academic accomplishment. Then they can look down on everyone else. Many scientists I have talked to that are very passionate talk about how they had to reignite their love for what they are doing after university.
fantasy is the best dude it can do anything the other genres can do but better.
Why do critics always disrespect authors/books whose works they have never read. I’ve read Dickens, Poe, James Joyce, Oscar Wilde to name a few but while I recognise their place as literary giants everything they published is not uniformly excellent. Terry Pratchett is wonderful at bringing the absurdities to life (to borrow your phrase) to the attention of his readers in a witty and entertaining way. Are all his books great, no but many are amazing. I remember reading It in 1987 and a colleague at work stated I was reading rubbish. On questioning her motives it wasn’t Stephen King she was criticising but the horror/fantasy genre itself. When I pointed out the number of literary giants who wrote in the genre there was complete silence, she had no answer to my reply. Literary snobbery at its most blatant. Great video!
Who said? Close them in one room with a Chasemfiend
Pratchett not a literaly genious? How? Does the person writing even know what the term means? One could not agree with his worldview - I most often did not - but his books are excelently written, gripping, entertaining and highest quality.
1) Sturgeon's Law is a thing, and 90% is probably an underestimate.
2) LitFic is just as much a genre as Action/Adventure, or SF, or Mystery. It tends to be enjoyed (or perhaps "enjoyed") by people for whom pretense is a way of life, but that's not a reflection on the genre, just its fans.
3) LitFic isn't inherently bad, but see #1 above.
4) It helps to be a bit arrogant when confronted by bigotry. If I don't respect the opinion of a bigoted snob, why would I be affected by that opinion?
John Updike lamented that "the category of 'literary fiction' has sprung up recently to torment people like me who just set out to write books, and if anybody wanted to read them, terrific, the more the merrier ... I'm a genre writer of a sort. I write literary fiction, which is like spy fiction or chick lit." Likewise, on The Charlie Rose Show, Updike argued that this term, when applied to his work, greatly limited him and his expectations of what might come of his writing, so he does not really like it. He suggested that all his works are literary, simply because "they are written in words."
Why would a fan of the genre claim their genre of choice "isn't literature" or isn't even capable of being literature.
The most far-fetched fantasy I've ever witnessed is that when you watch professional millionaire athletes compete in sports that you are somehow part of their team and you share their victories. Compared to that, Lord of the Rings and hobbits are realistic.
I think two different questions collide here. Is fanatsy literature and is fantasy less respectable.
The latter is the issue you actually address in your video. Fantasy is unjustly disregarded, even though it is just as respectable and valid as ‘literature’ for the reasons you mentioned.
I think the first question is a bit more complex. If you look at the Cambrige definition, it defines literature as ‘written artistic works, especially those with high and lasting artistic value’, and honestly I don't think most fantasy works fall under that definition. There are of course examples that fulfil this definition, such as Le Guin's, Tolkien's and even GRRM's fantasy novels, but it doesn't apply to the broad field.
We could of course try to broaden the definition, but I think it's much healthier to accept that fantasy doesn't have to be literature under the current definitions, and that we should work towards breaking the false superiority people have about literature.
Let’s include science fiction
1: The word "genius" is very loaded, it is probably best to avoid using it and instead describe how someone is so good at something, without saying "genius". Why? Because it is usually used to put men, and only men, on a pedestal, giving them a disproportionate amount of attention. Just don't talk about geniouses please. Use a different word.
2: Fantasy has, from its inception (after tolkien, as literary scholars started theorising the genre) been refered to as popculture. And that is true of most fantasy - but some authors focus on different things, social issues and/or political or philosophical things. But then they compete with all other books that also strive to do the same right? And then yeah, not that many fantasy authors remain as heavy hitters within social sciences or philosophy etc. etc.
3: Sci-fi has a longer history of creating what people refer to as "classics" - that are not popculture. Them being classics doesn't mean that they are fun to read.... I read "the female man" and I was kinda bored. But I get the point it is making yada yada. But I prefer Pratchett for sure. But like, pratchett and Joanna Russ doesn't really write for the same reasons, and this is probably why academics are interested in researching Russ more than Pratchett. (Unless their field is popular culture, which some do research in.)
4: I think a lot of fantasy exist, with large ideas and very complex thinking and amazing language - but they are manuscripts on a shelf somewhere. They don't get published because that's not what the market wants. So the reason why there is no fantasy "genius" is twofold, the hegemony thinks of fantasy as pop- which it is, most of the time. So they will not sponsor difficult scripts with culture fund money. And the audience doesn't want books whose aim is not to entertain, so these books won't be produced. So there is no avenue in which these books can exist.
I agree with the Professor. Fantasy didn't start with Tolkien. Books we call classic up to late 19th century are full of fantastic elements.
Sci-Fi and Fantasy are really respected in procommunist countries. It was a way to escape harsh censorship.
Romance, Fantasy/Sci-Fi and Thriller are best selling genre on Amazon in Literature category. I rarely see other stuff there. And almost never books that are winning "critics" awards.
Never really cared what other people thought about fantasy because it never made sense to begin with.
After a certain point, you also get used to the weird, uhh, opinions that other people force. Or maybe that's a severely American thing with how things are going, but you might as well use your precious time the way you want.
It sure feels like modern literary fiction bores me more often than not, too. It feels too samey, being bound by reality. It's questionable how much is really being added to whatever notion of grandeur proposed by critics. Maybe in 20+ years that will be different, but the same could be said of genre literature for others.
I completely agree and was going to write something similar. To be honest, a lot of contemporary literature seems to be navel gazing and depressing. I do enough of that on my own, why read it. Ha!
Most literary fiction is preachy and boring as stale snot on the sidewalk.
The good stuff provides escapism AND teaches you something.
I had a philosophy teacher in high school who on the first day insisted there was no philosophy to be found in Harry Potter because it was just a silly fantasy series. (This was before JKR went off the rails so forgive my fervor at the time) As a die hard fan of the time I took this as a personal challenge. Every single assignment he gave, I managed to frame around Harry Potter and I got a perfect grade in that class. I was lucky to be raised on fantasy as an intellectual exercise and never understood people looking down on fantasy.
JKR went off the rails and proclaimed that there are only two sexes, a simple statement of empirical fact that until recently was known by everyone.
Drop a glass dome over San Fran for a thousand years and when the archaeologists dig up the bones there will be only two types of humans, male & female.
Nerdily. People are making up and using pronouns, why not words? Satire!
Seriously though. I look down on a lot of books, but not by genre. There is a place for pulp entertainment. I am more bothered by the DEI gatekeeping the Traditional publishers are doing today and look down ferociously on books pushed by Trads in trends.
There it is☝🏿 this kind of numb brain thinking
How can you label an author as mediocre and proudly state in the next breath that you've NEVER READ HIS WORK? At least you (literal you, not the metaphorical swine of the first sentence) have grounds to say Discworld "isn't my jam" because you've actually read a few books in the series; reading even one, or part of one, would make your assessment valid. But the author of the Terry Pratchett hit piece should never have been taken seriously in the first place.
I had a leaning towards fantasy long before I became a full-fledged fantasy fan. I loved to read; I was the kid who enjoyed the assigned reading in class (e.g. Shakespeare, Poe, To Kill a Mockingbird, A Tale of Two Cities), and I saw myself as a nerd, yet I didn't feel quite accepted as a nerd, well, because "girl." This was the 1980s, and it seemed to be "common knowledge" that science fiction and fantasy books, movies, and TV shows were both about guys and for guys. True, people loved Ripley, but she didn't seem to cause any substantial ripples in the perception of SFF, and nerd culture in general, as a "guy thing." Thankfully, perceptions have changed.
There are still some pockets within SFF fandom who want to cling fast to the idea of fantasy and science fiction media as a treehouse with a "No Girlz Alloud" sign posted by the door, but thankfully they're now a small (though loud) minority. That's why I love seeing Jen Williams' books on your table. If fantasy series like "The Winnowing Flame" existed when I was growing up, I never heard about them. She and her series represent the change in the fantasy world that has welcomed me in.
"Literature" IS a genre. Bugger the book snobs.
I think a big reason for people looking down on Fantasy is that the vast majority of Fantasy books and, what is worse, the most popular ones, are simply very badly written, Le Guin & Wolfe not being very broadly known, the only really popular exception being Tolkien. Instead people get recommended Harry Potter which, we have to admit is not a literary jewel, or Sanderson, who I don't even know how someone accepted to publish in the first place and they think that if that's what people like then yes, the genre is not worth it. Popular has never been the same as quality.
Most modern fantasy is difficult to read. It's like reading Danielle Steele or YA or something. NK Jemisin is obviously a literary master, but how many fantasy "booktubers" talk about her work? Or Rebecca Roans, marlon James, nnedi okorafor, Samuel delany?
I cannot believe anyone is using popularity of Sanderson's books to justify their quality. Sales does not equal quality.
If your argument is that it does equal numbers, then are we to accept the fact that Twilight series is better than all of Sanderson's work because Twilight series is more popular and sold 4 times as much as Sanderson's books (Twilight series sold 160M copies to Sanderson's entire work 40M copies sold)?
Is Stephenie Meyer modern Jane Austen because she has popularity and sales numbers behind her?
You had legitimate argument in Steven Erikson's Malazan series which can easily be considered going on par with many literary classics that stand test to hundreds (if not thousands since Malazan is most similar to Homer's Iliad) of years of time, but instead you had to choose probably the weakest fantasy author, just because he is popular.
Fantasy is just for entertainment. Literary fiction is real literature. Nothing wrong with either, just different.
Fantasy is just a medium.
@@eirikwatz6179 genre*
The Way of Kings is juvenile. Are you seriously going to compare it to like, "invisible man" for instance? And i mean, he answers his own question! Also, id wildly diaagree that fantasy does any kind of commentary on prejudice. The fans of fantssy are some of the most prejudiced, bigoted people ive ever encountered!
That is a lot of sweeping generalisations you are making
El camino de los reyes no es juvenil, aunque sea popular entre el público joven. Tiene violencia explícita, tramas políticas y religiosas, y protagonistas de moral cuestionable. Todo eso es incompatible con la literatura juvenil, y además diría que la cantidad de páginas también lo aleja de esa categoría. No hace falta que salga un enano con el pene erecto para ser adulto.
That's an awfully prejudiced bigoted opinion...
Reading through the comments you make. You seem unhappy and unfulfilled. I hope you find happiness in other ways. You don’t need to bring others down to feel good
I sound like a hater, but sff is my favorite genre but i hate all of your arguments for it.