Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="FraserRonald" data-source="post: 1081335" data-attributes="member: 7892">In my opinion (and its only that) realism exists in fantasy and science fiction in order to help to maintain the willing suspension of disbelief (WSD). Reading about a world with magic and elves (etc.) is already a strain on one's WSD, so why strain it any further? One should maintain consistency, and if one does not indicate a difference from our reality, the reader is going to get caught up on it. So, your thin, 90 lb. Weakling can't lift a car--unless you have already indicated to the reader that he is wearing his belt of Frost Giant's strength, or what have you.Also, the "realism" of the setting must be consistent. If the belt of Frost Giant's strength allows the 90 lb. Weakling to lift a car, then anyone wearing it should be able to lift a car. If Joe T. Blough puts on that belt and can't lift a car, that's not consistent, and you will confuse your reader, as well as destroy that reader's WSD.Fantasy can be as realistic as the writer wants it to be. I have only read the first book of George R. R. Martin's "A Song of Fire and Ice," but I think it is a reference most people can relate to. Throughout much--almost all--of that book, there was very little that was outside my frame of reference (the real world). There were a couple of supernatural instances, but that was about it. If the actual supernatural instances were not related by the characters present, but were rather related as events that someone had "heard of," it would have been as close to Medieval Europe as possible. Almost everyone in Medieval Europe believed in the supernatural, so such occurrences would be readily believed.I think that fantasy should be realistic in all ways, save those the writer explicitly points out to the reader. The sky in most worlds is blue, which is as it should be. As Dimwhit mentioned, this allows the reader a common frame of reference with the setting of the world. The reader feels a certain familiarity with the setting, and understands the underlying rules of the setting because they are the same rules the reader understands about our real world. If you read 200 pages of a book and then in some off-hand manner the writer mentioned (or a character did, whatever) that the sky is magenta, wouldn't that throw you right out of the story? "Huh? Did he mention that before?" The frame of reference is shattered and the WSD is strained, if not totalled.I agree with CCamfield. I would say fantasy shouldn't be realistic in those ways necessary to tell the story. There's nothing wrong with extraneous fantastic elements, as long as they aren't dragging the reader away from the story. I don't need to know how creative and wonderful the writer's world-building is; I want to know how creative and wonderful the writer's story-telling is. That thing is, I think some writers get carried away with fantasy. Many things are different or non-realistic for no apparent reason. Does every forest creature need to be completely different from those here in our world? If it's a furry herbivore that hops and eats carrots, does it need to be the six-legged, purple fivvilmueller? Why not just call it a rabbit, if it does what a rabbit does? If you're calling a prince 'a prince,' why does a horse need to be a besstellikan?But that's just me. YMM(and likely will)V.Actually, thanks for bringing this up, Mallus. I always appreciate a good soapbox, and I am quite interested to see what my E.N. Worlder comrades will say.Take care all.</blockquote>

Verification