Forked Thread: What is the difference between New Fantasy and Old Fantasy?

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Curse you hamishspence, curse you I say

hamishspence, I think this post means you've basically won the internet... or at least a major portion of EN World.

Congratulations!

 

[hamishspence]

Why, thank you.

I've always thought that the term "futuristic fantasy" covers a lot of what some people refer to as sci-fi. Magic in Space is a good sign that it hews closer to fantasy than science.

Mind you, if you define anything that is obviously supernatural as fantasy, and "godlike extradimensional entities" as fantasy gods by any other name, the sci-fi range gets narrower.

Some fantasy uses both "psychic powers" and magic, (valdemar series)

 

[Doug McCrae]

Everything that made up Star Wars came out of ancient mythology.

And The Dam Busters, The Fighting Devil Dogs and Jack Kirby's Fourth World.

 

[hong]

Doug, you just spoiled The Fighting Devil Dogs for me!

 

[williamhm]

Most of modern fantasy is based on old mythology. Especially the races. And yeah Gilgamesh is awsome, as is the Ramayana, Journey to the west, Odyssey, Illiad, not to mention the oral tradditions of a number of peoples. You could say that modern fantasy in a way pays homage to our past, and in a way keeps some of the old legends alive.

 

[Imperialus]

Once again, I have to point out, no. Lucas pulled his reluctant hero straight out of mythology. Everything that made up Star Wars came out of ancient mythology. Odysseus was a reluctant hero, Perseus was a reluctant hero, and I know there were others.

Odysseus was not a reluctant hero... Either that or you've read a translation very different from mine. Odysseus did have a few *headsmack* "WHY did I have to go and piss of Poseidon?" moments, but that doesn't make him a reluctant hero. Especially if you read the Odyssey in conjunction with the Illiad.

 

[Tewligan]

Once again, I have to point out, no. Lucas pulled his reluctant hero straight out of mythology. Everything that made up Star Wars came out of ancient mythology. Odysseus was a reluctant hero, Perseus was a reluctant hero, and I know there were others.

And The Dam Busters, The Fighting Devil Dogs and Jack Kirby's Fourth World.

And The Hidden Fortress.

 

[radferth]

Actually, while the Arthurian myths are an organization and amalgamation of several different takes on the same story, the Portuguese national epic "Os Lusiadas" was specifically written by Luis de Camões in order to become a "new mythology" for the Portuguese people. In that he is closer in approach to modern day comic book writers, or to George Lucas (another creator who set out to make a new mythology).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Os_Lusíadas

So whats the difference between old and new Fantasy: Jar-jar Binks.

 

[GSHamster]

One example that may illustrate the difference is Beowulf. Compare the original Beowulf with the modern Gaiman/Zemeckis movie version.

In the original Beowulf faces Grendel, Grendel's mother, and then a random dragon at the end. There's no real connection between the dragon and the rest. There's no connection between Beowulf's character and the monsters.

In the Gaiman version, Beowulf is a boastful hero, who succumbs to a seduction by Grendel's mother. The product of that liason is the dragon, and Beowulf is forced to confront the results of his weaknesses.

Even though it's the same story, Gaiman's version is modern fantasy. Everything is connected, everything happens for a reason. The hero's weaknesses at the start of the story become the central motivator of the entire story. There is a great sense of "order" in Gaiman's version. His version is not capricious, not random.

 

[williamhm]

One example that may illustrate the difference is Beowulf. Compare the original Beowulf with the modern Gaiman/Zemeckis movie version.

In the original Beowulf faces Grendel, Grendel's mother, and then a random dragon at the end. There's no real connection between the dragon and the rest. There's no connection between Beowulf's character and the monsters.

In the Gaiman version, Beowulf is a boastful hero, who succumbs to a seduction by Grendel's mother. The product of that liason is the dragon, and Beowulf is forced to confront the results of his weaknesses.

Even though it's the same story, Gaiman's version is modern fantasy. Everything is connected, everything happens for a reason. The hero's weaknesses at the start of the story become the central motivator of the entire story. There is a great sense of "order" in Gaiman's version. His version is not capricious, not random.

That does not hold for all the old fantasy though. Look at gilgamesh, Enkidu is created to teach gilgamesh some humility and in the process becomes his best friend, then because gilgamesh wants his deeds known he kills the giant, because he kills the giant Ishtar notices him and wants him for a lover, he spurns her, so she sends the bull of heaven to kill him, because he and enkidu kill the bull, and then taunt Isis, Isis kills Enkidu, whose death sparks his long journey looking for the secret of eternal life. So in a way everything is connected. And a lot of the old epics are like that.