Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Genre Conventions: What is fantasy?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Dannyalcatraz" data-source="post: 2307967" data-attributes="member: 19675"><p>No, when I said that those questions of identity (that I believe barsoomcore proposed) were present in Japanese historical fiction, I wasn't pointing out one particular work, but actually a large theme within that genre, at least as popular as within Sci-Fi, which I then enumerated several authors with large bodies of work- essentially pointing out the Asimovs and Heinleins of the genre.</p><p></p><p>And as I pointed out in my original refutation of barsoomcore's definition, there are works within Sci-Fi that didn't deal with identity- so I'm quite aware of that as well. In other words, it was dual attack upon his working defininition: Certain elements were not exclusive to the genre, other elements were not universal within the genre.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>In other words, that statement could be rewritten as "A group does not require a unique part; that group is a unique part."</p><p></p><p>We have already shown that there are no <em>parts</em> unique to any form of literature. Thus, the statement is nonsense.</p><p></p><p> </p><p></p><p>I'm not being anything less than completely honest with you. In order to satisfy that first sentence, I am trying to find what it is that makes SF/F unique...what <em>element, component, ingredient, etc.</em> sets it apart from other literary types.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Simple logic, actually. 2 locations ≠ 1 location. What part of "unique" is unclear?</p><p></p><p>To define is to "to determine or identify the essential qualities or meaning of" whatever is being defined, to "to fix or mark the limits of" what is being discussed. If a characteristic is shared between 2 genres, it cannot be used to define the difference between the 2 genres- it dosn't "mark the limits of" either genre; it may or may not be essential to one or both, but it distinguishes neither. </p><p></p><p>Example: while possessing fur may be a point of definition between reptiles and mammals, it generally cannot be used to define the difference between 2 mammals (there are some rare, hairless mammals). Also, having hair is not unique to mammals- there are arthropods and other critters that have evolved hairs. Hair cannot be said to be universal nor unique to mammals, so it can't be used as the quintessential characteristic of mammals. Nor can posessing teeth or a skeleton or a spinal cord.</p><p></p><p>What sets mammals apart (among other things) is having mammary glands.</p><p></p><p><strong>So, no-</strong> Tragedy remains Tragedy even when an element is shared with SF- it just means that the shared element between SF and Tragedy is not unique to either genre, and thus is not the defining aspect of either genre relative to each other. There is still something that makes Tragedy Tragedy and SF SF- but it isn't that shared element.</p><p></p><p>As for my sloppiness between "form" and "work" as interchangeable, you have a point. However, since a work is by necessity either a subset of (specifically 1 unit of) or the sole representative of a form, its not a very strong one. If a work within a form has a particular characteristic, then that form can be said to have units within it with that characteristics- that characteristic is within that form. The characteristic doesn't even have to be universal within that form.</p><p></p><p>Example: Black people (like myself) are humans. "Blackness" can be considered to be within the greater set of humanity, without all humans having to be black.</p><p></p><p>Similarly, a particular SF/F work with Tragic elements is still within the form of SF/F, and all SF/F need be Tragic, nor all Tragedy SF/F. Simple Venn diagram stuff.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Dannyalcatraz, post: 2307967, member: 19675"] No, when I said that those questions of identity (that I believe barsoomcore proposed) were present in Japanese historical fiction, I wasn't pointing out one particular work, but actually a large theme within that genre, at least as popular as within Sci-Fi, which I then enumerated several authors with large bodies of work- essentially pointing out the Asimovs and Heinleins of the genre. And as I pointed out in my original refutation of barsoomcore's definition, there are works within Sci-Fi that didn't deal with identity- so I'm quite aware of that as well. In other words, it was dual attack upon his working defininition: Certain elements were not exclusive to the genre, other elements were not universal within the genre. In other words, that statement could be rewritten as "A group does not require a unique part; that group is a unique part." We have already shown that there are no [I]parts[/I] unique to any form of literature. Thus, the statement is nonsense. I'm not being anything less than completely honest with you. In order to satisfy that first sentence, I am trying to find what it is that makes SF/F unique...what [I]element, component, ingredient, etc.[/I] sets it apart from other literary types. Simple logic, actually. 2 locations ≠ 1 location. What part of "unique" is unclear? To define is to "to determine or identify the essential qualities or meaning of" whatever is being defined, to "to fix or mark the limits of" what is being discussed. If a characteristic is shared between 2 genres, it cannot be used to define the difference between the 2 genres- it dosn't "mark the limits of" either genre; it may or may not be essential to one or both, but it distinguishes neither. Example: while possessing fur may be a point of definition between reptiles and mammals, it generally cannot be used to define the difference between 2 mammals (there are some rare, hairless mammals). Also, having hair is not unique to mammals- there are arthropods and other critters that have evolved hairs. Hair cannot be said to be universal nor unique to mammals, so it can't be used as the quintessential characteristic of mammals. Nor can posessing teeth or a skeleton or a spinal cord. What sets mammals apart (among other things) is having mammary glands. [B]So, no-[/B] Tragedy remains Tragedy even when an element is shared with SF- it just means that the shared element between SF and Tragedy is not unique to either genre, and thus is not the defining aspect of either genre relative to each other. There is still something that makes Tragedy Tragedy and SF SF- but it isn't that shared element. As for my sloppiness between "form" and "work" as interchangeable, you have a point. However, since a work is by necessity either a subset of (specifically 1 unit of) or the sole representative of a form, its not a very strong one. If a work within a form has a particular characteristic, then that form can be said to have units within it with that characteristics- that characteristic is within that form. The characteristic doesn't even have to be universal within that form. Example: Black people (like myself) are humans. "Blackness" can be considered to be within the greater set of humanity, without all humans having to be black. Similarly, a particular SF/F work with Tragic elements is still within the form of SF/F, and all SF/F need be Tragic, nor all Tragedy SF/F. Simple Venn diagram stuff. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Genre Conventions: What is fantasy?
Top