Not very good Magic Realism
Graham Head
relation to the 'Fantasy Canon' thread, particularly with regard to
'magic(al) realism', I'm beginning to wonder whether it really exists.
What I mean is, I find it hard to distinguish between texts that are
labelled in this way and other relatively literate, well-written fantasies.
In other words, if it's any good and isn't elfy-welfy (that is *so* useful!)
- or more to the point is ostensibly set in the 'real' world (whatever that
means) - then a literate fantasy is likely to be referred to as magic realism.
The important thing here is the criterion of quality - if it ain't well done,
the label won't be used, I would suggest.
Which leads me to ask whether 'magic realism' is now just the name given to the
good stuff published outside the genre?
--
Graham
Chad R Orzel
Graham Head <Gra...@nunhead.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>What I mean is, I find it hard to distinguish between texts that are
>labelled in this way and other relatively literate, well-written fantasies.
>In other words, if it's any good and isn't elfy-welfy (that is *so* useful!)
>- or more to the point is ostensibly set in the 'real' world (whatever that
>means) - then a literate fantasy is likely to be referred to as magic realism.
>
>good stuff published outside the genre?
>
within the fantasy genre is actually enjoyed by people who don't normally
follow the genre, and are trying to distance themselves from "elfy-welfy"
books.
But this probably depends upon how one defines "genre."
Later,
OilCan
Jo Walton
Gra...@nunhead.demon.co.uk "Graham Head" writes:
Magic Realism - a marketing label of its own - maybe. Yet there is something
that sets it apart from Fantasy - and that is to do with the logic. In Magic
Realism things don't need to be explained, or make sense, except artistic
sense. Things can happen that are never explained. Genre Fantasy, following
Tolkien, or all these Unknown writers everyone cited last time I mentioned
this, or because of its closeness to Genre SF, at least attempts to explain
things within the terms of its world. However, there are things published as
Fantasy which would be leapt on with cries of joy as Magic Realism from
Literary Critics if only they weren't written by genre authors - Tepper's
_Beauty_ is the most immediate example that springs to mind, and MacAvoy's
_Tea With the Black Dragon_ may be another. Has anyone read Jill Paton Walsh's
_Knowledge of Angels_, in the context of marketing, labeling and genre?
--
Jo
*********************************************************
- - I kissed a kif at Kefk - -
*********************************************************
Mike Scott
>What I mean is, I find it hard to distinguish between texts that are
>labelled in this way and other relatively literate, well-written fantasies.
>In other words, if it's any good and isn't elfy-welfy (that is *so* useful!)
>- or more to the point is ostensibly set in the 'real' world (whatever that
>means) - then a literate fantasy is likely to be referred to as magic realism.
My view is that the difference between fantasy and 'magical realism'
lies in the extent of the suspension of disbelief required. With
fantasy, you are expected to read the book as if the events described
are actually happening - you have to believe in the book while you're
reading it. Magical realism does not demand this rather tricky process
to the same extent - it's always implicit in the book that this is a
literary game, or a dream/fantasy/hallucination, and it tends to lack
the rigid internal consistency that assists the suspension of disbelief.
--
Mike Scott || Confabulation is the 1995 UK national SF convention
Mi...@moose.demon.co.uk || Mail Con...@moose.demon.co.uk for more details
Graham Head
> 'Magic Realism' is also, please note, almost exclusively an
> English-language concept. The main reason for it, I think, is that in the
> 20's through the 50's there was a strong revulsion to the fantastic in
> 'serious' writing. It was acceptable only as social criticism and suspect
> even then. Literature was supposed to be about 'real' people facing 'real'
> situations with a strong undertone that the ultimate result was supposed to
> help us on our long march upward.
I'm not sure I agree. Think of Auden & Isherwood, Dylan Thomas, Sylvia
Townsend Warner, Joyce, Ted Hughes (or is he too late?)
>
> Fantasy didn't fit, so fantasy was taboo.
>
> Other groups, such as the Spanish authors, never had that notion as a
> wide-spread precept so they kept writing fantasy and including fantastic
> elements in their novels quite happily. Then in the 70s and 80s when those
> novels became popular in translation the critics had to come up with a
> name for this 'special phenomenon.'
>
I seem to recall that the term 'magic realism' is actually a mistranslation
of the Spanish which means something like 'the marvellous real'. Can any
one out there confirm this?
> --Rick Cook
>
--
Graham Head
Graham Head
Mi...@moose.demon.co.uk "Mike Scott" writes:
>
> My view is that the difference between fantasy and 'magical realism'
> lies in the extent of the suspension of disbelief required. With
> fantasy, you are expected to read the book as if the events described
> are actually happening - you have to believe in the book while you're
> reading it. Magical realism does not demand this rather tricky process
> to the same extent - it's always implicit in the book that this is a
> literary game, or a dream/fantasy/hallucination, and it tends to lack
> the rigid internal consistency that assists the suspension of disbelief.
>
_The Library of Babel_ is rigidly self consistent (IMHO), not positioned
as a dream or hallucination, possibly a literary game and yet a compelling
story (one that has also been reprinted in an sf anthology IIR), yet
seems squarely within 'magic mrealist' writing.
Similalrly, if Rushdie's _Midnight's Children_ is categorised as magic
realism (as it was by at least one newspaper reviewer, I think), again
I find it hard to apply/detect your distinctions. YMMV.
--
Graham
David Weingart
"a fantasy written by a Latin American author"
--
73 de Dave Weingart KB2CWF
Personal: phyd...@emerald.princeton.edu | From near to far
wein...@rama.poly.edu | From here to there
Work: dwei...@nielsen.com | Funny things are everywhere
dwei...@nielsen.com | -- Dr. Seuss
Mark Rosenfelder
>relation to the 'Fantasy Canon' thread, particularly with regard to
>'magic(al) realism', I'm beginning to wonder whether it really exists.
>
>What I mean is, I find it hard to distinguish between texts that are
>labelled in this way and other relatively literate, well-written fantasies.
>In other words, if it's any good and isn't elfy-welfy (that is *so* useful!)
>- or more to the point is ostensibly set in the 'real' world (whatever that
>means) - then a literate fantasy is likely to be referred to as magic realism.
No genre "really exists"; its just a matter of what bins we find it useful
to lump books in. And what we find useful will depend on what we're doing:
selling books; finding a good read; writing a thesis.
The original Latin American magic realists show this nicely. In English,
which has a rich fantasy tradition, you can get away with calling their
books "literate fantasies". In Spanish, where (apart from translations)
fantasy hardly exists as a genre, they aren't fantasies, just novels.
Something that's often missed in discussions of these books, I think, is
how naturally "magic realism" flows out of the Latin American experience.
The dramatic and outrageous social realities of the continent invite
writers to talk about what's going on around them: thus, a certain realism.
The eccentric and extreme personalities depicted also come right out of
history. And the magic also comes naturally; partly because the sorts of
people depicted believe in it; partly because, living in a world far from
Western European rationalism, anything seems possible.
Something like _One Hundred Years of Solitude_ may strike U.S. readers as
far-fetched and exotic. After listening to my Peruvian wife's stories of
her ancestors living on the Amazon at the turn of the century, it seems like
straightforward reporting. I could tell you stories-- her grandfather's
meeting with the devil, the witch who cured his son, the amorous encounters
with dolphins, the woman who brought her daughter to a remote lake to be
killed-- that could have come straight out of Garcia Marquez or Amado.
>The important thing here is the criterion of quality - if it ain't well done,
>the label won't be used, I would suggest.
I don't know about that. _The Khazar Dictionary_, I would submit, is a
terrible book, but is counted as magic realism. The author seemed to figure
that if there's a couple of fantastic events per chapter in Garcia Marquez
or Borges, he could outdo them by putting in a couple per page. Not.
Dan 'Fergus' Roberts
>at an MLA conference years & years ago, I sat at a deli counter with
>another MLA attendee, and we chatted. It turned out that he had written
>*the* book on magical realism, introducing it to English-language academia.
Could you provide me with the author and title?
I'd appreciate it. Thanks.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dan 'Fergus' Roberts Fergu...@delphi.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------------