Thoughts on Fantasy

A couple discussions were going on recently on different message boards regarding the relative position of fantasy and science fiction. Ignoring, for now, the assertions that there is such a thing as "true" sci-fi (by which the posters meant "hard SF"), some interesting and disturbing points were made. The most disturbing, from my perspective, was the statement that "true SF makes people think and no fantasy series does that." So, I thought I'd collect my thoughts here, as a fan of both fantasy and sci-fi (or SF if you want to be academic and separate the fandom from "serious" stuff).

My knee jerk reaction to the above assertion is to say it represents general ignorance and poor reading skills. Of course, that gets into ad hominem attacks, which it is best to avoid. Therefore, let's dig a little bit into examples from the fantasy genre and discuss what indeed fantasy asks us to think about using a few well known authors.

1) Discworld (Terry Pratchett) - Discusses and asks us to think about racism, jingoism, morality, the importance/power of stories, the press (its freedom and responsibility), how government works, how society works, stereotyping, technology (its effects on society especially), religion, faith, blind obedience to dogma (political or religious), family, the nature and use of power, and many other things (could go on for pages)

2) Harry Potter (J.K. Rowling) - Discusses and asks us to consider the nature of morality, power, government, life, aging, death, racism, fads, consumerism (Harry only "wins" after he loses all of his "cool stuff"), wealth/poverty, the Other (the outsider, strangeness), family, respect, loyalty v. blind obedience, relationships (as she presents pretty realistic relationships), destiny v. free will, nature v. nurture, etc.

3) Lord of the Rings (J.R.R. Tolkien) - Discusses and asks us to consider history (and its effects), morality, destiny, technology, social progress (Cleansing of the Shire; Shire democracy v. Gondor & Rohan's absolute monarchies), nature v. urbanization, the potential pitfalls of industrialization (which we're seeing now), etc.

4) Conan (Robert E. Howard) - Although many dismiss Howard's creation as frivolous, I think that comes more from the movie versions than actually reading his work. Howard discusses and asks us to think about issues of race/stereotyping, religion/faith, alien contact, morality (his hero murders, steals, etc. but is at heart a good guy), and other issues depending on the story.

5) American Gods (Neil Gaiman) - Primarily discusses and asks us to think about faith, belief, destiny, and morality (in terms of what one would do if simple survival was on the line).

6) Videssos (Harry Turtledove) - Mostly discusses history and wants us to think about the power and knowledge of history, but also includes issues of race, government, cultural conflict/hegemony, faith/religion, and morality.

7) His Dark Materials (Philip Pullman) - Clearly focuses on religion/faith, morality, and related issues (see posts below), but there are also discussions of sentience, learning, and other important features as well.

8) The Eternal Champion (Michael Moorcock) - Including Elric, Corum, Hawkmoon, Von Bek, etc. the series discusses and asks us to think about the nature of reality, morality, race (especially with Elric), relationships (especially with Elric and Dorian Hawkmoon), history (especially with Von Bek), and scores of other issues. One of the major "changes" in the genre being the shift from a good-evil dichotomy to law-chaos, with law typically being seen as good, but both law and chaos alone being negative until they exist in balance.

As I've done in my classroom, I challenge readers to go back to these series/books and re-read them with one or more of these issues in mind. I think the results will be enlightening. For instance, I have been using Rowling's books (one per semester) in a course that focuses on discussions of race in literature. Initially, the students are invariably confused as to why she is on the reading list (and the handful who know of Pratchett are equally confused about why he is there with her). However, about a third of the way through the book--using Chamber of Secrets and Prisoner of Azkaban so far--the light in the attic clicks on, revelation occurs, and many of them rush off to re-read the other books in the series with serious issues in mind.

His Dark Materials

Ok, I'm wrapping up the last of Philip Pullman's His Dark Materials books (The Amber Spyglass). At this point, I see why various fundie groups in the U.S. were up in arms. There's really nothing for them to rant about in the first book, but the third, sure. Between the ex-nun turned Garden of Eden serpent and the re-staging of Milton's take on Lucifer's war on God (with God dying as a gibbering senile old man), ok their rants come from somewhere.

That said, we now have to look at whether they're justified in ranting.

From my perspective, as a semi-historian and whatnot, I have to say that they are most definitely not justified. Why? Because for centuries they (virtually any branch of Christianity) have been writing fiction and non-fiction denigrating and attacking every other religious faith in the world from Judaism to Buddhism, other Christian sects to Shinto. And do they seem to have a problem with this massive body of material (much of which is targeted at elementary school and younger children)? Of course not. But one fiction series that paints the faith in a, relatively, balanced light comes out and they go ballistic.

The thing is, although Pullman is quite open about his atheism, that doesn't really enter into the series. He still involves fate, limited predestination, and some sort of guiding higher principle (in this case Dust created by consciousness and imagination, which is itself conscious and capable of guiding people). None of these are remotely atheistic principles. So, maybe the fundies ought to take a look at the books from the perspective of what the faith could be if it loses its way versus what it could be if it truly follows the path it claims to. Unfortunately, the fundies views of the "right" path are precisely those that have caused their faith to lose its way, so they probably see far too much of themselves in the series' villains who are willing to kill and commit other atrocities in the name of their false view of religion/morality.

Even More Amusement

Once again McCain's campaign has shown how out of touch it is with reality. This particular one may hit the blogosphere pretty quickly, if it hasn't already. In an AP article, McCain's spokesman (and campaign blogger) is quoted as saying the NYT editors are like a blogger "sitting at home in his mother's basement and ranting into the ether between games of Dungeons & Dragons."

I'm betting this'll tick off a lot of the world's bloggers. Not that there's anything wrong with D&D (used to play myself, before going on to better RPG systems), but it does show how out of touch his campaign is. After all, these days 80+% of gamers are adults with jobs, families, etc. Moreover, the blogging world is filled with more businesspeople, self-proclaimed political pundits, journalists, and college/university faculty individually than tabletop gamers (heck, there're more wannabe goths and emo-kids blogging than there are gamers). Not to mention the quantity of conservative bloggers.

Of course, tabletop gamers tend to be liberal leaning and well educated and/or voracious readers. And most gamers seem to embrace technology. So, maybe McCain's camp is saying something about their view of the intellectual/technical level of their average supporter. Actually, that wouldn't be surprising given that their candidate has publicly admitted that he doesn't know how to use a computer.