Why I’m Happy to Suspend My Disbelief for Fantasy

Magic systems seem to be a big deal to a lot of fantasy fans and for many a well explained system can make or break a book. Now, this may shock some people, but it really isn’t a big deal for me. Naturally, I appreciate the beauty of an intricate magic system (who doesn’t have infinite admiration for Sanderson’s allomancy for instance) but if something is left in broad terms or defined simply as *magic* I genuinely won’t care and here’s why:

confessionsIt is the genre of the unexplainable– *crazy* idea BUT there is a reason why many supernatural forces are left unexplained in fantasy. It creates an atmosphere of mystique, eeriness and unfathomability. Here is where fantasy is haunted by the hallmarks of gothic literature. Feeding into the uncanny plays with the unwritten rules of the universe and allows the writer to explore hidden corners of the human psyche. And isn’t exploring *what we don’t know* what fantasy is often all about? Obscuring the logic of a world is valuable in its own way.

simarillionSometimes, however, there is a hidden explanation, even if we don’t know it– I know I’ve seen *loads* of people criticising Lord of the Rings for its “lack” of magical explanations. My answer to those people is that there are plenty of Tolkien’s notes you can look into if you’re unsatisfied with the reasoning behind his world building. Which goes to show, just because you don’t know the reason for something, doesn’t mean there isn’t one. Plus, if you need an origin story, look no further than The Simarillion. But really, ultimately, it’s important to note where Tolkien got his ideas from…

grimmsBorrowing from literary predecessors deserves praise not censor. Personally, I value stories that are self-aware and acknowledge where they’ve come from- for a story to revive its forefather’s memory and offer us something new is a very special thing. When it comes to fantasy, I’ve already mentioned fantasy’s connection with gothic literature, yet the modern genre has more than one forefather. It is very much rooted, thanks to Tolkien, in the oral tradition and fairy tales. There is a lot of borrowing going on between these genres, including the educational element. Following in the steps of fairy tales, supernaturalism is often far from the main message of the story. In reality…

Harry_Potter_and_the_Philosopher's_Stone_Book_CoverMagic is often a tool to get us from a to b. A very beautiful, interesting tool- but a tool nonetheless. That’s why, there really is nothing wrong with the *because it’s magic* explanation. I know, I know, that’s an extremely unpopular opinion in the fantasy world and I will probably have my fantasy fangirl status revoked for saying it, but hear me out. The truth is, no matter how far you get under the skin of any given magic system, the answer at some point will always be *because it’s magic*. Most of the time, we see an elaborate system on the surface and do not question why it works. Yes, I know there are some people who are not satisfied with the Harry Potter world building, for all its wonder and intricacies, but really do those people seriously think that diverting the plot for a “scientific” explanation of witchcraft and wizardry would have made those books better? (I will stupefy! anyone whose answer is yes to that) We have the surface details and that’s all we need!

the martianAt the end of the day scientific discussions mean nothing to me. Yeahhh in case it isn’t obvious I am not a scientist and the mechanics of how things work rarely holds my attention. I did love the Martian, but that was in spite of the explanations (where, let’s be honest, my attention glazed over) not because of them. So if an author is going to go into a huge amount of detail about how their world works, it’s not going to light my fire, in fact…

The_Eye_of_the_World_UKI find overlong explanations or infodumps boring. There I said it. If a book goes on a long tangent explaining something *made up* to me that I really don’t need to know, I’m gonna get bored fast. Everyone that’s read my review of Eye of the World can’t be surprised by this- cos that’s the perfect example of exposition getting out of hand (no Robert Jordan, I don’t care if you came up with a really interesting backstory to some backwater village, if it’s not plot relevant now, I don’t need 5 pages of explanation).

question mark bookAnd finally… it would make me a hypocrite. Okay, so I don’t normally refer to my own writing, but I hope you don’t mind my self-indulgence here, cos it’s relevant. I try to write things I’d like to read- so a lot of the reasons I do not often include explanations is because of a combination of the above (ie it’s not always relevant in the moment, I hate infodumps and I like to borrow from other genres). But to give a more concrete example to how important hidden explanations are, I’m currently working on a trilogy where in book 1 magic is more of a blunt tool (because, bless their little hearts they don’t know any better), book 2 explores some of the costs, and book 3 (which I’ve started working on now) is all about the big reveals. It would fundamentally destroy the setup of the story if I’d just given everything away in book 1.

So those are my reasons for why I don’t get too bogged down with magic systems. I know this will divide readers- and that’s a-okay- different opinions are the spice of life! Let me know which you prefer!

Eye of the World Book Review/Rant

The_Eye_of_the_World_UKI will be brief about this book: I hated it. (See Robert Jordan- that’s how to be succinct!) The only positive thing I can say about it was the prologue was decent- but it was downhill from there. It would be generous to say that reading this book felt like watching paint dry, because at least then I might have felt like I’d achieved something. Instead, I felt like I’d wasted my time reading a rehashed, dull version of every single fantasy book I’ve ever read. I swear there wasn’t anything new or different or even interesting about it.

Obviously just by virtue of it being fantasy, it’s marketed as the next Tolkien. But it has about as much in common with Tolkien as a cheap knock off “designer” bag in Camden has with a genuine Prada- because there is absolutely nothing special about the plot, the characters, or even the way-too-thought-out setting. It’s a walking cliché. If you don’t believe me, try doing “The Fantasy Novelist Exam” with Robert Jordan in mind http://www.rinkworks.com/fnovel/ (I may have made this blog just to share this quiz, because it’s awesome). There is no way Robert Jordan could have passed this test- I mean he loses a point at 33 just for being Robert Jordan. Which is fair.

And, as I’ve already mentioned, it was boring to boot. I read an excellent blog yesterday by Matthew Wright about info dumps and it instantly reminded me of Jordan, because there are info dumps galore here. I couldn’t move three pages without more exposition. It felt like Robert Jordan had written an entire saga of backstory and he was just desperate to show it off- whether it enhanced the plot or not (which it did not). It’s a never ending stream of tangents that drags on for 800 pages! 800 pages!!! One day they may use his book as an example of how not to write. Then again, I can’t imagine professors being cruel enough to set this book to their students.

Evidently, I won’t be continuing on with this series- even if Brandon Sanderson did write the end (I love Sanderson, but I won’t suffer through god-knows-how-many Jordan books- even for him).

Rating: 1/5 bananas (cos I need some ammunition to throw at Robert Jordan’s head if he ever comes back from the dead!)

half banana