This topic is currently marked as "dormant"—the last message is more than 90 days old. You can revive it by posting a reply.
1Cecrow
Clarkesworld Magazine explores the Big Questions about Epic Fantasy, with 28 authors.
http://clarkesworldmagazine.com/epic_interview1/
http://clarkesworldmagazine.com/epic_interview1/
2Cecrow
I think my favourite definition of "epic fantasy" in this article comes from Steven Erickson:
"If we take the supernatural (in these old texts) as representative of capricious Nature, including the forces of chance, mischance, unknown (and unknowable) causes to known (observable) effects; and see in the dialogue between humans and those external forces/entities a kind of universal struggle against the vagaries of Nature, then we arrive at a basic and fundamental theme .... Remove the gods and their magical power and the dialogue ceases being a dialogue, and instead becomes a monologue, an increasingly desperate harangue in the face of an indifferent, unknowing and uncaring audience (Nature). We call that Realism .... After all, in this world here, prayers go unanswered, and if any omniscient entity looks down on us, it is so alien as to understand nothing of our needs and merely observes in helpless bafflement .... Maybe in the end, the definition of Epic comes down to the author's own scope of vision. Of course, it can be argued that one can go inward easily as far as one can reach outward, and 'epic-ness' can exist in a wholly human drama, and we tend to call this ... um, literary and then apply to it some kind of exclusivity."
To sum all of that up, he's saying that whereas what we call literary fiction is an inward search for meaning and a reflecting up on the nature of existence, etc., fantasy is merely the externalizing of that, moving the journey outward so that its characters face the supernatural as good and evil powers, etc. It makes the conversation more tangible.
Granted, this might amount only to a beautiful way of dressing fantasy in metaphorical clothes and trying to pass off even the most mundane fantasy adventure as something symbolically deep, but I think there's some credence to this unique approach of defending the genre.
"If we take the supernatural (in these old texts) as representative of capricious Nature, including the forces of chance, mischance, unknown (and unknowable) causes to known (observable) effects; and see in the dialogue between humans and those external forces/entities a kind of universal struggle against the vagaries of Nature, then we arrive at a basic and fundamental theme .... Remove the gods and their magical power and the dialogue ceases being a dialogue, and instead becomes a monologue, an increasingly desperate harangue in the face of an indifferent, unknowing and uncaring audience (Nature). We call that Realism .... After all, in this world here, prayers go unanswered, and if any omniscient entity looks down on us, it is so alien as to understand nothing of our needs and merely observes in helpless bafflement .... Maybe in the end, the definition of Epic comes down to the author's own scope of vision. Of course, it can be argued that one can go inward easily as far as one can reach outward, and 'epic-ness' can exist in a wholly human drama, and we tend to call this ... um, literary and then apply to it some kind of exclusivity."
To sum all of that up, he's saying that whereas what we call literary fiction is an inward search for meaning and a reflecting up on the nature of existence, etc., fantasy is merely the externalizing of that, moving the journey outward so that its characters face the supernatural as good and evil powers, etc. It makes the conversation more tangible.
Granted, this might amount only to a beautiful way of dressing fantasy in metaphorical clothes and trying to pass off even the most mundane fantasy adventure as something symbolically deep, but I think there's some credence to this unique approach of defending the genre.
3Sakerfalcon
I read this after being directed to it from Robin McKinley's blog. It was a fascinating read, and I liked that such a wide range of authors contributed to the discussion.
4BigJoel55
I would argue that GOOD epic fantasy goes a step further. That is, it takes the dialogue Erikson speaks of and externalizes the search for meaning, then this journey forces or engenders an equally profound inward journey. You don't necessarily come to terms with some inner truth or supernatural revelation just because you tramp through the forest and kill the dragon. Therefore, good epic fantasy is also good literary fiction.
