How does Tolkien (1964) define fantasy? Compare and contrast this to the other definitions from last week’s reader?
Tolkien compares the similarity between fantasy and a fairy-story in which both, in his mind cannot be described directly leaving it undefined. In his mind you cant put a definition on fantasy, it cannot be caught in a net of words for its indescribable. So much so that analysis will not necessarily discover the secret of the whole.
Tolkien talks about the human mind and how it is capable of forming mental images of things not actual present. We naturally call this faculty of conceiving such images as our imagination. But imagination is often tied to something higher then just mere image making, something in which we call as fantasy.
Fantasy is a natural human activity. It certainly does not destroy or even insult reason; on the contrary the keen and clearer the reasoning is the better the fantasy will be. Therefore giving human imagination the power of the fantasy world.
In comparison to last weeks thread. Atteberry presents quite a similar take on Fantasy as he goes on to say that fantasy is a concept that can’t really be tamed to just one meaning. Its vastness and diversity exudes beyond all stereotypes. He then goes on to distinguish the differences between it and other similar genres.
References:
J.R.R Tolkien, "On fairy-stories, in tree and leaf (Boston:Houghton Muffin Company, 1965) p.55"
Attebery, B. The Fantasy tradition in america literature: from irving to le guin. bloomington: indian university press, 1980, pg 1-10
I wish Tolkein and Atteberry would have been more bold about defining the fantasy genre. It's kind of a cop out on their part to say, "It's too broad to be defined." You could say that about any genre, and yet genres exist because there are defining characteristics worth noting.
ReplyDeleteyou have a valid point there travis. I must say with you bringing that up it has changed my view towards that whole concept. this requires some more digging
ReplyDelete