What other fantasy books do YOU read?

[Lalwendë]

Alas, no! There had been a signing and they had a few copies left for sale. This is getting to be a habit for me now - missing signings. I also missed Christopher Lee by about 30 minutes a few years ago, but then I might have fainted if I'd met him anyway! Though I lie...I did get to meet Alan Lee of course! I was about fifth in line!

[Goldberry101]

I really like Eragon and Eldest by Christopher Paolini (not sure if that's spelled right) and I have one other question, kind of silly but how do you get a little picture under your name? This is my first time doing any kind of foum thing and it's kind of confusing.

[Lalwendë]

I've just had a book buying binge again (damn Waterstones and Tesco with their cheap paperbacks... ).

I read Urban Grimshaw and The Shed Crew in an evening or so, a true story and a little too gritty (but very good). So I decided to read something that was a total contrast afterwards, and I'm now onto The Mists of Avalon! I'd forgotten how good it was!

I must have read it in the mid 80's first time around and it was a library book so I've not set eyes on it since. Basically, its a retelling of the Arthurian myths from the point of view of the women, and it also has a very pagan feel to it. I'm currently at the point where Arthur is about to be conceived...

[Rhod the Red]

The Chronicles of Narnia, Harry Potter and David Edding's Tales of Berialand.

[Bêthberry]

Originally Posted by Lalwendë

I've just had a book buying binge again (damn Waterstones and Tesco with their cheap paperbacks... ).

I read Urban Grimshaw and The Shed Crew in an evening or so, a true story and a little too gritty (but very good). So I decided to read something that was a total contrast afterwards, and I'm now onto The Mists of Avalon! I'd forgotten how good it was!

I must have read it in the mid 80's first time around and it was a library book so I've not set eyes on it since. Basically, its a retelling of the Arthurian myths from the point of view of the women, and it also has a very pagan feel to it. I'm currently at the point where Arthur is about to be conceived...

Do I hear an echo of Tristram Shandy here? Any winding of clocks?

I wonder how davem's strictures about Tolkien's Christian subtext--or should I say LMP's Christian subtext apply--if at all--to a book which so directly incorporates the struggle between pagan and Christian visions.

This issue relates to a point Lalwendë made some posts ago about Neil Gaiman' s mythology. If I remember correctly, Lal suggested that our appreciation of his American Gods depends upon our prior knowledge of the old mythologies. Is this a failure according to davem's theory of experiencing fantasy?

I've recently finished a book which is not usually categorised as fantasy--William Gibson's Neuromancer--but science fiction. (Well, both are often subsumed under the rubric speculative fiction these days, so perhaps that division does not matter.)

Why do I have this urge to think of Neuromancer as fantasy? Especially since Gibson is 'credited' with inventing the idea of the Net. There is one aspect particularly in which his work reminds me very much of Tolkien: the language.

Gibson has so fully realised his time because he creates many new words to give shape, texture, credibility to his vision: technology is married to nature in his first sentence, which describes the sky in colours of television screens. His metaphors are astoundingly apt, sharp, direct. Tolkien created the elven languages and was scrupulously particular in his use of English philology to characterise Middle earth.

Is there something in the very language which an author uses to write his or her work that gives rise to the tradition of fantasy? Does fantasy involve a major reimagining of language, so that it is not merely descriptive of a different reality but actually implies that reality? Or is this simply a feature of the masters of the genre? (if I'm making much sense here)

[davem]

Originally Posted by Bb

This issue relates to a point Lalwendë made some posts ago about Neil Gaiman' s mythology. If I remember correctly, Lal suggested that our appreciation of his American Gods depends upon our prior knowledge of the old mythologies. Is this a failure according to davem's theory of experiencing fantasy?

i think it depends how much background the author gives the reader. I haven't read American Gods, so I don't know how much info Gaiman gives. Of course a fantasy novel can intentionally depend on a prior knowledge of Fairy lore or Mythology. Then again, there are fantasy authors who seem to hope desperately that his/her readers know nothing about the traditional stories. Anyone reading Stephen Lawhead's Arthurian series will be appalled by his twisting & misuse of Celtic legend for his own ends - this is a real case of a 'conscious Christian subtext' - in fact its not even a 'subtext', but a deliberate misrepresentation of the facts in order to promote his religion.

The case with Tolkien is different as, while he may have been inspired by ancient myths he has created a self-contained Secondary World which does not require any knowledge of Primary World myths & legends to be comprehensible (in fact bringing too much Primary World knowledge into one's reading can actually break the spell he weaves). This is different to what Lawhead does, in that once the Pagan themes are changed, subsumed into new forms the originals can be ignored.

Gaiman does not write epic fantasy in the Tolkienian sense, but explores ideas & themes from myth, folklore, contemporary fiction, modern culture. His stories take place on the borderland between, if you like the personal & the Collective unconscious.

Does fantasy involve a major reimagining of language, so that it is not merely descriptive of a different reality but actually implies that reality? Or is this simply a feature of the masters of the genre? (if I'm making much sense here)

Its the 'Green Sun' thing, I suppose....

[Bêthberry]

Originally Posted by davem

Gaiman does not write epic fantasy in the Tolkienian sense, but explores ideas & themes from myth, folklore, contemporary fiction, modern culture. His stories take place on the borderland between, if you like the personal & the Collective unconscious.

I suppose it all depends on how one interprets 'epic.' This might be true for most of Gaiman's work, but I wonder if Stardust isn't more traditionally fantasy a la Tolkien.

Originally Posted by davem

Its the 'Green Sun' thing, I suppose....

So then both Fantasy and Science Fiction partake of this same incantatory Green Sun. Do the two part in the "satisfaction of primordal human desires"?

[davem]

Originally Posted by Bêthberry

I suppose it all depends on how one interprets 'epic.' This might be true for most of Gaiman's work, but I wonder if Stardust isn't more traditionally fantasy a la Tolkien.

Hmm, too long since I read Stardust. Struck me as closer to Dunsany than Tolkien. In fact, now I think about it, in his use of Faery as the Land of the Dead it is very close to Mirlees' Lud in the Mist. I see where you're coming from, but I think as a novel about Faery it shares little with Tolkien's approach.

So then both Fantasy and Science Fiction partake of this same incantatory Green Sun. Do the two part in the "satisfaction of primordal human desires"?

No, I think they can both do that. Much Sci-fi is traditional faery story translated to the 'future' - Star Trek (the original series) is an Immrama.