![]() ![]() I'm also not against it "dealing with royalty or leaders or large, epic events of great importance." as long as it is on a more personal basis, much how GRR Martin's work is done, even though it well moved into the 'epic' stages. Thanks for the recommendations, I'll do some delving. I was just trying to point out the parts that I found most useful in defining what I enjoy, which is often labeled as low. And that is Magic being relatively unknown, and uncommon. I don't think I am confused as to what it is, and am well aware Tolkien is not "low" fantasy in any shape, but it does have that one quality I was speaking about, which other works which are often labeled as low share. Those are two basic criteria that people should be able to provide titles for.Ĭlick to expand.Like any subgenre, it is often open for debate, or has vague definitions encircling it. Lots of books have grey content and lots of books have mysterious stuff in them. Try Mike Sullivan's Riyria series, as that has some good mystery, though the magic is present. Stephen Brust's Jhereg series is maybe a bit mechanistic for you, but might still work, as might Glen Cook's Black Company books. Also George Martin's Song, if you haven't read it, probably fits the bill. So let's drop the language issues entirely and go with magic being mysterious and "grey" stuff. I don't really consider Tolkein numinous fantasy, as I understand it, but there's a lot of disagreement there too about that concept. Sometimes people will use it in an academic sense in relation to the academic definition of high fantasy. It's a term that developed in the 1980's, it was often applied to sword & sorcery as the pulpy, trashy side of fantasy writing, which was not always its original intent, and was largely abandoned as a term, as for the most part was the term high fantasy. It means not high fantasy - not dealing with royalty or leaders or large, epic events of great importance, and not written in a "high" style but in a low one - modern vernacular, commercial, action instead of poetry supposedly, etc. It does not mean numinous magical fantasy or low magic fantasy. Which is okay, as it's never been a clear term, nor a particularly useful one. I think you're a little confused as to what "low" fantasy means. This dropped off a ton in the last book, and is why I'm not including that in my quest. And pretty much every side is seen as fighting for what they think is right, but doing a lot of wrong in the process. When you do see glimpses of magic, you're still unsure if it's sleight of hand, or magic. Probably how some people in our own ancient times talked about such things. Any talk of dragons, or magic, or elder races is all mostly just talk. You pretty much just have humans as a race. Reference the first 3 Song of Ice and Fire books for the overall motif of what I really like. Most of the people in power can be seen as bad or good, just depending on how you are looking at it. AKA: there's not really a "good" guy, or good side to the major conflicts. I also like grimy, dirty, gray and gray morality. And my one main qualm is that you get lowborn footsoldiers out there discussing warrens in great detail, as if every peasant in the world knows all the arcane secrets to be held. Seems like every chapter there is some new form of magical warren brought up, or new demon is summoned, or new race of ancient beings comes to light, etc. Lately I've been reading Malazan, and I need a break. It's more about his knowledge of the arcane, leadership and wisdom, and when push comes to shove, using some sort of barely defined power. Maybe it's because I grew up on Tolkien, where one of the more powerful wizards seems to almost never use any type of spell. I think Magic has a very strong spot in fantasy, I just prefer that spot to be behind the scenes, mysterious, and rarely used. I find that I most often can get into fantasy books which are of the "low" variety.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |