fantasy geeks and sf weirdos

[marxlaws]

many times in college my friends would snubb my fantasy books for the classics. and while i did nt realy care because , i read the scarlet letter and dante's inferno and they can have 'm. although i admit to taking the jackets off some of my sci fi and fantasy books because.. well.. some of them were so juvenile and gaudy i got tired of the look. (ok, so i threw them away. i felt retarded and juvenile carring them, so sue me.)

How do we stack up against the big guys? which is the real classic- grapes of wrath, tale of two cities, last mohican, scarlet letter and maybe paridise lost or the illiad and beowolf or on the other side of class- wheel of time, lord of the rings, gardians of the flame, dragons of pern,wizards of earthsea or clash of kings?

what makes a classic? what makes it better then the rest, better than fantasy or sf? is it economy of words? is it the power and depth of its message. does it have to formulaic? does it have to be original in its writing or stay to some tried and true protagonist climax thing? homer has wrote classics, a lot of people talk about his work but very few have read them, really. i got more of a kick seeing movies of the bronze age. i just went back and skimed beowolf to remind myself what it was, lol good luck with that, its a classic i have no idea why it is and lotr is not.
is it book sales? do the authors need to be dead?
i dont know you all sound well read, maybe you can tell me.

 

[Tom]

I'm not old or an expert or anything but I think its because sf and fantasy appeal to younger people mainly. Don't get me wrong, I love fantasy and sci fi but I can see why people don't consider them real classics.

Although it could also be that fantasy and sf both require an imangination and a good sense of wonder, which some adults don't have.

 

[Wabbit]

There are classics in every genre. There are many great works written in Fantasy. There are many more wonderful things written in SF.

I do think the crap to good ratio in fantasy lit is a LOT higher than in other genres. I used to read fantasy and sf exclusivly and I just got tired of the same old "quest for blah blah" story churned out over and over in the form of a trilogy ( if you are luck it's just three books )

However, it all comes down to a question of taste. It's all subjective.

 

[direstraits]

I think the question is not how well do we stack up against the big guys, but how well the big guys stack up against me and my favourites. In the end, we're the ones who are enjoying the read, not everyone else.

I look for other stuff to fill my time between fantasy primarily because, like Wabbit, there are so many of the same thing. And there are very good non-fantasy/scifi out there which would be criminal to miss. However, I return to my first love whenever someone of caliber comes along and whisks me away to some great quest or just unravelling story.

In my readings, I've sometimes found that there are 'big boys' that are less enthralling than the least of my fantasy favourites. It could be that I'm not good enough a reader to appreciate the finer points of the prose. Or whatever. Let me read my finer fantasy a couple more times until I reach a higher level of understanding, or until another good book comes along, whichever comes first.

To me, a great story that stays with me is classic. Of course, if it happens to be fantasy, then that notch is just that little bit higher.

ds

 

[marxlaws]

there must be something to a book when you place" the classic" in front of its name, that im not getting.

 

[Ashlea]

It's hard to define a classic since even the critics have different criteria, but it's definitely a book that has stood the test of time and appeals to audiences that are in a different century or culture. It has a universal theme and originality and strong, beautiful language.

Where most genre novels fall short is in the originality department (as already discussed) or in the language (full of cliches and on an elementary reading level).

 

[marxlaws]

It's hard to define a classic since even the critics have different criteria, but it's definitely a book that has stood the test of time and appeals to audiences that are in a different century or culture. It has a universal theme and originality and strong, beautiful language.

Where most genre novels fall short is in the originality department (as already discussed) or in the language (full of cliches and on an elementary reading level).

well said. and i do agree almost completly but..

Full of cliches and on an elementary reading level, can you give me an example of a great sf or fantasy that dont cut the mustard, make the grade, pop the weasle, toot the horn. from my perspective huck fin falls a little short in those catigories and so does animal farm and so did most of dickens stuff.

and in your opinion what sf/fantsy would be a classic? (besides cyikac by twain and frankenberry by shellster) are vern and wells books classics?

 

[Billy]

I was under the impression that LotR was considered a classic. Some others that you mention, eg. Huck Finn, Dickens and Animal Farm are considered classics for different reasons. To be honest i don't know the reason for Huck Finn, but Dickens has a brilliant command of the English language and although his stories may seem tedious now days his style of writing is what was once (and sometimes still is) considered proper English prose. His novels have stood the test of time and they had a social message in them that was important. Animal Farm is considered a classic because of its theme. George Orwell's manipulation of language in order to convey meaning is also one of the things that make Animal Farm a classic. Plus it is still widely read.

I think there are many fantasy novels that have the potential to be classics, but unfortunately they are often overlooked because many feel that light-hearted entertainment that lacks an important social theme/lesson is worthless. but of course, we all know different.

 

[Ell]

I don't think you'll ever get consensus as to what constitutes a classic. I think a classic must appeal to more than its contemporary audience (i.e. stand the test of time over more than a generation). A lot of science fiction is fairly recent, so it's tougher to tell what will still be around in 50+ years.

I definitely think LOTR is a classic.

Off the top of my head, other fantasy classics: The Odyssey, The Iliad (to me mythology and fantasy fall under the same category), The Once and Future King, Le Mort D'Arthur, Dune, The Chronicles of Narnia.

Sci-fi classics: The Time Machine, War of the Worlds (most HG Wells), The Foundation and Robot series by Asimov, Fahrenheit 451, probably the Ender series, Brave New World, . . .

 

[marxlaws]

I don't think you'll ever get consensus as to what constitutes a classic. I think a classic must appeal to more than its contemporary audience (i.e. stand the test of time over more than a generation). A lot of science fiction is fairly recent, so it's tougher to tell what will still be around in 50+ years.

I definitely think LOTR is a classic.

Off the top of my head, other fantasy classics: The Odyssey, The Iliad (to me mythology and fantasy fall under the same category), The Once and Future King, Le Mort D'Arthur, Dune, The Chronicles of Narnia.

Sci-fi classics: The Time Machine, War of the Worlds (most HG Wells), The Foundation and Robot series by Asimov, Fahrenheit 451, probably the Ender series, Brave New World, . . .

Fahrenheit 451 is the only one i dont know about. loved the idea but the book dragged. but i might say that about a lot of classics, cough tale of two cities, last of the mohairs, agony and the ectasy,cough hem better now. it seems a lot of classics drag on. zane grey, hemmingway tolstory, cooper. and as much as i love londons works, White Fang, come on now. animal farm is kept alive by col lit prof. they have pushed that $16 dollar 10 page essay on the kids from the get go. it was a neat read but classic hmmm. ever read babbit?

 

[marxlaws]

I was under the impression that LotR was considered a classic. Some others that you mention, eg. Huck Finn, Dickens and Animal Farm are considered classics for different reasons. To be honest i don't know the reason for Huck Finn, but Dickens has a brilliant command of the English language and although his stories may seem tedious now days his style of writing is what was once (and sometimes still is) considered proper English prose. His novels have stood the test of time and they had a social message in them that was important. Animal Farm is considered a classic because of its theme. George Orwell's manipulation of language in order to convey meaning is also one of the things that make Animal Farm a classic. Plus it is still widely read.

I think there are many fantasy novels that have the potential to be classics, but unfortunately they are often overlooked because many feel that light-hearted entertainment that lacks an important social theme/lesson is worthless. but of course, we all know different.

i did pick on the man that created the artful dodger maybe i went too far. but yes dammit we all know different! i think your right about lotr, can you find fault in tolkens classic? formulaic? can it be formulaic if you are the first? and does it keep it off the classic reprinting list?

 

[Ell]

Fahrenheit 451 is the only one i dont know about. loved the idea but the book dragged. but i might say that about a lot of classics, cough tale of two cities, last of the mohairs, agony and the ectasy,cough hem better now. it seems a lot of classics drag on. zane grey, hemmingway tolstory, cooper. and as much as i love londons works, White Fang, come on now. animal farm is kept alive by col lit prof. they have pushed that $16 dollar 10 page essay on the kids from the get go. it was a neat read but classic hmmm. ever read babbit?

Sometimes, I think we tend to forget that not all classics are for everyone. We all have different tastes in books. Classics are no different. What you hate, others may love and vice versa.

What science fiction/fantasy books do you think are classics?

 

[marxlaws]

Sometimes, I think we tend to forget that not all classics are for everyone. We all have different tastes in books. Classics are no different. What you hate, others may love and vice versa.

What science fiction/fantasy books do you think are classics?

no im sorry , my opinion is always right. only the books I say are classics will be noted as classics. tyvm.

 

[Ell]

Ummmm, okay!? So what are they?

 

[Prolixic]

no im sorry , my opinion is always right. only the books I say are classics will be noted as classics. tyvm.

Sorry Ell, it appears ol' marxlaws has forgotten to take his medication...again. Dude...the pills before posting please. Believe it or not there are some folks who don't agree with you.

Classic is a term thats been overworked recently. Its become more of a marketing gimmick than an adjective describing time tested works of literature. I've read books that were classics and well written that I couldn't stand, but read them anyway because they are considered essentials. In fact, I'd be more inclined to believe something actually was a classic if there were folks who said they couldn't stand it. Stranger in a Strange Land is a Classic, to me, because it was one of Heinlein's ground breakers. Tarzan--pick any story--, on the other hand, is merely old--pulp fiction mashed into book form with a wildly inconsistent story elements and dubious storylines. Jack London's White Fang is a Classic because its a fantastic story.

 

[marxlaws]

the part about me always being right is a joke to say the least, ask my wife, im never right. i just have a problem with the classic books and how they were/are selected. you would think there would be more fanasy and scifi books included in there ranks. the classic titles for me are slow reads that the best thing i can say about them is that everything was spelled corectly and punctuation was perfect. i thought the movies that followed were infinitely better-- moby dick -gregory peck or patrick stewart,coopers last of the mohicans , anything by shakespeare most notably better than the book- taming of the shrew with john cleese is a personal fav, homer- o brother where art thou, tale of two cities- i hate to write this (the mini series), count of monte cristo (love the sandwich too) i forget who wrote it but the last movie on it was great., and all quiet on the western front- with johnboy. to kill a mockingbird gregory peck again, agony and the ecstasy- chucky heston (only improved a little.) the scarlet letter and the grapes of wrath with fonda.
and im gonna put in the bible- chuck does moses so well man and the jewish overseer is that yeah seee. meyaeh seee.. you gonna do it my way seee. guy ...whats his namme edward g robertson lol thats it. first half are tough to read but oy the movie!

 

[Oberon]

I think there's a disconnect in teaching literature (there's a loaded word, too) that ignores the genres where great writing is equal to the writing in the so-called classics. The usual Eng lit "classic" is "teachable" ... you don't have to explain away fantasy elements (or mystery elements for that matter), and very often this kind of story provides an historical slice of life, so one doesn't have to get into bracketing historical context because it's there in the story. There are fewer avenues toward distraction from the course objective of studying the use of language to create "literature." Notice I don't has to diss the classics or the genres ... it's a matter of expediency in teaching literature that leaves out SF from the syllabii ...

 

[marxlaws]

I think there's a disconnect in teaching literature (there's a loaded word, too) that ignores the genres where great writing is equal to the writing in the so-called classics. The usual Eng lit "classic" is "teachable" ... you don't have to explain away fantasy elements (or mystery elements for that matter), and very often this kind of story provides an historical slice of life, so one doesn't have to get into bracketing historical context because it's there in the story. There are fewer avenues toward distraction from the course objective of studying the use of language to create "literature." Notice I don't has to diss the classics or the genres ... it's a matter of expediency in teaching literature that leaves out SF from the syllabii ...

that was a good point . i never thought of it that way. i guess i would be hard to explain why the will and the word dosent work on the norag tribes in the blood moon of evortia and that we should have seen the climax coming because the the planet norax is in it third phase of the heavenly wheelhouse of the daughter of nine moons. good point.

 

[Ell]

Yet, Martian Chronicles by Bradbury has been taught here since I was in high school (a very long time ago). There are probably others too - just don't come to mind at the moment.

ps. marxlaws, I kinda knew you were joking.