Is there too much magic in fantasy?

magic or not I can take it or leave it, though I do like:

Benedict Jacka - Alex Versus
Jim Butcher - Harry Dresden
Kevin Hearne - Atticus O'Sullivan

I also agree that Lest Darkness Falls is a cracking novel and novels such as Island in the Sea of Time (S. M. Stirling) and 1633 (Eric Flint & David Webber) are enjoyable too.... all of them with no magic beyond the initial 'zap'.
A few things. One: I just don't like his writing style. In my opinion, it's too cold, and calculated, and most of the time, boring. He can write about historical events, but not characters. Every single protagonist is a 6" tall superman, who is more amazing then his peers, who gets all the girl, and who all seem to have the personality of a wooden toy. I've read all the Sharpes, and I can honestly say, I don't know Sharpe at all. Other then he's a murdering, womanising, a-hole. Hey, sounds like Thomas of Hookton.

His can't seem to keep track of who to focus on. Numerous times he'll swap perspective of characters, quite a lot of the time during the same sentence. It's just my opinion, but I prefer it when the whole chapter is one character's perspective, or at least make it obvious that we're changing character with a break in the chapter. It's just messy, and, again, the historical setting in his books seem to be his characters, not the actual characters.

His continuity is nonexistent. All of his prequels contradict his original works.

Ah, and despite writing for 20 odd years about Redcoats, and The 95 Rifles, he knows NOTHING about muskets, or rifles, or firearms in general. See my Introduction thread for a proper whine. Some may find this petty, but if you're going to write a series of novels who's main focus are rifle wielding troops, then I would suggest you get the facts correct!

What makes it worse, is that in 20 plus years, the author hasn't corrected himself or even attempted to get his firearm, or military knowledge up to date, thus showing the colours of the smug, arrogant bloke.

He has single handedly ruined all further works about the military in Black Powder times. Every author who takes BC as an inspiration for writing copies his damn errors, 'cos, you know, Cornwall is clearly the gospel in these matters.

It infuriates me to no end that he's grabbed this mainstream holding in historical literature, and every book of his has about a gerzillion 5 star reviews all saying, 'It's amazing. Sharpes' amazing and does things with swords, and stuff.'

This must be how fantasy authors feel about Twilight.

The fact that every damn book has a 'If you like Sharpe, you'll love this!' sticker on it makes me so mad that I've been known to take the book to the rifle range and slam a one ounce musket ball through the thing.



hmmmm no opinion either way then?
rotfl3.gif
rotfl3.gif
 
Hello, all.

I feel this'll be a touchy subject, but, submitted for your approval, during my reading forays of fantasy, I've found quite a common thing that magic seems to be, well, everywhere; wizards, or magic-throwers, of magical entities pour out of every book, it seems.

Okay, I hear you cry, 'err, duh, it's fantasy.' However, does that mean that fantasy 'must' have magic coming out of the rafters?

Maybe it's me, but some of the best fantasy I've read is when only one, or a few characters have magic, and magic is treated as an old, primal, mad thing that's not to be messed with, and not something that everyone can seemingly tap into.

Granted, it can be argued that Science Fiction, as a rule of thumb, has space travel in it, so Fantasy has magic, 'dems just the rules.

Am I alone in this thinking? I love fantasy, but whenever I'm reading a new fantasy and someone flings a spell I go, '(sigh) magic. Shoot 'em in the face with an arrow, in the faaace!'

I don't mind magic i it feels a part of their world if that makes sense. It needs to take something out of the user though and not be all powerful so every character can play a part. The magic in lord of the rings didn't bother me at all but harry potter is unwatchable.


In the lord of the rings movies gandalf is for sure the most powerful but everyone manages to be important. Frodo for being able to hold the ring. Legolas with his ridiculous killing ability. Gimli a good fighter as well as his knowledge of the mines. Aragorn protecting the little ones at the beginning etc. If only the magic guy is important I'd hate it but it's a good balance in lord of the rings and in game of thrones as well as most the books i read.
 
Thanks mate, fantasy has always been my favorite genre but lately I've been crazy for it. Particularly I've been wanting to find more in film and such but good fantasy rarely finds it way to tv/movie. Aside from LOTR and GOT right now there isn't much so I've recently started reading the first law trilogy. It's great so far.
 
I don't mind magic i it feels a part of their world if that makes sense. It needs to take something out of the user though and not be all powerful so every character can play a part. The magic in lord of the rings didn't bother me at all but harry potter is unwatchable.


In the lord of the rings movies gandalf is for sure the most powerful but everyone manages to be important. Frodo for being able to hold the ring. Legolas with his ridiculous killing ability. Gimli a good fighter as well as his knowledge of the mines. Aragorn protecting the little ones at the beginning etc. If only the magic guy is important I'd hate it but it's a good balance in lord of the rings and in game of thrones as well as most the books i read.
One of the interesting things is, outside of the ring itself, how little magic is actually used in Lord of the Rings; Gandalf almost never uses any of his.

I find an awful lot of fantasy just seems to use magic as one massive deus ex machina.
 
I find an awful lot of fantasy just seems to use magic as one massive deus ex machina.

There are a couple of popular books that at the climax sees the protagonist unleash an awesome-storm-of-godlike-magic-that-defeats-everything - without realizing they were capable of doing so, or how they actually did it. :(
 
One of the interesting things is, outside of the ring itself, how little magic is actually used in Lord of the Rings; Gandalf almost never uses any of his.

I find an awful lot of fantasy just seems to use magic as one massive deus ex machina.

I'd rewatch the trilogy mate, gandalf uses more than i remembered i just started rewatching them (only watched the first). In the first he had that wizard battle and the whole you shall not pass scene holding that monster thing back. Idk i guess it's not that much but it seemed pretty important.
 
I'd rewatch the trilogy mate, gandalf uses more than i remembered i just started rewatching them (only watched the first). In the first he had that wizard battle and the whole you shall not pass scene holding that monster thing back. Idk i guess it's not that much but it seemed pretty important.
Yes he uses it at critical points but as you say it's not all that often. I can think of another couple; Helm's Deep and fighting with and then escaping from Saruman, although the escape part was only using a butterfly (?) to pass a message on to the Eagles. All told not an awful lot of magic.
 
Yes he uses it at critical points but as you say it's not all that often. I can think of another couple; Helm's Deep and fighting with and then escaping from Saruman, although the escape part was only using a butterfly (?) to pass a message on to the Eagles. All told not an awful lot of magic.

And yet magic is omnipresent throughout the books. People doing magic is rare, but people having abilities and artifacts that transcend the natural in affect is everywhere.
 
And yet magic is omnipresent throughout the books. People doing magic is rare, but people having abilities and artifacts that transcend the natural in affect is everywhere.
I think that's exactly why it seems strange when you stop and realise how little it is used and yet, as you say, between the wizards and the elves there's a lot of magical ability around.
 
I think that's exactly why it seems strange when you stop and realise how little it is used and yet, as you say, between the wizards and the elves there's a lot of magical ability around.
It strikes me as a similar thing to living in the modern world where people could change their look and identity, make prototype machines or start new religions - but largely do not. Perhaps the actual use of magic requires more of the user and infrastructure than what an everyday action might?
 
It strikes me as a similar thing to living in the modern world where people could change their look and identity, make prototype machines or start new religions - but largely do not. Perhaps the actual use of magic requires more of the user and infrastructure than what an everyday action might?
Rules for magic
Which brings us full circle to the original issue of 'too much.' I think books like LOTR are more believable and satisfying with their sparse use of magic than those that @Brian G Turner described rather neatly as 'unleashing an awesome-storm-of-godlike-magic-that-defeats-everything.'
 
I think that's exactly why it seems strange when you stop and realise how little it is used and yet, as you say, between the wizards and the elves there's a lot of magical ability around.

Arguably we see magic and don't realise at times. How much of Gandalf's ability to inspire and browbeat is him, and how much is Narya?

There's also the problem that magic is detectable, so magicking their way to Mordor is a non-winner. Think its why Gandalf turns down Glorfindel.



I would also add that I'm all for awesome storms of godlike magic that defeat everything. I love high magic fantasy. But I don't like how its commonly done, as described by Brian. Like everything else in a story it should not cheapen what went before. My favourite "awesome storm of godlike magic that defeats everything" from Magician:

The MC Pug has become a mighty magician, but is under suspicion and uneasy as he is from a culture currently being invaded and enslaved by the one he has become a magician of - with all magicians there being magically conditioned to see their role as to Serve the Empire. This continues until he goes to a gladiatorial fight where, after one thing leading to another, he is presented with a course of action that is right under both his new cultural mores and his old cultural mores.

So he proceeds to annihilate the arena.

Which is awesome - not only because its really well written, but because I was really waiting for something like that to happen, and also because it doesn't mean happily ever after - he has to abandon his new home as a result (although its happily ever after on his new world I guess)

I'd add that the first book of the Wheel of Time got this one right too for my tastes. Foreshadowing and unfortunate consequences do wonders for this sort of thing. Although I'd appreciate for many, its so old hat that no amount of good writing can rescue it.
 
I'd add that the first book of the Wheel of Time got this one right too for my tastes. Foreshadowing and unfortunate consequences do wonders for this sort of thing. Although I'd appreciate for many, its so old hat that no amount of good writing can rescue it.

Wheel of Time was quite magic sparse in the first book, but as the series progressed it became a case of everyone using magic all the time. Talk about power creep. Magic had to keep getting more outlandish just to make it interesting.
 
Wheel of Time was quite magic sparse in the first book, but as the series progressed it became a case of everyone using magic all the time. Talk about power creep. Magic had to keep getting more outlandish just to make it interesting.

Wheel of Time's magic was always interesting to me, because it was (almost) always being used by interesting people.

Not sure I'd call The Eye of the World all that magic sparse to me.
 

Similar threads


Back
Top