Fantasy fantasy fantasy?

[TheDisreputableDog]

TeaDidikai

I evoke my rights, and evoke in my rites- I don't need to invoke my rights, they are already present. wink

gonk Fiddlesticks. And I concentrate so hard...

TeaDidikai

How do you feel about the blending of theory (not of story line etc) with faith?

And example would be Granny's Headology- does the concept, because it is based in fiction become invalid?

I don't think so. At least where Headology is concerned, but I haven't read a Lancre book in awhile. Some of the things he says about the various gods don't make as much sense to me, but as I've never been followed around by a small turtle, what can I say.

That's interesting. Pratchett has a lot of bizarre "magical" beings and events, but there are also many "fabric of reality" concepts. Going Postal has a whole post office full of revenant thought forms.  

[TheDisreputableDog]

TagraNar

The only problem I've seen with Pratchett is that his plots seem to be based around the same idea: start out with an unassuming characterand then throw them into a situation that escalates to the point that the "hero" must do the right thing or the world will end. I got into a Pratchett kick and was reading book after book (even buying three at a time at the book store) and while each story was different, it all seemed to end up with that basic backbone.

Not necessarily. That's mostly the Rincewind books, as I recall. That's just who Rincewind is.

...Alright, maybe you have a point. I'll only give you Rincewind and most of the stand-alone books, though. The witches always know what they're doing, Ridcully understands more than he lets on, and Vimes is too worldly. Rincewind manages to be worldly without knowing a damn thing, over and over again. However, I don't think the fact that he's found a system that works for him is necessarily a bad thing. I think the richness of the environment and the quality of writing makes up for it. Piers Anthony writes much the same way, but they're harder to take in because of the constant puns; Pratchett at least has more sophisticated allusions. Also, that's what a plot is: build-up, climax, denoument.  

[maenad nuri]

I quite enjoyed Wee Free Men and A Hat Full Of Sky, espcially for the use of magic within them.

also, the use of education being commodity along the lines of a traveling marketplace.  

[TagraNar]

TheDisreputableDog

Not necessarily. That's mostly the Rincewind books, as I recall. That's just who Rincewind is.

...Alright, maybe you have a point. I'll only give you Rincewind and most of the stand-alone books, though. The witches always know what they're doing, Ridcully understands more than he lets on, and Vimes is too worldly. Rincewind manages to be worldly without knowing a damn thing, over and over again. However, I don't think the fact that he's found a system that works for him is necessarily a bad thing. I think the richness of the environment and the quality of writing makes up for it. Piers Anthony writes much the same way, but they're harder to take in because of the constant puns; Pratchett at least has more sophisticated allusions. Also, that's what a plot is: build-up, climax, denoument.

Yes, that's what plot is, but every plot does not have to end with the world possibly ending. It was mostly the stand-alone books, and it may have just been because I was reading them so fast and so close together. They're not bad, by any means, but the "OMG! the world's going to end!" plotlines can get tiring. It's a problem in the Magic: the Gathering cycle of books, as well.  

[TheDisreputableDog]

TagraNar

Yes, that's what plot is, but every plot does not have to end with the world possibly ending. It was mostly the stand-alone books, and it may have just been because I was reading them so fast and so close together. They're not bad, by any means, but the "OMG! the world's going to end!" plotlines can get tiring. It's a problem in the Magic: the Gathering cycle of books, as well.

That can happen when you read books of the same type too close together, especially series whose individual books don't have much of a connecting plot. You start to notice things you might otherwise not see or ignore.  

[TeaDidikai]

TagraNar

The only problem I've seen with Pratchett is that his plots seem to be based around the same idea: start out with an unassuming characterand then throw them into a situation that escalates to the point that the "hero" must do the right thing or the world will end. I got into a Pratchett kick and was reading book after book (even buying three at a time at the book store) and while each story was different, it all seemed to end up with that basic backbone.

Really? I don't see that at all. I mean, there are elements of that, but at the core of the storylines? Well, not for me. ~Shrugs~  

[Operation Shoestring]

What's all this crap about well researched?

If Marion Zimmerman Bradley did any research on Wicca before she wrote it into Glenraven2, i saw no sign of it whatsoever.

Nor did i see much in the way of scholarship in Merecedes lackey's work.  

[Deoridhe]

TeaDidikai

How do you feel about the blending of theory (not of story line etc) with faith?

And example would be Granny's Headology- does the concept, because it is based in fiction become invalid?

I don't know Granny's Headology, but I'll go with the Shin'a'in Quad Goddess as an example.

I think that if treated as something which came from fiction - e.g. not claiming the Shin'a'in goddess is Sekhmet or something - it can be a ...gateway god, if you will, to dealing with the real thing. I can be helpful and good for those who are not inclined to get caught up in it. But, for the purpose of gods at least, I think that if you're not tapping into something external you run the risk of worshipping yourself and getting caught in a positive feedback loop that will encase you like a cage.

In terms of magic, it's more a case of what works and testing it out, though.  

[I be me]

TagraNar

The only problem I've seen with Pratchett is that his plots seem to be based around the same idea: start out with an unassuming characterand then throw them into a situation that escalates to the point that the "hero" must do the right thing or the world will end. I got into a Pratchett kick and was reading book after book (even buying three at a time at the book store) and while each story was different, it all seemed to end up with that basic backbone.

God damn it woman!
you may have just ruined pratcett books for me forever (and that is a serious crime)

I heard (from a radio intervew, my got that mans voice) that Terry Pratchett gets asked all the time if he is pagan etc., but he answers that he finds books, the kind of books that regular people aren't sposed to own from odd creepy little book places and he basis most of the religious/magicness in his books on what he reads.
That might be pure bull to sell his books,

but I love the Pratchett books to get the ABOUT magic information, wile actually getting any information about magic. (if that makes sence and it does in my little head)
Things like headology being the foundation of witches work, covens being a bunch of ladies sitting around drinking tea, magic having a cost, gods only existing if people believe in them (wich I don't really think they stop to exist, they just don't hang around here anymore), and maybe you can light a candle using only magic if you got good enough but its a lot easier and cleaner to use a match.
(personal beliefs I don't want anybody to mistake for "well proven facts about bla bla bla agree with me or you are stupid")  

[CuAnnan]

Nuri

I quite enjoyed Wee Free Men and A Hat Full Of Sky, espcially for the use of magic within them.

also, the use of education being commodity along the lines of a traveling marketplace.

That, and they were damned funny.  

[Pelta]

reagun ban

Nuri

I quite enjoyed Wee Free Men and A Hat Full Of Sky, espcially for the use of magic within them.

also, the use of education being commodity along the lines of a traveling marketplace.

That, and they were damned funny.

*me has a book signed by Terry Pratchett* lol Teehee. I met him in person and gave him an origami crane. I made him laugh. Teehee. BOW DOWN BEFORE ME!
Erm... Anyway. I absolutely loved Wee Free Men. Can't wait to read A Hat Full of Sky. I haven't yet crying . My favorite ones all involve the witches, but the best character in any/all of the books is Death. And Binky.
I can't believe you left Pratchett out of your article Reagun! Disgraceful! biggrin I sure hope it got discussed that night...  

[TeaDidikai]

Deoridhe

I don't know Granny's Headology, but I'll go with the Shin'a'in Quad Goddess as an example.

I think that if treated as something which came from fiction - e.g. not claiming the Shin'a'in goddess is Sekhmet or something - it can be a ...gateway god, if you will, to dealing with the real thing. I can be helpful and good for those who are not inclined to get caught up in it. But, for the purpose of gods at least, I think that if you're not tapping into something external you run the risk of worshipping yourself and getting caught in a positive feedback loop that will encase you like a cage.

In terms of magic, it's more a case of what works and testing it out, though.

Gods? Heavens no! ~shudders~ No need to apply energy to someone elses thought form.

I'm thinking more along the lines of "magic works because...-insert something semi-reasonable-".  

[Deoridhe]

TeaDidikai

Gods? Heavens no! ~shudders~ No need to apply energy to someone elses thought form.

Heh. ^_^

TeaDidikai

I'm thinking more along the lines of "magic works because...-insert something semi-reasonable-".

Magic is REALLY not my strong point - I'll be dead honest there. It's possible, but I don't know how probably and I can't really be intelligent about it.  

[TeaDidikai]

Deoridhe

TeaDidikai

Gods? Heavens no! ~shudders~ No need to apply energy to someone elses thought form.

Heh. ^_^

TeaDidikai

I'm thinking more along the lines of "magic works because...-insert something semi-reasonable-".

Magic is REALLY not my strong point - I'll be dead honest there. It's possible, but I don't know how probably and I can't really be intelligent about it.

Fair enough.

I am really looking forward to that Mysticism v. Religion thread now. The ability to square off with you without having to DA might be amusing. mrgreen  

[Deoridhe]

TeaDidikai

I am really looking forward to that Mysticism v. Religion thread now. The ability to square off with you without having to DA might be amusing. mrgreen

Well, hurry your a** up and make it! scream wink

I'm just worried we'll end up on the same side again. We seem to do that a lot. It's irritating, not being able to actually debate with you on somehting you hold true. scream