Babel Clash

Batman IS NOT magic.  Batman IS fantasy, however.

Lee & I seem to be working with two very different definitions of magic.  In Lee’s definition, magic is synonymous with fantasy and the words can be used interchangeably.  This definition leads inexorably to the conclusion that Batman is magic because a) superheroes are magic and b) Batman is a superhero, therefore c) Batman is magic.  But, in my humble opinion, it is a sweeping generalisation to assume that all superheroes are magic.

In my definition, magic is a subset of fantasy.  To use the language of deductive reasoning, all magic is fantasy, but not all fantasy is magic.  I’m not disputing the fact that Batman is fantastic.  Batman is wicked fantastic.  Some of the stuff he can do is pretty darn unlikely.  But the fact remains that it is unlikely, not impossible.  Yes, it is very, very unlikely that one person could be the best at everything - detecting, disguising, super-sciencing, athleticism, you name it - but it is not impossible.  Yes, it would be bizarre for “real” people to run around dressed like bats, but it is not impossible.  Yes, it is unusual for real people to keep a Rogues’ Gallery, but Allan Pinkerton did and he was a real dude.  If it’s at all possible, no matter what the odds are against or how unlikely or remote, in my definition, it is fantasy not magic. 

Magic is the impossible.  It’s controlling wind (like Shannon Hale’s Goose Girl and Patrick Rothfuss’ Name of the Wind), it’s the ability to fly/levitate (like Brandon Sanderson’s Mistborn), it’s shooting bolts of fire (like Jim Butcher’s Dresden Files).  It’s the stuff that us mere mortals constrained by the laws of physics just couldn’t possibly do.

In conclusion, I would like to offer this Venn diagram as irrefutable proof that Batman, while he is fantasy, is most decidedly not magic.

You’re absolutely right, Lee.  It’s not that I don’t like magic in my stories.  I just don’t like ill-defined magic.  I rebel against the use of magic as deus ex machina, but at the same time, I dislike book that provide a litany of rules and regulations regarding the uses of magic.  I want something that strikes a balance between magical free-for-all and plot-stopping thirty thousand commandments  governing the capabilities of and uses for magic in any particular world.  I don’t need to know that Superman can’t peel a cellophane S off his chest (because in my world he can’t.  Period.) unless it’s critical to the plot.  As a reader, I want to be able to assume that if you’re telling me magic can’t raise people from the dead, it’s because it has bearing on the plot somewhere down the line.  And if it doesn’t, I’m gonna be frustrated.

What I want is a book that convinces me that, while the author may not see the need to give out every detail & bit of minutiae about the rules governing magic, she or he knows what they are & is committed to playing by them.

There are two things I have to disagree with, though.  1) Batman is not magic.  I think Sheldon put it quite admirably.  The Green Lantern is magic.  Batman is a deep voice, a fortune that could rival Bill Gates’, and a crap ton of training.  Don’t get me wrong, I love the Dark Knight, but he’s not magic.  2) VCRs are totally obsolete.

As sort of an aside and since Lee brought up weird things going on with the magic of Superman . . . Does anyone out there watch Smallville?  Can someone explain to me what on earth wish-fulfilling kryptonite is?

Thanks, Tom & Joel for contributing to Babel Clash!  Please take this opportunity with your last couple of posts to share any information you’d like regarding The Grave Thief and Petrodor.  Or to just get the last word in on gods and their uses . . .

And for all you readers, tune in tomorrow for the beginning of our next conversation with A. Lee Martinez.

Tom’s point about the idea of infallible & omnipresent gods being a relatively recent innovation in human history got me thinking about deities in fantasy that are no where near perfect or omniscient.  Some of my favorites from the list I came up with are Galactus, Devourer of Worlds, Cthulhu who brings to light the insignificance of humanity, and the Authority from Philip Pullman’s His Dark Materials Trilogy (the Authority happens to be my personal favorite fallible deity).  Why do I love these deities?  Because they’re not perfect.  They’re destructive or frail or overwhelming or chaotic.  I find them more compelling because they’re not perfectly knowledgeable or perfectly benevolent.  I guess I want a little snap and pizazz and uncertainty from my deities.

Anyway, thinking about the last two also led me to this fun poll . . . Cage Match 2010.

Being female, I have a visceral reaction to the idea that women are frail.  Once I’m past that initial flare, I have to admit that most of the men I know could take me in a fair fight.  That’s just the way it is.  But the fact remains that there are plenty of women in fantasy & science fiction who kick butt and take names (my personal favorite being Eowyn - I will admit to having her speechto the Nazgul memorized), which makes me wonder if I shouldn’t propose a third possibility beyond counter-balance or highlight.  What if women often serve the same sort of role tricksters fill in folklore?  Could butt-kicking women be there to demonstrate that sometimes being clever, quick, or more skillful can allow you to triumph over brute strength?  What do you say?

Our new topic comes to you in the spirit of the Olympics.

From Hercules to Frodo, how important is it that authors present physical prowess believably? How strong is too strong?  As we take a look at our heroes in fantasy and science fiction, do you want their athleticism to be realistic or is superhuman power (magical, cybernetic, etc.) expected?

Also in the Olympic spirit, I’m passing the torch to a new moderator here on Babel Clash.  Please welcome Terry.   She is a collaborator in all things science fiction, fantasy, graphic novels & horror here at Borders.  I’m personally very excited to see where she takes Babel Clash next.

Since this is a transitional period, now is a great time for us to collect feedback.  We have many ideas for updates and improvements that we hope to implement in 2010.  We want to create a site and a community that you enjoy and respect, so we’re happy to collect your feedback. Please post your comments with suggestions.

I’d like to thank the staff of Circle of Seven Productions for their technical assistance and creative support. Please check out their page.

I’m now managing the Borders Ink Facebook page, our site dedicated to the graphic novels & young adult categories.  If you’re a fan, please check it out.

It’s been fun.  Good luck, Terry!  Now, please welcome Tom and Joel.

Thanks again to Amber and Anton.

Tune in tomorrow to find out the topic of our next conversation with Tom Lloyd and Joel Shepherd.

Also, there’s some exciting Babel Clash news to share.  Find out more tomorrow.

Amber and Anton, thank you for contributing to our discussion on Babel Clash.  Please take this opportunity with your last couple of posts to share any information with us that you’d like regarding Cat’s Claw and Dead Matter.  Also, please feel welcome to share any news regarding other upcoming projects.

Both titles are now available online or at your local Borders or Waldenbooks store and on Borders.com.

In the spirit of our conversation about “reluctant adults,” please check out the urban fantasy blog where Anton contributes, the League of Reluctant Adults.

Lots of Urban Fantasy questions on my mind today.  Anton and Amber, feel free to respond to any that you choose.

Urban fantasy is the hot genre in the SF&F category, and that’s been the case for the past few years.  Do you see that changing anytime soon?  Do we have a timeless formula here?  Keep in mind that I use “formula” loosely, sort of like how Robert Jordan and Terry Brooks follow the Tolkien epic fantasy “formula.”

In epic fantasy, we sometimes see rival camps.  There are those who like their high fantasy epic and optimistic, like Tolkien, and those who crave some blending of weirdness and grim realism, like Moorcock.  Do you see camps forming along those lines in the urban fantasy fan base?  If there are, do fans line up behind the sexy stories (like Laurell K. Hamilton’s) or the more action-packed (Jim Butcher, for example)?

Is it important that UF remain rooted in familiar cities, such as San Francisco or Chicago?  If the setting shifts to someplace more fantastical, is it still the same genre?  Does it matter to you?

Welcome to the Amber and Anton hour, err two week, at Babel Clash.  *slips Babel Fish in ear*  First and foremost, I’d like to thank Borders and Morgan for inviting us.  Amber promised this would be as good a place as any to harass me, but she’s such a sweetie, so I’m sure she was kidding.  At least, I hope she was.

So the first question that Morgan threw to us was:  Does reading science fiction and fantasy make you a “reluctant adult”?  What about the authors working in these genres?  Should these “reluctant adults” tackle “serious literature” instead?  How’s that for a loaded question?

As a founding member of The League of Reluctant Adults, I am clearly biased about this.  For years, most of us who engage in fandoms of any kind always got dirty looks from outsiders.  Even now people walk by my office, look at all my geek posters and fifty or so action figures on my desk like they are visiting the two-headed goat with the traveling carnival.

But I do think that thanks to the internet and the number of television channels on the dial these days, cultural awareness of our nerdly niches have become more mainstream.  Why?  I think much of it has to do with gaining understanding.  Outsiders can read up, ask questions, explore geekdom on their own, and at the end of all that, i think they find themselves able to identify with a lot of what they encounter.

Take True Blood or Buffy the Vampire Slayer.  Yeah, they have vampires and all that paranormal stuff, but at the heart of them, what drives them?  Relationships, trying to get through their daily lives, problems that people can identify with…

I mean, I’ve always dreamed of being a sexy Louisiana waitress that falls for vampires… but I digress.

As for should us reluctant adults tackle “serious literature” instead?  I’m going to go to food for this one.  Sometimes you want to go to Morimoto’s restaurant.  he’s an Iron Chef and the food is exquisite, pricey and worth every penny.  Sometimes I hanker for Chik-fil-A, which is fast food, not pricey and I have no idea who dropped my waffle fries in the oil.  Regardless, Chik-fil-A is exquisite in its own way.  It fills my need.  I don’t really wonder if the chefs at either restaurant should be changing roles. I’m just happy they excel at what they do and that it feeds me.

I see a lot of flame wars out there where the literary authors poo poo the mass market writers and the mass market authors poo poo them as well.  I don’t see the need for it.  I think the differences are what help to keep everyone fed out there, depending on their appetite.  I strive to write the best books I can, but are they literary?  Hell to the no.   I won’t pretend that I go there, but hopefully they are damn fine entertainment.