Quote:
Originally Posted by HarryT
Well, in fairness, it's reasonable to assume that the OP cares, or else they wouldn't have specified "high fantasy" as opposed to mere "fantasy". Not - I should add - that I actually know what "high fantasy" is myself  . |
Of course it's reasonable.
It's also reasonable to assume they (the OP) can use their own judgment as to which recommendations "qualify"--without external curation.
What's unreasonable is to think that any one definition of "High Fantasy" (if there even WERE one definition) encompasses/excludes works absolutely. That there's no room for interpretation.
It's perfectly acceptable for anyone to have their own ideas about what constitutes "high" fantasy, it's just not wise (or very helpful) to assume those ideas represent some sort of canon that can then be applied like a "loving mallet of correction" to the recommendations of others deemed "wrong."
tl;dr version: two out of three (non-western, fantasy) ain't bad!
