Thread: Is all fantasy derivative of Tolkien? How to prove it isn't?
View Single Post
Old 10-11-2014, 05:20 PM   #85
DiapDealer
Grand Sorcerer
DiapDealer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DiapDealer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DiapDealer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DiapDealer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DiapDealer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DiapDealer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DiapDealer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DiapDealer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DiapDealer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DiapDealer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.DiapDealer ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
DiapDealer's Avatar
 
Posts: 28,682
Karma: 205039118
Join Date: Jan 2010
Device: Nexus 7, Kindle Fire HD
Quote:
Originally Posted by varlog
It is high fantasy (certainly not SF) and has nothing to do with Tolkien.
I believe it might have been the addition of "High" that you included in front of your "Fantasy" that drew the disagreement. Not that there's still not subjective opinion and personal semantics involved when determining what should--or shouldn't--qualify as High Fantasy. But I don't think you'd have too many backing you on the Murakami as High Fantasy front. Fantasy--sure. Joining such magical-realism practitioners as Marquez, Allende, Powers, and maybe even Gaiman. Fantasy is pretty huge--and I, for one, have no problem with it encompassing Magical Realism. But "High Fantasy" is a fairly narrowly defined subset of Fantasy. My opinion, at least.
DiapDealer is offline   Reply With Quote