Score

This list is based on Jeff VanderMeer's original "essential fantasy reading" list.

Should magic realism count? There is a lot of it here.

Why no YA? What if its GOOD YA?

I agree. The earthsea trilogy is YA. Or do we really mean "no Harry Potter"?

Lord of the Rings isn't highbrow, but Watership Down is?

Wheres the Shannara Trilogy? Where are The Dragonlance Chronicles? Or The Belgariad? Oooooh, Im going to have to do something about this....

Antoine wrote: "Should magic realism count? There is a lot of it here."

I think Antoine that 'highbrow fantasy' may be code for magical realism, or aka 'snob fantasy'. Not that magical realism isn't full of great literature, but it is unfortunately often a guilt-free way of pretencious readers enjoying fantasy without compromising their imagined good taste in books. I personally think that often dismissed authors such as Tolkein and Le Guin to be of much literary merit and people who sneer at genre fiction to be rather small-minded and misinformed.

See, I love both genres, but I don't see any real reason to call "One Hundred Years of Solitude" (for example) a fantasy, even a snob fantasy. It has a dreamy improbable quality, but it takes place in a world which is recognizably our own, without any obvious trappings of fantasy: no magic, no swords, no imaginary kingdoms or lost civilizations, no higher (or lower) reality. I can see why a fantasy fan in search of respectability might be drawn (as I am) to magic realism; but that doesn't make them the same thing.

Jenn{OuR lAdY pEaCe LuVa!!!} wrote: "Wheres the Shannara Trilogy? Where are The Dragonlance Chronicles? Or The Belgariad? Oooooh, Im going to have to do something about this...."

Now this is exactly the stuff that I think this particular list was designed to exclude. However, that is only one readers opinion.

Ok, if this list was trying to exclude those books and series, do you mind explaining to me why? Im not trying to be rude or anything, just you seem to know why, mind sharing?

Antoine wrote: "See, I love both genres, but I don't see any real reason to call "One Hundred Years of Solitude" (for example) a fantasy, even a snob fantasy. It has a dreamy improbable quality, but it takes place..."

I love both genres too, but I don't think it is fair that one should be valued over the other. I see no reason whatsoever to classify Magical Realism as the 'high brow' fantasy. Both genres are equally capable of great literature for those who take the time to know them both, but many people are in the habit of dismissing 'high fantasy' as lowbrow genre pulp. Sci-Fi also suffers from similar treatment, although not as harshly from my experience.

I agree with you Amanda. I don't value one (magic-realism) over the other (fantasy). But that doesn't make them the same thing either... and I don't see why magic realism belongs on this list. BUT if eight people think One Hundred Years of Solitude is a fantasy, who am I to disagree with them?

And Jenn, my comment about Terry Brooks, David Eddings and co. was a moment of out-and-out snobbery on my part. I have always felt that those authors were riding the coat-tails of others who came before them, instead of staking out some really new territory. But you are completely entitled to feel differently... and vote accordingly!

Yeah, I thought this stuff would be excluded too, but I see it snuck onto the list anyway. Not bad mouthing anything. I've read and enjoyed all the books mentioned. They just are not what I consider "Highbrow". I don't think they fit the list's description either, as they are more traditonal storytelling, and frankly are already on 500 lists or more.

Why is Twilight on this list?

Because Twilight seems to creep onto all lists!

Don quixote is fantasy? i can't recall anything fantastical happening in it. Can someone refresh my memory?

I don't know if they are refering to his delusions - ie. trying to fight windmills?

Excellent sounding list...full of fantasy that is not a thirty book series!
It rightfully has series and such but I am glad to have come across a more interesting than usual list. As to books not being fantasy,while I believe the intent of this list is probably traditional fantasy,I have heard some talk about the subjectiveness of the term. That is to say a more literal dictionary definition. Thus,some of the odder choices...still I wouldn't choose them.

Well, there's some stuff on here I definitely wouldn't call "highbrow" (Jordan, Goodkind, freaking Dragonlance....), aside from some I just don't find well-written at all (Neverwhere and the Night Circus for instance), but all in all, not bad for a GR list. It includes some seminal books and some genuinely well-written stuff. I like that it has both magic realism and more traditional fantasy--I think the point of calling it "highbrow" is that it's meant to be a list of more literary books with speculative elements, rather than just pulpy entertainment.

I guess it's a matter of opinion. I didn't find Interview with a Vampire well written at all. Neverwhere on the other hand is one of my favorite books and i have the deepest respect for Gaiman's writing. I think highbrow is an extremely vague definition. Do we mean "literary" fantasy as opposed to "genre" fantasy?

Dungeons and Dragons books and anything by David Eddings do not qualify please remove.

And if Terry Goodkind and Terry Brooks are on here they need to be removed too, I didn't see them though.

Yeah, interview with a Vampire is quite bad.

Jenn wrote: "Ok, if this list was trying to exclude those books and series, do you mind explaining to me why? Im not trying to be rude or anything, just you seem to know why, mind sharing?"

Look up the definition of highbrow. Those series are not that.

To be honest, I don't see why the Prince of Nothing series is on here, myself, but maybe I'm just too much of a snob for my own good...