SLCLS Genre Study discussion

At today's fantasy genre study workshop, Cynthia asked an interesting question: are talking animal books fantasies? Would you call The Mouse and the Motorcycle a fantasy?

We also talked about ghost books as fantasies. Do you agree? My 15-second Google search brought up a 2009 poll that said that more people think ghosts are real than don't, so would you call a ghost book a fantasy? Maybe if the ghost had magical powers?

I think that there is a dividing line between fantasy and paranormal that is being ignored. Ghosts (whether you believe in them or not) fit firmly into paranormal.There has to be more in it than ghosts to make it fantasy in my opinion. as far as talking animals go, that one is a bit more tricky. I would never say that Calvin and Hobbes was fantasy and it has a talking animal. I don't think I would call the mouse and the motorcycle fantasy because it doesn't have any of the other traditional elements, and the plot isn't a fantasy plot. then again maybe this is what is meant by magical realism, which I still just don't get.

(view spoiler)[Ghosts and talking animals - just a pair o' normal things. I'll be here all week, folks. :-) (hide spoiler)]

Ghost books seem like fantasy books to me. Paranormal fiction seems like it would be a fantasy subgenre. Maybe somewhere on the border between fantasy and horror.

Books with actual talking animals in them are probably fantasy books of one subgenre or another, because a talking animal is a fantastic creature. However, a lot of books that seem to feature talking animals may actually be about normal animals that are represented as thinking or speaking in a human manner so that the reader can connect with them as characters, in the same way that a book set in a foreign country would present dialogue in English, but we're meant to understand the characters are actually speaking Russian or French or whatnot.

Today I started a fantasy/romance. It is called "A Knight in Shining Armor". It is a "once upon a time" book. It takes you through time travel back to the 16th century and of course "modern day". Abandoned by her lover, thoroughly modern Dougless Montgomery finds herself alone and brokenhearted in an old English church. She never dreamed that a love more powerful than time awaited her there...until Nicholas Stafford, Earl of Thornwyck, a sixteenth-century knight, appeared. Drawn to him by a bond so sudden and compelling that it defied reason, Dougless knew that Nicholas was nothing less than a miracle: a man who would not seek to change her, who found her perfect just as she was. But she could not know how strong were the chains that tied them to the past -- or the grand adventure that lay before them. So far the book has been very enjoyable.

Knight in Shining Armor by Jude Deveraux is one of my all time favorite romances. I never thought of it as being fantasy, but with the time travel element, I guess it could be. And there's a ton of others in the series. But this one is the best!

Jim Butchers "Ghost Story" seems to be fantasy. Ghost books sound more like horror. Although they appear in all genres include the last RC "Last Wool and Testament" to name one title.

I just started reading "The Screaming Staircase" by Jonathan Stroud. It has ghosts, specters, kids in charge, modern and victorian elements...I'd say it's fantasy and horror all mixed up together. Whatever it is, I like it. Well, except when I read it late at night...then, not so much.

Ghost Story is part of a larger series that is definitely fantasy so it's not strictly to do with ghosts. I think you have to ask yourself several questions to define a fantasy:
Does it take place in another world? Are there more than one type of creature in the world? Is there the typical good vs. evil? etc.
I think by answering these questions you can define a fantasy. A book that has a talking animal character but none of the other elements of fantasy isn't one. Same if it has just a ghost or other creature. It must have multiple points to be made a fantasy.

I agree. I think Paranormal is books with ghosts, vampires, werewolves and maybe even witches. Fantasy to me is more than that. even if it takes place in this world it should have more than just the elements of horror.

I always wondered what books like "The Time Traveler's Wife" would fall under. Do they use magical realism? I also wonder about allegories like "Animal Farm." What do you think?

Holly wrote: "I always wondered what books like "The Time Traveler's Wife" would fall under. Do they use magical realism? I also wonder about allegories like "Animal Farm." What do you think?"

The Time Traveler's Wife attempts to use science to explain the premise (some kind of genetic mutation if I remember correctly- it's been several years since I read it), so I would classify it more under a sci-fi heading if forced to place it in a genre, although I think it fits best in general fiction.

Allegories like Animal Farm are tough, but one could probably argue that it's Fantasy because it's full of talking animals. My two cents, anyway.

I don't know- I'd say Time Traveler's Wife makes a nod to science, but I'm not sure it's enough to qualify as science fiction. I'm not sure where that line should be, either. But I guess that's what we'll talk about next summer during our sci fi genre study. :-)

Again I think we're trying too hard when it comes to defining certain books as fantasy. They can have fantastical elements but still not be fantasy. Talking animals alone don't make a fantasy.. a book needs more than that

That's a great point. For instance, you wouldn't try to define every book that has a bit of romance in it as a romance novel.

Ruth wrote: "Ghost Story is part of a larger series that is definitely fantasy so it's not strictly to do with ghosts. I think you have to ask yourself several questions to define a fantasy:
Does it take place ..."

I disagree. If a book has any element that cannot happen in the natural world it's a fantasy.

I have to agree with Ruth and with Jennifer. It has to be more than one element to make a Fantasy novel or a Romance novel I personally don't feel that Ghosts and vampires count as an element of Fantasy. Or rather they can exist in a Fantasy but their presence does not make a Fantasy. to me saying that the presence of a Ghost make sit a Fantasy is to ignore the Genres of Horror and Paranormal

Cara wrote: "I have to agree with Ruth and with Jennifer. It has to be more than one element to make a Fantasy novel or a Romance novel I personally don't feel that Ghosts and vampires count as an element of Fa..."

I don't know if paranormal is really a genre, or at least, not a standard one. But that gets back to the basic problem with the genre construct. We are trying to draw a line around something that's amorphous- it's only going to be so successful. I think making generalizations about genres can be helpful, but in a limited way.

I think it's interesting that Barnes and Noble in Jordan Landing has a section dedicated to Teen Paranormal... It made it tricky to try and find a book I was looking for. I had to think it through whether it was fantasy or paranormal. So I think paranormal is getting its own genre classification, at least for now. It'll be interesting to see if it lasts, but then again Zombie groups are getting more prevalent. Creepy, but interesting.

I think some of these "Zombie" and paranormal items should be under a Horror genre. Fantasy sounds too tame and not enough of the creepiness that "Zombie" and paranormal contains.

I think i would include books with both ghosts and talking animals a subgenre of fantasy (at least when it comes to adult books.) I think Calvin & Hobbes might be different because i've always seen it as set in Calvin's imagination (also the fact that it's a comic strip and comic strips often anthropomorphize animals

According to Wikipedia the definition of fantasy is "Fantasy is a genre of fiction that commonly uses magic and other supernatural phenomena as a primary plot element, theme, or setting. Many works within the genre take place in imaginary worlds where magic and magical creatures are common. Fantasy is generally distinguished from the genres of science fiction and horror by the expectation that it steers clear of scientific and macabre themes, respectively, though there is a great deal of overlap between the three, all of which are subgenres of speculative fiction." Now granted according to this definition books with ghosts could be fantasy but not talking animals. Now this is a very large generalization and every book is going to be different

Aren't talking animals magical creatures? How else can it be that they talk.

Most of the time when you have talking animals it's so the reader can get inside said animal's head. Take the Brian Jaques series for example. I still support that even if they talk to human's that alone doesn't make a fantasy. It's a fantastical element for sure, but it's not a fantasy. Take the mouse and the motorcycle (the book that started this all) it takes place in the real world, there is no magic or supernatural phenomena and it doesn't have the classic good vs. evil. So even though it has the talking mouse it doesn't have any other element that makes a fantasy according to Wikipedia. So talking animals alone DO not make a fantasy

Now here's an opposite example of a book that has talking animals and is considered a fantasy: The Chronicle of Narnia Series. So there are other elements that make this a fantasy. It takes place (mostly) in a magical world. It has other supernatural creatures (centaurs, fauns and others), it also has the classic good vs evil theme. So my point is that talking animals ALONE do not make a fantasy there must be other elements present in the book.

The Mouse and the Motorcycle would fit nicely into the Low Fantasy genre, as it is defined by Wikipedia. They cite The Indian in the Cupboard as an example and that would seem to be the same sort of book to me, though it features a toy instead of a mouse. Fully magical worlds and stuggles between good and evil are trappings of High Fantasy.

I suppose you could classify the Mouse and the Motorcycle as fantasy, but I guess I question the utility of it from a reader's advisory standpoint. Does expanding what we mean by fantasy to include talking animal books really help us find books for people, or help us understand what people want to read? Thoughts?

I'd agree that if a patron asks for fantasy books, in most cases they probably aren't expecting to get The Mouse and the Motorcycle as a recommendation. The various sub-genres under the general fantasy umbrella cover a pretty large territory, not all of which will appeal to all fantasy readers. It's not really any different than a patron that comes in and asks for a mystery, though; you prompt them for more info about what they've liked in the past until you're comfortable that you're not handing a gritty police procedural to a cozy reader.

Fantasy is a large genre, as evidenced by all the subgenres, so I think to find the type of fantasy that the patron is looking for we need to ask questions. There is no one-size-fits-all fantasy.

For me, I classify Fantasy as anything I don't believe could actually happen such as magical worlds, supernatural settings etc. Generally speaking, I don't enjoy fantasy books. There are a few notable exceptions, but I have a hard time keeping all the names and places straight.