# Interesting New Yorker article about fantasy



## M. LeRenard (Dec 7, 2011)

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/backissues/2011/11/tolkien-tedious-or-tremendous.html

So here's one of the most ambivalent articles about fantasy books I've ever seen, even giving Paolini the benefit of the doubt (while simultaneously discussing the flaws inherent in his writing style).  I suppose the part about Tolkien's teaching methods is the most interesting, and makes a whole lot of sense considering the style of his work.
Anyway, it's only a couple pages and probably worth a read, and this place could use some extra activity, so what do you guys think about this article?  Is this too broad a way to talk about fantasy?  Agree with the points, disagree?


----------



## BRN (Dec 7, 2011)

The article you linked was interesting, but were you talking about http://www.newyorker.com/arts/critics/atlarge/2011/12/05/111205crat_atlarge_gopnik ?

The article's author showed some dry humour in his evaluation, and it made for an enjoyable read. But as for the content inside the article, I found it refreshing that he discussed the many parallels of Paulini's world and Tolkein's without dismissing them as a fault of Paulini's writing - a lesser reviewer might have snarked at what is essentially plaugiarism; but why not create from the model that probably influenced him to write anyway?

 I thought the review was rather harsh about Eldest. Eldest wasn't a terrible read, though it definitely didn't have as much of my interest as its prequel. 

Page 3 of the review was particularly interesting, but I didn't think it was fair to imply that writings styles earn "share" of the reading market; in my own opinion, it's how much we emotionally invest in the character's success that lends a series its strength, and that emotional investment generally comes from identity or empathy - not so purely from the emotional strength of the writing.

Interesting article all the same. A fairer dissection of fantasy I've yet to see.


----------



## â™¥Mirandaâ™¥ (Dec 7, 2011)

The Newyorker said:
			
		

> Most popular books wear their artlessness on their sleeve



My favourite part of that entire article


----------



## M. LeRenard (Dec 7, 2011)

SIX said:


> The article you linked was interesting, but were you talking about http://www.newyorker.com/arts/critics/atlarge/2011/12/05/111205crat_atlarge_gopnik ?


Whoops.  Yes, that's what I meant to link to.
Anyway, I thought it was rather nice to see an article in a magazine like that (whose fiction is always of a very snooty and specific type) that gave a pretty fair overview of why fantasy works.  Fantasy is lagging behind sci-fi in being taken seriously, and sci-fi took a good long while.  I wonder what the next literary punching bag will be?


----------



## FlynnCoyote (Dec 13, 2011)

That was a good read. 

I`ve rarely seen a fair critique of the Inheritance cycle but this one made sense to me.


----------



## M. LeRenard (Dec 13, 2011)

That's what made it intriguing to me.  Usually what you get from media is either, "Paolini is a child prodigy!!!" or "Inheritance is the worst thing since Hitler!!!"
Now, I hated those books for precisely the reason this fellow seems to find merit in them, which is that they sound like something some teenager wrote for Fanfiction.net.  But here this article comes explaining that the appeal is there precisely because it's a style of thinking that teenagers and young kids associate with, that kind of immature, imitative, trying-too-hard-to-impress style.  I mean, that in no way makes me want to try reading them again, but it does clarify a bit more (beyond 'his parents are book editors') why this piece of junk took off so fast.  I still happen to think there's something to be said for quality, but at least now I know.


----------



## FlynnCoyote (Dec 14, 2011)

I enjoyed the series, though admittedly it was obvious (painfully at times) that Eragon was his first book. Though I noticed a slight improvement as the series progressed, I do feel that a more competent writer would have showed more improvement than was evident over that period of time. 

Which is not to say I can do better, but I`m gonna try. 


This review has given me some food for thought as well.


----------

