Fantasy Is NOT the Same Thing As Magic
- This topic has 42 replies, 11 voices, and was last updated 3 years, 2 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
There is a huge difference between portraying a fact (showing that it exists) and having a protagonist or character utilize spiritual or demonic power. That is witchcraft, and the bible explicit teaches against messing with the realms of demons, angels, magic, witchcraft, and sorcery. Thoughts?
There’s also a difference between writing a character who does something evil and actually practicing something evil. Magic (in the literal sense) is something we have to be extra careful about portraying, because I do think there’s a more narrow line between the two when it comes to magic than with some other things, but I don’t think it’s any more inherently sinful to carefully portray magic for edifying ends (showing it as it is, as sin with consequences) than it is to carefully portray lust or murder for edifying ends (showing them as they are, as sins with consequences). And as with lust or murder, there are ways to portray magic truthfully for effect without being graphic or explicit in a way that would unnecessarily tempt or disgust readers. So when I say “portray,” I don’t mean we should show every detail.
It is something that should be up to personal conviction as far as whether or not an author personally chooses to write about it or read about it. Some people are more prone to fall into certain sins than others, and you shouldn’t portray or read about magic if you’re going to be tempted to practice it in real life any more than you should portray or read about lust if that’s something you’re going to be tempted to fall into in real life. I also think maturity plays a part, as with any other sin topic; if you won’t be tempted to fall into that sin but you can’t portray it accurately, then you should still avoid it. But I don’t think it’s something you can put a blanket condemnation on, either, any more than writing about any other sin.
“For you were once darkness, but now you are light in the Lord. Walk as children of light (for the fruit of the Spirit is in all goodness, righteousness, and truth), finding out what is acceptable to the Lord. And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather expose them. ” – Ephesians 5:8-11
Of course we ought not participate in evil, but we can’t expose sins without showing the truth of them, either. There is a way to do both.
Speculative fiction author. Mythology nerd. Worldbuilding enthusiast. Singer. Fan of classic literature.
I’ll compose a message sometime and ask you you’re specific views.
😉 Will do!
Good, I can feel your anger, take a weapon, strike me down, and your journey to the–oh wait, I wasn’t supposed to say that out-loud. xD
*coughs* Yeah, WHOOPS. 😛 *cough cough*
Seeing your thoughts more throughout this thread, I’m curious as to why making a natural ability “ritualistic” would turn it from okay to not okay, and how much you consider individual intent vs objective reality to matter in a “magic” system.
Sanderson’s systems are on a spectrum of natural and supernatural that you can’t really pin down as one or the other. Mistborn and Stormlight both take place in the same universe, in which a being who may or may not be their universe’s God in Mormon cosmology was shattered into a bunch of shards, each of which bound to a human consciousness to form a being with immutable intent toward something like Ruin and Honor. These beings went to different planets and their bodies became, in different ways, power sources for what you could call magic systems.
An ordinary person, if they were born on one of these shards’ planets, might simply have the power from birth to do some fantastical thing like have perfect pitch and sense when other humans are around, regardless of who they worship or whether they acknowledge the shard that gives them power.
You could make a strong argument that Cosmere magic (that being the name of his books’ shared universe) is natural. The ecosystems of entire planets shape themselves over millennia because of the presence of energy which operates on our understanding of the laws of thermodynamics.
But the abilities also literally come from absurdly powerful spiritual beings. The books, like many fantasy books, operate on a different cosmology to our world. Assuming real-world witchcraft involves asking beings who are explicit enemies of God for power, that applies not at all to any cosmology where that spiritual dynamic isn’t in place. The Cosmere certainly has no demons. There are incarnations of urges like Ruin and Hatred, but the people who align with them are obviously insane and evil, and the people who use the power of other Shards often have not the slightest idea of ultimate cosmic reality. All they know is they can fly, or whatever.
Though even here I’m leaving out huge chunks of the very complex cosmology, one which is by no means fleshed out enough that the fans know how it all works–where do you see the lines drawn here?
Yes, it is overused, but to be clear, I think it is incorrect and bad for the word magic to be used to describe fantastical abilities or elements. It’s not about it being confused with real magic, it’s about us not using the word magic at all. Magic is magic, sorcery is sorcery. Thoughts?
I can see that, though I think the actual word choice is less important than whether the actual content resembles magic. Magic by any other name is still magic. (And the line between “renamed magic” and “fantastical ability” is extremely blurry and I’m not venturing anywhere near it XD) Anyway, I do see what you mean, and I do agree. I wouldn’t call any fantastical abilities magic, purely out of principle.
I literally do not read books that use the word magic to describe their fantastical elements unless there is some very special and rare reason it is used, so yeah, same here. xD
Same XD It narrows the fantasy section down a lot.
Without darkness, there is no light. If there was no nighttime, would the stars be as bright?
I can see that, though I think the actual word choice is less important than whether the actual content resembles magic. Magic by any other name is still magic.
I agree.
Speculative fiction author. Mythology nerd. Worldbuilding enthusiast. Singer. Fan of classic literature.
So if I understand your point correctly, you’re saying that you agree that magic and supernatural things are sin, but it is fine to right if portrayed carefully as thing a person does in the book that is wrong, like any other sin such as murder, theft, lust, lying, etc…Is that correct?
If that is what you’re saying, that is a valid point, and not one I’ve thought about much. I suppose that could be done, if done very carefully as you say, but I want to say a few things that I believe must be kept in mind if it is done. First, it must be clear, beyond even a small doubt clear, that the magic or supernatural elements are evil, sin, and were mistake. In addition to this, I don’t think the magic/supernatural things should give any benefits, even temporary benefits (such as saving someone’s life) to the characters, because if it does, it will easily be confused with the normal way people use magic in books. Also, I wouldn’t recommend having a main protagonist use magic, even in a clearly sinful, unhelpful, and damaging way, because it could confuse the reader, seeing that they are after all, the protagonist. But, you’re probably already going to do that, so just be careful. Lastly, I just want to make sure we agree that the way you are describing magic to be used, is not the way people (such as Sanderson, Rothfuss, and Riordan) use it in books, they use it as a totally okay ability or power that has side effects, which, it seems, you might actually agree with me that it is unbiblical to write. Do you agree with that? That things like Harry Potter are bad to right?
You’ve really got me thinking about whether I’d ever write a book with magic in that way Miss Archer. xD You have to be extremely careful and clear that it is bad, that’s the gist of my answer I guess.
I was wondering if anyone was going to ask about that. 🙂 So here is what I mean: Even if I don’t use words like magic, supernatural, sorcery, etc…if I were to make my fantastical abilities feel ritualistic, through pagan cermonialish type stuff, chanting, blood rituals, or things that really feel like it’s coming from some demonic or spiritual realm, then it is bad. I know that is kinda vague, but I’m not the only one who thinks this, in fact, see my response to Rose below and her comment about this very thing.
As for Sanderson’s books, first off, as I said, I really liked Sanderson’s fantastical abilities of the armor and abilities power by storms (storms shards I think?), and I don’t think he called it magic in the book (everyone calls it the magic system of course 😡), but that’s not what’s keeping me away from it. I did pretty extensive research on Wikifandom (because I really wanted to read The Way of Kings, it looked great), and was incredibly disappointed to find that not only is there something called the Old Magic, but much worse, there was god like beings, supernatural realms, a false religion, reincarnation of a character (I hate reincarnation so much, it’s the weak way out), and I think the characters even go to a sub-natural realm. Not good stuff, very unbiblical. As for Mistborn, as you said, it is also set in the Cosmere, and though I don’t know as much about it, from what I’ve heard (and by the fact that it’s in the Cosmere), it also has magical and supernatural elements. So disappointing.
though I think the actual word choice is less important than whether the actual content resembles magic.
I agree (see my reply to Taylor on this subject), but I don’t think this should change anyone’s view that writing magic in this way is anti-biblical.
I’ll write out a fuller reply eventually (I’m pretty busy) but I think so far I’m agreeing with R.M. and Taylor.
"Can't have dirty garbage."
So if I understand your point correctly, you’re saying that you agree that magic and supernatural things are sin, but it is fine to right if portrayed carefully as thing a person does in the book that is wrong, like any other sin such as murder, theft, lust, lying, etc…Is that correct?
Correct.
First, it must be clear, beyond even a small doubt clear, that the magic or supernatural elements are evil, sin, and were mistake.
Agreed.
In addition to this, I don’t think the magic/supernatural things should give any benefits, even temporary benefits (such as saving someone’s life) to the characters, because if it does, it will easily be confused with the normal way people use magic in books.
I don’t think that’s necessarily the case so long as rule #1 is followed and the benefits are temporary and far outweighed by the consequences. Magic in the real world holds appeal to people because it’s perceived to have a benefit, therefore to omit any such benefit in a fictional portrayal seems dishonest to me. But that benefit definitely ought to be fleeting and not worth the cost, and I think it’s still possible to keep supernatural magic distinct from common-use “magic” with that balance (or… lack thereof, I suppose, since they oughtn’t be balanced).
Also, I wouldn’t recommend having a main protagonist use magic, even in a clearly sinful, unhelpful, and damaging way, because it could confuse the reader, seeing that they are after all, the protagonist.
Eh… I can definitely see reasoning for this, and I don’t intend to have my protagonists dabble in anything like this if/when I include it in my books. However, I can also see a benefit to showing the protagonist stumble in this just as any other sin (again, under the assumption that it is portrayed as clearly wrong and as having consequences), since readers stumble into sin and I can see how it might be helpful to follow a character who fails and then realizes their failure, suffers the consequences, and grows from it and leaves it behind. But, again, I can see arguments for both sides of this particular point and I don’t wholly disagree with your initial statement. I can see a potential danger in the protagonist using it as clearly as I can see a potential benefit, and the danger ought to outweigh the benefit at least until very careful and thorough thought and consideration and prayer has gone into a decision the other way.
Lastly, I just want to make sure we agree that the way you are describing magic to be used, is not the way people (such as Sanderson, Rothfuss, and Riordan) use it in books, they use it as a totally okay ability or power that has side effects, which, it seems, you might actually agree with me that it is unbiblical to write. Do you agree with that? That things like Harry Potter are bad to right?
I’m not sure I’m following your classification. I’m not familiar with Rothfuss, so I can’t say one way or the other there. Riordan’s and Sanderson’s books I think would both fall into the grey area @taylor-clogston was describing in which the powers are intrinsic and natural to the world, but also connected to the supernatural, and there’s no clear distinction (and as they’re fantasy worlds, I would argue that they needn’t ascribe to exactly the same laws of distinction. If the god(s) of a given fantasy world have designed that world in such a way that people naturally have powers beyond what would be expected, whether they’re purely natural or have hints of that world’s supernatural, that’s very different to my mind than a world in which characters manipulate the supernatural to gain powers as in the real world). Harry Potter, on the other hand, bears enough similarity to the real-world and its magic that it’s much more iffy. So I’m not sure where we agree or disagree on this point, since I think we’re categorizing things differently.
You’ve really got me thinking about whether I’d ever write a book with magic in that way Miss Archer. xD You have to be extremely careful and clear that it is bad, that’s the gist of my answer I guess.
That’s cool to hear. I like making people think. XD We do at least agree on the gist of it, lol.
Speculative fiction author. Mythology nerd. Worldbuilding enthusiast. Singer. Fan of classic literature.
My friend, at some point you need to actually read a text before you can reasonably comment on it. I want to talk about several things that you’re not understanding based on wiki readings, but it would do no good because you haven’t read the text yourself. You owe it to yourself not to let other people make your opinions for you!
A friend of mine thinks the Bible says it’s okay to sell your children into slavery because they decided to let someone else read the Bible and tell them what it meant. They never read it for themselves, only let someone else make an outraged YouTube video about the evils of Christianity and then believed that video without question.
Listening to YouTubers and reading articles and wikis are not even remotely useful replacements for reading a book yourself and coming to your own conclusion. Hearing other people’s analysis on a text can be super useful, but it should never come first.
I don’t think that’s necessarily the case so long as rule #1 is followed and the benefits are temporary and far outweighed by the consequences.
It’s a real dangerous thing to mess with and it can portray you (the author) as someone who is okay with magic to readers who are confused. It’s a very slippery slope.
Riordan’s and Sanderson’s books I think would both fall into the grey area
Yeah, just to come out and say it, I don’t agree. xD Riordan is clearly messing with the supernatural and greek gods, it doesn’t get much clealy supernatural than that, well, Harry Potter is still worse I guess. As I talked about to Taylor, the fantastical abilities and systems in the world are not magic as far as I can tell (though Taylor is right, for me to speak on this better I would have to read the book first), but there are supernatural realms, false gods, and false religions all utilized in the book and have to do effect the plot and characters. It’s just that bible teaches we shouldn’t mess around with the supernatural realm, and Sanderson clearly is.
True, true. 🙂 But what I research this on far more than wiki. I read reviews, searched through the book, read a little of the book itself, and read descriptions of the all the fantastical elements, and read up on all the religion/god/supernatural stuff, so though you are right that I would be able to argue my point better if I have read it, I think I know enough to say that is is clearly messing with the supernatural realms, and probably heavily influenced by Mormonism as you said.
It’s a real dangerous thing to mess with and it can portray you (the author) as someone who is okay with magic to readers who are confused. It’s a very slippery slope.
I think we’ll have to agree to disagree on that. It can be a slippery slope, and we should write with the awareness of that and step back from the topic if we do start to slip, but I don’t think it’s inherently problematic to show temporary benefits that pale in comparison to the cost.
Yeah, just to come out and say it, I don’t agree. xD Riordan is clearly messing with the supernatural and greek gods, it doesn’t get much clealy supernatural than that
I think an argument could be made for Riordan either way. On the one hand he has defined a world that readers are aware is not the same as the real world, despite their overlaps, and in that alternate world the gods exist and have given powers to their children. But on the other hand, it does overlap with the real world and we know that those gods would be a replacement for the real God. So a debate could be had on that point. (Not that I’m encouraging said debate. XD)
As I talked about to Taylor, the fantastical abilities and systems in the world are not magic as far as I can tell (though Taylor is right, for me to speak on this better I would have to read the book first), but there are supernatural realms, false gods, and false religions all utilized in the book and have to do effect the plot and characters. It’s just that bible teaches we shouldn’t mess around with the supernatural realm, and Sanderson clearly is.
I still don’t think any of those things are inherently wrong to use. The real world has false gods and false religions. It’s far more one-note and lazy, in my opinion, to create a world in which there is only one religion which is obviously the true religion based on Christianity than to create a world with dynamic, conflicting beliefs in which there is one true religion alike to Christianity, but it takes work and faith and conflict to come to believe that it is true and to maintain your faith because not everyone believes what you do.
And I think that the design of a world plays a large role in whether or not magic is a problem. In our world, magic is wrong because it’s an attempt to take power that rightfully only belongs to God. Miracles are just as supernatural, but they’re not considered wrong, because they’re a gift of God’s power, bestowed by Him willingly. The source and motivation makes the difference. And I think the same can be true of fiction. The reason I have no problem with powers in most fantasy worlds is because they’re a built-in part of the world, something that the creators of that world have designed for characters to have. Powers given freely by the established god of a world, even if not, say, genetic and therefore intrinsic to people (which the powers in Mistborn are, at least as far as I’ve read), fall into the same category imo. There’s no moral question of whether or not the characters are twisting creation or subverting something to serve them that was never meant to be theirs. It’s been given to them. Powers that people steal from the established god of a world or work with demonic forces to acquire are obviously still problematic. Those are a twisting and subverting of what was intended in the design of the world.
In short, I believe it’s much more a matter of what the initial design for the world is than it is a matter solely of whether or not the powers are supernatural. Whether or not they’re supernatural should be considered, absolutely, but I think it’s a lot more nuanced than just that.
Speculative fiction author. Mythology nerd. Worldbuilding enthusiast. Singer. Fan of classic literature.
I still don’t think any of those things are inherently wrong to use. The real world has false gods and false religions. It’s far more one-note and lazy, in my opinion, to create a world in which there is only one religion which is obviously the true religion based on Christianity than to create a world with dynamic, conflicting beliefs in which there is one true religion alike to Christianity, but it takes work and faith and conflict to come to believe that it is true and to maintain your faith because not everyone believes what you do.
And I think that the design of a world plays a large role in whether or not magic is a problem. In our world, magic is wrong because it’s an attempt to take power that rightfully only belongs to God. Miracles are just as supernatural, but they’re not considered wrong, because they’re a gift of God’s power, bestowed by Him willingly. The source and motivation makes the difference. And I think the same can be true of fiction. The reason I have no problem with powers in most fantasy worlds is because they’re a built-in part of the world, something that the creators of that world have designed for characters to have. Powers given freely by the established god of a world, even if not, say, genetic and therefore intrinsic to people (which the powers in Mistborn are, at least as far as I’ve read), fall into the same category imo. There’s no moral question of whether or not the characters are twisting creation or subverting something to serve them that was never meant to be theirs. It’s been given to them. Powers that people steal from the established god of a world or work with demonic forces to acquire are obviously still problematic. Those are a twisting and subverting of what was intended in the design of the world.
In short, I believe it’s much more a matter of what the initial design for the world is than it is a matter solely of whether or not the powers are supernatural. Whether or not they’re supernatural should be considered, absolutely, but I think it’s a lot more nuanced than just that.
I agree with you @r-m-archer.
"Can't have dirty garbage."
To be candid, I’m surprised that you even consider Riordan okay. The bible constantly talks against other gods, and messing with demonic and supernatural realms, and Riordan’s plots are literally based around greek gods and their supernatural powers. Do you think our God would like us reading books where those false gods are actually real with supernatural powers? I feel bad even considering it.
I still don’t think any of those things are inherently wrong to use. The real world has false gods and false religions.
Yes, in our world there are false gods, that are fake. In that world, there are real gods (I called them false because I don’t want people confusing them with ours), that act like humans except they are supernatural. I believe one of them even dies, or died before the series started or something. It’s just a mess. Gods fighting, dying, granting supernatural power, being worshiped by a false religion, this is literally the very thing our God tells to say away from. What I like in a fantasy world is a God referenced as the creator of the universe (like Asland-Lewis, Eru Illvatar-Tolkien, and the Creator-Jordan). That make it clear that the world is created by a supernatural being, which is pure logic, and does not give in to any of the nonsense aesthetic or evolutionary views. Otherwise, there shouldn’t any made up pantheon of supernatural beings, there shouldn’t be characters meeting with God and being granted supernatural powers, and there shouldn’t be any religions. Maybe a religion could be okay, but only if it played a minor rule and was clearly nonsense, OR the religion was just a “we worship the Creator” type thing, I see nothing wrong with that. Creating your own religion that isn’t the type of Creator worship I just described in a world is something I am very strongly against, it is literally making a false religion and false gods, how does it get more anti-biblical than that? I’m frankly surprised that the thought of doing such as thing doesn’t give you a bad feeling in your gut. xD
Thanks for the tag, @noah-cochran
I’ve been watching this thread from afar while busy with midterms and papers, so hopefully my contributions are coherent (I also hope to catch up on the other threads soon). 😛 I feel like this debate has gone beyond how we define magic and is delving more into different presuppositions about what makes fiction Christian, how Christian writers ought to portray sin/evil, and whether Christian writers can portray the supernatural. My response is more geared to those questions and less toward the original prompt. My impression from reading all the replies is that the magic question is a subset of the questions I listed above. If I end up misunderstanding someone’s argument or veering super off-topic, someone let me know! 🙂
-I’m in 100% agreement that fantasy does not need to have magic to be considered fantasy.
-However, I agree more with @taylorclogston on defining “magic”. Dictionary definitions of words are descriptive not prescriptive, meaning they describe how a word is currently used, not mandate how a word must be used for all time. If the logic is that there is an “official” definition of a word that can never change, then we should all still be speaking Old English (or Latin or something) because those are the true words and the ones we speak now are the corrupted variations, with different spellings and definitions.
We even use “magic” in different senses. We might say “Her wedding was magical”, by which we mean the wedding was nice and elegant, not that people were practicing witchcraft there. Words can have a range of meanings, indicated by context. If someone is using “magic” in a story differently than the witchcraft-specific definition, context will indicate it.
An example of this is the terminology of “evolution” in Pokémon. I know some Christians will react against the games/cartoon because they think it’s teaching Darwinian evolution. But in the context of the Pokémon world, “evolution” has its own distinct meaning and has nothing to do with Darwinism.
-I don’t agree that Christian writers can never depict the supernatural. First of all, good literature is built upon truth. We must depict the world as it actually is (by which I do NOT mean fantasy worlds cannot be created with their own world building rules; rather, a Christian worldview must underlie it). We are not materialistic or naturalistic, depicting a universe devoid of anything spiritual or supernatural.
All that to say, Christians must not promote witchcraft or depict it in a morally neutral manner. We do not condone or promote evil. But like @r-m-archer was saying, there is a difference between acknowledging evil exists and promoting it. It does not follow that we cannot acknowledge those things exist in fiction and we cannot call them out as evil. In 100 Cupboards by ND Wilson, there is a witch character who is very creepy and clearly portrayed as very, very evil. 100 Cupboards isn’t an explicitly Christian novel, but the author is a Christian, and that really shows in the book’s themes.
I recently read a book called Recovering the Lost Art of Reading by Leland Ryken and Glenda Mathes, and there were some excellent chapters on what makes literature good, true, and beautiful. Their thoughts on ethics and portraying sin in fiction was super helpful and relevant to this discussion. Highly recommend it.
-I would add some further thoughts that reading and writing Christian fantasy often calls for a lot of thoughtfulness and nuance. Tolkien didn’t just add a God figure to Middle Earth; there is a whole cosmology there that doesn’t fit in an allegory. CS Lewis used a mythology system in Till We Have Faces—but he is not promoting paganism. Christine Cohen’s The Winter King is in a similar vein. None of these authors are intending to undermine a Christian worldview but are instead using those elements to support the books’ themes.
I’ll use an example from my own WIP (which is an epic fantasy series). The people in the world have a lot of lore, including a system of gods. Answers will not truly be found on what’s up with this religious system until the end of the final book (#spoilers). I decided to include these elements of the story because it really works well with the themes I’m exploring: fate, providence, existentialism, mortality, our desire to be the rulers of our own universe, Nietzsche’s “ubermensch”, the bondage of the will, etc. I’m worried people will be like “This author isn’t a Christian and is promoting paganism!!!!” But that’s not what I’m doing. I have a very specific purpose in mind. My intention is to support the Christian worldview, not undermine it, and how I’m doing that isn’t 100% clear until the very end of the series.
All that to say, I would love to hear your thoughts on what makes fiction “Christian” and if there is any value in reading fiction that isn’t written from a Christian perspective (or is written from a Christian perspective but not explicitly so). I feel like those are the questions underlying the magic one and could be helpful to “clear the air” on this debate before I go into some of my other thoughts.
-Also, to @taylorclogston ‘s point, I recently watched a popular TV show, deciding from the trailer and some reviews beforehand what it was going to be about. But when I actually watched it, I realized my assumptions had been really off. While the show certainly didn’t have a Christian worldview, it did have a lot of thought-provoking Christian themes. I ended up enjoying it and my husband and I have discussed it off and on since.
-I think @r-m-archer is on to something about the issue with magic/witchcraft being man desiring power God has not granted to him and trying to achieve it through forbidden means.
Thanks for the reply Ashley. 🙂
I believe I have answered on these points in my last few comments in reply to Taylor and Archer, so read over my replies to them if you would like to see my rebuttals to your points on the definition of magic, Sanderon’s works, portraying magic and the supernatural in fantasy worlds, etc…I really don’t feel like typing it all up again. xD
- The forum ‘Private: Fantasy Writers’ is closed to new topics and replies.
