Oh, I don't think magical realism is the same as fantasy, but there is quite a bit of overlap, enough that setting up one as valuable and the other as drivel is ridiculous. You know?
Oh, go away Johnny Depp. You seem incapable of picking good movies to be in of late anyway.
Stephen King would be like Vampire Diaries--well written, well plotted--but not really innovative. Good, not great. Pratchett would be more like Buffy. Innovative. Genre busting. There's value in both. And one isn't MORE valuable than the other--but they aren't interchangeable either.
Agreed. Definitely. Probably people will still be reading King then, but in lit classes? That's a different question.
I think there's something to be said for the way that genre fiction is often the domain of women, as well--the inherent kyriarchy reflected in the canon: how sexist and classist and racist, etc. it is. But that's an entirely different issue as well. I won't go there now.
There are things TV can do that no other medium can do (long term character development couched in visual metaphors and whatnot), just as there are things that books and movies and comics and poetry and visual art can do that other mediums can't. We need them all--to dismiss a genre or a medium out of hand is just... snobbery, yes. But more than that, it's sophomoric. It's a false sophistication that really reveals how little the dismisser has thought about the nature of art and communication.
YES. YES YES YES YES YES YES. This is exactly what I was trying to get at.
no subject
Oh, go away Johnny Depp. You seem incapable of picking good movies to be in of late anyway.
Stephen King would be like Vampire Diaries--well written, well plotted--but not really innovative. Good, not great. Pratchett would be more like Buffy. Innovative. Genre busting. There's value in both. And one isn't MORE valuable than the other--but they aren't interchangeable either.
Agreed. Definitely. Probably people will still be reading King then, but in lit classes? That's a different question.
I think there's something to be said for the way that genre fiction is often the domain of women, as well--the inherent kyriarchy reflected in the canon: how sexist and classist and racist, etc. it is. But that's an entirely different issue as well. I won't go there now.
There are things TV can do that no other medium can do (long term character development couched in visual metaphors and whatnot), just as there are things that books and movies and comics and poetry and visual art can do that other mediums can't. We need them all--to dismiss a genre or a medium out of hand is just... snobbery, yes. But more than that, it's sophomoric. It's a false sophistication that really reveals how little the dismisser has thought about the nature of art and communication.
YES. YES YES YES YES YES YES. This is exactly what I was trying to get at.