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?
Ah. I see what you're saying.
You know, what's interesting about this is that one reason that magical realism is so lauded has to do with post-colonialism and academia's reaction to undervaluing the storytelling methods of colonized people. The reclamation of folk methods and combining them with the storytelling techniques of the empire is one of the things that sets it apart from fantasy--which tends to have its roots set strongly within the bounds of the empire itself. So, it seems almost reactionary and self-hating of academia/the West's literati, you know? Valuing the *exotic* method, and demeaning the accessible? Interesting.
no subject
Ah. I see what you're saying.
You know, what's interesting about this is that one reason that magical realism is so lauded has to do with post-colonialism and academia's reaction to undervaluing the storytelling methods of colonized people. The reclamation of folk methods and combining them with the storytelling techniques of the empire is one of the things that sets it apart from fantasy--which tends to have its roots set strongly within the bounds of the empire itself. So, it seems almost reactionary and self-hating of academia/the West's literati, you know? Valuing the *exotic* method, and demeaning the accessible? Interesting.