Kristin, you didn't sound defensive at all. More like...deflated. And I, at least, didn't want you to feel that way, because just doing the damn writing, whatever it is, is something to cheer on and shout about.

And we all know some of the biggies on lots of people's reading lists are fantasy. Like Tolkien, and L'Engle, and C.S. Lewis (and here's where my lack of fantasy knowledge shows because I'm running out of examples). And...the guy (?) who wrote The Once and Future King, et cetera, et cetera (imagine that with Yul Brynner's King accent, just for fun).

I'm just glad you're writing, 'cause I encourage all my friends to do it. Nods.

erika, yes, submit, submit, submit! Hmmm. That could be taken so many different ways.

I go back later and find the same word five or six times in three or four pages

Beverly, I do this all the damn time. Earwormed by a word, I guess you'd call it.

And...the guy (?) who wrote The Once and Future King

T.H. White. One of my favourites. But I may have a different definition of fantasy than most people, because I don't consider Arthurian legend fantasy. I do call Tolkein fantasy, and I can't read him. I'm also the only human being I know that thoroughly allergic to him.

But Kristin, I'm with Amy. You sounded deflated. And why on earth? YOU WROTE!

Speaking of which, I am quite unbelievably proud of my internet wife.

Deb, what's the difference between fantasy and magical realism?

connie, my own definition, or the textbook one? Actually, strike that, because I have no clue what the textbook definition actually is.

For me, it's like this, or at least one definition is: if it's a different world setting, different species, but human dilemnas, it's fantasy. That puts Tolkein, with his hobbits and talking trees and various elf types, square on the fantasy quarterdeck. And most of the ones I've read have struck me as gushy, or overly simplistic, or horribly dated. I knew I was in deep shit trying to read Tolkein when I realised the people I was talking to weren't rooting for Smaug to eat all those pimply hairy dwarf types.

If it's this world, human beings, with fantastic things happening to them, I tend to classify it as magic realism. So for me, the perfect crossover book is one in which the fantastic occurs, the other species may occur, but it all happens right here to genuine human beings, as in the way Neil Gaiman does it in Neverwhere: London Above, London Below. All the elements of fantasy, but I get to actually give a shit, because it's real time, real humans, real places in which I've eaten lunch.

Same goes for my classification of science fiction. For me, while I'm sure there are eighteen billiond postgraduate blabfests seriously and pompously explaining why Douglas Adams is science fiction? I consider him a unique form of magic realism. Because when the "Guide" first begins, we begin with the premise that Ford Prefect, the guy next door, is actually from somewhere else. I don't really care what's happening on planet Zorkon, unless there are human beings there. And I'm always going to find that touch of magic or fantasy more compelling if it's happening here, right now, where I have to glance at the guy in the post office and think, whoa, is he an alien...?

I'm always going to go for Like Water For Chocolate or Peter Straub's Ghost Story above a sword and sorcery or hard scifi.

edited for really, really bad typing. My hands hurt like blazes today.

Magical realism is more set in real world but has elements of magic woven in -- it's very common in Hispanic literature especially. Anaya, Cisneros, and Marquez are all good examples.

Fantasy has its own set of subgenres, but it's more typical taking place in a different world -- often an older or younger Earth-like realm, and almost always in less technologically advanced times.

Some of my favorite contemporary fantasy authors are George R.R. Martin, Robin Hobb, and J.V. Jones.

Likely an x-post...

Definitely a crosspost. But Alice Hoffman also does some nice magic realism if that's the definition. And "Witches of Eastwick" also qualifies.

When you come down to it, it's the basis for BtVS and Angel. Our world, with extraordinary things just beyond the corner of our vision.

Fantasy has its own set of subgenres, but it's more typical taking place in a different world -- often an older or younger Earth-like realm, and almost always in less technologically advanced times.

Does that mean you'd call Emma Bull's stuff magic realism? Brust's Agyar? You equate it with urban fantasy?

Woohoo, erika!

AmyLiz, I read Mr. and Mrs. Bo Jo Jones in high school. I don't have the book anymore, but the mere fact it's one of the few books I read then that I still have vivid memories of says something,

Kristin, I love a good fantasy novel, and I'm planning to write in the genre one of these days.

When you come down to it, it's the basis for BtVS and Angel. Our world, with extraordinary things just beyond the corner of our vision.

I mostly agree with your definition of the differences between magical realism and fantasy. I also prefer magical realism as a literary genre. However, I think when creatures such as vampires and other demons are involved you are more into fantasy/horror than magical realism. Although I do agree that there is some element of magical realism to BtVS and Angel because of the fact that they take place in a real world setting.

However, I think when creatures such as vampires and other demons are involved you are more into fantasy/horror than magical realism.

Ah, but ghosts and vampires aren't other species, or fantasy species: pretty much every culture I know of that has them as belief or legend has them as beings who were once human.

That, right there, puts them in a whole nother class than hobbits and dragons, for me.