Is there actually a useful description of the difference between the "high fantasy" set and the "epic fantasy" set?
@womzilla The only usage of "high fantasy" I've seen that made it useful was where "high" described the prevalence of fantastic elements.
-
-
@chaosprime The original high/low terminology--which is explicitly judgmental--dealt with the approach to language in the work.Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@chaosprime Tolkien = grand = high; Howard = coarse = low. Vance, as usual, confounds everything--e.g. elevated speech, picaro protagonistThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@chaosprime I think part of the challenge is that I've got an almost reflex hatred of the ideas behind the high/low fantasy distinctionThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@chaosprime And if "lots of magic" = "high fantasy", then D&D novels and Glen Cook are "high" while Tolkien and Peake are "low" -
@womzilla Not just magic, but fantastic elements. So Tolkein is elevated by the elves and dwarves and goblins and divine critters. - 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
@womzilla Which does distinguish it from epic fantasy, which can be "low fantasy" on that spectrum, as SoIaF is.Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.