Mythopoeic Fantasy and "rehabilitation" of something for a later day

Extollager

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2010
Messages
9,241
Darkly Bright has published a short essay by me that might interest readers who are intrigued by classification of types within a genre. I say that within the genre of literary fantasy there are sword and sorcery, Gothic-type fantasy, comic fantasy, etc. Furthermore I attempt to argue that mythopoeic fantasy exists as a distinct category within literary fantasy, but that it's relatively uncommon as compared with the rest. The essay's not the last word on anything, but maybe you would like to add some words here or at the DB site or both.

 
Very interesting. Have you read Lud-In-The-Mist, and if so would you consider that mythopoeic?
 
Hitmouse, that's one I've owned for decades -- but still haven't read. It does seem to be highly regarded by thoughtful readers of literary fantasy.
 
Hitmouse, that's one I've owned for decades -- but still haven't read. It does seem to be highly regarded by thoughtful readers of literary fantasy.

I too have copy of this one unread. I think I may do something about it.
 
Last edited:
Very interesting. Have you read Lud-In-The-Mist, and if so would you consider that mythopoeic?
I read this book recently and really enjoyed it. By the way, I really like pre-Tolkien fantasy books in general.
 
Lud in the Mist is an outstanding piece of work but mythopoeic? It can be said to feature and rehabilitate some mythic figures but I can't say I'd have put it in there.

But then it depends how you mean mythopoeic. That essay's definition is different from wikipedia's and both different from the definition I picked up somewhere, which puts an emphasis on creating myth to fulfil some of the function of myth.

I would also point out that by Dale Nelson's standard, you've got to question how much of fantasy isn't mythopoeic. Howard's Conan? A rehabilitation of the great Irish warrior-heroes of mythology. Pratchett's Witches are rehabilitations of countless types of folklore and myth. The gothic antiheroes of works like Gormenghast can be seen as rehabilitations of the morally ambiguous trickster gods.
 
I've got a pet theory that Titus Groan is a strange retelling of King Lear. The characters map over surprisingly well.
 
Well, that was an interesting read and I'm glad that you're still writing these articles. I liked the one about Lovecraft's comfortable world very much. I must say that I'm not sure what "mythopoeic" really is or, more accurately, what "wisdom" really is: I get the feeling that it isn't just "good sense" or "good morals". I've not read all the books you mention, but I get a feeling of gentleness and - hmm, it's hard to name. Old-fashionedness, conservatism, nostalgia, tranquility, a rejection of fancy (cosmopolitan?) stuff, etc. Would something like News From Nowhere count, with its gentle setting but fairly radical (for then) politics?

They're SF rather than fantasy, but both The Handmaid's Tale and 1984 feel "wise" to me, in that they impart moral warnings and are about characters seeking to live quiet, decent lives. But they are both squalid and brutal, being set in dictatorships, although 1984 does have some quite elegiac rural bits. Neither contains "wise" characters or anything tranquil. Both Salem's Lot and It Can't Happen Here (fantastical horror and social satire/semi-SF respectively) have a lot of kindly affection for small-town America, especially its more gentle elements, but both spiral into violence. It Can't Happen Here feels wise in the sense of giving a warning. Maybe that lack of calm rules a story out? That said, That Hideous Strength has some really lurid, pulp-horror moments, too.

I wonder if a sort of majestic-ness (majesty? I'm not sure that's the same) is important to this. Pratchett is certainly a "wise" writer, but there's a chaotic energy to his stories that probably rules them out. Gormenghast has grandeur, but it's faded and grotesque. Hmm.
 
We have our own mythopoeia right here on Chrons, in the form of all the goings on in Lounge threads (the tea rooms alone have about 7%* of all posts ever made hereabouts, plus various “shenanigans” involving everywhere between hell and Las Vegas, and journeys by ship and spaceship) and some Playroom threads (I’m looking at you, Elton John in-jokers and Last Post regulars)

Considered all together, and especially since these are largely written by the same people over the past twenty-plus years, it counts.

*In 2017 I said 9%, we seem to have slowed since then
 
I clean missed this was Extollager's article! Oops.

I wonder if a sort of majestic-ness (majesty? I'm not sure that's the same) is important to this. Pratchett is certainly a "wise" writer, but there's a chaotic energy to his stories that probably rules them out. Gormenghast has grandeur, but it's faded and grotesque. Hmm.

But then, aren't there myths, legends, and other old stories that are chaotic and grotesque? Is Loki not tying his fruit and two veg to a goat by string to make a giant laugh not grotesque? Isn't the Dream of Rhonawby chaotic?

Once we accept that, why deny mythopoeia to stories following in those veins?
 
We have our own mythopoeia right here on Chrons, in the form of all the goings on in Lounge threads (the tea rooms alone have about 7%* of all posts ever made hereabouts, plus various “shenanigans” involving everywhere between hell and Las Vegas, and journeys by ship and spaceship) and some Playroom threads (I’m looking at you, Elton John in-jokers and Last Post regulars)

Considered all together, and especially since these are largely written by the same people over the past twenty-plus years, it counts.

*In 2017 I said 9%, we seem to have slowed since then
Plus, you are Baylor are responsible for 43% of posts.
 

Similar threads


Back
Top