Good Fantasy Makes Good Philosophy

Last updated on: October 1, 2012 at 4:39 pm by Leah Libresco

Good Fantasy Makes Good Philosophy 2012-10-01T16:39:26-04:00 Leah Libresco

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Over spring break, during some of the time I should have spent on my senior essay, I was reading books by Robin McKinley. I’ve read and liked a number of her books, so I was tracking down and reading the ones I’d missed. Some were good, some were so-so, none were as good as Spindle’s End and only Chalice was terrible.

Plenty of authors have trouble with exposition, dropping long, clunky bits of backstory into the plot or forcing characters to spend time explaining things they both know to each other for the benefit of the reader (often referred to as an “As You Know, Bob“). McKinley didn’t make this mistake in Chalice, she went one better: she neglected to include the background information at all.

Without any sense of the constraints the characters were under, I couldn’t feel invested in the plot. The main character was able to do some kinds of magic, but I never was able to figure out how difficult or surprising some of her spells were or what the limits of her ability were. So, as the climax of the book approached, I couldn’t experience it as a challenge, since there was nothing I knew she would have to surmount.

Good fantasy and science fiction (and historical fiction, too) need to set clear expectations of the rules the characters are constrained by, or all plot tension is lost. That doesn’t mean that I need to know every detail of their world, but I need a grasp of the relevant obstacles.

I’m not bringing all this up because I’m planning to expand the focus of this blog to scifi and fantasy lit crit (although one glance at my bookshelf would suggest it’s my real bailiwick), but because I think the failure’s of Chalice are a good illustration of a point I tried (unsuccessfully) to make in my answer to one of Michael Egnor’s eight questions for atheists: Why is there regularity in nature?

Egnor imagined that regularity and coherence implied a Divine Lawgiver who kept causality running. I still think that any world without some kind of reasonably accessible rulebook would be so inhospitable to human life and thought as to be impossible (or at least implausible enough to look like a specific case of the Anthropic Principle). Most arguments about miracles assume that aberration from the natural order is the condition which requires a purposeful agent, and that seems much more plausible than Egnor’s take. (And don’t forget that the necessity of preserving causation, at least most of the time, gives Christians a reasonable out on some problems of theodicy).

I can’t live or act in a lawless world — a world where I can’t make reasonable estimates about cause and effect. It’s ridiculous for Christians to assume that atheists think we live in such a world or that we believe this is the logically necessary fate of people without God. It’s bad writing and bad philosophy. To be honest, if your beliefs point to this conclusion, it’s probably time to look into metaphysical backsliding. And a different novel to boot.

Reviews/Recommendations

Previous Post

April 9, 2011

Ex-Gays and Debating Mores (Index Post)

Next Post

April 11, 2011 Where Yuan Went Wrong (Part 3)

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category 7 Quick Takes Apologetics Atheism Book Conversion Debate Tactics Debates Epistemology/Philosophy Housekeeping Ideological Turing Test Marriage Morality in Practice Parsing Catholicism Possibly Heretical Radio Reviews/Recommendations Sequence Index Spiritual Practice Uncategorized

Select a Month April 2017 March 2017 January 2017 December 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

What king was known for writing many proverbs?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Saul Solomon David Hezekiah