Realism in fantasy stories

thiarfearr

I was just wondering why do people allow for certain unrealistic aspects in fantasy novels, but not for others that may be less unrealistic in the real world. I haven't really worded that well but for example, in A Game of Thrones/ASOIAF series, you'll frequently see people argue that its not realistic for a 14 year old boy to lead an army, or houses to rule for thousands of years, yet the series contains dragons, zombies and other magic.

How come people can suspend their disbelief for these aspects, but not for others?

ancapailldorcha

I imagine it's to do with immersion. I tend not to think too much about something I really enjoy while I'm enjoying it whereas if I'm watching rubbish, I'll actively seek out and ridicule the flaws.
Anyway, I doubt this is a thread for the Humanities forum.

thiarfearr

thiarfearr wrote: »

I was just wondering why do people allow for certain unrealistic aspects in fantasy novels, but not for others that may be less unrealistic in the real world. I haven't really worded that well but for example, in A Game of Thrones/ASOIAF series, you'll frequently see people argue that its not realistic for a 14 year old boy to lead an army, or houses to rule for thousands of years, yet the series contains dragons, zombies and other magic.

How come people can suspend their disbelief for these aspects, but not for others?

You'll probably get more discussion on the Literature forum :

Moved from Humanities to Literature.

quickbeam

There are real-life examples of teenagers leading armies - princes in the middle ages often did. I don't know if it was as young as 14 but certainly at 16 and 17 they did. But there is also argument that in ASOIAF a year lasts longer than ours so 14 years there would result in a more mature person than 14 years here.

Also, there's real-life examples of houses lasting for 1000 years. I don't find either example unbelieveable, so it probably doens't answer your question.

The Corinthian

thiarfearr wrote: »

I was just wondering why do people allow for certain unrealistic aspects in fantasy novels, but not for others that may be less unrealistic in the real world. I haven't really worded that well but for example, in A Game of Thrones/ASOIAF series, you'll frequently see people argue that its not realistic for a 14 year old boy to lead an army, or houses to rule for thousands of years, yet the series contains dragons, zombies and other magic.

How come people can suspend their disbelief for these aspects, but not for others?

Because some are more plausible and others not? Because the jump is possible for some and not in others? Because the reader makes a concious decision to suspend disbelief for certain things?

You generally find, I think, that if the reader is asked to make one simple suspension of disbelief, such as dire-wolves did not go extinct or magic exists, and you then continue on, taking this new addition into account, then it is easier for the reader to accept it as long as everything else follows logically. ASOIAF also makes the idea of magic easier to swallow by making it something rare and almost not believed by the characters themselves, which also helps us relate to it better.

Where it came to young generals and long-lived dynasties, there was no suspension of disbelief sought, so the reader is more likely to be critical and view it from a 'Real World' perspective.

Of course, by 'Real World', I mean 'Real World' to the best of their knowledge, because many who might be sceptical may not be aware that there Joan of Arc led an army at 17 or Alexander the Great at 20 - so it's not entirely outside the bounds of possibility, although improbable.

Noble houses can last a long time too; the Hapsburgs have been noble for about a thousand years and the Roman Massimo family dates it's (alleged) beginnings over two thousand years ago. To rule for a thousand years is more questionable, but there are allegedly examples of this too; notably the imperial families of Ethiopia and Japan.

Anyhow that's my take on it.

quickbeam wrote: »

But there is also argument that in ASOIAF a year lasts longer than ours so 14 years there would result in a more mature person than 14 years here.

The seasons are longer, often lasting years, but the years appear to be the same length as ours. Not sure how they measure them, now that I think on it.

binncheol

I'm pretty sure that in the ASOIAF series GRRM admitted to making some of the characters a bit too young...

Not sure where I picked that up from though and only relates to ASOIAF, but thought I'd throw it out there

The Corinthian

binncheol wrote: »

I'm pretty sure that in the ASOIAF series GRRM admitted to making some of the characters a bit too young...

I remember reading an interview with him where he claimed that he'd wanted to create 'gaps' between some of the books to allow some characters to age, but that this hadn't worked out. It is possible that when he speaks of having made some of his characters too young, he's referring to this failure.

radagastbr0wn

Because it is acknowledged that the world's biology and physics are entirely fantasy, but human relationships and actions should fit with the real world. People suspend disbelief if they know it's supposed to be fantasy, but the stuff stuff that exists in the real world has to actually be realistic.