The work of the author (or DM), then, is to show the reader (or player) that the fantasy is, in fact, not fantasy at all, but a symbolic representation of reality. Now, that doesn't mean we need to beat folks over the head with heavy-handed moral lessons. Rather, the object is to stimulate the mind through the power of abstraction and imagination.
Consider the world of Richard Mitchell in his book The Gift of Fire:
The strange power that we call imagination is at once a form of thinking and a useful aid to more thinking. Imagination can be understood as at once a kind of intelligence and a kind of poetry, which we ordinarily think of as something not at all intellectual but "creative." A bad mistake. Poetry and intelligence have one tremendous power in common. Each is a way of discovering, and of revealing, that things very different from each other are also like each other, and that similar things are very different from each other. Metaphor is in the heart of each, some way of language that can treat a city seen at dawn in the distance as though it were a sleeping creature and a girl as though she were a rose.
It is mind that does such things, of course, and if that way of understanding is to be called creative, then we might better understand human "creativity" not as some unaccountable and maybe emotional urge within, but as thinking. As such, it is remarkably useful in the mind's work of knowing itself.
My mind to me, a kingdom is, says the poet. Well, that's nice. It is hardly one of the great, sonorous lines of mighty verse, but it does stay in the mind. And we can think about it, which might be better than "appreciating" it, whatever that might mean. It would be fun to have the poet here, to ask him some questions about his curious assertion, and even to consider whether or not he has gone a bit too far. Can it be that what he says is simply a truthful description of some might and majesty, or is he perhaps boasting a little about his independent, sensitive, poetic mind? And, an even more important question: Is he doing his proper duty as a poet, and casting light on some universal by example of the particular, or is he just "expressing himself"?
So, your mind is a kingdom, eh? What sort of a kingdom is it? Are the borders open or jealously guarded? Do the citizens rejoice in their king, his just laws, and his kind governance, or do they have to console themselves with the thought that someday they will get to die and escape all this? Are the king's officers arrogant or cordial in the execution of their duties? Do they take bribes?
And how about the politics of your little kingdom? Is there a perpetual feud going on between the conservatives and the liberals? Is the king himself the king of all, or is he the leader of one of the factions? Is he in secure possession of his throne, or is he beset by pretenders? Is there any danger of revolution? Which side would you be on?
As I look back on the world that I have been constructing, I sense that I have not done my poetic duty, casting light on the universal by example of the particular. My dealing with sexism or racism is an attempt to illustrate how the universal principle in our world applies in my world of fantasy. But the thing that should be happening is the freeing of the mind to wander, and to wonder:
What does the fantastical in this world symbolize? What does it say about the world? What does it say about me? And how can I better understand how it is with us humans by examining the implications of the symbolism?
2 comments:
In some way your post has brought me to question the kingdom of my own thoughts.
You made me have a talk about this with myself. Here's a transcript:
Why do you play these games?
- Roleplay. It lets me live another character, and see the world as someone other than myself. It lets me tell a story.. Everyone has a desire to be creative.
Why don't you just write, then?
- It is different. When writing, you create everything to suit yourself. Here, we have a cooperative effort. We are all creating a single story, and we can't control everything ourselves. There is a thrill in not being able to see as far into the future as you'd want. Besides, writing is much harder, as it all depends on you, and you never want to disappoint yourself. Here, you can simply play along with the cards you are dealt. All you need to understand is a single character,.. but that is still no small thing.
Why do you insist on realism in these games?
- It allows me to bring aspects of the real world to a game, where I can explore them freely. If the setting is realistic, a lot of the things I learn from the game can be applied to the real world. Furthermore, only a realistic setting can give certain things the respect they deserve. For example, it has always bothered me how killing another creature is a trivial action in all fantasy games. If I killed someone, I couldn't just shrug it off like a normal thing. There are many such examples.
Alright, then why fantasy at all?
- Could it be simply fun? High fantasy games, like WoW are designed purely for fun, and I dislike them because of it. But do I also need a dose of fantasy to make it a bit more casual and fun? Most likely, that is one of the reasons, but not The Reason. Then what is it? Is it some protest, desire to see the world different from what it is? Is it that the real world limits my imagination too much, that I need some more room to be creative? Still not it.. It is because a well chosen dose of fantastic in a setting can make a setting more like reality than a copy of reality can. Example: In reality, there is no such thing as an orc. In high fantasy settings, all orcs (except those controlled by the player) have no more than a couple defining traits and goals, which are almost universally classified as evil. In some rare cases, a game will show that from the orc perspective all humans are evil. Now, stereotypes exist in reality, and you need to have them in your game if you want it to be realistic. But what is wrong is making them true. In a well-dosed setting, every orc will be an individual. He could have a son he loves, a wife he cheats, a friend he would die for, or an ideology he would fight against. When you show your orcs like this, and then have them raid a caravan and slaughter everyone, your character might still see them as evil, but it should make -you- wonder what drove them to do it, and even would you do the same thing in a real situation analogous to this one. How many of your friends would? Now, the same can be achieved by using an Indian tribe instead of orcs, but when done with such fantasy elements, the idea behind it tends to be more abstract and more likely to stick in your mind. Finally, if it were Indians rather than orcs, it couldn't get the same emotion, as we all know (even if our characters don't) that Indians are humans like us and wouldn't act like that in reality.
Also, I have a bit of S&S lore that should expand on what we said here. I'll post it later.
Post a Comment