I want to add that magic is something that belongs to person and cannot be taken away. If a magician casts a light spell, it is HIS ability to make light. And he can do this in any situation at any place and time. It influences self-esteem. He can be proud of such ability. In reality, any stupid idiot can switch light on and off, but only in special places. Nothing depends on person, everything is defined by environment.
Also, in ‘magic’ world hero is not mortal; even if he dies, it means that he just looses body for some period of time. So you can do amazing experiments that are too risky in reality.
That’s why non-fantasy books, but in which hero has some personal abilities that cannot be taken away(and which can be trained or improved by other means), and in which reality forces hero to behave in risky manner, have same entertaining value as fantasy books do. And vice versa—fantasy books that have dragons and spells and so on, but in which hero is general and behaves as general commoner, and nothing depends on his abilities(quite general ones), are not worth reading.
I’m not sure that those words can be applied to everybody, may be they are valid only for persons who experienced lack of ability to influence something in childhood and have chosen avoidant pattern to deal with unpleasance of such experience.
(I hope my english is not bad enough to irritate you to death)
This sounds reasonable.
I want to add that magic is something that belongs to person and cannot be taken away. If a magician casts a light spell, it is HIS ability to make light. And he can do this in any situation at any place and time. It influences self-esteem. He can be proud of such ability. In reality, any stupid idiot can switch light on and off, but only in special places. Nothing depends on person, everything is defined by environment.
Also, in ‘magic’ world hero is not mortal; even if he dies, it means that he just looses body for some period of time. So you can do amazing experiments that are too risky in reality.
That’s why non-fantasy books, but in which hero has some personal abilities that cannot be taken away(and which can be trained or improved by other means), and in which reality forces hero to behave in risky manner, have same entertaining value as fantasy books do. And vice versa—fantasy books that have dragons and spells and so on, but in which hero is general and behaves as general commoner, and nothing depends on his abilities(quite general ones), are not worth reading.
I’m not sure that those words can be applied to everybody, may be they are valid only for persons who experienced lack of ability to influence something in childhood and have chosen avoidant pattern to deal with unpleasance of such experience. (I hope my english is not bad enough to irritate you to death)