Interleaved below:
Dale Nelson Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Thanks for those suggestions, Sawfish.
>
> Further questions:
>
> 1.Are the following terms identical, or, if not,
> how do they differ from each other? -- weird
> fantasy, dark fantasy, supernatural horror
OK, let's consider the terms used in combination. I'll use the definition taken from a free online source that seems most germane to our discussion:
1) Weird - I'd want to emphasize the 2nd definition here.
2: of, relating to, or caused by witchcraft or the supernatural : MAGICAL
[
www.merriam-webster.com]
[NOTE" I may want to fine-tune this one...]
2) Dark (as in mood)
I'd use most of the 3rd definition:
a: arising from or showing evil traits or desires : EVIL
the dark powers that lead to war
b: DISMAL, GLOOMY
had a dark view of the future
d: relating to grim or depressing circumstances
[
www.merriam-webster.com]
3) Fantasy
I'd want to concentrate on 2b.
b: imaginative fiction featuring especially strange settings and grotesque characters
[
www.merriam-webster.com]
4) Supernatural
Much of the definition is related, but I'd suggest concentrating on 2a.
a: departing from what is usual or normal especially so as to appear to transcend the laws of nature
[
www.merriam-webster.com]
5) Horror
There are several definitions that may be useful here. Under the 1st definition:
a: painful and intense fear, dread, or dismay
b: intense aversion or repugnance
Under the 2nd:
a: the quality of inspiring horror : repulsive, horrible, or dismal quality or character
[
www.merriam-webster.com]
[NOTE: It may be useful to differentiate between "horror" and "terror".]
I'd have no objection to fine-tuning any of these, or perhaps substituting a mutually agreeable definition, but I think it will work best, moving forward, to have fairly concise definitions of key descriptive terms.
> 2.Do we agree that the definition of wf (or
> whatever other term we select) should be broad
> enough to include certain works aimed at young
> readers? I'm thinking here of some books by John
> Bellairs, such as The House with a Clock in Its
> Walls.
I'm fine with this idea, Dale.
Let's decide on the definitions and then tackle the rest of your post.
Does this sound OK, to you?
>
> I'm not quite comfortable with "supernatural
> horror" in that there's likely to be confusion
> when it comes to Lovecraft, at least. Because of
> his essay, he may be identified with "supernatural
> horror," but the development of his imagination,
> and some of his best stories, were away from the
> supernatural towards science fiction. Is there
> anything supernatural in "The Colour Out of
> Space," "The Shadow Over Innsmouth," At the
> Mountains of Madness, "The Whisperer in Darkness,"
> "The Shadow Out of Time," and perhaps others?
> Then there's William Sloan's To Walk the Night and
> The Edge of Running Water. In these novels the
> atmosphere is eerie and some plot elements suggest
> "the supernatural," but both are works of science
> fiction or science fantasy. I would like to
> suggest the term "Gothic science fiction" for
> these novels by Sloan and those Lovecraft stories,
> i.e. they are literary works emphasizing the
> evocation of an eerie atmosphere and uncanny
> suspense -- like the Gothic novels of Anne
> Radcliffe, I believe -- but while the strange
> things may remain only partially accounted for,
> the sense is that everything that happened is, in
> principle though probably not in fact, presumed to
> be explicable in rational, scientific terms.
>
> If we include Gothic science fiction within weird
> fantasy or dark fantasy, then our definition of
> the latter term will have to be broad enough to
> encompass stories that might not deal with "the
> supernatural."
>
> As a Christian, by the way, I also have a little
> discomfort with the word "supernatural" or at
> least with the way it's often used. This term
> suggests a dividing line on one side of which are
> "natural" things -- the "laws of nature," atoms,
> rocks, stars, plants, machines, human bodies,
> etc., and on the other side of which are, or may
> be, "supernatural" things -- miracles, spirits,
> angels, devils, God. The term has some usefulness
> if we are discussing things in which there is
> believed to be something present or going on that
> transcends the sensory, such as sacraments and
> (other) miracles, etc. But the real dividing line
> is between created things and the Creator.
>
>
> From Dec. 16 to Dec. 27 or so, I might not be
> contributing much here, btw.
--Sawfish
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The food at the new restaurant is awful, but at least the portions are large."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~