Where to draw the line between fantasy and reality in a story?
I realize this question may sound broad or vague, so allow me to explain.
I never knew much about combat or dealing with injuries until I started gathering research for a fantasy novel I'm planning to write, which will have a lot of action and fighting. Prior to obtaining my research, I thought that you could get hit in the head and fall unconscious for a few hours. I see it all the time in stories. Somebody sneaks up behind Joe while he's in the woods -- WHAM -- the next scene shows Joe waking up a few hours later tied to a chair in the villain's basement or something.
After doing some very basic reading on concussions, I learned that this situation is not realistic. In fact, when people are knocked out, they're usually knocked out for less than 30 seconds, a few minutes at most. Any more than that and they're dead.
It's not just this specific case. I learned that a lot of other events that are so frequently portrayed in fiction simply would never happen in real life... I never had a problem with it before, but now I am the writer. I am afraid that if I write a scene like the one with Joe above, people might criticize it for being unrealistic, even if I was writing a fantasy. So, in general, where is the line drawn between what's believable and what's too unbelievable (especially if I'm writing a fantasy)? How accurate is too accurate? Should I stray away from writing a flying scene because, realistically, my character would die from increasing in altitude too quickly?
This post was sourced from https://writers.stackexchange.com/q/20399. It is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.
2 answers
You are accessing this answer with a direct link, so it's being shown above all other answers regardless of its score. You can return to the normal view.
Terry Pratchett had a clever excuse for readers if something happened that went against the laws of physics. He'd simply say that the rules were different because the world was shaped like a disc instead of a sphere. But he only used that for the laws of physics. He didn't try to explain away every possible plot hole that way.
I think as long as you are consistent, there shouldn't be much problem. But if in every single chapter the readers are thinking, "Wait, how is this even possible?" The answer better be a little more in depth than, "Because magic! Anything can happen with magic!" You'll get away with that once or twice, but any more than that, then you're going to have serious difficulty holding things together.
I remember working on a MUD with a friend several years back. (basically an online game.). I told my friend that there were some serious flaws in the combat system. For instance, in the game, it was possible to stand in front of a monster who was fully aware of your presence, and backstab them with a hammer. He said that this was no problem at all, because the game was fantasy, and therefore anything was possible. I told him that may apply to wizards casting fireballs, but you can't backstab someone who knows you're there. If you're going to stab them in the back, you shouldn't be facing them because most people have their backs behind them. And you can't use a hammer to do all this, because you can't do any stabbing at all with a hammer.He disagreed, and then threw several hissy fits when several beta testers complained about the mechanics of backstab.
Anyway, you don't have to get every single detail on point. In fact, I read somewhere that in fantasy magic, if you get too detailed and try to make it too scientific, there will be readers who will pick your books apart because you didn't follow your own rules exactly. Apparently, Robert Jordan's biggest fans are the worst about it.
So long as most of the story is honest and has decent explanations that are mostly consistent, your readers will be willing to suspend disbelief over a few minor inaccuracies.
This post was sourced from https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/20439. It is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.
0 comment threads
If you're doing essentially the same thing as 90% of your genre (flying people achieve great heights immediately, people with superpowers never have issues with getting fuel for those powers, someone can be knocked unconscious for hours but be okay) because the "realistic" details are not the purpose of your story, then I think you're fine. If anything, your readers may be more surprised if you present the realistic version.
However, it depends what kind of story you're writing. If your entire point is to explore what it would really be like to fly or develop powers etc., then yes, by all means research the effect thoroughly and present the problems in all their gory detail.
I think that would be a valuable and fascinating story, because while many people know about getting the bends going underwater, or think about air pressure in a plane, nobody really thinks about the effect of that same air pressure if you could fly under your own (magical) power.
0 comment threads
0 comment threads