magic
22 posts in this topic.
-
Read Terry Brooks voyage of the Jerle Shannara and you find a magic called the Wishsong. the wish song is just singing magic, wish for it sing for it and its yours.
-
I dont really try and set magic to some specific set of rules in my book. I leave it up to the caster to decide how they wish to invoke it.
-
I think magic can be a good thing, and if you want to use it, great. Personally, I would rather not use it in any of my writing, at least not right now. Reading Eragon really put me off the idea of having 'magic' in a novel, as Christopher Paolini uses magic in such a way that it makes you cringe. I can't really describe how he does it, but it just seems really cheesey. That's not to say I won't ever have magic in my writing, but... well, we'll see. It can work though, you just have to look at Harry Potter, and even LOTR to see a good writer using magic in a good way.
I think we need to know more about what your story is about before we can really help. Anyway, good luck, hope you get something sorted out!
Kaz -
People who can 'Sing" who have the power to influence the world with their voice. No words, Just the voice, with a correspondence between the tone, ect... and the effect.
-
I Like the idea of singing magic. It seems like something a real culture would develope, and realism is a key part in stories. After all, I doubt there is a single religion in the world that does not use song. Making it into magic is just one step further.
By the way -Dargquon Ql'deleodna wrote: Magic where your magic has to be channeled through objects (wands, staff, etc.) sucks, its really gay shitty magic.
I resent that. Largely. You say that like it's a rule. I think of it as a rare acceptation that it usually used by unprofessional writers. What about Gandalf? He uses a staff. What about Hermes, the Greek God? He had a wand! The list goes on and on. A new book by Rick Rioridan, (the guy who wrote Percy Jackson and the Olympians,) The Red Pyramid, uses both wands and staffs to great effect.
So, don't be snarky and put an ultimatum on all wand magic.
(And by the way, 'gay' is no longer a kosher word, in case you haven't noticed.) -
First, I have to apologize that this isn't exactly on topic--I'm gonna ask a question about my own work because it's a somewhat related question.
In my opinion, magic without limits is extremely annoying to read about--almost as if the author just decided there would be magic and there it was with no explanation whatsoever. This is true even in books I love, like Tamora Pierce's etc. etc. So. If you are going to put magic in at all, make there be a reason for/source of it.
Good examples:
Ersula K. LeGuinn's (Sp?) books
The Princess Academy (For younger kids and I don't remember the title, but it was surprisingly good and non-juvenile)
Now, my question:
Ok, so in my latest *story* (I refuse to call it a novel) magic is not commnplace. HOWEVER, there is one tribe of people, largely isolated (until the time of the story, of course), who have small telekinetic abilities as well as visions (not of the future, but of events taking place at that time somewhere else.
What I'm playing with now is the fact that those that have this ability all show the same symptoms as epileptics. My idea is to leave some room for interpretation as to whether these powers are *real* or just the way an outsider preceives a seizure, but I'm not sure I can pull it off.
Opinions? -
Kelcia, while justified, keep in mind that your comments are directed at a four year old post and that they may not hold the same relevance.
Having said that I think that it's interesting that people come into writing about how a lot of concepts interrelate.
Canislupus
I also despise magic without limits, mainly from the narrative perspective. How can you possibly justify a character failing if they have the ability ot fix every problem? You can't maintain a consistant character if they don't have limits that are narratively accessible.
Which kind of (but not really) leads me to your post. It will mainly depend on how you portray it. How much evidence will be portrayed to support the vision? Will they see things they wouldnt have been able to see in their lives and that their knowledge of cant be explained? If so, then you're going to have a hard time keeping this ambiguous. Same with telekinesis, how much evidence do you throw in, but far more importantly, how is it portrayed?
If you post it on YWS I'd love to review it in light of this question.
Henry James's Turn of the Screw is probably worth reading if you want to have a go at this kind of ambiguity. You can never be sure exactly what is going on, and the subjective nature of the narrative experience makes it unclear whether the main character is a hero or villain. When pulled off well it makes for great reading.
Sign in to reply to this topic.
Delete this post?
Are you sure you want to delete this post? This cannot be undone.