Magic explained is just science.
Comment on Anon gains a superpower
Jax@sh.itjust.works 1 day agoOne thing I’ve noticed is that the more answers you give, the less magic that ‘magic’ seems.
Stormlight Archives and the Cosmere are the best examples I can give of this. The magic systems that Sanderson has created are awesome, but the more you learn the more it becomes like science rather than magic. Not only does it become more like science, it becomes far more important to the actual narrative. Sanderson doesn’t capture the same kind of mystic, arcane nature that Tolkien’s magic does - and I think it’s entirely because we just don’t have answers about what magic actually is.
Not to say that Sanderson is a bad author, by any means - I love his work. Magic is cool because you don’t know how it works, though. Otherwise it’s just a power system/ platform for cool stuff happening. I’m all for it, but the former is the reason I can love and enjoy the latter.
GunValkyrie@lemmy.world 1 day ago
thebestaquaman@lemmy.world 1 day ago
Advanced technology is, to the uninitiated, indistinguishable from magic.
Some famous quote or something, can’t remember where I read it.
Seleni@lemmy.world 1 day ago
I agree. I think that’s why I like Kate Griffin’s Matthew Swift series (and the other novels she sets in the same ‘verse). The general rules of the magic system are explained, but the magic still feels wild and mysterious and… well, magical.
ThoGot@lemm.ee 1 day ago
That’s basically the difference between hard magic systems (Sanderson) and soft magic systems (Tolkien)
Jax@sh.itjust.works 13 hours ago
Why use many word when few word do trick?
(You’re right, and thank you — I just thought it was funny that all I said was boiled down to soft and hard, accurately)