this post was submitted on 10 Aug 2023
15 points (100.0% liked)
Fantasy General
300 readers
1 users here now
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I don't necessarily have a problem with the categories as the writer defines them here (though there is a lot of room to argue about some of this stuff, especially high vs epic) but that aside some of the examples given for each genre are poor representations.
Edit: The 1st Mistborn trilogy in Epic? Jurassic Park for Science Fantasy?!
I read it as High is more hero's journey, Epic is fate of the world. It kinda makes sense as a separate genre.
LotR, Mistborn Era1 and GoT are all multi viewpoint epics while the high fantasy ones are more about specific character journeys (in a magical world)? (have only read earthsea from that selection so can't be sure)
One of the main comments I hear for/from people going from Mistborn era 1 -> 2 is that 2 is less epic but has better characters etc. I would put era 1 under epic.
Also - why does this post say 7 comments but only have 2?
Mistborn for me is a sore thumb in your examples, it doesn't have anywhere near the level of intricacy in plot, nor the wide range of viewpoints, which I'd classify as Epic. Whereas I'd say the focus on it's magic system and fewer POVs make it a good fit for High as categorised by the writer (again I think that's a bit problematic anyway, but fair enough, it's not a bad distinction).