Let these changes make you more holy and true
Talking with ![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
nineweaving about her upcoming panels at Boskone, I said that I hoped someone would talk about Lloyd Alexander's Prydain on "The Magic Goes Away," because the ending of The High King (1968) is one of the only times I don't hate that trope. She asked why and I textbricked:
It came up at the panel on existentialist Lloyd Alexander at Readercon: it works for me because Alexander ties the departure of magic not to nostalgia or the end of a golden age but to the idea of responsibility and reality, reckoning—it is not always painful—with the world as it is. Gone are the Sons of Don who only ever remained in Prydain to hold the line against Arawn, a counterweight of preternatural good against supernatural evil, and with the vanquishing of the latter, the former would unbalance the world if they stayed. Gone are the magical implements that would till a field or weave a tapestry without the touch of human hand, but they are replaced by the inestimable treasure of the secrets of craftsmanship that Arawn stole long ago from humanity, which Taran explains are all the more precious because, unlike the ownership of individual enchanted objects, they are accessible to everyone and can be endlessly shared. I hated for years that Eilonwy had to choose between enchantment and everything else she wanted from her life, but Fflewddur with his oft-invoked kinship to the House of Don doesn't even get the choice, even though the ultimate renunciation of magic was foreshadowed by his funny, heartbreaking, crucial sacrifice of his harp, finally making himself responsible for his own flaws instead of relying on enchantment to keep him from having to do the work of growing up. (He still gets the last word in spirit: "And, in time, only the bards knew the truth of it.") Even though the story opens in a world of oracular pigs and books of prophecy and enchanted swords and warrior zombies et cetera et cetera, its magic is not in the end stronger or stranger or more wondrous than people themselves. There's a pang at its loss, but it's not even that there's so much else left when it's gone, there's so much unfolding into the space it left. It's not easy, but it's the world. The world is all we have. We make it the best we can. I like that much better than Tolkien's idea—reflected in Boskone's wording—which I cannot but imagine was inflected by his Catholicism, of a Fall.
It matters so much to me, the world that we have. I hate living in a time when so many people would deny it in favor of a world that never was or a world they imagine will come. I see the environmental signs, "There Is No Planet B," but it's not only the planet. It's our lives.
nineweaving about her upcoming panels at Boskone, I said that I hoped someone would talk about Lloyd Alexander's Prydain on "The Magic Goes Away," because the ending of The High King (1968) is one of the only times I don't hate that trope. She asked why and I textbricked:It came up at the panel on existentialist Lloyd Alexander at Readercon: it works for me because Alexander ties the departure of magic not to nostalgia or the end of a golden age but to the idea of responsibility and reality, reckoning—it is not always painful—with the world as it is. Gone are the Sons of Don who only ever remained in Prydain to hold the line against Arawn, a counterweight of preternatural good against supernatural evil, and with the vanquishing of the latter, the former would unbalance the world if they stayed. Gone are the magical implements that would till a field or weave a tapestry without the touch of human hand, but they are replaced by the inestimable treasure of the secrets of craftsmanship that Arawn stole long ago from humanity, which Taran explains are all the more precious because, unlike the ownership of individual enchanted objects, they are accessible to everyone and can be endlessly shared. I hated for years that Eilonwy had to choose between enchantment and everything else she wanted from her life, but Fflewddur with his oft-invoked kinship to the House of Don doesn't even get the choice, even though the ultimate renunciation of magic was foreshadowed by his funny, heartbreaking, crucial sacrifice of his harp, finally making himself responsible for his own flaws instead of relying on enchantment to keep him from having to do the work of growing up. (He still gets the last word in spirit: "And, in time, only the bards knew the truth of it.") Even though the story opens in a world of oracular pigs and books of prophecy and enchanted swords and warrior zombies et cetera et cetera, its magic is not in the end stronger or stranger or more wondrous than people themselves. There's a pang at its loss, but it's not even that there's so much else left when it's gone, there's so much unfolding into the space it left. It's not easy, but it's the world. The world is all we have. We make it the best we can. I like that much better than Tolkien's idea—reflected in Boskone's wording—which I cannot but imagine was inflected by his Catholicism, of a Fall.
It matters so much to me, the world that we have. I hate living in a time when so many people would deny it in favor of a world that never was or a world they imagine will come. I see the environmental signs, "There Is No Planet B," but it's not only the planet. It's our lives.
no subject
no subject
That makes sense to me. I didn't make the portal fantasy connection, but I saw that she crossed boundaries and was not punished for it.
no subject
Very much looking forward to Boskone, and hope you all enjoy the 'thon!
no subject
Thank you. The Chronicles of Prydain were incalculably formative for me. I have thought about them a lot over the years.
Very much looking forward to Boskone, and hope you all enjoy the 'thon!
Much appreciated! Enjoy Boskone!
no subject
This is so, so beautiful. I think I'll just run off to weep into my tea, and then I'll share on Twitter.
And yes, you're right to tie it to there is no planet B. It matters so much to me, too.
no subject
*hugs*
It's all there in Alexander. That one unbreakable string.
no subject
no subject
YES the one unbreakable string. It's there even in fire.
no subject
The original version seemed to contain an unnecessary amount of Tiny Wittgenstein, who isn't even from this mythology.
It's there even in fire.
Yes.
no subject
no subject
I think you're right, and I would have been fine with that, too. Dammit.
no subject
THIS.
no subject
*hugs*
no subject
It didn't have to be this way. We could have made it work. Could save a few things still.
Nine
no subject
I prefer to think more in terms of saving than mourning. It is important not to discount the scope of catastrophe, but there is a great irresponsible danger in deciding that something is doomed when it isn't, yet. It relieves you of the pressure to fight for it.
no subject
And now i'm imagining eco-warriors for magic...
Nine
no subject
Someone has to keep the sun rising.
no subject
And some of what you talk about above are actually among the reasons why I ended up loving the Magicians books as much as I did. They resonated with me in a way I'm not sure they would have a decade or two ago, when I was both less jaded and less aware of how valuable the world is and how important it is to hold onto. The resonance was not quite in this exact way, but I really, really loved what those book ended up having to say about engaging with the magic worlds of childhood as an adult, and outgrowing them in order to move on with your adult life, but still keeping a conduit to childhood open. Sometimes it's more important to be the person who makes magic doorways for other children who need them.
no subject
Thank you. I second your re-read!
I remember having a conflicted relationship with them as a young teen; I remember being unsettled in a way I couldn't quite deal with. I think perhaps I wanted a more classic happy ending at the time. But for that very reason, I think I might like them much better now.
They were formative books of my childhood—I read them for the first time in first grade, meaning it took years for some of their facets to come into focus. (I read The Last Unicorn around the same time, which gave me a wonderful course in deconstructing high fantasy before I knew how it was even constructed.) I still pick up on new things every time I re-read or even think about them. I really think they hold up.
The resonance was not quite in this exact way, but I really, really loved what those book ended up having to say about engaging with the magic worlds of childhood as an adult, and outgrowing them in order to move on with your adult life, but still keeping a conduit to childhood open. Sometimes it's more important to be the person who makes magic doorways for other children who need them.
That's really nice. I can see the value of that.
Re: "No Planet B"
I see a connection here to fantasy role-playing games both in when they started, in the mid-1970s, and in the personal situations of many players.
Re: "No Planet B"
That sounds about right to me. I think it is necessary to have refuge. But that doesn't mean the world isn't still there, and the people who behave as though it isn't frighten me.
(I fortunately know a majority of gamers who are quite reality-connected, although if you mean that the concept became popular in a time of great instability, I would absolutely buy that.)
Re: "No Planet B"
https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap200214.html
no subject