Fantasy Literature and the Twentieth-Century Mythological Revival
Trebicki, Grzegorz
Extrapolation
04-01-2013
Fantasy Literature and the Twentieth-Century Mythological Revival. Marek Oziewicz. One Earth, One
People: The Mythopoeic Fantasy Series of Ursula K. Le Guin, Lloyd Alexander, Madelaine L'Engle and
Orson Scott Card. Jefferson, NC: McFarland, 2008. 273 pp. ISBN 9780786431359. $35 pbk.
Reviewed by Grzegorz Trebicki
The significant presence of broadly understood mythic elements in contemporary fantasy is a literary
phenomenon that, probably, can no longer be reasonably questioned. The function of the motifs
connected with the tradition of various myths and rites or the use of ancient archetypes in particular
texts of fantasy fiction has also been analyzed on several occasions. By way of example, very interesting
discussions have been offered by J. M. Walker ("Rites of Passage Today: The Cultural Significance of A
Wizard of Earthsea"), P. Archell-Thomson ("Fairytale, Myth and Otherness in Andre Norton's Juvenile
Science Fiction"), T. Shippey (/. R. R. Tolkien: Author of the Century), and Ursula K. Le Guin herself ("Myth
and Archetype in Science Fiction"), to mention only a few. It seems, however, that a more comprehensive
exploration of the issue has been missing. Now this gap has been largely filled by Oziewicz's study.
The slightly misleading subtitle, The Mythopoeic Fantasy Series of Ursula K. Le Guin, Lloyd Alexander,
Madelaine L'Engle and Orson Scott Card, suggests it will focus primarily on textual analyses of mythic
elements in some of the most prominent twentieth-century fantasy works, but Oziewicz goes far beyond
that. In fact, his work is as much theoretical as analytical. He discusses contemporary critical standpoints
as well as relevant anthropological, psychological, and sociological issues, touching upon problems of
literary reception and contemporary culture in general; in short, he makes an ambitious attempt to
comprehensively explain the complex and sometimes confusing phenomenon that is mythopoeic fantasy.
As B. Attebery summarizes in his foreword, Oziewicz, apart from delivering us "careful and sympathetic
readings" on some of the most prominent texts of mythopoeic fantasy, "also leads well-planned side
expeditions into the philosophy of science, consciousness studies, literary theory, comparative religion
and American cultural history" (2).
The book falls into two principal parts, each of which comprise four chapters. The first one is mainly
theoretical, whereas the second, in the author's own words, is a demonstration of "how specific American
mythopoeic fantasy series [...] may be seen as exploring the components of a new mythology for a unified
humanity" (7).
The first chapter, "The Confusion over Fantasy and the Confusions of the Theoretical Era," is devoted to
contemporary fantasy criticism. Oziewicz makes several insightful observations here. For example, he
thinks it is essential to discriminate between fantasy as a worldview, a cognitive strategy, and a genre.
The failure to perceive this distinction is the main reason for the terminological confusion obscuring
fantasy scholarship. What Oziewicz suggests, elaborating on the theories of such scholars as Tolkien,
Rabkin, Hume, and Attebery, is that fantasy is not a genre proper, but rather a certain cognitive mode
that manifests itself in several literary forms; at the same time, "the term fantasy, when qualified by an
adjective and properly described, should be used as generic definition" (24). Thus Oziewicz arrives at
the more specific category of mythopoeic fantasy, which he believes to be the genre somewhat central to
and most fully expressive of the cognitive mode of fantasy inherent to human minds.
While the diagnosis of the present condition of fantasy criticism is generally accurate, some of the
Fantasy Genre
1
solutions proposed may seem controversial. From a strictly genealogical perspective (genealogy of
literature meant here as a systematic study of literary genres in historical context), the mythopoeic
fantasy appears to be more of a convenient critical construct than the true generic category Oziewicz
claims it to be. Moreover, when one adopts a broader view of contemporary "fantastic" literature in all its
formal, generic, and ideological richness and diversity, the central position of mythopoeic fantasy as
delineated by Oziewicz is, at the very least, questionable. These simplifications are partly excusable,
however, as they do not seem to obscure the central theme of the study.
The next facet of Oziewicz's argument occurs in the second half of Chapter 1 and the entirety of Chapter
2, "Reductionist and Holistic Criticisms in a Battle of Worldviews." He focuses on two kinds of fantasy
criticism: reductionist and holistic. Both approaches are ideologically informed, and "whereas the former
adopted as its allies relativism, biological determination, naturalism, behaviorism, Freudianism and
secularism and used them to examine fantasy, the latter aligned itself with [...] antireductionism,
essentialism and Jungian, religious and spiritual perspectives" (5). Oziewicz dismisses reductionist
criticism as mostly an inadequate tool for explaining contemporary fantasy since it fails to "account for
fantasy on its own terms" (5). The author's arguments are unobtrusive yet persuasive. In his search for
more convenient approaches, he elaborates in Chapter 3, "Mythopoeic Fantasy as a Modern Genre," on
the theories introduced by Tolkien and C. S. Lewis in order to propose his own definition of mythopoeic
fantasy. This genre is characterized by certain specific structural traits linking it with archaic myths and
rites, but it is also seen as "a literary search for a harmonious relationship between human beings,
between human beings and nature, and between humans and the absolute" (89).
Finally, in the last of the theoretical chapters, "Twentieth-Century Rehabilitation of Myth and the Search
for the New Story," Oziewicz places mythopoeic fantasy in a larger social, anthropological, and cultural
context. One of the main conclusions he draws from the first part of the discussion (and the leitmotif of
the whole study) is that the works of contemporary mythopoeic fantasy can be seen as a part of the
complex cultural process of the creation of "the new story" - a sort of modern mythology that unifies the
human race.
The four remaining chapters provide analytical material for the theories and concepts introduced earlier.
Fantasy cycles by four American writers illustrate various approaches to mythopoiesis, which, according
to Oziewicz, lies at the very core of each of those literary creations. Hence in "Rediscovering Harmony,"
Le Guin's Earthsea sequence is shown to focus on the ideas of balance and harmony, both individual and
collective. In "Bridging the Past with the Future," Alexander's "Prydain Chronicles" are described in
relation to a certain future-oriented vision of universal appeal proposed by this work and constructed on
the basis of traditional Welsh legends. In "Integrating Science and Spirituality," the dominant aim of
L'Engle's "Time Quartet" is revealed to be uniting scientific and religious paradigms. Finally, in
"Reconnecting with Nature," Card's "Tales of Alvin Maker" are perceived as an attempt to construct a new
American ecologically conscious mythology. Throughout most of his argument, Oziewicz, despite his
obvious involvement in and enthusiasm for the subject of his analyses, retains a tone that is sufficiently
scholarly and objective. The study also reveals impressive awareness of previous criticism in the field as
well as of contemporary anthropological, psychological, and cultural theory. The word "holistic"
(frequently used by Oziewicz) seems to describe his own work.
As with any other ambitious scholarly undertaking, One World, One People is not without its minor flaws
or controversies. Apart from certain "genological" simplifications, the selection of mythopoeic fantasy
texts may appear to some readers a bit arbitrary. Oziewicz's decision to focus on American fantasy
(excluding Tolkien's Middle Earth and Lewis's Narnia cycles) is perhaps disputable as well. His
acknowledgment of fantasy as a cognitive strategy that supposes a supernatural existence is somewhat
misleading and imprecise in the context of his own argument. The word "transcendental" might be better
Fantasy Genre
2
suited here than "supernatural," which, at least in some readers' minds, brings inescapable associations
with various "ghost stories". These and several other reservations do not undermine the overall status of
the book. One World, One People could be properly qualified as an essential position of modern fantasy
criticism. While the first, theoretical part will be of most interest to scholarly audiences, the second,
analytical part will attract a more popular readership.
Inevitably, if we do not share the author's ideological stance his vision of fantasy is not likely to appeal to
us, although even in this case we will have to appreciate the scope of his arguments and, perhaps,
acknowledge fantasy as an alternative yet self-coherent mode of dealing with reality. As Attebery
suggests in the foreword, fantasy literature focuses on "the expression of mythic worldview. Fantasy
writers and readers share this worldview, others do not" (i). However, if we do want to put in some effort
and try to understand the complex phenomenon of contemporary mythopoeic fantasy, Oziewicz's study
is probably the best place to start.
Byline: Trebicki, Grzegorz
Volume: 54
Number: 1
ISSN: 00145483
Publication Date: 04-01-2013
Page: 122
Section: Reviews of Books
Type: Periodical
Language: English
Copyright Liverpool University Press 2013
Grzegorz, T. (2013, April 01). Fantasy Literature and the Twentieth-Century
Mythological Revival. Extrapolation, (1), 122, Retrieved from
http://elibrary.bigchalk.com
Fantasy Genre
3