Joey’s answer to “Does anyone like that the author wrote the railroad as a physical, operating one? I felt it unnece…” > Likes and Comments
30 likes · Like
This is not magical realism first of all. Second it took a concept that does exist and a movement and took away from it when he wrote about it as a physical entity. You can't write historical fiction and then just invent preposterous things, just write magic realism then.
How is it not magical realism? It presents a primarily realistic view of the world with the added element of the fantastical. That's the very definition of magical realism.
And you CAN "just write historical fiction" any way you choose if you're not fettered by narrow definitions of genres that exist to market books. I don't think it took anything away from the real history of the underground railroad at all. It's not like Whitehead is presenting his story, steeped as it is Gulliver's Travels, as a literal history.
He did not use the railroad as a fantastical element he used it as it were real not magical or fantastic. And I just think it takes from the story because I feel there is a responsability when handling history and facts and certain topics like slavery to portray them in a realistic and not cliched way, which ia already a gigantic task in itself. And to me the physical railroad was just one of the biggest issues, I honestly felt Slavery and every character in this book to be a cliche and worst than that not original, I just felt the author watched Django and said hey maybe I'll write something like that. This again is my opinion and you're entitled to your own.
Part of what defines magical realism as separate from fantasy is that the fabulist elements are presented in a way that deflects from their magical nature, as if they're a normal part of the real world. The railroad here, I think, qualifies. I just re-read this book and came across this review, which the author quotes Madhu Dubey, who maintains that "“speculative fictions overtly situate themselves against history, suggesting that we can best comprehend the truth of slavery by abandoning historical modes of knowing." For me, this sums up why I thought The Underground Railroad was all the more powerful for its fantastical elements.
I'm reading through these comments and I am seeing that magical realism really resonates with some of us while it just cannot work for others. So.... to each their own.
back to top
date
newest »
newest »
message 1:
by
Maria
(new)
Oct 24, 2017 05:53PM
This is not magical realism first of all. Second it took a concept that does exist and a movement and took away from it when he wrote about it as a physical entity. You can't write historical fiction and then just invent preposterous things, just write magic realism then.
reply
|
flag
How is it not magical realism? It presents a primarily realistic view of the world with the added element of the fantastical. That's the very definition of magical realism. And you CAN "just write historical fiction" any way you choose if you're not fettered by narrow definitions of genres that exist to market books. I don't think it took anything away from the real history of the underground railroad at all. It's not like Whitehead is presenting his story, steeped as it is Gulliver's Travels, as a literal history.
He did not use the railroad as a fantastical element he used it as it were real not magical or fantastic. And I just think it takes from the story because I feel there is a responsability when handling history and facts and certain topics like slavery to portray them in a realistic and not cliched way, which ia already a gigantic task in itself. And to me the physical railroad was just one of the biggest issues, I honestly felt Slavery and every character in this book to be a cliche and worst than that not original, I just felt the author watched Django and said hey maybe I'll write something like that. This again is my opinion and you're entitled to your own.
Part of what defines magical realism as separate from fantasy is that the fabulist elements are presented in a way that deflects from their magical nature, as if they're a normal part of the real world. The railroad here, I think, qualifies. I just re-read this book and came across this review, which the author quotes Madhu Dubey, who maintains that "“speculative fictions overtly situate themselves against history, suggesting that we can best comprehend the truth of slavery by abandoning historical modes of knowing." For me, this sums up why I thought The Underground Railroad was all the more powerful for its fantastical elements.
I'm reading through these comments and I am seeing that magical realism really resonates with some of us while it just cannot work for others. So.... to each their own.
