Escaping Fiction

Caution: this post may contain spoilers in William Shakespeare’s The Tempest and Cornelia Funke’s Inkdeath.

If there is one thing I enjoy doing at the end of a long day, it is sitting down to read a good book. I would rather read than watch a movie or some television show. Although the latter are nice, I prefer something that will engage my mind and make me think. Of course, I enjoy reading for pleasure, sometimes to the point where it doesn’t feel like I’m working at all because I’m so engaged in the story. Sometimes, after a difficult day or when a book is well written, I wish I could escape into the story itself.

“Because by now Elinor had understood this, too: A longing for books was nothing compared with what you could feel for human beings. The books told you about that feeling. The books spoke of love, and it was wonderful to listen to them, but they were no substitute for love itself. They couldn't kiss her like Meggie, they couldn't hug her like Resa, they couldn't laugh like Mortimer. Poor books, poor Elinor.” –Cornelia Funke, Inkdeath

After all, what reader would not want to visit the lands of their favorite books? Who would not want to explore Middle Earth with the Fellowship? Or fly to Neverland with Peter Pan and Wendy? Or would readers? After all, many stories include great hardships, enemies, and even death. Why would readers willingly wish they could visit their favorite characters if readers knew they would suffer?

Me with my e-reader in Il Campo, Siena, Italy
Photo Credit: Lori Klein

This summer, my family and I visited several places where some of my favorite books are set. One such setting was Tuscany, the beautiful setting for Lisa Bergren’s The River of Time Series. Although we did not travel back in time to medieval Italy, visiting both Siena and Firenze made the books come alive. This made the books seem less like fiction and almost like reality. The same is true for other book settings I have visited.

If this were the case for other books, would it really be so exciting to visit a fictional setting if it became more like reality? I agree that it is exciting to visit such settings in our world. Nevertheless, I do not believe we would want all the stories or the characters to come to life. Cornelia Funke in her Inkheart trilogy, especially in Inkdeath, portrays the unfortunate circumstances of the relationship of readers and a book itself. Within the story, many of the characters learn that living within a book is far different and even more difficult than reading one.

In reality, readers may not want to go through the same hardships that beloved characters do. At the same time, readers still return to books, often times with a sense of longing for another story or another world. For our own world can be full of perils that readers may not want to experience, so they may turn to fiction. From a Christian perspective, readers may have a longing for heaven, for even Christ said His kingdom was not of this world (John 18:36). At the same time, literature, even utopian literature, can never contain perfect worlds.

As much enjoyment readers get out of their favorite books, they must also remember to treasure their own lives and relationships. After all, reading should be a reflection of life with all its hardships and joys. In the end of Shakespeare’s The Tempest, Prospero puts away his magical books to travel back to Milan with his daughter and other character. Ultimately, he puts more emphasis on people and relationships than his own power through books. Even readers should remember that their own lives and relationships are vitally important.

What are some reasons you read? Do you have any favorite story settings you would like to visit?

Literary references: J.R.R. Tolkien’s The Lord of the Rings trilogy, Lisa T. Bergren’s The River of Time series, Cornelia Funke’s Inkdeath, William Shakespeare’s The Tempest, and the Holy Bible.

The Best and Worst of Movie Adaptations

In an increasingly digitalized world, books decline while movies rise in popularity. Throughout the years, popular books are made into movies, and fans typically get excited. Until they see the film. Countless times have I heard people complain about movie adaptations of their favorite books. Many such movies leave out key scenes or add ones or—heaven forbid—change an important character.

A mixture of excitement and disappointment arises concerning movie adaptations. Even with good films, it seems that book fans always find something to complain about in the movie. So why should book fans even attend a movie adaption of their favorite books?

Some of the most accurate of such adaptations include The Lord of the Rings trilogy and The Hunger Games. Although these films could not capture every detail from the books, I would consider these good adaptions because they captured the stories’ essence. Of course, I have still heard people complain about these movies because the directors left out elements the audience deemed important.

On the other hand, some favorite books may have disappointing films. Despite the excitement over the Lord of the Rings trilogy, The Hobbit adaptations disappoints many fans because of all the changes and additions. Other movies that ruin major plot elements include Prince Caspian, The Voyage of the Dawn Treader, and Eragon.

Nevertheless, several movie adaptations succeed despite inaccuracy, such as How To Train Your Dragon (1 and 2) and The Three Musketeers. BBC’s Sherlock could be added to this list for plot reasons, but the characters are very accurate to the books.

Some devoted book fans often complain about movie adaptations, but other book fans may claim that the movie encourages more people to read the book. This is true to an extent, for not everybody reads. But I have read many different books because I learned about them from their film adaptations. This way, even non-readers may discuss certain stories—to an extent—with book fans.

However, much controversy and sometimes contradictions exist over movie adaptations of biblical stories. Why should people give so much allowance to such adaptations but complain about minor changes within fiction? Why should people enjoy Paramount Pictures’ Noah because it gets people to read the Bible but complain about The Hobbit because Legolas and Tauriel were not in the book? Why should adaptations of Bible stories be allowed creative license but not adaptations of popular fiction?

We, as an audience, should examine our priorities when it comes to critiquing movies. I am not against Scripture-based films because many of them may increase knowledge of biblical stories. Generally, I try not to be overly critical of films and just enjoy them for what they are, even though there are times when certain aspects irritate me. As a writer, it would be exciting to watch one of my stories turned into a movie.

Overall, movie adaptions are the interpretations of the directors. If readers do not like that, fine. Just read the book. Unless the author directs the movie, the book will almost always be better.

What stance do you take on movie adaptations? Is there a particular movie adaption of a book or a story that you enjoy/dislike?

Original literary references: J.R.R. Tolkien’s The Lord of the Rings, Suzanne Collins’ The Hunger Games, C.S. Lewis’ The Chronicles of Narnia, Christopher Paolini’s Eragon, Cressida Cowell’s How to Train Your Dragon, Alexander Dumas’ The Three Musketeers, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s Sherlock Holmes collection, and the Holy Bible.

The Likeable Villain

Most good stories need a good villain. Within society today, the villain is becoming increasingly humanized. No longer are villains a purely evil force working against the heroes. Instead, villains are characters with backstories, motivations, and other characteristics. 

 



The Black Knight at the Kaltenberger Ritterspiele
Photo Credit: Lori Klein

Recently, it seems increasingly that the villains, or rather the antagonists, may be a more admirable character than the protagonists themselves may. However, from a Christian standpoint, it seems wrong to like the antagonist. How can I reconcile my beliefs with my appreciation for a well-written antagonist?

 

Some examples of sympathetic antagonists include Loki from Thor, The Avengers, and Thor 2, Rumpelstiltskin from Once Upon a Time, and the phantom from Phantom of the Opera. I am certain that these characters may be debated as to their sympathetic qualities, but I find them to be likeable characters, even though they are villains.

 

Of course, not all villains have some tragic backstory. Many antagonists are great because they are characters readers like to hate. Some examples of these cruel villains are King Miraz from Prince Caspian, James Moriarty from Sherlock Holmes, and Letah Drahkôn from The Alliance Series.

 

As a writer, I may choose my favorite villains as models for my own. Yet, I have to be careful, for often times I may like a villain simply for his despicable nature. 

 

From the reader's perspective, I prefer the antagonists with redemptive quality, whether or not they really have an opportunity for change. Many recent writers seem to play on the audience's expectation of hope. Viewers and readers alike may hope for characters to act one way, but they act another.

 

I believe there is much to learn from antagonists, not just what not to do. Within my own life, I cannot play God, for people are capable of making their own decisions no matter how many ways I wish they would act.

 

However, I still struggle between liking villains and maintaining good character. As a Christian, I am called to think on things that are noble, pure, and virtuous (Philippians 4:8). Therefore, appreciating the antagonist may seem like indulging sin nature. While I may not strive to act like a villain, should I appreciate any of them at all?

 

What are your thoughts on antagonists? Do you have one or more whom you appreciate?

 

Literary References: Marvel’s The Avengers, ABC Studio’s Once Upon a Time, Gaston Leroux’s Phantom of the Opera, C.S. Lewis’ Prince Caspian from The Chronicles of Narnia, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s Sherlock Holmes collection, L. Nicodemus Lyons’ The Alliance Series, and the Holy Bible.