Share:
Spinners are always and everywhere - Tom Finn on fantasy and pseudo-medicine
Tom, you're a screenwriter, novelist, play and playwright. You also served as editor-in-chief of the Nautilus Magazine for Adventure & Fantasticism. In other words, you have worked through the technique and the craft of fiction. What should an author pay attention to captivate readers?
Above all, he should understand himself as a good narrator and good entertainer. This includes rekindling the reader's interest in every scene, every chapter.
The transitions between fantasy worlds and some therapeutic applications appear fluid. Possible connections between the preference for fantasy literature and the openness to such applications is discussed by the author Thomas Finn in an interview. (Image: captblack76 / fotolia.com) In a fantastically created setting, there are generally three ways to resolve it: Explained Supernatural, that is, a rational explanation in the end for supposedly supernatural. You choose that in "Dark Woods". After you have recited the German invasion of World War II, the Viking berserkers and the troll myths, you come to a rational end.
But a classic, fantastic story can also be left open. Neither reader nor protagonist knows in the end whether the big eyes at night in front of the window really belonged only to a cat, and the mysterious scratching begins again.
Or, the author chooses a fantastic development like you in Aquarius. Mermaids, unicorns or dragons really exist. What are you looking for, so that even a fantastic plot credible, so logical in itself?
First of all, both ways work. And for both ways you simply need a compelling idea, which fits in each case to the respective story. Think of Richard Crichton's Jurassic Park. The idea of drawing dino genes from the blood of prehistoric and amber-trapped mosquitoes is so cool that the method, in combination with the cloning technique, simply screamed for a good story - without it being too fantastic. The horror theme in "Dark Wood" was also inspired by good role models (which I will not reveal here) - just in the insect world. The leap to higher-developed organisms such as humans is made easy. In "Aquarius" I have mentioned, not without reason, the very real water monkey theory, which offers a possible explanation for sirens and mermaids in the here and now. Such incorporation makes a fantastic thriller more believable, at least in my view, as it draws history closer to reality. On top of that, a story will always be believable if you let your characters act credibly.
If you look for homeopathy fans, "alternative" vaccine critics, angel healers or diviners, you will often find Marion Zimmer Bradley or Harry Potter novels alongside the Heillehren novels. Why is that? Can not you differentiate fantasy from science??
Is that so? Maybe they just as well as atheists and scientifically thinking people, appreciate good stories? For example, as an agnostic and highly committed to science, I also count Harry Potter as an unconditional required reading. This is simply a good and believably constructed story in many ways, which is fun. You do not have to be a vaccine opponent or believe in the miracle activity of sugar globules to enjoy the fantastic. If I did that, I would have to reject the same logic PC Action Shooter just because you've seen exactly these games at home with many gunfighters. But with such explanatory patterns, you make it too easy. By the way: You will also find strawberry jam in the fridge at Impfgegnern. Does that mean that the enjoyment of strawberry jam is uncritical?
In the history of fantastic literature, there were writers who believed in their supernatural characters, such as Algernon Blackwood, as well as tough "artisans" who consciously used their "dark gods" to create horror, but not even ghosts or Demons believed, like HP Lovecraft. What about fantastic authors today??
Spinners and esotericists are probably always and everywhere. That one or the other of them is still writing, can not be prevented. Nobody from the colleagues I know really believes in ghosts and demons. They are usually very down to earth. On the contrary, the most successful representatives of my genre are busy actively tackling real 'demons,' for example, on the Twitter account of J.K. Read Rowling. The fact that fantasy is so popular as a narrative element is simply because it activates the subconscious in all of us - and that is very archaic. Because only because everyone tells you that no monsters lurk in the cellar, it does not mean that it could not exist. It can only tell those who have not been eaten.
Have you yourself gained experience with readers who seamlessly transitioned from fantasy reading to esotericism??
No, I do not know any personal ones. But that does not exclude that there are probably such readers. But then probably to the same degree as those very science-savvy readers who read the fantasy purely for pleasure. Incidentally, the strangest experience I had was at the 2004 Leipzig Book Fair. There, during a lecture in front of 100 people, the microphone was snatched from a group of devout Christians, who then delivered an admonitory speech aiming to make any fantastic literature a work of the devil. Since then, I tend to think that readers of fantasy - on the contrary - have a much greater level of abstraction than many others who take their fabulous stories from a book alone.
Is there a connection between the boom in esoteric "seminars", pseudo-medicine, etc., and the ever-increasing market for fantasy literature??
The passion for fantasy, even among the so-called cosplayers, who like to disguised at scene events like their favorite comic or film characters, are more akin to the passion for good food than to visit a church or a mosque. In between there is a subtle but very relevant difference. Whether there is a connection between the boom in esoteric seminars and the market of fantasy literature, I can not say. The first one would have to be proven, that is, whether there is a boom in esoteric seminars at all. Although I've also come across scene magazines offering such seminars - it just does not mean that they attract enough visitors for the operators to live off. So supply should not be confused with demand just because anyone believes that to be able to make the fast mark. In the same way, I could try to prove that, in parallel with the increased offer of esoteric seminars, the activities of the IS in Iraq / Syria became stronger, the sales of diesel vehicles decreased or the polar ice caps melted off more.
The boom of fantastic literature in Germany was mainly triggered by two mutually reinforcing effects: on the one hand by the good ten years lasting enthusiasm for the book series "Harry Potter, on the other hand by the simultaneous, spectacular film adaptation of the 'Lord of the Rings'. On the other hand, it is nothing new that many people - regardless of their taste in reading - seek a foothold in spirituality. But institutional religion in Germany has been on the decline for quite some time, leaving many with a spiritual gap. And this gap is filled by some people just that they are, as it were, their private beliefs together. A bit of Wikka here, a bit of Buddhism there - and Christianity, which has always tasted best. Finished.
In addition, many people are completely overwhelmed by today's flood of information. They simply can not tell facts apart from the so-called "alternative facts" (ie lies). The tendency to withdraw from comfort or overburdening to the simplest doctrines of salvation and thinking is therefore observable in many people. The success of the AfD explains itself as well as those who have the providers of esoteric seminars or Globuli. But whether these people even read just now, all times as thick books as they sometimes brings them fantasy, I dare to doubt clearly. After all, reading is demonstrably not one of her primary skills.
What are your criticisms of homeopathy?
Just everything. Homeopathy has been proven to be completely ineffective beyond the placebo effect, based on wholly nonsensical assumptions and is simply an insult to those who seek their intellect. The worst thing is that the health insurance funds - and thus also those who reject the nonsense - co-finance globules. And purely for competitive reasons. In 2014 alone, this will affect sales of 528 million euros in Germany. If homeopathic remedies were finally banished from the pharmacies and sold to where they actually belonged, namely the confectionery shelves, then the delusion would presumably disappear quickly. Because the mere fact that globules are currently only sold in pharmacies, ennobles the sugar globules unreasonably.
Serves fantastic literature of pure entertainment, or it can also be used therapeutically, for example in anxiety disorders?
Well, I do not exclude the latter. At least not, if it is a story with "feel-good factor". As well as any form of light and romantic stories. It is better not to forget that many fantasy stories of today's character are rather hard, dirty and bloody. So less "The Neverending Story" is much more "Game of Thrones" - and especially the latter is reading, which I would rather not recommend for anxiety disorders. In short: The fantasy as a narrative form is so complex that you can not just shuffle this genre over a comb. The readers appreciate the fantasy - by the way, as well as the science fiction - rather because it allows the creation of new worlds. H.G. Wells (including War of the Worlds, The Time Machine) and Gene Roddenberry (creators of Star Trek) are also fantastic writers, and it is these two that have inspired generations of scientists.
Do you separate fictitious literature strictly from reality or do you also use it to write critically about society in another context??
If the latter offers itself as part of a story, then I do. Lastly, at "Dark Wood", which incidentally beats the mischief of TV reality shows on the grain. From then on, I let myself be guided purely by the requirements of the respective story. Sometimes a critical approach fits in there, sometimes it just works - and then I leave it.
One critic writes: "Homeopathy is like uncle doctor games for adults - you get" real "medicines from" real "pharmacies with" real "sounding names (even though they are always the same sugar pills as in the game) and to play along you do not have to laboriously study medicine and memorize tons of rules of the game - no, everyone who believes in the game, may also play - and if he wants to invent his own rules of the game. Any evidence of the meaning of the devised game rules i.A. not required by the players - is allowed what pleases. "Can the belief in Globuli, and the use of" imaginative "means with a fantasy game compare?
You mean the so-called fantasy role-playing games, in which the players playfully take on the roles of private detectives, Jedi knights or elves? In this case, the answer is no. Because the rule corset of these games often includes several volumes - which precludes the arbitrary "invention" of new rules before. And these rules are not for self-examination, but for coping with narrative situations that could only be resolved arbitrarily narrative. For example, if the player figure manages to get a lock with a lockpick, if she manages to balance unmolested on the roof ridge, etc. ... People who believe here to be able to introduce their own rules are quickly isolated. Conversely, it becomes a shoe. Real medicine must - to call itself that - submit to a strict regimen that serves to prove that the method of therapy also works. In this respect, every remedy that works is real medicine. Those providers of funds who refuse or refuse this regula- tion - usually for very good reasons - call their methods "alternative medicine". It is the same principle as "alternative facts." They also have nothing to do with real facts - and they do not stand up to scrutiny.
Does a doctor or naturopath have the same right to create an imaginative story about the effects of sugar globules as a fictional author?
We live in a free society. Who should prevent that? Advertising in general lives from 'storytelling'. I do not have to like that, but as long as you can not prove that you are deliberately spreading real lies, I have to accept that. The problem is that, of course, a good shaman needs to develop decent bric-a-brac in order to awaken the patient's self-healing powers. Placebos work in a similar way. Perhaps it will be enough if the local manufacturers of homeopathic products, as in the USA, are forced to write down every single pack that the product is ineffective.
Some proponents of homeopathy claim that the globules at least do no harm. Is that correct?
No, that's not true, of course. Although the products themselves can only harm people with sugar intolerance in large quantities, the real danger they pose is different: that is, if they or those who prescribe or use them prevent patients in need of proper treatment becomes. We just recently had this with the case of the boy who died from a middle ear infection because his parents gave him globules instead of effective medication. However, homeopathic remedies also harm us others in two ways: on the one hand, they inflate the costs of all our health insurance contributions; on the other hand, the efforts of the homeopathic lobby undermine all scientific research. But if reason no longer directs our actions, where will this thinking then lead socially?
Interviewee:
Thomas Finn
Writer, play, theater and screenwriter