This is discussion archived from a time before the current discussion method was installed.
//Question — how are these distinguished from Sitcom that break the fourth wall or involve a considerable fantasy element ("My Mother The Car", "Mr. Ed", "Malcolm in the Middle")? - The Odosia
// Magic Realism doesn't involve breaking the fourth wall, like Malcolm in the Middle. Mr. Ed and My Mother the Car have one big fantastic element which forms the premise of the whole series, but don't involve anything fantastical beyond that one thing. Magic Realism usually involves many little fantastical things, but no one single fantastical element that constitutes a major part of the show. — Devil's Advocate
// This discussion seems to be about how to talk about a "Kafkaesque premise" without getting off into scary lit-jargon like ... "Kafkaesque premise". What is needed is snappy Wiki Word. The trope for [Malcolm in the Middle. Mr. Ed and My Mother the Car] clearly exists. — Gus
// "Magic Realism" is itself lit jargon, and an accepted genre of literature. Perhaps less scary than "Kafkaesque premise", but still. I don't think it's synonymous with "Kafkaesque premise", though. I agree that Malcolm in the Middle, Mr. Ed and My Mother the Car represent their own tropes, but I think MITM (breaking the fourth wall) is different from ME and MMTC (one fantastic element) — Devil's Advocate
// Malcolm in the Middle shares its fourth-wall-breaking withThe Many Loves of Dobie Gillis. Mr. Ed and My Mother the Car belong in the same category with Bewitched and I Dream of Genie.
// I agree. There are two sets: [The Many Loves of Dobie Gillis, Malcolm in the Middle] and [Mr. Ed, My Mother the Car, Bewitched,I Dream of Genie]. Respectively, No Fourth Wall and Like Kafka Only Funny might describe them. — Weremonkey Gus ''' A little clarity note: Magic Realism is distinct from the two sets I just gave.
//I like those two categories a lot. Like Kafka Only Funny should definitely be a sub-type of sitcom, but should No Fourth Wall be classed as one, since I'm thinking it might logically include "Ally Mc Beal" — The Odosia
//This morning I'm more inclined to classify No Fourth Wall as a sub-type of Magic Realism. There really are two subtypes, the Sitcom ("Malcolm In The Middle", "Dobey Gillis") and the Dra Medy ("Ally Mc Beal", "Scrubs The Series") — The Odosia
Darksasami: I guess this never got done. So, how about Kafka Comedy?
Gus: I don't think the case for "Kafka" as identifier for the trope is working for everybody. Parsing back, it seems like a label is wanted for series that specifically hand off a hugely unlikely premise as a done deal. The car talks, the furry alien cracks wise in the ordinary household, the wife is a witch... you get the picture.. I believe High Concept is a term generally in use for this.
Red Shoe: I'm concerned that the shades of difference between this thingy, Fantastic Comedy and Magical Realism (and maybe even No Fourth Wall) are getting pretty subtle. I'm not entrirely confident that I quite get the practical difference Kafka Komedy and Fantastic Comedy, and the only real difference I see between Magical Realism (as it applies here, which is somewhat different from its meaning as a literary genre) and Fantastic Comedy is that the former isn't per se funny.
Ununnilium: Perhaps Magical Concept?
Gus: erases an ill-conceived dissertaion on Magic Realism in favor of: What Ununnilium said. Some shows have a Magical Concept, other do not. Some of them are comedies, others ... not so much. This entry has, I think, always been about Magical Concept.
Ununnilium: But, see, I was thinking of things where there's one single "magical" thing. Mr. Ed, My Mother the Car, and so on. Magic Realism works for what it describes, but those two are more Magical Concept.
Tanto: Regarding proposed cut: No. This is a legitimate literary term that exists outside the wiki. Improve the entry if you must (although I personally don't see the problem; it looks fine to me), but don't just delete it.
Zeta: Seconded, it's fine as it is. The definition and examples are perfectly clear to me. It's a mostly realistic story with elements that are unusual and the audience is left to decide if the origins are best explained via magic or an unlikely set of events or coincidences.
C Trombley: As I noted in the forum, this is a real and useful term that we shouldn't drop because a couple people had trouble understanding it. The only thing that ought to be dropped is that stupid Take That! to Li-Fi folks, but it is occasionally misused like that. I guess I'll go clear that up. I tried to fix the page so to explain the difference more explicitly, and tone down the Take That!.
Washington213: If you're talking about my topic on the forum, iwasn't suggesting we cut this article by any means. I legitimately didn't get it, and only wanted explanation. Now, I understand it, and have fleshed out the article to aid others. Also, the Take That required both points of view. After all, if fantasy is being used, even if only partially, in literary fiction, that's pretty much the opposite of Sci Fi Ghetto, now isn't it?
- Max Chaplin: Not Really. It's true the idea of Magic Realism blurs the border between mainstream and speculative fiction, but the term is sometimes used as a "clean" surrogate to the dreaded pejorative "fantasy". That makes some writers embrace the idea and reject the name, like Pratchett (see quote below).
C Trombley: I took out the quote because it confused the article without being funny. Here it is if someone wants to argue for it back:
- Max Chaplin: The quote made more sense during the Latin American Boom
, when the term was coined in order to nail the then-unique style of Márquez and co. It addresses the vagueness of it's distinction from "straight" fantasy. Pratchett's argument that Magic Realism "is like a polite way of saying you write fantasy" is still relevant, but I wouldn't put it on the page because it undermines the term.
Elihu: This page is a mess. There are several "rule of thumb" sections that are really out of nowhere. Also several sentences seem to be just words strung together for half of their length. It's like numerous cuts have left a lengthy but muddle explanation.
Cambdoranononononono: I'm moving Love Hina to Mundane Fantastic. The characters might not express much surprise at the strange things that happen, but these elements are in the foreground, even if the plot doesn't revolve around them. In the particular episode in question, the magic was a central part of the plot.
