I can't think of why I'd respond to this, not having seen the
original mail. But I've always been a huge fan of magical theory so why
not throw in my two cents. My duty as a Slayers otaku, after all.
PLEASE NOTE, that this was written with the intent of intelligent
discourse. Take as you will. Flames will be ignored, criticism welcomed.
Praise, of course, will be rewarded. ;)
>Lina
On Tue, 6 Oct 1998, Thomas R Jefferys wrote:
Ahem.
Everyone and their dog has their own hypothesis of how magic works, and not
all of them are compatable (indeed, almost none are completely compatable).
The problem with rigorous definition of what is by nature a plastic thing,
is that the definitions almost always lead to contradictions.
This may sound argumentative...but I think that you sort of
answered your own question right there. While I understand your desire to
put a scientific theory to magic (which has been the goal of the
oft-maligned "hermetic" sect in fiction since god only knows when) I think
even the most strict of "hermetics" would agree that a fundamental part of
magic itself is its inherent instability, and the fact that you can rarely
if ever really trust your senses at all. In short, expect to be talked in
circles a lot concerning magic. Like I just demonstrated, see? ;)
As a physics guy, I can usually see such contradictions in many magic
hypothesis, such that it's clear that the inventor did not spend much
effort exploring the consequences of his definition. The problem with the
Not always true. Magic is in and of itself a dirty science,
especially those schools of magic which deal with nature and
spiritualism...spells and ephemera of this type (to my exposure) tend to
be very "quick and dirty": it's not important to know why or how it
happened, just to know enough that it did. Although this isn't wonderful
pure science, a fireball by any other name still chars your behind quite
nicely. ;)
"virtual energy field" hypothesis of summoning is that it would lead to the
conclusion that summoning spells should be absolutely safe; any attempt of
the summoned creature to leave the energy field is thwarted by the fact
that the rules of manaphysics does not allow such a thing to happen. This
means that all stories of chaos caused by demons breaking out of their
summoning circles are bullshit. All such summonings are essentially
temporary bridges between worlds surrounded by a ward that prevents escape.
Possible but unlikely. I can't imagine the number of stories where
a summoning has gone horribly, horribly awry; the magic circle got stepped
over, the being is inherently more powerful than the pathetic magi who
summons it and either breaks the ward or possesses the magi or
whatever....there are plenty. This is a good video game magic schtick for
example, and as a Slayers canon example look at Aka-houshi Rezo in Slayers
TV: he thought he could control or defeat the consequences of his
summoning experiment and THAt went HORRIBLY wrong.
The notion of "sacrificing part of one's soul" sounds a bit unnerving to
me. What if you can't get to the apple to recover your little bit of soul?
What happens when this occurs once too often? Also, what about creatures
that supposedly have no soul, yet can work magic anyway, such as vampires?
Do these guys actually have a soul, can't work magic, or don't exist in the
first place? A hypothesis of magic that allows soulless creatures to work
magic cannot use soul-power to fuel it.
There is the somewhat problematic argument that while the
terminology states "a part of one's soul" the word one's does not directly
have to deal with the caster in question. the demon race Mazoku in
Slayers, for example, are considered beings of ultimate darkness...they
could be considered to be "soulless" in the tradtionalist or even
Judeo-Christian sense. They instead feed off the soul energy, aka
emotions, of humans and use that as food and power. In layman's terms,
even in pure science there is no theory that is 100% correct, and villains
of story and song are generally exeptions rather than rules.
Anyway, rigorously defined magic systems lead to contradictions unless they
are very carefully thought out. Also, such systems would inevidably lead to
conclusions that disallow some things from existing or happening. The way I
see it, if you're going to rigorously define magic, you'd better be
prepared to accept the consequences of your definition. If not, then you
might as well not have wasted the effort.
Fundamentally, I can't disagree with that statement. It is a
logical statement. But as I find myself constantly reminding MYSELF (as
well as others), there are some things to which logic simply cannot be
truly applied. Magic is by definition that which nature cannot allow, but
by the will of one being must be allowed. It is the exception, not the
rule...a mystery and a power to be either respected or feared. This is
part of the reason that long ago, in the days of D&D, it didn't pay to
tick off a mage unless you knew how powerful he was...because although he
studied science and method to learn his craft, you never really knew what
would happen next. Magic, especially "hermetic" magic (as you seem to be
implying most magical systems are), is like trying to tame chaos. No one
man could ever truly do it.
In a fan fiction sense (to make this relevant to the FFML ;), I
think people need to realize that there should be a balance between a
well-defined and concrete magical system for the world in which you plan
to explore, but also the fact that magic by it's very nature simply CANNOT
be rigid. I think watching so much Slayers has ingrained this in my head.
Take Sylpheel, for example...a powerful white mage. Should she be able to
cast the Dragu Slave? No. But she DOES. Because the plot demanded it,
really. Fate does things like that; throws kinks into even the best laid
plans. Makes exceptions to rules we believed were concrete. Sows
dissension in the scientific ranks.
In short, I think that I'd take a milder stance than Tom-kun seems
to. If you're going to define a magic system, great: it adds flavor to a
story and adds an element of immersion on the part of the author AND the
reader. But you SHOULD be conscious of what you've done, otherwise you
look like a hack. If your magic system is based on colors, for example,
don't switch it to days of the week 5 sections inward. However, on that
same token, you DO need to know when to bend the rules. Exactly how DID
that villain cast that spell? Where DID that hero find that last energy to
cast that spell, even if he (to coin an earlier phrase) couldn't reach the
apple with his soul in it? Heroes are exceptional; that's why we like them
and that's why they stick out and overcome adversity when others do not. I
think if you carefully and frugally use exceptions, explain them in the
context of the story's plo framework, and maintain consistency without
becoming bogged-down in details, then I think you can use a well-defined
magical system without "wasting the effort."
My $0.02.
Mine too. ;)
[*]===-----------------------------------------------------------------===[*]
"Wherever monsters rampage, I'll be there to take them down...wherever
treasure glitters, I'm there to claim it...whenever an opponent rises to
face me, victory shall be mine!" -Lina Inverse, Slayers TV Op.
[*]===-----------------------------------------------------------------===[*]
Todd Harper: lina@wwa.com, lina@maison-otaku.net
University of Wisconsin@Madtown and overall violent yet friendly guy =)
http://www.maison-otaku.net/~lina
The O-Files!: http://www.maison-otaku.net/~lina/ofiles
[*]===-----------------------------------------------------------------===[*]