Jump to content

Talk:Magical realism

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Relation to Fantasy / Fantasy Portal

[edit]

I decided to remove the fantasy portal from the top of the page, which was added a few days ago. I don't think it's accurate to categorize magical realism as a sub-genre of fantasy, or to put that portal in such a prominent position in the article, when there is nothing else in the article that alludes to fantasy at all. Magical realism and fantasy are two genres that may share features, but evolved completely separately from each other, and are parts of completely different literary movements. If it is part of a larger literary movement, I think it would be much more accurate to say it way part of postcolonial literature or postmodern literature, but neither of these categories have a portal of their own.

I can see the logic in the relationship between the two - and have left the portal at the bottom of the page as it is. I hope this is ok! -- User:Daneditsarticles (talk) 16:53, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Lovely Bones

[edit]

Would the Lovely Bones count as an example of Magic Realism? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.141.117.5 (talk) 06:58, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Archived talk page and offer to help

[edit]

I've archived the talk page so it is easier to navigate this page (less scrolling, etc.). The students working on this article for WP:MRR should feel free to ask me any questions about researching and writing this article or editing on Wikipedia in general, as I am here to help. I look forward to seeing this article improve over the course of the semester! Awadewit (talk) 16:48, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bibliography

[edit]

Hey group! Just wondering if anyone has found some good sources for our wiki article?

Liz, were you able to get to Irving? Any luck? --Kayohk (talk) 00:01, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Long List

[edit]

So group! Here's the deal, once you have your articles/books picked out, edit this section and just add them into our list to create one final list in a simple fashion... Once you hit the edit button, just follow the formatting already existing in the page as you add the texts in. It's pretty straight forward I think. Only add new texts, we don't want any repeats. Hope that works! --Medge88 (talk) 05:09, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Books
Magical Realism. Theory, History, Community. Zamora and Faris
Varieties of Magic Realism Zlotchew
Magic Realism. Social context and discourse. Angulo
Comentarios filologicos sobre el realismo magico Camacho Delgado (Spanish text: ok or no?)
Catching Butterflies. Bringing magical realism to ground. Takolander
A Companion to Magical Realism Hart and Wen-chin
Uncertain Mirrors. Magical realisms in US ethnic literatures. Benito, Manzanas and Simal
Historia verdadera del realismo mágico Menton
Realismo mágico y lo real maravilloso : una cuestión de verosimilitud : espacio y actitud en cuatro novelas latinoamericanas Llarena Rosales
Magical Realism and the fantastic. Resolved versus unresolved antinomy. Chanady
Magic(al) Realism Bowers

"Ghosts, metaphor, and history in Toni Morrison's Beloved and Gabriel García Márquez's One hundred years of solitude" Author: Daniel Erickson —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ebenfc (talk • contribs) 17:38, 20 January 2010 (UTC) ART ORIENTED REFS[reply]
Mysterious and magical realism anthology: contains such artists as Marisol, Matta, Romulo Maccio, Dali, Fernando Botero, Enrique Castro
Magic realism - Argentine Artists anthology: ed. Marucco
Six Artists, Six Friends anthology: ed. Cozzolino
El cuerpo en la mirada Benjamin Dominguez
Magic and other realism anthology: ed. Munce
American realists and magic realists anthology: ed. Miller and Barr Jr.
Magic realist painting techniques Rudy de Reyna
The fantastic art of Vienna anthology: ed. Comini


Non-Latin focused magic realism: will we assess this at all?
Magical realism in West African fiction. Seeing with a third eye. Cooper
Magical realism in contemporary Chicano fiction Walter
Magic realism ed. Hancock (an anthology of Canadian short fiction in the magic realism style.)

Articles 

   * Recognizing Van Eyck: Magical Realism in Landscape Painting
   * Katherine Crawford Luber
   * Philadelphia Museum of Art Bulletin, Vol. 91, No. 386/387, Recognizing Van Eyck (Spring, 1998), pp. 7-23
   * Published by: Philadelphia Museum of Art
   * Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3795460

   * Magical Realism and Theatre of the Oppressed in Taiwan: Rectifying Unbalanced Realities with Chung Chiao's Assignment Theatre
   * Ron Smith
   * Asian Theatre Journal, Vol. 22, No. 1 (Spring, 2005), pp. 107-121
   * Published by: University of Hawai'i Press
   * Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4137078

   * Magical Strategies: The Supplement of Realism
   * Scott Simpkins
   * Twentieth Century Literature, Vol. 34, No. 2 (Summer, 1988), pp. 140-154
   * Published by: Hofstra University
   * Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/441074

   * Magical Realism in Spanish American Fiction
   * Angel Flores
   * Hispania, Vol. 38, No. 2 (May, 1955), pp. 187-192
   * Published by: American Association of Teachers of Spanish and Portuguese
   * Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/335812

   * Magical Realism and the Legacy of German Idealism
   * Christopher Warnes
   * The Modern Language Review, Vol. 101, No. 2 (Apr., 2006), pp. 488-498
   * Published by: Modern Humanities Research Association
   * Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20466796

   * Realismo Magico: True Realism with a Pinch of Magic
   * Lee A. Daniel
   * The South Central Bulletin, Vol. 42, No. 4, Studies by Members of SCMLA (Winter, 1982), pp. 129-130
   * Published by: The Johns Hopkins University Press on behalf of The South Central Modern Language Association
   * Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3188273

   * Magical Realism: "Arme Miraculeuse" for the African Novel?
   * Lydie Moudileno
   * Research in African Literatures, Vol. 37, No. 1, Textual Ownership in Francophone African Writing (Spring, 2006), pp. 28-41
   * Published by: Indiana University Press
   * Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3821116

   * The Dark Side of Magical Realism: Science, Oppression, and Apocalypse in One Hundred Years of Solitude
   * Brian Conniff
   * MFS Modern Fiction Studies, Vol. 36, No. 2 (1990), pp. 167-179

   * On Magic Realism in Film
   * Fredric Jameson
   * Critical Inquiry, Vol. 12, No. 2 (Winter, 1986), pp. 301-325
   * Published by: The University of Chicago Press
   * Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1343476

   * Magic Realism: Defining the Indefinite
   * Jeffrey Wechsler
   * Art Journal, Vol. 45, No. 4, The Visionary Impulse: An American Tendency (Winter, 1985), pp. 293-298
   * Published by: College Art Association
   * Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/776800

   * Realism without Magic
   * William H. Pritchard
   * The Hudson Review, Vol. 42, No. 3 (Autumn, 1989), pp. 484-492
   * Published by: The Hudson Review, Inc.
   * Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3850828

   * Julio Cortazar quotes on normal and abnormal movements: Magical realism or reality?
   * M. Merello
   * Movement Disorders, Vol. 21, No. 8 (2006), pp. 1062-1065

   * Writing the Vanishing Real: Hyperreality and Magical Realism
   * Eugene L. Arva
   * Journal of Narrative Theory, Vol. 38, No. 1 (2008), pp. 60-85

   * Magical Realism
   * Ann Kim and Nancy Pearl
   * Library Journal, Vol. 128, No. 5 (2003), pp. 140-149

Larodge (talk) 08:25, 20 January 2010 (UTC) Additional notes/questions/commentaries on source list[reply]

Several of these articles probably won't be used, like the German idealism one and the Taiwan theatre of the oppressed one. It all depends though on how we decide to organize the page. If we want to put little sections on supersubcategories of magic realism, these specialized articles/books (on Africa for example) could be used. What do you think? C U Larodge (talk) 21:59, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is a good start! Ideally, Wikipedia's articles are global and inclusive, which means they would include discussions of magical realism throughout history and across the whole world. However, that project is enormous. :) Would it help to narrow your focus to "Magical realism in Latin American literature", since that seems to be the focus of your course (am I right about that)? Perhaps we could even create a subarticle on that topic. Awadewit (talk) 02:31, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Added to "shortlist of more specific refs" --Kayohk (talk) 06:34, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Found something else

[edit]

I'm taking a creative writing course and, having just gotten an email about Wednesday's guest lecturer, I wiki'd him and his book Two Strand River is considered a classic piece of Canadian magic realism. The author is the head of UBC's crwr department: Keith Maillard. Maybe we should read this one... Larodge (talk) 22:39, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In addition

[edit]

What about... "A Companion to Magical Realism." Hart, Stephen M., Ouyang, Wen-chin. (quite in-depth)

or

"Realismo mágico y lo real maravilloso : una cuestión de verosimilitud : espacio y actitud en cuatro novelas latinoamericanas" Llarena Rosales, Alicia. (focuses on 4 Latin American novels in realismo magico style)

Or we could use, as an example of magical realism lit. "Pedro Páramo." Rulfo, Juan.

PS thanks liz for the list! --Kayohk (talk) 00:50, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re: everything said so far...

[edit]

Alright guys, I guess what we should address is how broad we're going to be? How do we want to go about defining magic realism? I am looking up books in Irving right now and am finding plenty, many with a specific focus on the Americas. I figure we are mostly responsible for providing a clear, blanket definition of magic realism across the board... Thoughts?

Sorry for not getting back to you earlier (esp. Liz), for some reason I didn't check our actual group page but instead just checked my own talk page. --Medge88 (talk) 01:11, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

BOOKS •Hart, Stephen, and Wen-chin Ouyang. A Companion to Magical Realism. Tamesis Books, 2005. Print.

•Zamora, Lois, and Wendy Faris. Magical realism: Theory, History, Community. Duke Univ Pr, 1995. Print.

•Menton, Seymour. Historia verdadera del realismo mágico. Fondo De Cultura Economica USA, 1998. Print.


ARTICLES •Eugene L. Arva. "Writing the Vanishing Real: Hyperreality and Magical Realism." Journal of Narrative Theory 38.1 (2008): 60-85. Project MUSE. [Library name], [City], [State abbreviation]. 28 Dec. 2009 <http://muse.jhu.edu/>. ***

•Moudielno, Lydie. "Magical Realism "Arme miraculeuse" for the African Novel? ." Research on African Literatures 37.1 (2006): 28-41. Web. 19 Jan 2010.

•Brian Conniff. "The Dark Side of Magical Realism: Science, Oppression, and Apocalypse in One Hundred Years of Solitude." MFS Modern Fiction Studies 36.2 (1990): 167-179. Project MUSE. [Library name], [City], [State abbreviation]. 28 Dec. 2009 <http://muse.jhu.edu/>.

•Simpkins , Scott. "Magical Strategies: The Supplement of Realism." Twentieth Century Literature 34.2 (1988): 140-155. Web. 19 Jan 2010. ***

•Merello, M. "Julio Cortazar quotes on normal and abnormal movements: Magical realism or reality?." Movement Disorders 21.8 (2006): 1062-1065. Web. 19 Jan 2010. ****

•Kim, Ann, and Nancy Pearl. "Magical Realism." Library Journal 128.5 (2003): 140-149. Web. 19 Jan 2010.

•Kim, Ann, and Nancy Pearl. "Magical Realism." Library Journal 128.5 (2003): 140-149. Web. 19 Jan 2010.****


IN ART: •Wechsler, Jeffrey. "Magic Realism: Defining the Indefinite." Art Journal 45.4 (1985): 293-298. Web. 19 Jan 2010.

I have no idea why this hasn't posted on the page the last two times I've tried, so I apologize if you get it three times. These are the sources I've come up with. Let me know what you think. Do we have to turn in a hard copy as a group tomorrow of our long and short lists? Thanks, --Medge88 (talk) 02:22, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

To organize

[edit]

Everything on the page is suspect to revision. We need to read through it carefully and try to ascertain which parts are most necessary, which dispensable, which are non-existent. It seems to me that the page was last edited too...particularly. I feel a kind of 'essay on magic realism' vibe throughout. I don't really like how the list of references is so long and detailed, though that may be what we are required to do. I want to add a music section. The art section needs to be amplified.

My big question to all of us group members is how much should we delve into the works themselves? Is this a critical or a content-based page? I think jb mentioned somewhere/sometime that there is a page dedicated to works of magic realism, but as of yet I have not found it. When jb refers to books (vs articles) that we must collect, are those supposed to be fictional books? So far, I only have non-fictional everything.

I recommend to scour the discussion page which has now been ARCHIVED (towards top right of page). It is a fountain of tips/comments for how we're going to go about editing this page.

I'm at IK Barbsy right now and will try to take out a bunch of books pertaining to art and magic realism. Hopefully this works out.

Larodge (talk) 02:43, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that it's all subject to revision. This is an opinion, not a genre of literature. 72.177.123.145 (talk) 04:10, 13 August 2013 (UTC)Eric[reply]

K...

[edit]

By the end of tonight, probably around 10pm, I'm going to come back on here and compile a complete list of our references. I will skim my list down and hopefully y'allz (other than Medge!) can bulk yours up by then. We need to meet and look at all the books in question together to decide on things; virtual decision-making is extremely limited, IMO. Larodge (talk) 02:48, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thoughts

[edit]

I feel like currently the article doesn't really give a good description of WHAT magical realism is. It's sort of wishy-washy and vague. The article also just lists examples of works of magical realism in literature, art, and film but doesn't explain in depth why these works are categorized as magical realism.

Should we go into more depth on magical realism in film? Or take that part out and focus on music instead?

Another thought: Say we focus on lit., art and music, we could provide an example for each and describe it in-depth? Or should our main focus just be on defining magical realism? I guess this will dictate what sort of sources we keep in our short-list... --Kayohk (talk) 04:48, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree entirely that the article, especially the opening paragraphs, are much too vague in defining magical realism. The term is mentioned numerous times without actually providing a sourced definition. 69.157.244.220 (talk) 03:10, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I agree about the wishy-washy. It's not a particularly good article, as the rating indicates. And regarding what works to do, I feel like there needs to be a balance between content and commentary...somehow. An article comprised entirely of commentary doesn't sound very appealing to me. Conversely, I don't have the time to read a couple of novels that highlight the style, plus critical essays. I think this is where organization amongst group members comes in, because the page should be balanced between these two types of content. Maybe one or two members can be responsible for reading fictional works and the rest critical? Or each member be assigned a split between the two? No se..
Personally, I like the idea of having sections on art, music and film; they're totally relevant! There's basically nothing there as it is, apart from very wordy stuff on visual art, so as long as we add good information from credible sources, I don't see any harm; it won't do anything but enrich the page, even if we only do a small bit on each segment. Obviously, we're in a lit class, so lit should be our main concern. --Larodge (talk) 07:07, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

I definitely think we should meet as a group (in person!) to figure out how we're going to organize everything & split up the work/reading. And I'm totally in favour of including sections on art, music & film as well. Without it, it looks like the term can only be applied to literature, which is not the case. --Kayohk (talk) 07:22, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

& More...

[edit]

In terms of literature, I think we should focus on Latin America. This will help us narrow down our sources. Any ideas on how we should go about creating our shortlist?--Kayohk (talk) 06:37, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I AGREE
I think this would be a wise decision: focus the page on Latin American roots. However, I think we should have a subsection on international spread of the style. Nothing big, but it needs to be there; otherwise Wiki magic realism only belongs to Latinos and it's far spread out of there by now. Agree/disagree? With regard to the ref lists, I'm going to list everything I've got with whatever everyone else has put on the page, then cut it down into a short list (only adjusting my sources). Ok? --Larodge (talk) 07:14, 20 January 2010 (UTC)


Possible Short list for Novels

[edit]

I agree with including a brief subsection on international spread.

About the short list, sounds good! I wasn't sure what to do about the articles, but for books, I thought we should use:

Magical Realism. Theory, History, Community. Zamora and Faris Magic Realism. Social context and discourse. Angulo "A Companion to Magical Realism." Stephen Hart and Ouyang Wen-chin Catching Butterflies. Bringing magical realism to ground. Takolander (maybe?)

Will wait to see what you've got.--Kayohk (talk) 07:25, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Hey I'm just checking in to see where our progress is at... I agree that we should focus on magic realism in Latin America seeing that it is relevant to the class and it's a huge subject that can be looked at from many angles. Let me know if there's anything specific that I should do before class for tomorrow, and I'll try and check back, otherwise I'll see you then! --Medge88 (talk) 08:01, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Hey, As far as a couple books that would be good I;ve found the following, note that I haven't included the biobliographic reference, merely the title for our group reference to go search for later:

- Ghosts, metaphor, and history in Toni Morrison's Beloved and Gabriel García Márquez's One hundred years of solitude Author: Daniel Erickson

This particular one is a comparison of 100 years of Solitude with a great book by the American writer Toni Morrison. This could be good for giving a sense of contrast between different styles of magical realism, or it could be good to show how magical realism is present in various cultures. However, we've just decided to focus on MR in LA,therefore it may only serve as a brief citation of the prevalence of MR in other texts and hopefully a good persepective on a classic example of latin american MR.

--Ebenfc (talk) 19:35, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

RE: long list & making a short list

[edit]

Thanks for compiling everything Liz. Personally, I think since we're only allowed a handful of novels, we should choose novels that focus on the concept of magical realism and in defining it. For our articles, we can be more specific and include ones that cover magical realism in different arenas (art, music, film) as well as different parts of the world. What do you all think? --Kayohk (talk) 07:59, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Short List

[edit]

Here is the paraphrased version of the long list. If new sources need to be added, they should probably go here (probably will get checked more often than the long list). However they should be demarcated so they stand-out against the rest of the already agreed-on sources, so we know there's new material to assess. Right? :),.

Books
Magical Realism. Theory, History, Community. Zamora and Faris
Varieties of Magic Realism Zlotchew
Magic Realism. Social context and discourse. Angulo
Catching Butterflies. Bringing magical realism to ground. Takolander
A Companion to Magical Realism. Hart and Wen-chin
Historia verdadera del realismo mágico Menton
Realismo mágico y lo real maravilloso : una cuestión de verosimilitud : espacio y actitud en cuatro novelas latinoamericanas Llarena Rosales
Magic realism and Canadian literature anthology of stories AND critical essays
Magic(al) Realism Bowers

'''Ghosts, metaphor, and history in Toni Morrison's Beloved and Gabriel Garcia Marquez's One Hundred Years of Solitude Erickson

ART ORIENTED REFS
Mysterious and magical realism anthology: contains such artists as Marisol, Matta, Romulo Maccio, Dali, Fernando Botero, Enrique Castro
Magic realism - Argentine Artists anthology: ed. Marucco
Six Artists, Six Friends anthology: ed. Cozzolino
El cuerpo en la mirada Benjamin Dominguez
Magic and other realism anthology: ed. Munce
American realists and magic realists anthology: ed. Miller and Barr Jr.

(Last two on American artists but SUCH good sources!)



These texts are not immediately connected to Latin American magic realism. They may be used for a subarticle, but are not of utmost importance.
Magical realism in West African fiction. Seeing with a third eye. Cooper
Magical realism in contemporary Chicano fiction Walter
Uncertain Mirrors. Magical realisms in US ethnic literatures. Benito, Manzanas and Simal
Magic realism anthology of Can. short stories


Articles 

   * Magical Strategies: The Supplement of Realism
   * Scott Simpkins
   * Twentieth Century Literature, Vol. 34, No. 2 (Summer, 1988), pp. 140-154
   * Published by: Hofstra University
   * Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/441074

   * Magical Realism in Spanish American Fiction
   * Angel Flores
   * Hispania, Vol. 38, No. 2 (May, 1955), pp. 187-192
   * Published by: American Association of Teachers of Spanish and Portuguese
   * Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/335812

   * Realismo Magico: True Realism with a Pinch of Magic
   * Lee A. Daniel
   * The South Central Bulletin, Vol. 42, No. 4, Studies by Members of SCMLA (Winter, 1982), pp. 129-130
   * Published by: The Johns Hopkins University Press on behalf of The South Central Modern Language Association
   * Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3188273

   * The Dark Side of Magical Realism: Science, Oppression, and Apocalypse in One Hundred Years of Solitude
   * Brian Conniff
   * MFS Modern Fiction Studies, Vol. 36, No. 2 (1990), pp. 167-179

   * On Magic Realism in Film
   * Fredric Jameson
   * Critical Inquiry, Vol. 12, No. 2 (Winter, 1986), pp. 301-325
   * Published by: The University of Chicago Press
   * Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1343476

   * Magic Realism: Defining the Indefinite
   * Jeffrey Wechsler
   * Art Journal, Vol. 45, No. 4, The Visionary Impulse: An American Tendency (Winter, 1985), pp. 293-298
   * Published by: College Art Association
   * Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/776800

   * Realism without Magic
   * William H. Pritchard
   * The Hudson Review, Vol. 42, No. 3 (Autumn, 1989), pp. 484-492
   * Published by: The Hudson Review, Inc.
   * Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3850828

   * Julio Cortazar quotes on normal and abnormal movements: Magical realism or reality?
   * M. Merello
   * Movement Disorders, Vol. 21, No. 8 (2006), pp. 1062-1065

   * Writing the Vanishing Real: Hyperreality and Magical Realism
   * Eugene L. Arva
   * Journal of Narrative Theory, Vol. 38, No. 1 (2008), pp. 60-85

   * Magical Realism
   * Ann Kim and Nancy Pearl
   * Library Journal, Vol. 128, No. 5 (2003), pp. 140-149

   * Recognizing Van Eyck: Magical Realism in Landscape Painting
   * Katherine Crawford Luber
   * Philadelphia Museum of Art Bulletin, Vol. 91, No. 386/387, Recognizing Van Eyck (Spring, 1998), pp. 7-23
   * Published by: Philadelphia Museum of Art
   * Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3795460



These texts are not immediately connected to Latin American magic realism. They may be used for a subarticle, but are not of utmost importance.

   * Magical Realism and Theatre of the Oppressed in Taiwan: Rectifying Unbalanced Realities with Chung Chiao's Assignment Theatre
   * Ron Smith
   * Asian Theatre Journal, Vol. 22, No. 1 (Spring, 2005), pp. 107-121
   * Published by: University of Hawai'i Press
   * Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4137078

   * Magical Realism: "Arme Miraculeuse" for the African Novel?
   * Lydie Moudileno
   * Research in African Literatures, Vol. 37, No. 1, Textual Ownership in Francophone African Writing (Spring, 2006), pp. 28-41
   * Published by: Indiana University Press
   * Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3821116

   * Magical Realism and the Legacy of German Idealism
   * Christopher Warnes
   * The Modern Language Review, Vol. 101, No. 2 (Apr., 2006), pp. 488-498
   * Published by: Modern Humanities Research Association
   * Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20466796

We have SO FAR decided to maintain interest in how magic realism plays a part in art, film and music. However we are open to comment/criticism on this decision, and welcome it. :) --Larodge (talk) 08:04, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Great! So, for our short list (2-4 novels, 6-24 articles) I propose we keep all the articles listed, and focus on the bolded novels. Let me know if you think I've left out a very vitally important novel to the topic of magical realism. If anyone has any other ideas, please throw them out there! --Kayohk (talk) 08:17, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Oh crap. I totally edited out your bolds, in a frenzy of neurotic editing. I'm so sorry! Can you remember which ones you picked out? I know they were at the top of the list... The thing is that the books aren't really novels; in fact they're mostly collections of articles or essays, rather. I haven't looked at them carefully enough to know which are more important/viable than which others (except the first: jb says so, so it's got to be ;)hehe). I want to look at them a bit more before throwing them off the list; this was just such a rushed compiling, I didn't really have the time for it earlier. Anyhow, I don't know if you looked after or before, but I added a bunch of books for the art section. If we're doing that, these'll be great. Sorry about the edit scrape: that was wicked, I'll try to stop doing that... --Larodge (talk) 08:41, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

No Problem! I've re-bolded them. I think it's okay if they're not really novels, as long as they're credible sources that cover the topic, IMO. But of course, if you feel something should be included instead, by all means! --Kayohk (talk) 16:18, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

As we discussed in class, it would benefit both our project as well as the wikipedia page to focus on Magical Realism within the realm of Latin American literature. I think that maintaining focus on a particular aspect of MR will result in a thorough contribution to a page which needs help. I think that along the way we may, and hopefully will, come across information that will lead us to edit the definition of MR on the current page and that given our focused topic, we'll be able to provide a critical addition. I also think that we may want to briefly note how MR in LA compares and contrasts with literature from North America or Africa, etc. This would give a good prespective of how LA literature fits in with other variations, while still maintaining focus on MR within literature. So far, I like what we have so far and am satisfied with our short list, though we'll need to begin looking into these books to see if they're really what we think they are and if they can give us what we need. I also think we should devise a way to break up the work load amongst us. Any thoughts?

--Ebenfc (talk) 19:50, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So thus far, everything looks really good and I think we all have a good grasp on what we need to be doing... (Jon seems to think it looks ok, too, so that's always a good sign!) I figure at this point should we divide everything up amongst ourselves? I really am up for anything, I can take the top 6 articles (maybe with the exception of the film article), so it would include: Magical Strategies: The Supplement of Realism, Magical Realism in Spanish American Fiction, Realismo Magico: True Realism with a Pinch of Magic, The Dark Side of Magical Realism: Science, Oppression, and Apocalypse in One Hundred Years of Solitude, Magic Realism: Defining the Indefinite, Realism without Magic. Is that okay to start? --Medge88 (talk) 01:07, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Sounds good! I wouldn't mind taking one of the books. Maybe "Magic realism: social context and discourse". Not sure how long it is, but if need be I could read an article or two as well. I'm not picky. --Kayohk (talk) 04:30, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with everything y'all've said; I think we're all on the same page (;)wink wink!!! right?!?!). ANYHOW. About dividing the books. Some books pertain more to different authors' connections to magic realism...so if we were to do particular subsections on say..Borges or Garcia Marquez, these would be useful: Varieties of Magic Realism is an example. Others, like the ones in bold, deal more with the definition/history/most important stuff. These are definitely our main material.
Meg, I think your doing the 6 articles sounds good. However, should we be already directing out readings toward what the subsections will deal with? I think we ought to ask this on Friday... Larodge (talk) 07:28, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey guys, don't know if anyone else has checked this lately in search of some signs of progress. I'm starting on those articles now...how is everything else coming along? Any more thoughts on the structure of the page? --Medge88 (talk) 04:13, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have yet to start reading; the class readings have absorbed too much of my time. I'm planning to begin this weekend, realistically. :| Larodge (talk) 07:11, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I too have yet to start reading, though we had planned to discuss readings in class today, but it was cancelled, obviously. I can´t realistically say how much I could get done this weekend, seeing as it has taken me a while to finish a third of El Reino de este mundo and I still have the rest to do. Also, we discussed distributing books on Friday, though alas, it didnt happen. If you guys want, to get together this weekend and discuss and or distribute books I am available Sunday. I´ll periodically check up on this posting to see if anyone is up for it. Ciao. --Ebenfc (talk) 01:57, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please try to thread discussions using indenting. It makes it easier for others to follow. You can do this by adding colons in front of your comments or asterisks. Awadewit (talk) 08:41, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, so hopefully this works with the indent. I just wanted to make mention of the fact that a couple of the articles I chose weren't that helpful, and so I am going to include "Writing the vanishing real..." by Arva in my list of articles instead of "The Dark Side of Magical Realism...". Hope that works! Please let me know if it doesn't as I'm trying to get my part of the assignment done by tomorrow. Thanks, --Medge88 (talk) 00:27, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats and scope

[edit]

OK, you guys are really getting off to a good start here: not only have you been compiling your bibliography but you have also started thinking hard about what the article should look like, what it should include, and so on.

As I said to you today, these are my thoughts:

The term "magic(al) realism" is primarily associated with a group of Latin American writers, mostly in the 1960s to 1980s, although it was used earlier (to characterize some European visual artists) and has been used since (often to describe many more or less "postcolonial" writers especially from the Indian subcontinent) and in other fields (film, for instance).

Unfortunately (I think), the rather peripheral and even tenuous applications of term get too much space in this article at present. To take but one example, I think that the stuff on Woody Allen can be cut immediately.

In my view it is right that this article should mostly be on the use of this term in the discussion of Latin American literature. This means that there might be subsections on (for instance) the origin of the term and its use elsewhere and in other fields. But you should not feel the need to do extensive research beyond the bounds of Latin American literature.

Now it is possible that someone (some other Wikipedia editor) may disagree with this view, however sensible and defensible it is. If that were to happen, then the solution is quite simple: we could split off part of the article and rename it (something like) "Magic realism in Latin American fiction."

But for the moment let's not worry about that: our focus is on magic realism in Latin American fiction, whether that is said explicitly or not.

Good luck and again, well done for the good start. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 22:49, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that the editors should focus on Magic realism in Latin American literature, as that is already a large topic and the focus of the class they are taking (I indicated as much above). However, I'm not quite sure that I agree that this should be the focus of this article. I think it should be part of it, but magical realism has a strong presence in literature outside Latin America (I am unsure about other media). To give one example, the works of Salman Rushdie are a combination of postmodernism and magical realism. I think a subarticle is more manageable and would help the editors focus their research, but ultimately this is up to Jbmurray and the editors themselves. Awadewit (talk) 02:25, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A meeting...

[edit]

So I propose we meet on Sunday. It's not absolutely necessary but it'd be nice. Kayoh and I discussed meeting downtown somewhere, as we're both coming from the North Shore; if that jives with everyone, I suggest Waves on Richards (and Hastings or Pender). A personal fave, buses abound nearby, wifi, DARK HOT CHOK.
I'll check in every once in a'

--Larodge (talk) 13:25, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hey I could possibly do that... I have a lot to do tomorrow though, so if it's possible that we meet up later, that would probably be better for me. I have read all of the articles and taken notes on them, so now all I have to do a few more write-ups and I'll post them up here. Let me know how that sounds! --Medge88 (talk) 04:05, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]


That sounds good to me! I wouldn't mind meeting up later as well, as I also have a lot to do tomorrow :( --Kayohk (talk) 05:51, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re: anotbib

[edit]

Heyloo, I deleted that whole thread to keep things clean. Hope that was a good call. See ya!

Larodge (talk) 02:31, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Outline for Article

[edit]

Hey guys! So here's the rough outline for our article that we came up with in class:

Definition
Characteristics (general)
Impact on readers & society
Difficulty with application & broadness

1. History (event based, include works & authors who impacted the style and/or furthered the style, transitions to different fields)

2. Literature
2.1 Themes
2.2. Specific qualities related to literature
2.3 Major Works & authors (link to other articles)
2.4 Comparison with related genres
2.5 Politics

3. Major topics in literary criticism

3. Visual Art

--Kayohk (talk) 17:12, 29 March 2010 (UTC) Please feel free to add to it! --Kayohk (talk) 05:44, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi everyone. Hopeful about starting the real editing process. A suggestion: check out Modernism's introduction. It poses a trouble (something regarding newness and a rejection of the precursory Enlightenment). It then walks you through that issue with the attitudes of a few particularly relevant figures of the time, which happen to conflict. A final figure "sums it up" in a quotation and the editors then come to analytical conclusions for the wiki user... They demystify all the quotes, make sense of it all, and make a final comment on WHY there would be confusion and HOW that's relevant to the genre itself.
I like it, and I think it's useful as 20th century art/lit genres tend to be messier with regard to definition. Too many example attitudes could exhaust the intro, but a little could be nice for MR. Later! --Larodge (talk) 08:08, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It might also be nice to include some historical background for the development of magical realism in Latin America in the 20th century. This could go in the "History" section. Awadewit (talk) 04:59, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi to whomever... History is filling up nicely (thanks, Awadewit: check it out and see what you think so far). I think for those who want to start adding edits, Themes and qualities, and Topics in literary criticism, would be good places to get started. They need help and filling! Also, I don't know how I feel about having a politics section. I feel like the info contained in a Politics section could be more easily (and automatically) dispersed throughout the other sections. Que pensais vos? Ta ta.
--Larodge (talk) 10:40, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi guys, hope everything's going well... the article is looking pretty good! I was going to say, I really think maybe we should move the Major Works & Authors section to after the themes and qualities rather than having it last. I would do it myself, but I'm not sure how to move headings and I don't want to mess up the page. That section is also looking pretty sad, needs to be filled out more. And Liz, I'd agree with the elimination of a Politics section. I think we should get talking more seeing that it's due REALLY soon!
--Medge88 (talk) 00:39, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi everyone! Agreed, the article is looking much better :) Megan, I agree with you that the Major Works & Authors section should be moved up, and should definitely be filled out a bit more. I'll try adding a bit more to it. Also, I don't have a problem with taking out the politics part. I'm not quite sure what we had in mind anyway, when we listed it as one of our headings. I think the politics connected with magical realism are sufficiently covered in our other sections.--Kayohk (talk) 04:34, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestion for article

[edit]

Hello all! Just wondering, what do you guys think about taking out the last section on visual art? I figured since we decided to focus on Magical realism in literature, maybe this part isn't necessary. I think magical realism in relation to art is covered quite in depth in the "development within visual art" section. However, I have no problem keeping it, if you all think it's important!--Kayohk (talk) 05:48, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Kayoh, I think it's important that we keep it, as the two sects of visual art need special clarification. Yay on being done! --Larodge (talk) 23:47, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Italian "realismo magico"

[edit]

Since I'm Italian I'm surprised that in your description of magic realism you only refer to the Latino-american authors of this genre.
It's true that in Latin America magical realism has become the mainstream literary genre and it's also true that these Latino-american writers are among the most popular in the whole world today, while in Europe magic realism still remains a minority genre. However, as you say in your historical account on magic realism in visual arts, the expression "realismo magico" has been invented in Italy to label the novels written by Massimo Bontempelli, a former futurist.
And in Italy we also use this label to indicate the novels and screenplays by Cesare Zavattini, like "Miracle in Milan". Furthermore, we call magic realist many movies by Federico Fellini, among which the oscar-winning "Cabiria's nights" and "The road".
So, I think you should expand your analysis to European magic realism.
Lele giannoni (talk) 13:13, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Neutrality?

[edit]

This article includes a vast quantity of opinions presented as facts and normative judgements. You can barely read a paragraph without it. Just one example among many:

"here are two modes in postmodern literature: one, commercially successful pop fiction, and the other, philosophy, better suited to intellectuals. A singular reading of the first mode will render a distorted or reductive understanding of the text. The fictitious reader - such as Aureliano from 100 Years of Solitude - is the hostage used to express the writer’s anxiety on this issue of who is reading the work and to what ends, and of how the writer is forever reliant upon the needs and desires of readers (the market).[59] The magic realist writer with difficulty must reach a balance between saleability and intellectual integrity."

We have here an example of both. "A singular reading of the first mode will render a distorted or reductive understanding of the text". Adding a citation onto something does not mean that you can present an opinion on literature as some kind of scientific fact. The phrasing needs to be changed. And then we have "The magical realist writer with difficulty must". I don't see why any writer must do anything, myself, much less that a Wikipedia article should be telling them this. If a writer must do anything, it is avoid split infinitives like "with difficulty must".

I think the root of this problem is that the article has been written in a style similar to a Lit essay, not an encyclopaedic entry. 86.185.100.253 (talk) 17:29, 5 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

While it is very nice to see that the notion of magical realism generates so much discussion, the resulting complexity of the entry at this stage is bewildering and leads this reader (and contributor to the French version) to conclude that it might have been wiser for the study group that worked on all this mostly last year to have carried out their internal discussion in another forum and posted only a shorter, synthetic version at the end of their work. And as another reader has already pointed out, there is no good reason to favor latin-american works that much. Armand W. (talk) 06:38, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is the encyclopedia that anyone may contribute to. The intention is that people like you shall make the improvements you find are needed, directly. Please do. If you feel unsure, make only the most important changes first, and see what happens. --Ettrig (talk) 15:27, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, changing the language is Ok, however important to keep the sources meaning. Zulu Papa 5 * (talk) 16:25, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I was struck by exactly the same problem. The lead, for example, contains all kinds of gratuitous negative generalizations about western culture.--75.83.64.6 (talk) 19:46, 12 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Films

[edit]

I would like to compile a list of films that have been noted for magical realism. Likely will create a section in this article and then a category to add to films which have sources noting them for magical realism. Does this seem like and appropriate start? Zulu Papa 5 * (talk) 14:37, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Tone of voice

[edit]

Most of this article sounds like it was written by a first-year grad student trying as hard as possible to sound like an authority. The overall effect is pedantic, and much of the English is more awkward than scholarly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.243.20.179 (talk) 17:59, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This comment was written seven years ago and it's still just as true as it was then. The entire Major topics in criticism page really does sounds like "it was written by a first-year grad student trying as hard as possible to sound like an authority," and I would know because I am a first year grad student. It's entirely too verbose, unclear, and the "Latin American exclusivity" section reads like it was copied straight out of a term paper. Generally the article feels as though it was written by many authors who didn't all agree on the origins, definitions, or goals of magical realism. I would highly recommend that the section be shortened, and that the argument against the Latin American origins of the genre be more heavily sourced and re-worded if it is felt that that section is even necessary.75.166.174.171 (talk) 03:47, 16 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Pseudorealism

[edit]

For me it sounds like magic realism has a lot in common with so-called pseudorealism. Perhaps something that could be included in the article. 84.210.60.115 (talk) 20:26, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Boris Vian?

[edit]

There is so little on any Euro magical realism - even connections drawn from Latin America to Europe are shakey. Additionally, not one mention of Boris Vian - yet given all this article says, he is one of the top contenders to be a magical realist!81.102.247.28 (talk) 00:16, 27 August 2011 (UTC)Alex[reply]

WikiProject Novels

[edit]

Isn't WikiProject Literature more suitable for an article about a genre? — Jeraphine Gryphon (talk) 02:15, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Difference between genres?

[edit]

What's the difference between the genres supernatural fiction, supernatural drama and magic realism? Please answer at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities.08:29, 15 May 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.250.44.41 (talk)

I too wonder whether it is possible to distinguish "magic realism" from supernatural fiction. Is m.r. (simply) a subset of supernatural fiction characterized by realist tone, voice, etc? (Eg, we note the reticence of the author, the indifference of the narrator.)
Or is magic realism a Latin American literary movement rather than a genre? Then should we call British and U.S. American works magic realist only if the authors expressly join the movement?
P.S. Today I redescribed and cat Skellig as magic realism rather than mystery fiction. The latter implies crime, I think, not simply a crucial element of mystery nor any mystery that the author does not resolve. Probably I called it magical rather than supernatural only because one scholarly ref[1] uses the term and compares/contrasts the Almond novel with a Marquez story. But it has me wondering now, for I have seen other Brit & Amer children's literature called ]magical realism rather than supernatural fiction].
Anyway, it seems to me that the lead sentence would better link "magical" to Supernatural than to Magic (paranormal) --where magical redirects. Magic concerns deliberate undertaking; "magical" implies that rather than "wonderful", "awesome", or any of that ilk.
If the perceived problem with supernatural is the connotation above nature, then say supernatural and explain the problem. Or say unnatural or unreal without links to either one of these two articles. But our coverage of supernatural fiction does not connote above nature.
--P64 (talk) 23:42, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Supernatural is when magic is outside of the norm. If someone sees a wereworlf, they freak the f out. But magic realism would be harry potter without the humans. You see a werewolf, tip your hat and say good day.
-G — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.53.14.180 (talk) 09:25, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Investigation showed that "supernatural" is not generally used in that narrow fashion --for abnormal intrusion of eerie, occult, spirit, uncanny upon normal-- when it disambiguates "magic". So I re-targeted magic (supernatural) to the general disambiguation page as an instance of Redirects from incomplete disambiguations. Our article supernatural fiction does convey that narrow sense --albeit one much broader than academic critics find useful. I have not investigated our links to that article, although it is clear at a glance that we do not limit to the extra-narrow academic sense.
Redirects to Magic (disambiguation)
Magical, magically, and magic (supernatural) all now redirect to the "Magic" disambiguation --as do magic powers and magical powers which may be irrelevant here.
The target for all those pages has been been magic (paranormal). Before making the change yesterday, I disambiguated all uses in article space (more than 100); directed about half to magic (paranormal), about half to magic in fiction, a few to other pages but none here. There was not a single naive link of the first word in "magical realism". --P64 (talk) 18:07, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

merge Hallucinatory realism

[edit]

Article Hallucinatory realism was created at 15:50, 11 October 2012‎. It is stated this is a term used in the translated version of the motivation for Mo Yan's Nobel Prize in Literature. However, hallucinatory realism and magic realism are the same thing in Chinese language. Both of them refer to zh:魔幻写实主义. I think they are actually same. --Neo-Jay (talk) 06:54, 12 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • No merge See my comments in the AfD and updates to the article. We have no idea if these are the same thing. The term appears to have currency in 1970s/80s Germanic scholarship and may have a more specific meaning in those languages we are not aware of. Need an expert before deciding. I realize everyone wants a "good enough most likely" definitive answer but it won't hurt to leave the article in place for a while and let an expert arrive to look at it, the article was just created yesterday. The term has a history going back 40 years or more, in a specific definition sense. -- Green Cardamom (talk) 04:22, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • No merge per Green Cardamom. Also, this is an inappropriate fork of the AFD conversation. The conversation about the notability of the idea should be discussed in a singular space, Sadads (talk) 01:21, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Authors not mentioned

[edit]

It is a little surprising that certain authors, some of whom are famous in the genre, have not been mentioned (not that the article should be a laundry list), either here or in the Wikipedia category list. These would include Ernesto Sabato, Nobel laureate Miguel Angel Asturias, Francisco Paco Taibo, Avram Tertz, Robert Walser, Felipe Alfau, Fyodor Sologub, Ludwik Vakulik, just off the top of my head. Others who have produced works in the genre but are not wedded to it would include Mario Vargas Llosa, Thomas Pynchon, Nelson Algren, Luigi Pirandello, Jorge Amado, and Heinrich Boll. Since the article concentrates, and rightly so, on Latin American fiction, it is a little jarring that Garcia Marquez's intellectual debt to Juan Rulfo gets no mention. This is well known and requires no great scholarship to uncover it.Euonyman (talk) 01:28, 25 September 2013 (UTC)Euonyman (talk) 16:16, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Cryptonomicon

[edit]

In Neal Stephenson's novel Cryptonomicon, Enoch Root shows up unaged in novel segments set 50 years apart. The same character also shows up in novels by the same author set centuries earlier. This seems like enough to get the novel mentioned here. Keith Henson (talk) 23:59, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Verification needed

[edit]

For the source

Elga Perez-Laborde:"Prologo,"Iconografía de Mitos y Leyendas, Marcela Donoso, ISBN 978-956-291-592-2.

The ISBN points to a publication "The law of success in sixteen lessons", not to the source specified in this article. The same citation in the Spanish Wiki has the same problem. Knife-in-the-drawer (talk) 04:20, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

'Magical' versus 'Magic' Realism

[edit]

The article says '... Of the four terms, Magical realism is the most commonly used'. Indeed it is - so why is the page entitled 'Magic' and not 'Magical' realism? 'Magical Realism' is a completely standardized term in English when discussing South American fiction , at least, and so IMHO should also be used for any fiction that is being compared with, or assimilated to such fiction. Most of the references using the term 'Magic Realism' have authors who are not native English speakers, or refer to domains other than fiction. So, I feel a name change for the page to 'Magical realism' is in order.

ChengduTeacher (talk) 13:14, 21 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The article itself even switches between "magic" and "magical". Since the introduction itself states "magical" is used more often this should probably the term used throughout the article. 77.8.163.211 (talk) 08:54, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Where is the source for "magical" being more commonly used? While it is used, I see little evidence for it being the dominant or "completely standardized" term. In fact almost all the evidence I find points to the opposite: 1. In Spanish, the native language of the movement, it is ALWAYS "Realismo Magico" if you were to speak of "Realismo Magical" (the equivalent of Magical Realism) people would either not know what you were talking about or at best think you were one of those people always calling things by the not-quite-right name. 2. Encyclopedia Britannica lists it only under Magic Realism, not "magical." 3. Merriam-Webster and HarperCollins/Dictionary.com list it under Magic Realism. 4. Cambridge dictionary lists it under "Magical" but notes that Magic is the US usage. 5. The title of the article contradicts the assertion which of course is up for debate were it not for the preponderance of evidence to the contrary.

I'll await a response from the "magical" camp, but I move that we strike the sentence "Magical realism, perhaps the most common term," from the opening as it is not vital to understanding what the genre or movement IS, and is obviously a debated point. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stoic Correction (talk • contribs) 04:17, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The assertion that magical realism is the most common term is reliably sourced to Bowers (2004). --Florian Blaschke (talk) 14:22, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jorge Luis Borges?

[edit]

I'm skeptical that Jorge Luis Borges wrote magical realism.

I've read all of his collected stories. Could someone please point me to one that's a clear example of magical realism? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:18A:8101:B470:551E:3F06:89EE:A190 (talk) 22:24, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Borges did not write magic realism.

"La noche boca arriba" as magic realism. The article cited to make a case for Cortázar's story as an example of magic realism, in addition to seeming to have many flaws in itself, is misquoted here. The article's conclusion is that the story in question is not magic realism, but "lo real maravilloso" (both of which are inappropriate categorizations of the story according to critically accepted definitions of each). Most literary scholars would agree that "La noche boca arriba" is not magic realism, but rather fantastic literature, a category to which much of Cortázar's fiction belongs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.114.145.53 (talk) 13:52, 7 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

New Media

[edit]

The New media subheading contains a reference (without citation) to Pamela Sacred and her story La Voie de l'ange, "a continuation of The Diary of Anne Frank written in French by a fictional character from her Venetian Cell hypertext saga." I've scoured the internet for information about this and I literally can't find anything! Nothing about Pamela Sacred and her work at all! What the hell? Does anyone know what this is referring to? Christmasoratorio (talk) 21:03, 28 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Christmasoratorio, while doing some research on video games & magic realism, I found a reference for your quest.--Herbert Ashe (talk) 01:11, 24 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Magic realism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:58, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Missing main verb

[edit]

Whenever a piece of art looks surreal, but it's actually a reflection of the reality without any mise-en-scène.

After a nose job, nice to still possess nostrils—though some may differ. — MaxEnt 19:56, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Examples in intro

[edit]

I noticed that the intro contains a bunch of examples of Bengali authors, but the body of the article does not make any mention of them. I'm not familiar with magic realism, but this implies to me that either Bengali literature is an epicenter of/major contributor to the development of magic realism and deserves coverage in the body, or that the examples in the intro should be cut down to include only more notable authors. - Sdkb (talk) 12:01, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Latin American exclusivity

[edit]

The Magical realism#Latin American exclusivity subsection reads like someone's personal essay reacting to statements elsewhere in the article. I have marked it as OR, although Template:Essay-like might have been better. Either way, it needs to be fixed. 192.91.173.42 (talk) 00:15, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Uncertain about my edit

[edit]

In the section Latin American exclusivity, I changed the following sentence:

"Russian author, Nikolai Gogol and his story "The Nose" (1835), is also a predecessor to the Hispanic origin theory."

to this:

"The Russian author Nikolai Gogol and his story "The Nose" (1835) is also a predecessor to the Hispanic origin theory."

I'm not certain if my removal of the commas was implemented well, since I think it may have been better to move it to after "Gogol". I'm also not sure if my addition of the definite article was a good idea. Could anyone please tell me what the best option is?--Thylacine24 (talk) 02:36, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Film and television"

[edit]

This article as a whole is not in great shape. The "Film and television" section of the article in particular is in a pretty grim state. It has two parts: explanatory text (which is a little narrowly focused, but at least properly cited), and then a frankly bloated list of "films and television shows that convey elements of magic realism." None of the films or shows listed have citations for their inclusion; further, the list has a pretty extreme recency bias- something like 75% of the entries are from the last 15 years. It looks like interested editors simply append films or shows they feel are "magic realist" (or have magic realist "elements"), and the "Magic realism films" category has the same problem. Some entries are quite plausible, though not properly cited (eg Twin Peaks, or Life of Pi), but many- perhaps a majority- are more typically described simply as "fantasy" or "horror" or the like, and aren't described as "magic realist" at all in their own articles, or consistently described as such in reputable sources, and have no discernable relationship to works historically described as "magic realist," such that their inclusion can only be considered original research (eg Coraline, or A Wrinkle in Time, or Krampus). (In an extreme example, although it isn't listed on this page, Tom and Jerry: The Magic Ring is in the category "Magic realism films.") Probably it'd be best to simply remove the list section entirely, and only name select, representative films or TV shows that can be shown to have been described as "magic realist" in reliable sources- otherwise the section will continue to balloon with low fantasy films, and horror films with contemporary settings. Yspaddadenpenkawr (talk) 19:26, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I concur. The list is almost a random assortment of fantasy and sci-fi. It feels like anything with a modern setting and unreal elements has been added, while largely ignoring the "largely realistic" quality of the genre. There are many films on the list I haven't watched, but offhand I would immediately eliminate: Princess Bridge (Fantasy), Cool World (Fantasy), Monkeybone (Fantasy), Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (Sci-Fi), Lost, Enchanted (Fantasy), Coraline (Fantasy), Where the Wild Things Are (Fantasy), Scott Pilgrim vs. the World (Fantasy), Over the Garden Wall (Fantasy), Tomorrowland (Sci-Fi), Hilda (Fantasy), A Wrinkle In Time (Sci-Fi), Encanto (Fantasy), Pinocchio (Fantasy), Disenchanted (Fantasy).
Many others also obviously do not belong, but I'm not familiar enough with them to be definitive. LordQwert (talk) 20:59, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I've gone through and tried to thresh out movies that, at least in my judgement, unambiguously do not fit the definition of magic realism used in the article- "a realistic view of the world while also adding magical elements, often blurring the lines between fantasy and reality... with magical or supernatural phenomena presented in an otherwise real-world or mundane setting... a different genre from fantasy because magical realism uses a substantial amount of realistic detail and employs magical elements to make a point about reality, while fantasy stories are often separated from reality." (See also the distinctions the article text draws between magic realism and other genres.) This rules out films or TV shows that are set in an imagined possible future (eg Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind), in a fantasy setting with no connection to the real world (eg The Princess Bride (film)), in a "portal fantasy" setting, where characters leave the real world to enter a fantastical alternate world (eg Cool World), where characters travel to other planets (eg A Wrinkle in Time (2018 film), where (pseudo-)scientific explanations are provided for the uncanny happenings (eg Lost (TV series)), which overtly depart from a realist narrative mode (eg Isn't It Romantic (2019 film)), where characters have explicitly described magic powers (eg Godmothered)... in all, over 60 entries, most of the list. Some remaining entries may or may not qualify to be listed on this page- when in doubt, I've left them in place. It'd probably actually be preferable to hack it down farther, to major, representative titles- leaving it as an open-ended list in the middle of this article is not great; we already have a category for "magic realism films" anyway.
It looks like the list sort of accreted as a result of users sort of hit-and-run adding movies or TV shows they liked, and which they thought vaguely qualified as "magic realist," to the list. It will probably have to be swept out periodically in the future. The list also remains very heavily recentist, likely as a result of the manner it was built up- a large majority of the films and TV shows are post-2000. Yspaddadenpenkawr (talk) 04:14, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think the best policy is to insist that every film added has a source that identifies it as magic realist. This will avoid bloating the article with a huge list of films and avoid wikieditors opinions creeping in. Ashmoo (talk) 09:54, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that this would be a good policy to follow- and not just for films, but for any form of media. The "major authors and works" section, on magic realist literature, lists many, many authors, but is also desperately short on citations- only Borges, Allende, García Márquez, and Rushdie actually have cites for their inclusion, and another cite is of Toni Morrison disputing the use of the term to label her work. (Especially suspect is the mention of "the young novelist Rune Salvesen"- who is mentioned nowhere else on English Wikipedia, and thus probably doesn't qualify as a "major author" of magic realist works.) Yspaddadenpenkawr (talk) 21:09, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Change Title

[edit]

I think we should move this to "Magical Realism" instead of Magic Realism. Even the current intro states that "Magical Realism" is the most common term, so why is the page named Magic Realism? Jtbwikiman (talk) 23:39, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. I'll check the existing talk page archives if any, and move unless this has already been mooted and turned down. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 14:52, 1 August 2024 (UTC).[reply]
There's #'Magical' versus 'Magic' Realism, but that seems to agree with the move. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 14:58, 1 August 2024 (UTC).[reply]

Requested move 1 August 2024

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved to Magical realism. (non-admin closure) Bobby Cohn (talk) 13:40, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Magic realism → Magical Realism – "Magical Realism" is the most common term WP:COMMONNAME applies. See discussion in this section above, #'Magical' versus 'Magic' Realism, and the article itself. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 15:01, 1 August 2024 (UTC). — Relisting. Bobby Cohn (talk) 15:49, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Based on what?—blindlynx 20:26, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with the change to "realism" as what I've heard most commonly. However I disagree with changing the capitalization per MOS:FIELD etc. It is not a proper noun. SchreiberBike | ⌨  01:36, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would agree to change it to "Magical realism", but certainly not to capitalise "Realism". It should be in sentence case, not title case. Esowteric + Talk + Breadcrumbs 06:10, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Move to Magical realism (lower-case "r") per the above. It's not a proper noun. Tevildo (talk) 07:26, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • magic realism got 109 results
  • magical realism got 146 results
The same search on Google Search. In 4 (larger) pages:
  • magic realism got 54
  • magical realism got 118
Hope that helps. SchreiberBike | ⌨  16:33, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
To add to that, Google Scholar search shows:
  • magic gets 24,000
  • magical gets 30,900
Just another variable. Wolfdog (talk) 17:13, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Surprised no one has mentioned Ngrams. This shows "magical" about twice as popular as "magic" (and it doesn't seem to matter whether the search is case-sensitive or not). —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 17:54, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So Move to Magical realism (lowercase). —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 13:54, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Should be moved to Magical realism, then. ANJANIY#gurung 09:36, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support a move to Magical realism. Primergrey (talk) 01:50, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Use "magical realism" to better agree with sources, and to comply with MOS:CAPS (especially MOS:DOCTCAPS and MOS:GENRE), WP:NCCAPS, and WP:CONSISTENT with regard to other "-isms" of this general sort and all literary, musical, and other genres and media styles and subjects of specialization or study. We only capitalize something along the lines of a genre where it contains a proper name like "Italian", when it's a closed-membership group ("the Pre-Raphaelites"), or when it is a globally significant and long-term, multi-art "movement" that is near-universally capitalized by RS, such as Romanticism or Art Deco (and even that capitalization has its opponents, both on-site and in off-site writing). Things like "gothic rock", "survival horror", "post-rock", "Afro-futurism", "anime", etc., etc., do not take capitals except for proper-name elements like "Afro-". (Even "gothic" in that post-punk subculture sense is not a proper name, just as "a platonic relationship" doesn't contain one either, versus "the Platonic ideals in philosophy"; eponyms cease being capitalized in contexts that are sharply divorced from their original ones.)  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  04:03, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Magical_realism&oldid=1243808706"