Recently, in my gaming group, there was a brief discussion about whether or not wuxia was fantasy.
To wit, the discussion went something like this:
Me: "Is wuxia really fantasy?"
Everybody Else: "YES!", with the subtext of "Obviously, dumbass!"
Granted, there were a few more comments than that, and they were more tactful, but you get the gist.
I, however, remained ... not unconvinced, but not completely convinced, either.
For my part, I originally conceived of wuxia more along the lines of pulp fiction rather than strictly fantasy, or any other genre. Thus, a mish-mash blend of history, occult, and ass-kickery. Moreover, as I understand it, a lot of the popular wuxia tales were actually Chinese pulp fiction written in the early 1900s.
Wuxia seemed to me a lot closer to the Shadow than to the works of J.R.R. Tolkien, Harry Potter, or Conan, though it might be more closely compared the exploits of Cuchulain or Beowulf, in the sense of bad-ass warrior heroics. Then again, the knights errant style of wuxia also pushed it a bit closer to King Arthur in my mind. Wuxia also has a bit in common with the Spaghetti Western, sharing some elements (outsider comes to town, restores order, leaves town) with Kurosawa's films, said films having influenced Spaghetti Westerns in the first place.
Ultimately, though, I thought that wuxia had a different flavor than the Western notion of "fantasy"; moroever, this difference seemed to me to go beyond merely cultural differences. Wuxia, I thought, is its own thing.
Then ...
G.M. Skarka, RPG designer, mentions the following when discussing his current project, Far West:
"I wanted some element of the fantastic -- the wuxia tales feature high-flying kung fu, but seldom do the tales involve "magic", as fantasy fans would define it. The majority of 'magical' elements in wuxia stories are secret knowledge -- alchemy, hidden techniques, etc. Far-fetched, to be sure, but within the realm of "science", as it was understood. Given the 19th-century vibe of the western, the best analog to that would be steampunk. Far-fetched, but within the realm of "science", rather than the truly magical."
Now that actually sounds like a reasonable conception of wuxia. Moreso, I think, than the "fantasy" label. Not so much magic, but secret knowledge and techniques. Granted, it doesn't match our conception of SF in the modern era, but it does seem to relate to Chinese history in the same way Frankenstein or the works of Jules Verne or Steampunk relate to Victorian history. It's also science fictional in the same way as the prana-bindu fighting arts of the Bene Gesserit in the Dune novels. (And yes, I do know that wuxia predates Dune.)
Wuxia as SF--a very interesting idea. I kinda' like it.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
I don’t know if I agree with that. I see SF as something that adheres to rational constructs. There is logic to the system. If anything, I see Wuxia as a form of magical realism. The fantastic elements do not flow out of reason but out of symbolism. On literal levels, Wuxia makes little sense. The Wuxia that I’ve seen seems to contain a series of amazing things that only work as metaphor.
I don't see how wuxia matches either magical realism or how the fantastic elements flow out of symbolism. Quite the contrary--many of the wuxia techniques, from what I've read and seen, are presented as "if you do x and y, then z is the result," whether x and y are "adhere to this special diet" or "perform this regimen of exercise and training," etc. Insights that flow out of symbolism in that sense would be exactly akin to "eureka" moments scientists experience, where they use symbolism to impart factual truths. Thus, I don't see this as metaphorical, either. In fact, assuming that you accept the existence of chi / qi flow, like electricity or chemical energy, it seems *very* scientific.
I am going off of a few specific Wuxia movies, namely Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon, Hero, Chinese Ghost Story, and House of Flying Daggers. In those films, there is no explanation about how characters can do the wondrous. Things simply happen. Fights move up into trees, sleeves are weapons, and people can fly. The fights and wondrous events flow from the moods and characterizations. They reveal truths about people and situations. That to mke is not science.
First, I would look to the larger context in which these movies are embedded, which is to say the stories that inspired them. Often in wuxia stories and movies, the techniques used are the results of specific training methodologies, etc., as I pointed out earlier. To use "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon" as an example, yes, there are explanations--the seeming fantastic abilities of Li Mu Bai, Jen, and Jade Fox are explicitly stated as a result of the training taught at the Wudang school, though Jen and Jade Fox learned the techniques from a stolen manual of Wudang techniques. My point, and I think Skarka's point, was that the wuxia techniques seem more like the known science of the time than fantasy, with specific inputs and actions producing specific results. Now, I'll admit it doesn't look like the science of *our* time, the Western empirical method, but these aspects of incredible martial techniques seem to me more like science than fantasy, as they are attainable by anybody willing to put in the diligent study and practice. This is not to say that there isn't Chinese fantasy, mind you, or that some wuxia, like much pulp, might blur the lines between genres. Interestingly, it is even possible to say that fantasy novels with a magic tradition that can be communicated the same way--by schools, etc.--are portraying a magic that functions akin to our science, so I see overlap there, too. Also, could you clarify what you mean by fights and wondrous events flowing from moods and characterizations?
Clarification:
Rather than saying:
"Now, I'll admit it doesn't look like the science of *our* time, the Western empirical method."
... I should have said something along the lines of ...
"Now, I'll admit it doesn't look like the common images of Western science, whether industrial or computerized, but it's no less systemitized."
I'm not sure if "empirical" is too loaded a word. Certainly, however, the methods are communicable and replicable.
Post a Comment