Re: Discussing Mccaffrey - Was Re: Pratchett on Rowling, again, sort of

: "norrin" <adweiland@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
: According to Clarke's Law, advanced technology may appear to be magic,
: but there's always an explanation like the Old Ones or the Man Behind
: the Curtain.

Any technology with such an explanation is insufficiently advanced.

: The absence of magic is one of the necessary characteristics of
: science fiction.  The presence of magic is sufficient to call the book
: fantasy. 

If there's an explanation in the forrest, but the author chooses
not to write about it explicitly, is it magic?  If not, how do you
know whether something's magic or not?  For that matter, if *so*,
how do you know whether a setting has magic or not, unless there
are massive infodumps explaining all the doors dilating?


Wayne Throop   throopw@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
   http://sheol.org/throopw