actually i am opposed to organized religion ... why do you ask?

[reverancepavane]

Your result for Which fantasy writer are you?... Philip Pullman (b.1946) 11 High-Brow, -23 Violent, 7 Experimental and 3 Cynical! Congratulations! You are High-Brow, Peaceful, Experimental and Cynical! These concepts are defined below. Philip Pullman was already a prominent author of children's books when he published his most praised work to date, the trilogy known as His Dark Materials (1995-2000). In this work, set both in parallel worlds and our own, Pullman made a courageous attempt to write a book for young readers which incorporated a whole vision of the universe, as well as a discussion of ethical issues. He managed to combine this with a burst of thought-provoking and entertaining imagination, bringing to life a Europe where the church is still in control, "souls" that have been externalised as animal presences, intelligent, sentient polar bears and much more. The series have been described as a sort of "anti-Narnia", as Pullman's attempt to write an updated variant of the kind of books C S Lewis, whom Pullman has criticized for having racist, misogynic and preaching tendencies, wanted to write. His Dark Materials has also spawned some controversy among Christians, who see the the work as an attack against Christianity, Pullman being one of Britain's most outspoken atheists. Other Christians have, however, claimed to have found spirituality in the books. Either way, Pullman's combination of renewal and expansion of the genre, his profound messages on the value of life and his refusal to under-estimate his young readers' ability to see life as it is makes Pullman one of the most interesting and important writers of modern fantasy. You are also a lot like Tove Jansson. If you want something some action, try Gene Wolfe. If you'd like a challenge, try your exact opposite, J R R Tolkien. Your score This is how to interpret your score: Your attitudes have been measured on four different scales, called 1) High-Brow vs. Low-Brow, 2) Violent vs. Peaceful, 3) Experimental vs. Traditional and 4) Cynical vs. Romantic. Imagine that when you were born, you were in a state of innocence, a tabula rasa who would have scored zero on each scale. Since then, a number of circumstances (including genetical, cultural and environmental factors) have pushed you towards either end of these scales. If you're at 45 or -45 you would be almost entirely cynical, low-brow or whatever. The closer to zero you are, the less extreme your attitude. However, you should always be more of either (eg more romantic than cynical). Please note that even though High-Brow, Violent, Experimental and Cynical have positive numbers (1 through 45) and their opposites negative numbers (-1 through -45), this doesn't mean that either quality is better. All attitudes have their positive and negative sides, as explained below. High-Brow vs Low-Brow You received 11 points, making you more High-Brow than Low-Brow. Being high-browed in this context refers to being more fascinated with the sort of art that critics and scholars tend to favour, rather than the best-selling kind. At their best, high-brows are cultured, able to appreciate the finer nuances of literature and not content with simplifications. At their worst they are, well, snobs. Violent vs. Peaceful You received -23 points, making you more Peaceful than Violent. This scale is a measurement of a) if you are tolerant to violence in fiction and b) whether you see violence as a means that can be used to achieve a good end. If you aren't, and you don't, then you are peaceful as defined here. At their best, peaceful people are the ones who encourage dialogue and understanding as a means of solving conflicts. At their worst, they are standing passively by as they or third parties are hurt by less scrupulous individuals. Experimental vs. Traditional You received 7 points, making you more Experimental than Traditional. Your position on this scale indicates if you're more likely to seek out the new and unexpected or if you are more comfortable with the familiar, especially in regards to culture. Note that traditional as defined here does not equal conservative, in the political sense. At their best, experimental people are the ones who show humanity the way forward. At their worst, they provoke for the sake of provocation only. Cynical vs Romantic You received 3 points, making you more Cynical than Romantic. Your position on this scale indicates if you are more likely to be wary, suspicious and skeptical to people around you and the world at large, or if you are more likely to believe in grand schemes, happy endings and the basic goodness of humankind. It is by far the most vaguely defined scale, which is why you'll find the sentence "you are also a lot like x" above. If you feel that your position on this scale is wrong, then you are probably more like author x. At their best, cynical people are able to see through lies and spot crucial flaws in plans and schemes. At their worst, they are overly negative, bringing everybody else down. Take Which fantasy writer are you? at HelloQuizzy Can't I be a cynical romantic? Some of my favourite "traditional fantasy" authors are Peter s Beagle, Ian McDowell, Steven Brust, Dan Crawford, John Moore, Esther Friesner, Louise Cooper, Dave Duncan, John M Ford, Gardner F Fox, Nina Kiriki Hoffmann, Barry Hughart, Peter Morwood, Dennis Schmidr, Carol Severance, Will Shetterly, Wm Mark Simmons, Jane Lindskold, Steven Erikson, Mike Stackpole, Lawrence Watt-Evans, and Roger Zelazny, amongst lots of others. As you can tell, I do tend to favour the lighter side of fantasy, whilst detesting the more formulaic fantasy. <grin>

Comments

Genius!

[finella-c.livejournal.com]

I am Ursula K. Le Guin: High-Brow, Peaceful, Traditional, and Cynical. No surprises there, really (and I am also, purportedly, a lot like Susan Cooper - yay!) That's two favourite authors in a single swoop. :-)

It's interesting that on the "how everyone did" graph summary, Violence is the one trait not on a bell curve - there's a sharp split down the middle of the curve. The social scientist in me is curious as to whether asking people (even indirectly) about their propensities to violence is one of those things that generates a particular response bias. There's also the point that some people think of popular culture (e.g. fantasy writing) as a kind of psychological pressure valve. So people permit themselves to be more violent in fantasy.

Thank you, this was a fun quiz.

Re: Genius!

[reverancepavane.livejournal.com]

Actually I suspect one of the reasons why there was such a split was how the violence-related questions were asked. Many seemed over the top. At least that's my feeling, amplified by how they viewed the result as both tolerance and propensity. It would be interesting to see their scoring modalities. I can see people getting cathartic satisfaction out of doing it (at least in simulation), but less so with people reading about it. Then again, I'm someone who has been playing games consisting of killing monsters and taking their treasure for more than half his life (actually make that three-quarters), so this probably seems more reasonable to me. After all, orcs aren't really your fellow human beings, are they>?

[angharad-gam.livejournal.com]

I am Susan Cooper, and a lot like Ursula LeGuin. In other words, high-brow, non-violent, traditional and romantic....

Funnily enough my dad wanted to call me Susan.