mudlady, since I mostly put away childish things I too choose not to read fantasy. Not for me fairies at the bottom of the garden, trolls in dark places, talking animals and birds, teeny weeny people that do the housework during the night . . .OK maybe I'll make an exception for them . . . BUT several RP'ers have written in the past that they prefer fantasy as they find the everyday 'real world' so unpleasant they need space away from it. I certainly don't enjoy books dealing in some modern horrors; unnecessary violence, sexual perversions, child abuse, mass killings etc. so try and steer a line between these extremes.
I sometimes wonder why the seemingly most gentle of people so much enjoy murder mysteries and crime novels.

I generally choose not to read fantasy. But once in a long while, a novel will come along with some elements of the supernatural woven into it that add a great deal to the meaning of the story. Such a book was Leif Enger's "Peace Like a River."

As for mysteries, they have to be well-written, with interesting characters. Two examples of mystery authors I find superb are Susan Hill and Ruth Rendell.

woodnymph - I saw Ruth Rendell speak at a book conference once. I had never read anything by her, so I decided to give her a try. I picked up a book at the library -- can't remember the title. The plot was about a young couple who was planning a murder just to see how it felt. I never finished the book and haven't tried any of her other novels. Was that just a bad first pick?

Change of Heart is probably her worst book, I really enjoy her work and hated that.

Keeping Faith I saw not as fantasy, but as a novel with a spiritual theme/base. Challenging, I thought, the reader to consider this type of claim/situation for its believability. I also think that at the time of publishing there was some kind of incident ongoing that touched on this type of a situation, so it was a timely novel.

I dislike fantasy myself - Harry Potter wore out really fast after the first two books. What were fun stories about a kid in a magical world, just became "dumb" to me. I need to keep a foot in reality.

I wish you would give some of Picoult's other books a try, but I know myself how hard it is, with so many book to choose from, to risk the third strike by the same author.

"I sometimes wonder why the seemingly most gentle of people so much enjoy murder mysteries and crime novels."

veer - I don't enjoy books with modern horrors either, but I do love mysteries. I think a lot of the appeal isn't the crime itself, but the story of how the characters solve the crime. The left brain enjoys the searching for information, deducting, connecting the info, and coming to a conclusion. The right brain enjoys the quirks of the story, the characters aren't perfect, maybe some oddballs; they provide entertainment. I want to be involved in the story, so solving the murder is the goal, but I want to enjoy the process.

I don't like it when a story revolves around the paranormal, especially their hot sex lives and they're not doing anything of substance. That seems to be a big trend now. Hmmm...actually the books with graphic descriptions of the hottest and best sex anyone could ever have in their life (3 pages just to get beyond the descriptions of their kissing), well maybe I've been missing something, but to me that's the biggest fantasy of all.

I have to admit I loved "Twilight". I got sucked (pun intended) into the teen angst angle. But as I read the rest of the saga, I started getting disgusted at the story. Talk about fantasy! I forced myself to finish "Eclipse" and read "Breaking Dawn" (some sort of masochistic compulsion?). I just kept saying "you've got to be kidding me!" It got so I enjoyed making fun of the totally implausible events.

There are some books where a little fantasy works, it has to be properly integrated into the story. I'm mainly thinking of psychic gifts where it's not hokey.

veer - if you find those teeny weeny people that do the housework during the night, please send them to my house!

jax, I have never read a book with a 'paranormal' setting and therefore didn't realise that hot sex played any part in their reproductive lives "Look away now, Earthlings". I guessed it would all be computerised/spooky/psychic . . .what have I been missing?
Look out for an envelope containing some t-w's plus miniature vacuums, dusters, mops etc. scatter under kids beds, behind the fridge, cat litter-tray, floor of car, cupboard under the stairs and other detritus-filled areas of your home. Sit back and wait for gleaming results. If you are not entirely satisfied with this product write to our head office in the Land of Ever Shattered Dreams.

Oh, very funny Vee.
I read somewhere that lovers of mystery novels have a strong sense of justice. I'd agree with that.
I don't like fantasy but used to read my husband's science fiction novels so that I could discuss them with him.
I had a good knowledge of the classic writers with his guidance!
I like Psychic books like the Dr. Chase mysteries by Marjorie Lawrence and the Harper Connelly ones by Charlaine Harris. Tried a couple of Mary Jane Davidson's vampire series but got bored with them!

As a reader of good fantasy, I want to pipe in here. I intensely dislike magical realism, or otherwise realistic novels with a touch of fantasy. They seem to me to be a violation of the contract between the writer and the reader. The world created by the novel must be internally consistent. If the writer works his way into a corner, then pulls out a magic trick to get away, that is cheating.

Peace Like a River worked for me because what happened was both foreshadowed by and consistent with the father's devout religious faith and belief in the presence of God's miracles in the ordinary world. In my opinion it is not necessary that the reader share this belief, so long as the character does.

Please note that I am not trying to convince any readers to read fantasy if they would rather not. I am merely saying that as one of those RPers who reads fantasy frequently, I also dislike the sudden, unjustified intrusion of magic in an otherwise realistic novel.

Rosefolly

Well said, Rosefolly, re the intrusion of magical realism. I am not usually a fantasy reader, but if I know going into a book that there are fantasy elements, I might be able to suspend my disbelief. But magical realism is just sneaky, in my opinion.

I was flabbergasted the first time I ran across magical realism: it was in One Hundred Years of Solitude by Gabriel Garcia Marquez. Everything was realistic and normal until Granny was hanging out the wash and she suddenly ascended to heaven (if I remember it correctly) and otherwise quite ordinary people were walking through walls. I do understand, though, that in some cultures magical realism is accepted, admired, and is much loved; such as in Mexico, Central America, South America, Africa, Asia, Eastern Europe...and in many folk tales the world over.

Supernatural tales can be an entirely different kettle of fish, in my opinion. I like the eeriness of them and the Gothic atmosphere (the original, not the faux-Gothic of some modern stories). I like best when there's probably some logical explanation for the strangeness, if we only knew what it was.

As another fantasy fan, I'd like to add my two cents, as well. There are many excellent fantasy series, and many goofy, fun ones (Sookie Stackhouse, anyone?). As others have said, as long as the book's internal world is consistent, I have no problem with fantasy elements.

One writer I like a great deal is Sarah Addison Allen (The Peach Keeper, Garden Spells, The Girl Who Chased the Moon) who mixes fantasy elements into a contemporary setting. However, these elements are evident at the start of the books, they don't pop up in a deux ex machina sort of way.

Another author I have recently discovered and come to love is Patricia Briggs, whose books include vampires, werewolves, fairies and monsters -- all believable within their fictional, though completely recognizable, world.

As Rosefolly said, I wouldn't try to convince anyone to read fantasy if they had no interest, but I would like to note that it is a huge genre spanning everything from goofy vampire romances to alternate-history Steampunk to more literary tales like Jonathan Strange & Mr. Norrell and A Discovery of Witches, to classic Tolkien. It's a big chunk of literature to miss.

FRANKENSTEIN by Mary Shelley is one of the most intelligent, profound novels ever written - about the relationship between the Creator and the Created. 'I was born good; misery made me a fiend!' 'Who am I? What am I?'

It's fantasy.

GULLIVER'S TRAVELS by Jonathan Swift is a profound, 18th century satire by an acknowldeged great intelligence, with great style. Book 3, The Floating Island of Laputa, is a wonderful send-up of the Royal Society and its wild experiments in the name of 'Science'.

is fantasy.

SOMETHING WICKED THIS WAY COMES by Ray Bradbury is about the nature of Good and Evil, beautifully told as are all Bradbury's works (FARENHEIT 451 is another of his).

It's fantasy.

I don't think you should knock the genre just because you've read inferior stuff. Try the best, which comes up to World Literature standards, then measure your Harry Potters et al against it. Not that H.P. isn't OK in its place, but it's not a work of deep and lasting intelligence.

Dido

veer - try a book by Christine Feehan. I believe that will...satisfy your curiousity.
I'll be waiting for those t-w's. Hope they like dogs.

annpan - do you mean Martha Lawrence, or is there another Dr. Chase series? Either way, I'm glad you mentioned her because I had read some a few years ago and enjoyed them. Had forgotten about her, but will now search for more. Have you read "An Ice Cold Grave" yet? I'd be interested in your opinion. Have you read any Victoria Laurie or Shirley Damsgaard? Those are two I still enjoy. I've read other series that tended to get too silly.

There are so many different types and levels of fantasy that I don't even know how to differentiate and describe them. I can say I don't like fantasy when I think of the books a friend of mine reads, but then say I love it when I think of Jim Butcher and Ray Bradbury. I can only say I like or dislike a certain author. I just paid a quick visit to readersadvice.com. Under the genre of fantasy there are over 50 types (including erotic fantasy for you veer). And in some of those those types you'll find Ray Bradbury and Jodi Picoult, who I would never expected to be in any way comparable (except both write fiction).

I have never been a fantasy reader in the sci-fi sense, but for no particular reason. Nowadays however, I am not attracted to start as so many authors only write in trilogies. I don't really want to commit to three books before I start the first.
I enjoyed LOTR when I read it years ago and have more recently read a few of the Sookie Stackhouse books before getting bored with them. I have no basic dislike of being asked to suspend my disbelief for while, and recently very much enjoyed 'A Discovery of Witches'. But I do agree with the comments above about inserting magical scenes into books which otherwise are supposed to be realistic.

Jaxnsmom: Yes, that should have been Martha Lawrence (senior moment, there!). I have read a couple of the Damsgaard and Laurie books but some time ago and cannot recall much about them, sorry. I tend to read more plain cosy mysteries.
I have read all the Harper Connolly books and enjoyed them very much. I wish there were new ones but it is all Stackhouse and I don't like vampire books. All that blood sucking!

Vee, Laurel Hamilton has a series about a fairy princess who works as a private detective in L.A. Sounds charming so I download it. Turned out to be pure porn. She's a fertility goddess, you see.

Piers Anthony, in his Cluster series, has a species that can best be defined as gas jets. The most erotic sex I ever read.

Jaxnsmom, thanks for the recommendation for Christine Feehan. I had to look her up and found the expression shape-shifters to describe the protagonists. Also checked Sheri's steampunk which led to cyberpunk.
So for my erotic fantasy as suggested by jaxs, does this mean I have to undergo some sort of full-moon computerised, blood-sucking sexual encounter with a human-cum-leopard while dressed in ripped black plastic, in the back seat of a Victorian horseless carriage?
At my age? Well, bring it on say I, but have a full medical team standing by.
Then back to Jane Austen.

Vee -- You got me laughing. And I needed to laugh today. Thanks. I especially relate to the part about having a full medical team standing by!

I'm in favor of anything that will keep my ADHD in check. Besides you need a break in between required and/or must reads like "Germinal", "The Mill on the Floss", War and Peace, etc...

I am not sure what category Ann Rice's novels fall into, but I have tried repeatedly to read her work and dislike all of it intensely. OTOH, "The Historian", also with a theme of vampires, I found masterful and intriguing.

Woodnymph, should you ever want to try Anne Rice again, I'd recommend her very early books vs. her vampire/mummy/witch ones -- they are far and away better than her later efforts, IMHO.

I though her first two straight fiction books were terrific: Cry to Heaven (a story about eighteenth-century castrati in Italy) and Feast of All Saints (about Louisiana's free people of color before the Civil War). It's been at least 20 years since I read them, but as I recall, neither had fantasy elements, and both were fascinating and well-written.

I also loved The Historian. All those libraries ...

As a lover of "good" fantasy, I found this quote from Ursula LeGuin, a master of the genre, intriguing:

"Fantasy is true, of course. It isn�t factual, but it is true. Children know that. Adults know it too, and that is precisely why many of them are afraid of fantasy. They know that its truth challenges, even threatens, all that is phony, unnecessary, and trivial in the life they have let themselves be forced into living."

This thread has been very interesting to follow.

I am not a reader of "fantasy", though in some rare cases it can be very intriguing. I prefer the "fantastic" to be anchored to mundane reality. For example, Tom's Midnight Garden or Tuck Everlasting are wonderful novels for young readers which involve elements of fantasy set against everyday backdrops. One of my all-time favorite short stories, Sarah Orne Jewett's "Lady Ferry" involves the relationship between a child and a mysterious elderly lady who claims to be three hundred years old. The story has elements of the unreal, but still manages to be grounded in recognizable characters and settings.

Fantasy novels set in completely unreal worlds populated by dragons, sorcerers, etc., leave me completely cold.

I don't think mystery novels fall into this category. Though I am not a hardcore mystery reader, I have an enduring affection for the early British "Queens of Crime", particularly Agatha Christie. (I occasionally read P. D. James, though sometimes I find her books irritating. I'm not sure why.)

Most mystery readers I've met are very interested in the workings of human nature, including its less than noble parts. Good mysteries seem to hinge on the tension between the public face characters show to the world, and who they really are on the inside.

Ironically, I really can not abide the "modern horrors" of true crime books. It is too depressing to read about brutal crimes.

My own crackpot theory about mystery readers is that they are people who enjoy the triumph of order over chaos. The hobby I am most passionate about is genealogy. Genealogical problems often resemble mysteries about unknown identities or origins. There is a uniquely satisfying experience in solving a genealogical puzzle. I've known genealogists who have burst into tears at finally solving a mystery which has plagued their families for generations.