# Which is better? Absolute fantasy worlds, or "Secret Underbelly" fantasy worlds?



## Mythical Traveller (Nov 28, 2013)

I'm tossing up on what type of setting to use for my next story and on that note, I wanted to get a feel for what people here think is the better type of setting for a story?

Do you think the "secret fantasy world existing within our own world" kind of setting is better, where an average Joe from our world is suddenly thrust into fantastic situations that their world generally regards as myth? (e.g. Harry Potter, or the Twilight series)

Or do you think that completely fantasy worlds, e.g. Lord Of The Rings, make for a better setting?

Both have pros and cons. The "secret underbelly" setting makes the protagonist more relatable for the reader, and allows the exposition to flow more naturally if there's a visitor to this fantasy world who needs an explanation himself.

On the other hand, a true fantasy world gives you more free reign as an author. You get to write all the rules of your setting and you don't have to worry about any incompatibilities that your story environment might have with our world.


----------



## Ireth (Nov 28, 2013)

If I could, I'd vote both. They both have their merits.


----------



## GeekDavid (Nov 28, 2013)

I'm with Ireth. I vote "yes."


----------



## Jabrosky (Nov 28, 2013)

I gravitate towards absolute fantasy. Like you said, there's more creative freedom that way. Furthermore, I really have to ask why magic and other supernatural phenomena really have to remain "underground" in worlds based off our own. Why can't they float out in the open?


----------



## Mythical Traveller (Nov 28, 2013)

Jabrosky said:


> I gravitate towards absolute fantasy. Like you said, there's more creative freedom that way. Furthermore, I really have to ask why magic and other supernatural phenomena really have to remain "underground" in worlds based off our own. Why can't they float out in the open?



I think the standard excuse is the "Salem Witch Trial" one. All us muggles are bound to be afraid of anyone who is different, and therefore we will inevitably seek to exterminate them. So beings with magical powers or other abnormal traits have to hide themselves away from us, lest they risk a genocide of their kind.


----------



## Steerpike (Nov 28, 2013)

Depends on how closely tied to the real world it is. Magic isn't really open and out there in our world, so the closer you want to make it like the real world the more hidden you have to make the magic.


----------



## GeekDavid (Nov 28, 2013)

The setting is less important to me than the skill and the story told. Either of the settings you have here could make for a wonderful story, or a flop, depending on a number of non-setting factors.


----------



## Philip Overby (Nov 28, 2013)

I'll go with absolute fantasy since that's what I mostly read. I do like the ideas of many urban fantasy stories, but I can't say I've read enough of that kind to have an opinion about it.


----------



## Feo Takahari (Nov 28, 2013)

There are two common justifications for "secret underbelly" worlds, and I've never liked either.

Option 1: People don't want to believe. They pretend the magic they see isn't real. But in real life, people say all the time that they saw ghosts or aliens or Bigfoot. Super-strength skepticism just doesn't seem realistic to me.

Option 2: Magic doesn't want to be found. I'm too pro-science to be happy with this. An entirely new discipline to research, one that could she'd light on processes that aren't currently understood, and a few folks want to keep it to themselves because "the world isn't ready"? Who gave them the right? (This gets worse if they're trying to escape prejudice--ignorance breeds fear when the truth comes out. This gets inexcusable if monsters are killing people and knowledge might help them protect themselves.)

I do like how _El Goonish Shive_ handles it. In that setting, the secret isn't that magic is real, but that almost anyone can use it. Magic is much easier to use than to resist, and it can do absolutely horrible things, so knowledge is limited to try to minimize the number of extremists and psychopaths who can access magic (at the price of making those psychopaths harder to defend against.) One character's long-term goal is to invent an easy method of resisting magic so as to reduce the damage psychos can cause.

Edit: I should also mention my usual justification. In many of my settings, magic is so rare a magic-user can go her entire life without meeting another like herself. In a setting like that, it's a bit more plausible that magic wouldn't have been confirmed (though it would probably have been seen a few times.)


----------



## Malik (Nov 28, 2013)

Absolute fantasy. 

So many urban fantasies I'm reading lately follow the same tired old pattern: young loser kid with no redeeming values whatsoever discovers (a magic sword, a teleportal, that he's half-dragon, that he's a wizard, that his D&D game is real, that he can step into a videogame) and suddenly becomes awesome for no adequately-explored reason.

I'd be all over the "Secret World" trope if it's done well. I'm just not seeing it right now, at least not in self-pubbed fantasy and not really so much in the big leagues, where it's conspicuously absent.

Absolute fantasy seems, to me, to be where the really groundbreaking stuff is. The Secret World trope had its moment in the sun and I think it'll be awhile before we see something really novel and breathtaking come out of the genre. I believe we will literally have to wait until the people who grew up reading Harry Potter are old enough to come up with their own ideas. I give it another 20 years.


----------



## Ireth (Nov 28, 2013)

Malik said:


> I believe we will literally have to wait until the people who grew up reading Harry Potter are old enough to come up with their own ideas. I give it another 20 years.



I grew up with HP (got the first book when I was 10; I'm now 24), and I'm writing a "portal fantasy" of my own, wherein a young woman is taken forcibly into Faerie by the villain. The heroine is nothing special (only a bit unusual in that she firmly believes in the Fae when few others do, given the time period), and she doesn't become special over the course of the book. I certainly hope it doesn't take 20 years for me to get published and my book to be a hit.


----------



## Sheilawisz (Nov 28, 2013)

I have a very curious setting in my _Joan of England_ trilogy, which could be described as a secret underbelly world but it's not exactly like that:

The story takes place in Earth, but it's a parallel Earth (in some other universe) and it contains little and curious differences when compared to our world. The year is 2007, and there is this huge, mysterious black castle not far from London...

The United Kingdom and the entire world knows that very unusual things happen inside the castle, many other strange happenings take place in different parts of the planet (always connected to the castle!) and the general public is sure that magic and interdimensional travels are involved.

There is Magic, the girls that attend the castle are well-known and feared and there are fantasy monsters, and that's not a secret for the normal world... However, _what_ exactly they do at the castle and what their _real intentions_ are constitutes the real mystery of the story.

I think that both Total Fantasy and secret underbelly Fantasy worlds have merit, both can be the setting for wonderful stories.


----------



## Helen (Nov 28, 2013)

Mythical Traveller said:


> Both have pros and cons. The "secret underbelly" setting makes the protagonist more relatable for the reader, and allows the exposition to flow more naturally if there's a visitor to this fantasy world who needs an explanation himself.
> 
> On the other hand, a true fantasy world gives you more free reign as an author. You get to write all the rules of your setting and you don't have to worry about any incompatibilities that your story environment might have with our world.



I don't think these assumptions are valid.

You've got both in Ordinary Worlds - Harry in Privet Drive (our world) and Frodo in the Shire (fanstasy world). Both work equally well.

Even if you disagree, you can just outline both scenarios and see which works best for your story.


----------



## Ireth (Nov 28, 2013)

Helen said:


> I don't think these assumptions are valid.
> 
> You've got both in Ordinary Worlds - Harry in Privet Drive (our world) and Frodo in the Shire (fanstasy world). Both work equally well.
> 
> Even if you disagree, you can just outline both scenarios and see which works best for your story.



I don't think LOTR really counts as an "ordinary world -> fantasy world" transition story. Frodo's homeland, the Shire, may be perfectly normal for HIM, but it is still part of* a fantasy world populated by elves, dragons and trolls, etc. If he had begun his journey in 21st century Earth, and been plopped down into Arda to be burdened with the Ring, that would be an entirely different story.

*Edited to clarify. The Shire is not a world unto itself. ^^


----------



## Helen (Nov 28, 2013)

Ireth said:


> I don't think LOTR really counts as an "ordinary world -> fantasy world" transition story. Frodo's homeland, the Shire, may be perfectly normal for HIM, but it is still part of* a fantasy world populated by elves, dragons and trolls, etc. If he had begun his journey in 21st century Earth, and been plopped down into Arda to be burdened with the Ring, that would be an entirely different story.
> 
> *Edited to clarify. The Shire is not a world unto itself. ^^



The Shire's definitely Ordinary World.

Anyway, I think Mythical Traveller is making the distinction here:



Mythical Traveller said:


> Do you think the "secret fantasy world existing within our own world" kind of setting is better, where an average Joe from our world is suddenly thrust into fantastic situations that their world generally regards as myth? (e.g. Harry Potter, or the Twilight series)
> 
> Or do you think that completely fantasy worlds, e.g. Lord Of The Rings, make for a better setting?


----------



## Mythopoet (Nov 28, 2013)

Neither. Everything is a matter of taste and execution. 

I usually prefer a good secondary world more than an alternate earth, but then I loved Harry Potter. I also really liked the way Jim Butcher did the hidden magical world thing in the Dresden Books (and hated his secondary world of the Codex Alera books). So *shrug*. There's nothing inherently better about either.


----------



## Ireth (Nov 28, 2013)

Helen said:


> The Shire's definitely Ordinary World.
> 
> Anyway, I think Mythical Traveller is making the distinction here:



That's exactly my point. You claimed that LOTR is akin to Harry Potter in that the hero moves from the ordinary world (i.e. the "muggle" world, devoid of magic) into a fantasy world of witches and wizards. That isn't the case. Frodo is and always has been a part of the "absolute fantasy" world he lives in, and there's no transition from the "muggle" world to be made. The "ordinary world" as part of the archetypal hero's journey arc is a different thing, and I think you're confusing the two. /2cents


----------



## Jabrosky (Nov 28, 2013)

Malik said:


> So many urban fantasies I'm reading lately follow the same tired old pattern: young loser kid with no redeeming values whatsoever discovers (a magic sword, a teleportal, that he's half-dragon, that he's a wizard, that his D&D game is real, that he can step into a videogame) and suddenly becomes awesome for no adequately-explored reason.


For my part, I prefer to write heroes who start out already having some skills and other advantages under their belt. Coming-of-age narratives about adolescent weaklings not only grow tiresome, but as a writer I don't particularly enjoy having to delay the part where the heroes start showing off their awesomeness until the middle act. My guess is that those narratives are only popular because, at least to inexperienced young people, they're the most obvious means of bringing about character change.


----------



## Helen (Nov 28, 2013)

Ireth said:


> there's no transition from the "muggle" world to be made.



He's transiting from the hobbit world.


----------



## Ireth (Nov 28, 2013)

Helen said:


> He's transiting from the hobbit world.



My point stands. Frodo's ordinary world is still a piece of the fantasy world he lives in, and he knows it from the start. Harry, if we're keeping with the comparison, has to learn of his wizard heritage, and by extension the entire wizarding world, when Hagrid shows up. Also, more to the point, LOTR is an entirely fabricated world (unless you believe it to be a mythological retelling of our world's history), and the Muggle world of HP is clearly our own.


----------



## Helen (Nov 28, 2013)

Ireth said:


> My point stands. Frodo's ordinary world is still a piece of the fantasy world he lives in, and he knows it from the start. Harry, if we're keeping with the comparison, has to learn of his wizard heritage, and by extension the entire wizarding world, when Hagrid shows up. Also, more to the point, LOTR is an entirely fabricated world (unless you believe it to be a mythological retelling of our world's history), and the Muggle world of HP is clearly our own.



Are you suggesting that LOTR is not hero's journey?


----------



## Ireth (Nov 28, 2013)

Helen said:


> Are you suggesting that LOTR is not hero's journey?



I didn't say that. I'm saying that LOTR is "absolute fantasy", and that HP is the "hidden underbelly" type of fantasy, as in the original post. That is the be-all and end-all of my argument. Let's not drag this out unnecessarily.


----------



## Helen (Nov 28, 2013)

Ireth said:


> I didn't say that. I'm saying that LOTR is "absolute fantasy", and that HP is the "hidden underbelly" type of fantasy, as in the original post. That is the be-all and end-all of my argument. Let's not drag this out unnecessarily.



I'm not trying to drag it out at all. Just trying to synch to what you are trying to say.

That's more or less the distinction the OP made -  he classed one film as one type and the other as another type.

And he asked which works better.

And I said that both are very similar when you get down to it.

So what's your point?


----------



## Ireth (Nov 28, 2013)

I was just trying to clarify what I thought was a mistake about the distinction between the two types mentioned in the poll. That's all. Apologies if I assumed anything incorrectly. I'll bow out now if I'm not accomplishing anything more; I've said my piece a few times over.


----------



## Devor (Nov 29, 2013)

When you mess up with a fantasy world, it just feels like you messed up.  When you mess up with the "underbelly" fantasy, it sometimes feels like the underbelly idea itself is to blame.  It's easy for readers to start asking things like "People really don't know about this?" or "You expect me to believe this kind of stuff is happening all over the world throughout history?"  It's a much bigger suspension of disbelief that you're asking of your reader.

I love Harry Potter.  But you've got to admit that Rowling gets away with the underbelly side of her story by making it into a running gag, by using it for comic relief.  That's brilliant, on her part.  People have an easier time suspending disbelief when there's humor involved.  But in her story there's also a tremendous divide between the wizarding world and the muggle world that only crosses over at specific points in the story.  There's also a thinner vein of comic relief that runs throughout the story, making the comedy feel less out of place.

That may not be so easy to replicate; the bigger the magic, the more the impact it would have on the world, the more it plays into the plot, and the better your explanation needs to be.  There's a whole slew of go-to horror fantasy tropes with built in explanations, of course.  Vampires, werewolves, monsters, Cthulhu.  But it's a challenge as you try to be more original or draw upon more traditional elements.


----------



## druidofwinter (Nov 29, 2013)

I much prefer complete fantasy worlds. The reason I read fantasy is to get out of this world.


----------



## Son of the Roman (Jun 5, 2020)

Mythical Traveller said:


> I think the standard excuse is the "Salem Witch Trial" one. All us muggles are bound to be afraid of anyone who is different, and therefore we will inevitably seek to exterminate them. So beings with magical powers or other abnormal traits have to hide themselves away from us, lest they risk a genocide of their kind.




Still doesn’t make sense if there is magical beings apart from humans, or if the “wizards” are more powerful than humans.


----------



## Kasper Hviid (Jun 5, 2020)

I vote Underbelly, solely because it's still somewhat unexplored territory, compared to epic fantasy.

At one time, it seems, underbelly was the standard way of doing children/YA fantasy: Alice's Adventure in Wonderland, Little Nemo, Peter Pan, Narnia, The Neverending Story. I think underbelly still carries this YA expectation. Harry Potter didn't help any.

I have been trying to list all the underbelly stuff I could come up with. Probably not of much interest here are the Danish *Alex på Eventyr* and *Krøniker fra Kvæhl*, so I won't mention those. But here's some stuff, in no particular order:

*Un Lun Dun* (China Miéville)
Makes fun of YA tropes and goes for Alice in Wonderland wackiness while maintaining a consistent world. I think underbelly works really well when the fantastic is taken to such extremes; we have a protagonist with whom we can share our distance to the weirdness.


> They set off under the early light of the UnSun, leaving the utterings to bicker and bargain with each other and chaotically start to make decisions. Deeba, Hemi, Curdle and the book walked out of the Talklands to look for a forest in a house, accompanied by the words Cauldron, Diss and Bling.



*Spirited Away
The Labyrinth*
A girl enters a strange world to retrieve some lost family, and learns something along the way.

*The Matrix*
Like pretty much any other VR-themed movie, it plays with the idea that what we see as reality is simply a simulation.

*The Legendary Moonlight Sculptor*
Korean light novel series. the other world is a virtual reality MMORPG. Lighthearted low-brain entertainment, which nevertheless gives a solid sensation of living inside a VR game.

*The Cannibals of Candyland*
The relative normality of the "real" world gives contrast to Candyland.

*The Mall (Downside #1)*
In search for a lost child, an unlikely pair ends up in a grotesque underworld beneath a mall. While there is some consistency to the world, we only gets snippets of understanding. This is a great strength in underbelly, I think; since we see the world through the eyes of a protagonist who is just as clueless as ourselves, the author can get away with withholding information and keep things mysterious.


----------



## Darkfantasy (Jun 6, 2020)

I love the "secret underbelly" better when it's done well because it's very easy to mess up. I've read books/watched movies and thought to myself: "people really haven't got a clue about this world? It sticks out like a sore thumb." I watched a vampire movie a while back where vampires were killing humans for food (obviously) and no one noticed that the only real trauma to this dead body seemed to be a bite on the neck. And that this was happening quite frequently in just one city...that's going to be in the new papers for sure. Another book followed a journalist who was reporting on unusual rituals performed on murder victims. The city was gripped in fear and of course, or journalist becomes a detective and gets sucked in (no pun intended) this paranormal world. But these beings had been here, they claimed longer than humans, so why was everybody now gripped in fear? He solved it by the end of the book. So why hadn't it been solved before and why were people only just noticing in 2011? So it can be done well but also seem false.

But I like the contrast of the familiar and the strange. And seeing how our world would be different with another system running along side it. For some reason it feels more real to me and more believable. I like mysteries and think their are so many in our own world you don't need to go to another planet to explore odd things. I like movies like The Mist and not just for it's killer ending but you have a basic day turn into a surreal nightmare. The things the MC was worried about that morning no longer are relevant. And it does go to show you how suddenly life can throw you a curve ball and yesterday's concerns no longer matter. Also, there tends to be less of a learning curve and you're eased into the story a bit slower, that's why so many children's fantasies start with the normal world. Our world isn't really that safe, but I like when it suddenly becomes safe compared to somewhere else. Other world fantasy with elves, dragons...has been done to death and I feel urban fantasy could be explored a bit more. I lost interest in epic fantasy a while ok because it could become very samey and formulaic and not in a good way. But that's just my opinion.


----------



## The Dark One (Jun 6, 2020)

I love a good real world fantasy or also sci-fi story. One of my favourite books growing up was Slan, which is an excellent secret sci-fil story involving the next phase of human evolution (even though it tends to be castigated as evil right wing propaganda that I've always been too stupid or too insouciant to notice).

My own story coming out next year is a secret-aliens-among-us type story, but quite original for all that...I hope.


----------



## TTCiloth (Jun 6, 2020)

The secret underbelly and absolute fantasy are such separate categories that it's difficult to compare them. Audience might have a harder time immersing themselves into a secret underbelly story because they might try to add connections where there shouldn't. However, Harry Potter is a secret underbelly so immersing the reader can be done.


----------



## The Dark One (Jun 6, 2020)

Obviously both can be good. What I like about secret fantasy is that it links the story to the reader's own reality and makes the story seem more real.


----------



## Gospodin (Jun 6, 2020)

I don't really have an opinion. Just dropping in to comment that the "secret underbelly" usually goes by _*masquerade*_ for any looking for further information.

Masquerade - TV Tropes


----------



## Kasper Hviid (Jun 6, 2020)

Guess we need to differentiate between a) hero sucked into another dimension, and b) hero discovering some underbelly of the real world


----------



## KaeSeven7 (Jun 6, 2020)

New here so sorry if this response is all over the place!

I think it could also depend on your characters and plot. If you want the world to feel secretive and maybe like an escapism, choose the 'underbelly' (great description, by the way). If you want your main character to stand out this could work too, and things could change dramatically in this world without the need for much transitioning. Then again, if you prefer writing about the gradual changes of a world, or get immersed extremely into the laws and physics, maybe it would be best to keep the reader ingrained in this world to avoid any confusion when switching back and forth. In the end try writing a scene in both ways and whichever you prefer, the reader usually would too!

Personally I enjoy using the true fantasy world, but slowly revealing the unsettling aspects so before the reader knows it, something they thought was familiar has become quite the opposite (hehe).


----------

