I've got some flying creatures in a fantasy story I'm working on. There's no magic in their flight though there is magic elsewhere in the world (the rules of the magic currently do not allow the ability to fly). Of course, engineering flying creatures is tricky. While pterodactyls are speculated to be up to 200 lbs, they were skinny and small in comparison to their wing spans (up to 33 feet). Nor do I think that most people know this.
My creatures aren't all that skinny or light. So, would your skepticism on their abilities to fly pull you out of the story?
Posted by InarticulateBabbler (Member # 4849) on :
If it's a fantasy, I'm already suspending my belief of the natural order of things. If you tell me there are fl;ying things, describe them, and use them as the characters would, I'm good. However, if you begin to explain why or how they could--unless it's relevant, or through a character's eyes that would naturally be thinking about that--it will not only make me wonder about the logistics, it will tear me out of the story.
Just write it, see if you feel it looks right afterwards. (Don't worry about it until someone points your fears out.)
Posted by Rommel Fenrir Wolf II (Member # 4199) on :
Well how long are they? Can the people in your story ride them? Or are they just flying creatures that have not been tamed?
RFW2nd
Posted by Tiergan (Member # 7852) on :
Nope.
In fantasy, it takes a lot, I mean a lot, for me to disbelieve if the story captures me. If a house got up and flew, yeah maybe, but a creature, no, not in the least.
Posted by Jericho (Member # 8073) on :
I really liked the question and the concept of the limits of the laws of physics in a world where even magic has laws. I think you could get away with the 'willy suspension' angle. I also think you can engineer a world that would allow for your flying beasties. If gravity were less and/or the atmo lighter or maybe even some organic material that these creatures were made from that allowed for stronger and hollower bones or they could even produce helium or something. I think there are a lot of ways to make it work if it is important for you or the reader to have it work.
Posted by TaleSpinner (Member # 5638) on :
We don't entirely understand how birds fly. Nor do we know how they find their way across thousands of miles when they migrate.
Until recently, we would not have believed craft of metal flying through the air. Even airships and balloons were a bit of a surprise to some.
I think that if flying is presented as a done deal, we'll accept it as long as it's consistent with the rest of the story. (It's totally daft, but who doesn't believe that Superman can fly, or that HP can play Quidditch on a broomstick?)
When I read fantasy I want to suspend my disbelief and will do so willingly provided the author doesn't give me a reason not to. Yes, that's a fragile thing, and it's part of the art IMHO.
Cheers, Pat
Posted by Bent Tree (Member # 7777) on :
*Rubs crystal ball*
I am seeing extends massive wings in your prose
Posted by tommose (Member # 8058) on :
Mathematically, a bumblebee cannot fly. There's no reason that the flying creatures in your world cannot be huge. Hollow bones, A fast flap cycle, deep wings, with more lift area...
If it's a fantasy world in the traditional non-technological world, the reason why would never come into question. They're big flying beasties is all. And good eating!
[This message has been edited by tommose (edited July 12, 2008).]
Posted by Robert Nowall (Member # 2764) on :
Well, Superman started by being "able to leap tall buildings in a single bound." Flying came later...
I suppose it's one of man's oldest dreams to fly like the birds. But airplanes don't "fly like the birds" by any means.
I remember the late Poul Anderson came up with a forced-draft intake as a next-evolutionary step, and used that to produce massive (and intelligent) flying creatures. You gotta come up with something to provide the necessary energy...
Posted by Noele (Member # 8081) on :
I'd say as long as you do the research into flying creatures to get a good idea of the mechanics then you're good to go. It sounds like you've already done that or started it at least. As long as it wasn't something as big as a horse with wings as tiny as a bee, I'd believe it. Heck, I could potentially believe that if given the right context.
Posted by wetwilly (Member # 1818) on :
I've never heard of anybody dropping "The Hobbit" when they find out that Smaug can fly, and he's got to weigh a couple tons. I wouldn't worry about it. Giant flying creatures are a staple of fantasy, so I don't think they require an explanation. It's like space travel in a sci-fi book...it's just part of the genre and doesn't require plausibility or an explanation.
Posted by tommose (Member # 8058) on :
Smaug could fly? What a ripoff!
Posted by halogen (Member # 6494) on :
Nah, I think the dragon concept has been beaten down to the point where the average person wont think twice about whether or not a two-ton lizard really should be able to fly. I wouldn't give it a second thought.
With that said it would be interesting to read a story that took some fact in with its fantasy.
That is to say, (using dragons as an example) perhaps the two-ton-lizard-with-wings isn't the best at flying, really more of a glider as opposed to all that swooping and twirling.
That or the lizard can fly at a young age and as it ages and increases in size the wings become less useful. The lizard could go through three stages; flying (the size of a dog), gliding (size of a horse), walking (size of an elephant). At the last stage the wings are old, useless appendages.
[This message has been edited by halogen (edited July 14, 2008).]
Posted by Jericho (Member # 8073) on :
Halogen, that is where I was. I was intrigued by the idea of there being limited magic and trying to make the rest conform to the physics of the world. I'd like to hear from annepin the intent.
Posted by annepin (Member # 5952) on :
Interesting spectrum of thoughts. Thanks to all who weighed in here.
My reason for asking is twofold. First, I'm sometimes amazed by the kinds of details that seem to bother people. They might believe in, say, FTL, but not in a weapon that could destroy an entire planet (this example is purely hypothetical! Any resemblance to real or actual opinions is unintentional).
The second reason is something close to what Jericho pointed out. I'm trying to create a "realistic" fantasy world, odd as that seems. The rules of magic i decided on don't allow for flying, so things who fly have to do so strictly on the rules of physics. I'm comfortable fudging the physics a bit, but I did want to try to make it as plausible as possible. So I was curious how people would interpret as plausible, give a fantasy setting where there is some ability to bend physics, but not entirely. There's a sort of spectrum of fantasy, I guess, and I wanted to investigate where the ability to fly, given wings, falls with people. If that makes any sense at all.
Posted by tommose (Member # 8058) on :
Actually, I think I need to reverse my opinion, based on the comments I've read, as well as some thought about the great fantasy stuff I've read.
If your rules for magic don't allow for the suspension of physical laws allowing the flight of non-aerodynamic bodies, then large non-aerodynamic creatures shouldn't be able to fly.
When I think about the great fantasy pieces I've read, there's been consistency and realism. If you want a believable setting, then there shouldn't be "exceptions" provided for literary fancy or convenience.
A situation where nobody flies, except for creature / character / object X leads to the big "huh" moment that can throw off the reader. Any time that you choose to ignore the rules of physics, there should be some explanation of how this is done, not necessarily written, but at least in your mind.
Tom
Posted by Doc Brown (Member # 1118) on :
There are still ways to make your creature fly. Heavier than air flight requires a bunch of energy (muscles) and a way to direct the energy (aerodynamics).
Give any creature powerful enough muscles and it can fly. Even a human could fly by flapping his/her arms, if the arms have tough enough skin & bones, and the muscles have enough power.
Normal metabolic muscles probably cannot provide that much power. In that case you can give your creature a nuclear power source. Maybe it eats uranium.
Posted by rstegman (Member # 3233) on :
one could use magic to modify physics
magic could make bones stronger so they can br lighter.
magic could make the body more energy efficient.
magic provide more energy or power than physics normally possible.
combine these and one could have a flying T-Rex with the wings of a Sesna plane
Posted by tommose (Member # 8058) on :
Now, that's interesting. With those rules, while you cannot directly use magic to create flight, you can use magic to alter individual physical properties in order to allow a creature to fly.
Using those rules, one could not only have "a flying T-Rex with the wings of a Cessna (sic) plane", but one could have a flying person wearing webbed finger gloves.
If, as stated, "the rules of the magic currently do not allow the ability to fly", then the question is, is it that magic allows no direct provision for flight, or no indirect provision. If flight is disallowed in either direct or indirect usage, then you can't have flying beasties who don't adhere to the laws of physics. You can, however, tinker with the laws of physics. A low density world with very light gravity, for example. A world along the lines of Niven's "The Integral Trees"?
If flight through magic is disallowed directly only, then you can have magical flying creatures, violating physical laws, AND you leave open a great story line about people in such a fantasy setting trying to figure out how to fly. Which spells, in which combination...
Tom
Posted by Crystal Stevens (Member # 8006) on :
That's already been done, more-or-less, in the Xanth series. The flying centaurs of Xanth flick themselves with their tails to make their bodies lighter so they can use their wings to fly. They can also use a flick of their tail to make other things light. Say like the people they might be tranporting from one place to another.
Posted by Rommel Fenrir Wolf II (Member # 4199) on :
Or the creature can be filled with a lighter than air element like Hydrogen or Helium. Like the Hindenburg or Graf Zeppelins in the 1930’s, ahh the golden days of air travel.
I wonder when they will build the next zeppelin, and name it Hindenburg II. I should build my own and name it the LED ZEPPELIN, zeppelin.
RFW2nd
Posted by Robert Nowall (Member # 2764) on :
Smaug can't fly...but dragons do not appear "on stage" in The Lord of the Rings...the Nazgul do but Tolkien was aware they resembled (in size if nothing else) flying creatures that once existed.
*****
On Zepplins---not long ago, the Zepplin company made a small Zepplin for possible use in the tourist trade. I was hoping it would lead to more, but I haven't heard. (The company of course still exists in Germany---they make aluminum products.)
Posted by Rommel Fenrir Wolf II (Member # 4199) on :
Do they make Titanium aluminum aircraft framing?
I need to find some for my plane that I want to build
But should I build my own zeppelin and call it The Led Zeppelin zeppelin
RFW2nd
Posted by wetwilly (Member # 1818) on :
Woops. My mistake. Been a while since I read "The Hobbit." I thought I remembered the human guy at the end shooting an arrow into Smaug's soft spot while Smaug flew overhead, ravaging the city. Faulty memory, I guess. I still stand by the idea of what I was saying, though, even if my example was bad.
Posted by Robert Nowall (Member # 2764) on :
Should'a said the Nazgul's steeds, not the Nazgul themselves, the Ringwraiths...the Nazgul and their steeds appeared together, but the Nazgul also appeared separately...
Posted by Robert Nowall (Member # 2764) on :
Y'know, sometimes I type things without reading them before hand. This time I posted it, waited a day, posted something else---then noticed it.
Smaug can fly---did fly---did just as "wetwilly" said.