Does grounding in reality make for a relateable story?

[HotfireLegend]

So basically, I've been doing some research and it seems that popular things became popular because they were often grounded in reality, with a touch of the fantastic. Superhero films (Daredevil, Marvel stuff etc - even though I'm not a fan of superheroes, or at least the western depiction of them) are grounded by being set in a modern era (I have yet to see something set in the real, non-fantasy future or past in this vein though!) and this means that the characters in these films are easy to relate to because they are sharing similar experiences to you.

Harry Potter used the experience of a school + magic
Daredevil uses 21st century issues + hero powers
Agatha Christie's Miss Marple and Poirot used the past (more modern in their era) + supreme intelligence
Horowitz's Alex Rider used the modern era + super spy kid

There are obvious exceptions to this formula, but these tend to be pioneers in their own field.
Lord of the Rings, Treasure Island, etc. They are not grounded in reality, but I believe LOTR was one of the first large-scale fantasy media phonenemons whilst Treasure Island was simply the first fiction book.

There are other things I quite like, such as Brandon Sanderson's fantasy books, but none of them have hit full-scale. Most people haven't heard of them, but they're HUGE in the NICHE of fantasy books, which is the main distinction I'm trying to make here.

Pretty much every famous book I can think of like A Series of Unfortunate Events or Tintin was grounded in the modern era of the time. Hunger Games uses a dystopian future, but very little that is not found in modern times already. Star Wars is the one large exception I can think of here, like Lord of The Rings. If I was to say anything, I'd say Star Wars is the Sci-fi beacon, and LOTR the fantasy beacon, everything else falling in the realm of modernness, to a degree.

Is their (Sanderson's books, for instance) lack of popularity (mass media-wise) due to being less relateable, plot, setting or character-wise, do you think? Is a modern or otherwise-relevant or desirable setting paramount to mass-media success, with a few exceptions? Can success be pulled off with characters alone?

 

[Zebestian]

From what I have gathered over the time it seems that there are certain patterns that books, movies, games, etc. follow. How many fantasy books have you read where there's an all-deciding giant battle waiting at the end? How many RPGs have you played where the ultimate objective is to save the world? Ever heard of the phrase "never stop a running system"? Why try out something new if most of the audience are gonna swallow something that follows established patterns? Popularity is heavily influenced my mass-media and vice versa. You need to be reported about, you have to be important enough to be recognized. And how is that done? You just have to have enough potential to be profitable. And I think all this fuss around profit kills creativity. Creators are forced into this established patterns to even be recognized. They have to be hella lucky if they want to get something new out there.

 

[Macro]

In my opinions: I think every story is inspired from reality in some way. I heard many times that LOTR was inspired by WW2. I'm not a fan of popular trends showing (especially memes..) up in video games though, it's a big immersion killer for me. They can be funny if the game is meant to be funny though.

Myths happen over and over again too and I tend to enjoy myth based stories a lot. They are fun for me since no one really has a clear record of what inspired them. I do wish the tried and done tropes for certain myths would change more though. For example, I am very very tired of dragons being final/major villains. How about the so called heroes being the bad guys and not even knowing it?

Hellboy was interesting for me because he was a good demon, even though he was created to end the world.

 

[Wize1]

Reality is the only thing we have to compare fantasy to. So absolutely. Fantasy is basically stretching the truth and making it more interesting or magical.
[doublepost=1446550163,1446493714][/doublepost]

From what I have gathered over the time it seems that there are certain patterns that books, movies, games, etc. follow. How many fantasy books have you read where there's an all-deciding giant battle waiting at the end? How many RPGs have you played where the ultimate objective is to save the world? Ever heard of the phrase "never stop a running system"? Why try out something new if most of the audience are gonna swallow something that follows established patterns? Popularity is heavily influenced my mass-media and vice versa. You need to be reported about, you have to be important enough to be recognized. And how is that done? You just have to have enough potential to be profitable. And I think all this fuss around profit kills creativity. Creators are forced into this established patterns to even be recognized. They have to be hella lucky if they want to get something new out there.

bravo kaimen

 

[Companion Wulf]

I think every story is inspired from reality in some way. I heard many times that LOTR was inspired by WW2.

Agreed. His own experiences during WWI, and his son's during WWII, were crucial influences on the book, but Tolkien insisted that there was no allegory of any kind. He left that up to his readers to decide.

Tolkien was inspired largely by his academic fields: philology and Germanic literature (particularly mythology and poetry). He once described LOTR as basically a religious and Catholic work, subtle at first, but the more you read it the more the religious aspect becomes clear. In fact, many theological themes do underlie much of the narrative, such as the battle of good versus evil, triumphing over pride with humility, and repentence, self-sacrifice, salvation and resurrection. He even mentions the line in the Lord's Prayer about leading not into temptation in relation to Frodo's struggle with the One Ring's power.

LOTR is set in a pre-Christian era, but with modern Christian influences. God IS the Lord of the Rings, the One God of Middle-earth, who created the actual world of this planet (thus, the entire back-influence is the world that God created).

 

[Wiskersthefif]

The thing that makes stories relatable are the themes and characters. "Lord of the Rings", for instance, is about overcoming impossible odds, the corruption that power brings, etc. These are all things which people can relate to, things people dream about. A story can have a completely "what is even going on?" plot (i.e. A story about a sentient Windex bottle, who secretly desires a tall, green, and handsome stalk of celery; but they are unable to be together, because cleaning products and food don't go together!) and still be very relatable.

So, in regards to a story being relatable, it's all about themes and characters (I didn't really touch on characters, but I think everyone knows how characters can be relatable). Plot is usually used to generate interest. An example of this is the "Star Wars" franchise, the themes themselves are not that interesting, but the universe/lore is excellent; and draws people into it.