Belen C. Lane, theological professor and scholar of storytelling in ministry, points
out that fantasy literature is loved because good stories allow one to imagine traveling to
new places, experiencing different lives, and becoming new people (399). Readers enjoy
momentarily ignoring their lives and their world to entertain these new, different ones.
Yet, when Fantasy is considered escapist literature, both Tolkien and Lewis argue that
Fantasy is, in fact, the opposite; through the use of imagination, Fantasy communicates
reality and simple elements of reality in a new, fresh light, allowing one to return to
reality with a fresh joyous and appreciative attitude. Lewis wrote that stories portray a
happiness that is “full of the simplest and most attainable things—food, sleep, exercise,
friendship, the face of nature, even (in a sense) religion,” which paradoxically frees one
and strengthens one’s view of real life (“On Stories” 454). Tolkien agrees, and just as he
pointed out in his definition of “fairy-stories,” he further notes that it was fantasy
literature that first illuminated fundamental aspects of life for him, such as stone, iron,
trees, grass, fire, bread, and wine. Thus, through using the imagination and creating
Fantasy, which is rooted in the primary world, simple things are glorified, as in “by the
making of Pegasus, horses were ennobled” (Tolkien 147). Tolkien calls this rediscovery
and appreciation of reality Recovery. Lane also promotes Tolkien’s and Lewis’s ideas,
expressing that to consider approaching Fantasy as escapism, is “to fail to recognize the
importance of the imagination in questioning and dismantling the unjust structures of a
world stubbornly resistant to change.” Put more simply, the creation and rhetoric of
another world pushes one to question the reputation of the real world (Lane 401).
Furthermore, when Tolkien provides his defense against Fantasy being accused of
escapism, he provides an excellent metaphor that has already been touched on. Those