Have you never read any of the stories where magic WAS explained? Powers from the gods, demonic gifts, the natural progression of human evolution to access energies that otherwise lay beyond our reach... these have all been used for explanations of magic. There can be reasons applied, and the best fantasy -- like the best science fiction -- often delves into these reasons behind the forces existing. The entire point I've been trying to make, though I'll admit I've possibly gone about it badly, is that in fiction magic is often used to emphasize the point that just because something can be explained doesn't mean it needs to be.

Consider your "magic potion" versus "wonder drug" situation above. The former name for the product emphasizes its unique and mysterious nature. You could delve into the deeper meaning of it by examining the spells cast, where their power comes from, what ingredients were used for what purposes, and so on, but all of that is unnecessary for the character to know; the knowledge that it is a magic potion is enough to satisfy their curiosity more often than not. Your wonder drug explanation, on the other hand, emphasizes the idea that you are trying to impose scientific rules upon how the object works, and as such for its operation to make sense some knowledge of that science is necessary. By trying to place your story within the realm of "it could happen to you!" you agree to that realm's rule sets, and consequently any deviation from them is seen as a reason to question it.

Continuing with the comparison, think about what the potion/drug might cause. Body shrinkage? Impossible with the way that biology and physics works, so the "magic potion" is the only reasonable explanation given the limitations of current science. Changing of bone structure/anatomic configuration/race/etc. all fall under the same rule, given that rewriting someone's DNA is a sure-fire way to kill them, not turn them into a five-three blonde bombshell who loves shopping and men when they were formerly a six-two hetero linebacker for the Saints. Perhaps this falls under your idea that magic is not expected to make sense while science fiction is, but that's because of that one little niggling catch in there: Science.

Take it or leave it. People don't like magic better, but neither are any of us professional writers who have weeks on end in which to do research into the underlying science behind what we write. Using magic eases the need for long-winded explanations that distract from the story, and minimizes reader complaints, allowing writers to get their stories across without having to worry as much about being nit-picked to death. Science fiction practically ASKS for this by insisting on the "science" element of its label, again, grounding it in real life and the rules thereof, and even then authors often get away with TREMENDOUS amounts of leeway concerning their transformation ideas. For a great example why not read any of the Caregivers universe stories, or even Marina Twelve's very good series "The Last Frontier." Both are examples of science fiction where the deep explanation of most of the science is largely taken for granted, with only occasional forays into deeper explanations. On the other hand, Maggie Finson's Heaven and Hell series, as well as its spinoffs, are decent examples of a series where magical transformations are featured with a (for the universe) relatively deep explanation of the powers behind it. For a non-TG example of the latter, check out Neil Gaiman's "American Gods;" an absolutely riveting read, and full of deep explanations to both spirituality and supernatural powers that are internally consistent.

In a lot of ways, magic and science fiction are two sides of the same coin, with many stories even crossing the borders between the two. Both have their uses and places, and both receive about equal use in TG fiction if you bother to look closely enough.

By the way -- I never said trying to understand the appeals of either was silly. What is silly is ignoring the answers because they aren't the one you were looking for. People have given plenty of reasons for the appeal of each and the popularity of each if you would care to collate the data you've been given, so your constant insistence that no explanation has been given indicates that you have ignored all data that doesn't seem like a good reason to you without considering the difference in other people's personalities and requirements. Pardon how I shall put this, but that is not being provocative -- it is being closed-minded to the differences in how other people think and feel. It may not line up for you. Okay. But for someone who seems to be seeking some logical explanation, to ignore the information before you is a highly illogical way to go about it.

Melanie E.