Game News Big Huge RPG is Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning

[Lesifoere]

You want to know my definition? True Greatness stems from producing a work of 'art' that stands the test of time. The Lord of the Rings certainly qualifies considering many fans weren't even born when Tolkien died.

Do you unquestioningly consider the entirety of the western canon an ocean brimming with true greatness, then? Much of it has endured only thanks to academia, which tends to be allergic to change and displacing established works/authors, and prefers to regurgitate the same syllabus over and over. I don't think Jane Eyre is very good, for example, and it's withstood the test of time for a lot longer than Tolkien. Heart of Darkness was just the result of a self-centered white dude patting himself furiously on the back on how enlightened he was while reaching out to a certain type of bleeding-heart pseudo-progressive liberals.

I am pretty sure the Lord of the Rings will still be read 100-200 years from now.

Wouldn't be too sure. It didn't affect social changes, didn't change/alter the English language, didn't lead/create/advance any literary movement except for derivative fantasy (which isn't taken seriously by... anyone at all), didn't offer any commentary of note (WAR IS BAD! World War II is very traumatic!), wasn't the first to do anything, etc etc. Come to think of it, what has it ever done? If you're going to reach for the popularity it-touched-people's-imagination argument, so have Harry Potter and Twilight.

 

[nomask7]

Lesifoere, which would you say is Mieville's best book? (I haven't read more than a few pages from any.) And which three books, in general, would you recommend for me to read?

 

[Ruprekt]

LoTR will probably still be read in 200 years for the reason that it isn't a novel.

 

[ironyuri]

Wouldn't be too sure. It didn't affect social changes, didn't change/alter the English language, didn't lead/create/advance any literary movement except for derivative fantasy (which isn't taken seriously by... anyone at all), didn't offer any commentary of note (WAR IS BAD! World War II is very traumatic!), wasn't the first to do anything, etc etc. Come to think of it, what has it ever done? If you're going to reach for the popularity it-touched-people's-imagination argument, so have Harry Potter and Twilight.

Lesifoere you are full of fucking shit. You also seem to have misunderstood the Lord of the Rings. Also you're full of shit.

The wedding is off.

 

[Darth Roxor]

You also seem to have misunderstood the Lord of the Rings.

What is there to understand?

 

[Ruprekt]

You also seem to have misunderstood the Lord of the Rings.

What is there to understand?

Nothing since it's not a herp teach me truths about life derp novel thing.

It's a piece of world creation and there's nothing to 'understand' there given how fully absorbed this has become into our culture. Tolkein wanted to create a new mythology and he succeeded beyond what could have been his greatest expectations.

 

[Lesifoere]

Wouldn't be too sure. It didn't affect social changes, didn't change/alter the English language, didn't lead/create/advance any literary movement except for derivative fantasy (which isn't taken seriously by... anyone at all), didn't offer any commentary of note (WAR IS BAD! World War II is very traumatic!), wasn't the first to do anything, etc etc. Come to think of it, what has it ever done? If you're going to reach for the popularity it-touched-people's-imagination argument, so have Harry Potter and Twilight.

Lesifoere you are full of fucking shit. You also seem to have misunderstood the Lord of the Rings. Also you're full of shit.

The wedding is off.

Who's butthurt now. Tolkien's never going to compare to writers who actually altered the language, the ones who created genres of poetry, the ones who started literary movements and challenged thought and convention instead of wanking over their own comfy vision of England that never was.

Fags who are impressed at his world-building are hilarious, anyway. Go read the Eddas, Icelandic sagas and Old English verses or something. They expose Tolkien's dumbed-down crap for what it is: insipid and bloodless.

Lesifoere, which would you say is Mieville's best book? (I haven't read more than a few pages from any.) And which three books, in general, would you recommend for me to read?

The Scar, easily. Perdido Street Station is mostly an interesting exercise in setting (yes, yes, and socialism), but The Scar is much more human, for lack of a better word. Most don't find the protagonist at all likable. I don't either, but I thought her incredibly well-drawn.

In general? Iunno. Your reading tastes can be pretty oblique. I'm a bit weirded out at recommending you anything, to be honest.

 

[nomask7]

Nothing since it's not a herp teach me truths about life derp novel thing.

It's a piece of world creation

It's a romance, like the thousands of romances before it. Why do you think Cervantes wrote his satire of just such romances if there were none before? I would agree that Christopher's collections of his Dad's notebooks constitute world-building, but you need to look up the word 'romance'. Tolkien himself callled LotR a romance. It's a book that's, ultimately, nothing special.

 

[nomask7]

In general? Iunno. Your reading tastes can be pretty oblique. I'm a bit weirded out at recommending you anything, to be honest.

Just the three "best novels" according to Lesifoere, then. Be a nice girl and play along.

 

[Ruprekt]

I was referring to tolkeins overall project.

Anyway, I don't care for literary fiction at all myself. Tragedy, comedy, romance (yes I know the word) I can enjoy; but the idea that narrative should be driven by character or "personality" (something I don't believe exists) is ridiculous to me. Same for tedious conceits about 'life' being driven by sex and death (which is again nonsense and ridiculous).

Looking for meaning in novels is an exercise in the absurd.

 

[Lesifoere]

I'm hard-pressed to name a top-[number] so I'll just fire off the ones that I at this moment remember as being the most affecting rather than intellectually striking (though they aren't mutually exclusive qualities, obviously). Geoff Ryman's Was, Catherynne M. Valente's The Ice Puzzle, Zelazny's Lord of Light.

 

[ironyuri]

Fags who are impressed at his world-building are hilarious, anyway. Go read the Eddas, Icelandic sagas and Old English verses or something. They expose Tolkien's dumbed-down crap for what it is: insipid and bloodless.

I've read the Kalevala you shitbag. And Beowulf. He took more inspiration from the Kalevala (the Finnish national epic poem) than many other things.

And no one is talking about his world building, in a previous post I stated that Tolkien built his world in order to provide a locus for his language creation. Obviously you can't, or didn't fucking read it.

There is a reason Tolkien continues to be important and continues to be a focus for academics, that is because his work is an important contribution. Further, the fact that you write it off as some petty fucking allegory for war is absolute trash you fucking cuntbag.

Tolkien is not just an allegory for war the entire Lord of the Rings saga and The History of Middle Earth series are works of history, actual works of history. The Silmarillion is a mytho-poetic epic. He is reproducing genres.

Each of Tolkien's races forms an ethnic or national community based along the histoircal lines of one or other European power. The dwarves for example are based heavily on the Prussian idea of blood and soil and ethnic nationalism. The Shirefolk/Hobbits are based on the English and are, despite their simple appearance shown to be carrying out some manifest destiny which will ultimately save the European project.

Tolkien's work is not important as fantasy literature it is important because it is a work of real history screened through fantasy.

The fact that his prose is heavy and often boring, that his world creation and character construction is often unoriginal (for example his wholesale theft of names from Nordic sagas, especially for the dwarves and Gandalf) does not detract from the work's importance. The purpose of the work is the resolution of historical contradictions at the imaginary level. Fuck. FUCK.


Ps: I forgive you and I've decided not to cancel the wedding.

Edit: I didn't even get into Tolkien's linguistic creations and how they relate to forms of European national identity via Herder et al.

You have made me rage too hard. Fuck.

 

[nomask7]

Thanks Lesi. The library here doesn't carry copies so you've at least supported the authors (the two of them that are alive) by making me order those books.

Rup, I don't disagree that looking for meaning is absurd, but it can also be fun, useful, and other things. Not that you can't look for meaning in LOTR. I just don't think it has any in addition to what other heroic Christian romances have, and there are many.

 

[Lesifoere]

I love making Tolkien fanboys snap. Beautiful. I knew you would eventually.

There is a reason Tolkien continues to be important and continues to be a focus for academics, that is because his work is an important contribution. Further, the fact that you write it off as some petty fucking allegory for war is absolute trash you fucking cuntbag.

Tolkien is not just an allegory for war the entire Lord of the Rings saga and The History of Middle Earth series are works of history, actual works of history. The Silmarillion is a mytho-poetic epic. He is reproducing genres.

Haha wow, you actually believe in all this in your heart of hearts. "Reproducing" is a keyword here, btw. Not that it's even a good reproduction.

Tolkien's work is not important as fantasy literature it is important because it is a work of real history screened through fantasy.
...
The purpose of the work is the resolution of historical contradictions at the imaginary level. Fuck. FUCK.

Even as if all this were true rather than you reading what you want into it, and even if this "real history screened through fantasy" mattered--it doesn't--Tolkien was a still very, very poor writer. I liken him to today's basement nerd boys (for that matter, Tolkien's attitude to gender suggests that his exposure to the opposite sex was... limited. I feel bad for his wife), and his output much like said nerd boys' variants of Eragon. With much more sophistication and literacy, of course, but the core isn't too different. Wish fulfillment set in a comfortable lala-land. Intellectually it is hollow; stylistically it has no grace whatsoever; imaginatively it was regurgitated material purged of all character and spirit, limping along on the crutch of disingenuous, feel-good Catholicism.

It's not all that important.

Thanks Lesi. The library here doesn't carry copies so you've at least supported the authors (the two of them that are alive) by making me order those books.

Chances are good you'll hate Ryman and Valente, though.

 

[ironyuri]

Even as if all this were true rather than you reading what you want into it, and even if this "real history screened through fantasy" mattered--it doesn't--Tolkien was a still very, very poor writer. I liken him to today's basement nerd boys (for that matter, Tolkien's attitude to gender suggests that his exposure to the opposite sex was... limited. I feel bad for his wife), and his output much like said nerd boys' variants of Eragon

Some of Tolkien's letters to his sons describe his affairs which led to him having to postpone his university degree. Apparently you fail to contextualise you post-modernist fuckbag.

Anyway, there was no snapping, that was mainly amusement. I accept that you don't like Tolkien and have poor taste in fantasy.

My supervisor is currently producing a book on the historical in Tolkien, a friend is submitting a PhD on Gene Wolfe/Tolkien and mythopoesis and he (Tolkien) is becoming ever more important in academic studies of history in fantasy. So what you say is fairly inaccurate. I still love you. When will we send our the invitations?

 

[Lesifoere]

I didn't say anything about his academic importance, just that ultimately his self-indulgent Disneyfied Germanic rip-offs aren't at all important in its blandness, absence of thought and meaning. Since I was a lit student, I know for a fact people submit theses on Harry Potter and there're university-level classes devoted to studying Anne Rice and Stephen King. Tolkien's in pretty exalted company!

Also, nah. Your kind are beneath me. I've no use for peasants.

 

[ironyuri]

I didn't say anything about his academic importance, just that ultimately his self-indulgent Disneyfied Germanic rip-offs aren't at all important in its blandness, absence of thought and meaning. Since I was a lit student, I know for a fact people submit theses on Harry Potter and there're university-level classes devoted to studying Anne Rice and Stephen King. Tolkien's in pretty exalted company!

Also, nah. Your kind are beneath me. I've no use for peasants.

Well then. Good day, madame.

Edit: "Germanic rip-offs aren't at all important in their blandness

I only think of Tolkien in terms of academic importance now because I've long since lost the desire to read him for enjoyment. I spent some 7 years on a Tolkien MUSH and 3 years on a Tolkien MUD. Nothing you could say could make me snap as a fanboy after those hellish years.

Also I refuse to accept that people submit theses on Harry Potter. Refuse. To. Accept.

Also, nah. Your kind are beneath me. I've no use for peasants.

Yours words drip like honey from your lips. A tender melody.[/b]

 

[Lesifoere]

Also I refuse to accept that people submit theses on Harry Potter. Refuse. To. Accept.

Tell you what, there have been Salvatore fanboys who handed in essays on Drizzt. Undergrad, but still.

Harry Potter scholarship is a growing field.

 

[JarlFrank]

The Scar, easily. Perdido Street Station is mostly an interesting exercise in setting (yes, yes, and socialism), but The Scar is much more human, for lack of a better word. Most don't find the protagonist at all likable. I don't either, but I thought her incredibly well-drawn.

In general? Iunno. Your reading tastes can be pretty oblique. I'm a bit weirded out at recommending you anything, to be honest.

I actually liked Perdido Street Station best, but that's because I enjoyed the world-building and ideas there most.
The Scar definitely has the best characters and character motivations and you can never be sure what's actually happening.
Currently reading Iron Council and... well, while it's not as good as the previous two, it's enjoyable, even though it reeks of leftist propaganda, and it has much less interesting characters (Judah being the only one who is an interesting character at all).

Also when reading Mieville you should get used to your favourite secondary characters dying in the second half of the novel, where shit usually hits the fan.

 

[ironyuri]

Also I refuse to accept that people submit theses on Harry Potter. Refuse. To. Accept.

Tell you what, there have been Salvatore fanboys who handed in essays on Drizzt. Undergrad, but still.

Harry Potter scholarship is a growing field.

Do not want.

At least there are useful aspects in Tolkien for study. Fucking Potter, fuck.

I don't care if someone submits a gender studies essay on Catti-Brie or a race study shitfuck on Drizzt. Salvatore is simplistic but as I said before it makes good toilet reading.

But Potter must be stopped. Cease this infernal nincompooperie.

 

[JarlFrank]

Also I refuse to accept that people submit theses on Harry Potter. Refuse. To. Accept.

Tell you what, there have been Salvatore fanboys who handed in essays on Drizzt. Undergrad, but still.

Harry Potter scholarship is a growing field.

BEHOLD, THE HORROR:
http://www.amazon.de/Twilight-Philosoph ... 0470484233

The first look at the philosophy behind Stephenie Meyer's bestselling Twilight series

philosophy behind [...] Twilight series

 

[Lesifoere]

While we're at it, why not also showcase--

The Ultimate Harry Potter and Philosophy: Hogwarts for Muggles
Critical Perspectives on Harry Potter (this one's even from Routledge, which is a credible academic press)
Unlocking Harry Potter: Five Keys for the Serious Reader

 

[JarlFrank]

Holy fucking shit.

I did read Harry Potter and enjoyed it (read the first book with about 13 or so, so yeah) but... holy shit.

How can anyone with half a brain come to the idea that fantasy novels for young adults have any real philosophical depth/deeper thoughts behind them than the author thinking "hmm how about a school of wizards"?
Especially novels which are about powerful teenager wizards/vampires that reek of wish fulfillment?

Heck, I wouldn't even dare suggest writing even a simple essay about HP or Twilight to a prof for fear of being laughed at. Hard.

 

[JarlFrank]

Unlocking Harry Potter: Five Keys for the Serious Reader

Looked at it, scrolled down, and saw the pic of the guy who wrote this:

 

[Lesifoere]

Unlocking Harry Potter: Five Keys for the Serious Reader

Looked at it, scrolled down, and saw the pic of the guy who wrote this:

Bwahahahaha.

HP fans can and often argue very passionately about the deep symbolism of, uhm... Harry being a Jesus figure. Voldemort as Hitler and his goons, like, Nazi. And so on. I'm sure there're a few who have sat down and analyzed the color of Harry's eyes.