Tolkien is an awful writer. He can't do characterisatuon at all. So he'll overcompensate by spending 15 pages describing the songs that the elves sing around the camp fire.
He invented a whole language so the book is le good.
Anon, I don't belittle Tolkien's achievements and intellect.
However, he should have spent his time on things that make the story better like beter editing, better characterization, plot, etc instead of wasting his time on pointless endeavors like a new lanhuage
Even the names of his characters are shit: Sauraon and Sauronman ? A lying councilman by the name Grimma Wormtongue ? That is just child level like writing. It's laughable
>That is just child level like writing. It's laughable
total misunderstanding of intent. he studied folklore and history ad nauseum. made stylistic choices to emulate that. many cultures having nomenclature directly connected to its referent. this died out in English culture, so he revived it intentionally. He had a slavish dedication to the meaning and significance of names. this is not something done out of sloppiness.
another thing to keep in mind is many characters change names several times, often changed for them by others due to they’re perceived. Saruman is a good example of this.
Intent doesn't count in writing, it's the written word in the published book that is the only measure of quality.
>He had a slavish dedication to the meaning and significance of names. this is not something done out of sloppiness.
I never would accuse Tolkien of being sloppy. He was an amazing linguist and researcher. However, at the end of the day he named a lying character Wormtongue and we are supposed to take it seriously. If I named an evil character in my book Evylin Dhoer, every reader would rightfully make fun of it. And even that is more subtle than what Tolkien did.
1 week ago
Anonymous
>Intent doesn't count in writing
not sure why people say this when they’re engaging in critique of writing. if you’re examining his choices as an author it absolutely counts. if you’re just consuming it with no concern of the writing process, sure it’s not. but in context for what you’re doing, absolutely it matters. >I never would accuse Tolkien of being sloppy >it’s just child level writing
I’m confused, is that not indicating lack of competence? >However, at the end of the day he named a lying character Wormtongue and we are supposed to take it seriously.
Yes, why shouldn’t you? it’s written in a particular format, it’s not some mystery thriller or political puzzle. it’s practically poetry.
again, you’re misunderstanding why they have those names or how they’re being utilized in-universe. they’re often dubbed as such by others, through reputation or common perception. if they’re being called something, it is in itself an action of the plot. it’s not like their legal name on an ID card in their pocket.
1 week ago
Anonymous
>I never would accuse Tolkien of being sloppy. He was an amazing linguist and researcher.
Even if Tolkien never wrote LOTR, he would still be famous in literary studies for his work on Old English literature, specifically his paradigm-shattering essay on Beowulf
What is GRRM known for besides his books and godawful HBO series?
1 week ago
Anonymous
>what is a person that made a famous thing known for except for the other things he made?
1 week ago
Anonymous
>However, at the end of the day he named a lying character Wormtongue and we are supposed to take it seriously.
he actually believed in the meme
1 week ago
Anonymous
>However, at the end of the day he named a lying character Wormtongue
Shit, if that's the case, why didn't Jaime call himself kingslayer when he hates it so much? and why did Aerys call himself the "mad-king"? Story is so dumb to have names so on the nose like that.
Saruman is not his real name it was Curumo. Saruman was just what the Rohirrim called him, it means "crafty man" or "wise man".
Wormtongue or Snaketounge was an actual title given to skilled Saxon poets.
GRRM does this too though. He actually goes out of his way to name like twelve characters after Robert Baratheon because naming your kids after the King is just a socially understood way of flattering the King, but fantasy authors all the time skip over this real thing because having 20 kids named Robert running around would be confusing. He does good things sometimes, many of which are also things Tolkien does, much of the criticism of GRRM are a result of his critiques of Tolkien seeming myopic and overfocused on qualities that he and Tolkien actually share, which suggests either a lack of self-awareness in Martin, or that he meant something deeper.
Remember the old, classic quote vis a vis Tolkien and Martin. It's Martin talking about how in the traditional kind of story that Tolkien wrote, and what Martin's beef with Tolkien really is is that Tolkien wrote from the philosophic world-understanding that essentially good governance means good, wise, kind, legitimate people holding rightful and limited authority. It's a hyper Anglo-Saxon, Tory sort of way of viewing the world, and what Martin seems to WANT to imply is that it's more complicated than that, but he doesn't show it, he has guys named Janos Slynt who are bad mean traitors, Janos Slynt isn't quite as Dunkelfalse Lugenshtabber as Grima Wormtongue, but Grima Wormtongue sounds like something a tricky northman might actually be named, Janos Slynt is like a cyberpunk villain. So I think Martin has essentially run into a problem where he's starting to become Tolkien despite himself, he's one inch away from a chosen one of an ancient bloodline saving Westeros already.
you’re bending over backward to defend a man that IRL thought a man in the sky dictated all morality versus a man that understands there is no such thing. tolkien is always going to have an inherently stupefying benighted quality because he existed in a cosmos that was like that
1 week ago
Anonymous
I don't think I've ever heard someone seriously critique Tolkien for having a parsimonious moral worldview.
1 week ago
Anonymous
How is it not serious? It’s a world emanating from a fundamentally incoherent view of reality and is therfore not relatable to modern human beings. It feels archaic because it is. How can a man who believed he was drinking magic blood every weekend craft a world that’s compelling to me or answers any of my questions or doubts about life? Tolkien can’t give a compelling answer to the world because in real life he chose denial and fairy tales. For all martins faults he’s living in reality and confronting reality by not resorting to muh god
1 week ago
Anonymous
You'll understand when you're older
1 week ago
Anonymous
I feel bad for you. Your abstract reasoning has been castrated by your obsession with materialism.
"The world is full of cathedrals for those with the eyes to see."
I want you to think about that quote, think about what you've just said, and think about what it says about you.
1 week ago
Anonymous
Christianity is trash.
1 week ago
Anonymous
Go back to whining about books that will never get released GRRMcucj
1 week ago
Anonymous
That's why your god failed.
1 week ago
Anonymous
What are you even on about? You’re seething about tolkien for being religious in a Cinemaphile thread, grow up.
1 week ago
Anonymous
>Christian Tolkien finished his magnum opus >Atheist Martin will never finish his magnum opus
who failed?
1 week ago
Anonymous
Jesus did, bum.
1 week ago
Anonymous
if you’re just taking the guy as some schizo hobo he ended up with half the western canon devoted to him and some of the most breathtaking works of art in his name. he pretty much won at life
1 week ago
Anonymous
Like a bull before the matadore's cape. I'm not christian, I just wanted to show everyone you're a brainlet.
1 week ago
Anonymous
Bro you succeeded god damn
1 week ago
Anonymous
Because I disagree with a religion that condones slavery? Yeah, good job, buddy. You're definitely on the moral high ground now. Stupid mfer.
1 week ago
Anonymous
>The world is full of cathedrals for those with the eyes to see >UHM HOW AM I SUPPOSED TO BELIEVE IN GOD IF BAD THING HAPPEN CHECKMATE SWEATY
Jesus Christ you people are so shallow and dumb like my frick your brain is smooth go play with your action figures you fricking moron.
1 week ago
Anonymous
I believe in God, I don't believe in THAT God, you moron. Read your book more often with some gusto, pussy. Then maybe you wouldn't be caught with your pants down defending a hamfisted God that sends people to war and floods the Earth to solve his problems, even though he's supposed to be Omniscient. Get a grip, loser.
1 week ago
Anonymous
>If God is real, why bad thing happen?
Real deep thinker here.
1 week ago
Anonymous
I believe in God, moron, I don't believe in a Hamfisted God.
1 week ago
Anonymous
Uhhh okay but Tolkien was a Catholic.
1 week ago
Anonymous
Yeah, because he was stupid. >My God has no limits -- EXCEPT THESE ONES HERE IN THIS BOOK
ie, you don’t believe in a god genuinely beyond yourself. you believe in a god that coheres with all your own little views on reality- that is to say, you believe in yourself as god. any actual god ought to make you uncomfortable, to orient your thinking to something more than you are. otherwise it’s an extension of human beings and not a thing beyond them. i will also add that gnostics still like jesus, who you accused of failing. gnosticism isn’t anti christ
I just know God isn't hamfisted, you fool. The fact that you're trying to defend this evil shit as "The Way" says they've got you by the nuts and you will stand for nothing. You'll even fight to have the right to defend evil just because it comes from someone you believe is God. Literally the walking contradiction you believe is God? Get help, dawg.
1 week ago
Anonymous
Yeah if you honestly think Tolkien was stupid because he didn't follow your particular brand of edgy new age religion that you and like 20 other people believe in idk what to tell you.
1 week ago
Anonymous
>Yeah if you honestly think Tolkien was stupid because he didn't follow your particular brand of edgy new age religion that you and like 20 other people believe in idk what to tell you
homie, Christianity is New Age, you idiot. It literally came from the New Age.
You sound upset pilgrim. Where was thou at the foundations of the earth? Declare, if thou hast understanding.
I was in a place he's never visited, buddy. And no, I don't mean Hell.
you’re telling me what is evil as some sort of axiom that I don’t agree with
Are you not defending it?
1 week ago
Anonymous
I don’t think I am the arbiter of morality, no, I don’t think I have the right to judge every human on the planet based on shit I personally made up. I believe I am the result of language, culture and history in my thought, and that any validity in my moral views comes from centuries of tradition.
1 week ago
Anonymous
>I don’t think I am the arbiter of morality, no, I don’t think I have the right to judge every human on the planet based on shit I personally made up
How would you know if I made it up or not? Because what? You've never read about it? You measure your knowledge based on something someone else wrote and experienced? You know what? Don't even pay attention to me. Learn for yourself.
1 week ago
Anonymous
>you base your knowledge based on something else
Yes, all human beings do this. The first step to tricking people into accepting a moral system is to convince them they came up with it themselves. That’s not how human brains work at all. We are reactive, and the hard won products of tradition, not self creation. To argue otherwise isn’t gnostic at all, but enlightenment crap
1 week ago
Anonymous
You're talking about the idea of Revelation sharing. You obviously know less than you think you do, that's all I'll say.
1 week ago
Anonymous
Tolkien was stupid, that’s not up for debate. He existed in the 20th century and had medieval views >but oxford!
He lectured a subject dying in modernity that no serious intellect cares about
1 week ago
Anonymous
1 week ago
Anonymous
You sound upset pilgrim. Where was thou at the foundations of the earth? Declare, if thou hast understanding.
1 week ago
Anonymous
you’re telling me what is evil as some sort of axiom that I don’t agree with
1 week ago
Anonymous
ie, you don’t believe in a god genuinely beyond yourself. you believe in a god that coheres with all your own little views on reality- that is to say, you believe in yourself as god. any actual god ought to make you uncomfortable, to orient your thinking to something more than you are. otherwise it’s an extension of human beings and not a thing beyond them. i will also add that gnostics still like jesus, who you accused of failing. gnosticism isn’t anti christ
1 week ago
Anonymous
If you honestly think the view of life tolkien had is evil and that the things he made are evil I think we just don’t have any common ground.
1 week ago
Anonymous
Pearls before swine.
1 week ago
Anonymous
Bless your heart little one. 🙂
1 week ago
Anonymous
>Here's something to think about that might suggest you are wrong. >FRICK YOU
Really makes you think.
1 week ago
Anonymous
western civilization would disagree
1 week ago
Anonymous
everything unique about western civilisation is what it accomplished in spite of christianity i.e. liberalism and secularism.
1 week ago
Anonymous
>Reality is 21st century American pop culture
Grow up
1 week ago
Anonymous
>relatable to modern human beings.
Who and what is?
1 week ago
Anonymous
>How is it not serious? >proceed to explain that you find completely banal 20th century Catholicism mystifying and alienating and cannot imagine anyone deriving any meaning from it
Either it is unserious, or you have some next level autism.
1 week ago
Anonymous
let me guess, you grew up religious and now youre super against it? is it cuz daddy made you wake up and go to church on sunday?
1 week ago
Anonymous
People used to be religious because there was frankly no good explanation for how things happened without a god.
>Why did the man in the trench in front of me get killed and not me >god had a plan for me
Or if you go further back to pagan beliefs
>why did a storm occur? >because thor willed it
Religion is, and has been for most of human history simply a way for humans to understand a world far beyond their comprehension. Tolkien was a product of his time and environment.
As for GRRM, his entire book series on a medieval society does it's very best to pretend nobody in that society except uneducated peasants believed in their religion, when that is absolutely not the case. Religion was incredibly important in medieval europe and throughout the entire world. So GRRM was the one choosing denial and a magic world where people are all le enlightened athiests for no discernible reason
1 week ago
Anonymous
>People used to be religious because there was frankly no good explanation for how things happened without a god.
There still isn't. >absolutely everything came from absolutely nothing for no reason.
It's so moronic that physicists themselves know they have to kick the ball further down to court with multiverses.. but it still begs the question.
1 week ago
Anonymous
>There still isn't.
Just because we don't know how shit works doesn't mean there's a god shaped hole there. Granted there could be, but we can look at pretty much the entirety of history full of things we assumed were down to god(s) until we figured out the natural causes/mechanisms behind them. Our understanding of the universe overall is still very poor- there's an entire form of lightning that has never been captured on camera and we don't know how it's made.
1 week ago
Anonymous
It can only be a god shaped whole. Anything that can create out of nothing, let alone create something on this level, fits all the definitions of a god.
The only people can't come to that conclusion aren't very fascinated with the universe. It's wonderful.. but they turn into something mundane and passé. Even before any discussion of God comes up.
1 week ago
Anonymous
>It can only be a god shaped whole. Anything that can create out of nothing, let alone create something on this level, fits all the definitions of a god.
It could be literally anything. A "God" is a very human conception, generally some sort of sentient deity with a conscious mind similar to our own, that has engaged in deliberate acts of creation similar to our own, and can be communicated with similar to how we communicate with each other. The human conception of god is just us projecting our experiences onto the natural world and assuming that somewhere there is a being not unlike us who is causing things we don't understand.
Any sort of god that exists is much more likely to be sentient in the same way a forest of trees is sentient than a human being
1 week ago
Anonymous
You realize Tolkien fought at the fricking Somme, right?
it's mad that none of the replies to this actually engaged with the point and just started harping on about reddit or leposting/saying the writing is bad because it just is instead while also suggesting that this place is preferable now compared to when that post was made
Well on one hand we have the WW1 veteran Oxford professor of literature who made up his own languages and on the other hand we have the degenerate obese sex pervert too lazy to finish his own series because he prefers sitting on his fat ass and being a TV producer.
It's a real tossup.
>muh characters!
Actual idiot.
>bro he wrote a language and went to war and blah blah blah shit that has nothing to do with the writing quality
Tolkien was a more respectable man the George for sure, that seems to be all Tolkiengays can argue since they have no case for him being a better writer
>some random book nobody read
This is why you will always be a pleb, brainlet. You've been instructed time and time again to stop posting. Enjoy litslop, brainlet.
Absolutely nothing is better than LOTR. Furthermore, your crappy novels wouldn't even exist if it wasn't for LOTR.
1 week ago
Anonymous
>Absolutely nothing is better than LOTR
whoa calm down there m8 you better drink some hobbit juice to relax
1 week ago
Anonymous
It's undisputable. Just like Bach is the father of music, Tolkien is the father of high fantasy. Contrarian homosexuals like you are just gonna have to deal with it and the sooner you do, the better because you're just embarrassing yourselves.
1 week ago
Anonymous
yeah it’s just a total coincidence that both your picks here are christcucks. nobody is falling for it
1 week ago
Anonymous
It may or may not be a coincidence that the father of Fantasy was a Christian but he was, Tolkien basically invented the genre. You're still welcome to make your gay trans spinoffs of his work.
1 week ago
Anonymous
>music was invented by a christcuck >fantasy was invented by a christcuck
pagans invented both actually. frick off
1 week ago
Anonymous
Fantasy is a modern genre, and yeah it was basically invented by Tolkien. No one knows who invented music, it's prehistoric.
1 week ago
Anonymous
you said bach did dishonest cuny
1 week ago
Anonymous
Bach perfected music, he didn’t invent it.
1 week ago
Anonymous
The modern concept of music as a tonal melody with a distinct beginning, middle, and end, capable of evoking an emotion or state of mind or even telling a narrative, instead of a series of disjointed noises meant to distract as a background to other entertainments, was in fact invented by Christian monks in the 600s-700s AD to organize their prayers. Musical notation was completely unknown before Gregorian monks invented it; at best, pre-Christian music was whatever random notes the player performed in order to give a rhythm to words of poetry being spoken.
1 week ago
Anonymous
>christcucks
What does that even have to do with anything? Go talk to people who write music for a living, Bach is their bread and butter, same goes with Tolkien for people who write high fantasy. It's just what it is. If you wanna fantasize about some rewritten history where pagans are the main characters, go ahead. Maybe you end up creating your own literary genere and pirated by some useless fat frick lol. You can name it "high pagan fantasy".
>some random book nobody read
This is why you will always be a pleb, brainlet. You've been instructed time and time again to stop posting. Enjoy litslop, brainlet.
At what? Tolkien's better at prose. All George has is he focus' more on each character's motivations, but that only gets you so far. At some point his obsession with characterization crashed his entire plot to the point that by AFFC that's all the books became to the detriment of literally everything else.
hard filtered by classic. Stick to Tom Clancy or Ian Flemming
He invented a whole language so the book is le good.
Anon, I don't belittle Tolkien's achievements and intellect.
However, he should have spent his time on things that make the story better like beter editing, better characterization, plot, etc instead of wasting his time on pointless endeavors like a new lanhuage
Even the names of his characters are shit: Sauraon and Sauronman ? A lying councilman by the name Grimma Wormtongue ? That is just child level like writing. It's laughable
he could have named them tik tak and tok. Who cares, he wrote an epic adventure story that few writers since have matched.
What the frick are you talking about he changes tone in LoTR and the hobbit to represent being compiled by 4 different authors, you have bilbos voice in the hobbit and the first chapters, Sam and frodos voice in the LoTR main book with distinct shifts in optimism between Frodo and Sam’s accounts and it was all compiled by Sam’s daughter explaining again the changer in author voice in the appendix. It’s structured like books in the Bible. The characterization occurs in shifts of authorial voice.
>spending 15 pages describing the songs that the elves sing around the camp fire
Because he is a Linguist first and foremost. Songs tie into what he loves.
If you took a random line of dialogue from LOTR with no tags, could you tell that it was from: >Frodo, Sam, Pippin, Merry, Aragorn, Boromir, Legolas, Gimli, or Gandalf?
IF so then he does characterization very well.
Tolkien stopped writing because he was dead. Germ stopped writing because he's a lazy, fat frick who lost the plot in volume 2 and since then just pulled shit out of his ass.
Well on one hand we have the WW1 veteran Oxford professor of literature who made up his own languages and on the other hand we have the degenerate obese sex pervert too lazy to finish his own series because he prefers sitting on his fat ass and being a TV producer.
>rapes Tolkien's son mercilessly after Tolkien makes a light-hearted comment about satyrs being degenerate sex pests in Greek mythology
did he go too far?
Howard Phillips Hatesanyonenotanglosaxon was also an atrocious writer hiding his inadequacies behind a florid vocabulary. His IDEAS were good, his writing was rubbish.
Lovecraft was only a philosophical racist, a racist in spirit, not a racist in practice. He was polite to Blacks, worshiped italian cuisine, and married a israelite. Racism was the cultured ideal to aspire to, not the boorish plebeian outburst of the animal instinct from a Southern lynch mob.
Iirc he became less racist and more worldly due to his wife. I wonder how he'd react to seeing america in 2024? It'd be like his worst nightmares realized in human form.
>heckin racism
He’s not wrong. No one wants to see the planet turned to Magna Asia
Lovecraft should have written, an effort at least, something less heroically nihilistic and more in like with Wagner but in New England. Like the American branch of old Tataria with its own Siegfried and Attila and Wotan and Donar.
There's no comparison. Tolkien wrote an entire mythology, and so much worldbuilding that it amounts to several extra books and a ton of it will never even be published. It even seems like he might have written a lot of it out of obligation to the story, rather than with the intent to publish it.
George Martins work is essentially taking the politics of medieval England and adding some fantasy elements. Most characters are neither evil nor inherently good and ultimately just want peace and stability but with different methods of achieving it.
Tolkien on the other hand is basically just a fairytale where evil villain who is evil wants to take over the world and the heroes stop him. There's far more worldbuilding though so grown men can sperg out over whether heckin ancalagon the black could defeat ungoliant or whatever stupid shit
Gurm never once discusses the 7 Kingdoms tax policy, Littlefinger just constantly borrows money.
I think GRRM's point with the tax policy stuff is more that there's more to being a good king than simply being a good righteous person. As GRRM is more interesting in the practical machiavellian aspects of leadership.
The awkward thing is that ASOIF, despite being nominally based on medieval england has much more in common with the early modern period than the medieval one. In an actual feudal society, being a good king is one of the most important things because it means your subjects will trust you- which turns out is very important when your entire society is made up of a decentralized loose collection of powerful warrior aristocrats whose cooperation you needed to do anything. In fact, pretty much everything from the betrayals and massacres reeks of either archaic or certain eras of the Roman/Byzantine empire.
The funny thing is, if he'd actually written about a medieval society then he could have gotten away with no tax policy, because the medieval period was for the most part too decentralized for the large state apparatus needed for proper taxation. Taxation did exist but it was generally a flat land tax on nobles or something similarly simple. The Roman, Byzantines and states of the early modern period had advanced bureaucratic states which were able to raise large armies and collect taxes. Don't get me wrong, he's still an excellent writer but the setting is a bit anachronistic
>Writer of the most influential fantasy series of all time >Perfectly blended mythology, modern fantasy, a reflection on a diminishing West, good vs evil, and a war story in one book >Filled with supremely human characters and extraordinarily beautiful moments (e.g Sam talking about the stories that will be sung of them) >Only flaw is that Wagner did it better earlier
vs >Fat slob who can't even finish his damn books >Only held up because of a hit tv show that eventually shit the bed >Obsessed with sex and vulgarity >Mildly more complex characters than Tolkien
Hm, tough one.
>Both are barely fantasy writers to begin with
Tolkien barely included magic in his story because his story is about the world slowly being demystified and Middle-Earth LITERALLY eroding into real world Eurasia.
GRRM barely included magic because he originally wanted to write sci-fi and the only reason he pivoted to fantasy is that he knew where the wind was blowing from, it was the only chance to save his failing career, and he saw a documentary about the War of the Roses on the boomertube one evening.
they’re both two different sorts of writers. tolkien wrote for himself. he had all the autistic mythology laid out and was literally going to do nothing with it- he only wrote LOTR because he first wrote the hobbit for his children and someone said he should publish it. he methodically completed his entire story as a packaged mythos which said everything he wanted it to say. other writers of that type historically were men like dante and melville, they are quite rare. most writers are like martin where they just gush out pages and pages in order to make a career- shakespeare was like that, so was dostoyevsky. they can shit out stuff at a prodigious rate when they need to and are lazy when they don’t.
Tolkien - invents fantasy as we know it.
Martin - wrote pseudo historic stuff we had for 2 centuries but with meme dragons so morons actually read it this time.
I'd go with Tolkien. Marty is good but he brought nothing new to culture.
Do any of you know what “characterisation” means? What aspects of the characters in LotR were you left confused by or thought was missing? What MORE did you want ?
LOTR has far higher literary merits, it's pretty much the perfect tale about virtues and it birthed an entire genre thanks to an autistic amount of thought put into world building from someone who was a renowned scholar in linguistic and mythology.
ASOIAF is a series made by someone who has a knack for drama but was too lazy to put the work to write historical fiction and went the easy way with fantasy.
LOTR will have more lasting impact over the next decades and maybe centuries while ASOIAF will probably lose relevance pretty fast, especially since we're still yet to see the ending.
Lore: Tolkien
Inventing half a dozen fricking languages just for the hell of it: Tolkien
Characters: GRRM
Story: GRRM
Prose: GRRM
Poetry & songs: Tolkien
Actually finishing your main work: Tolkien (although people forget that he didn't actually finish the Silmarillion)
Cultural impact and longevity: Tolkien
My personal favorite: GRRM
Fat pink masts jutting into myrish swamps until her c**t became the world while nuncle broke his fast on black bread, bacon burned black, and mulled wine while around him the planks of the ship groaned like a fat man taking a shit and in the privy the princess cursed as she shat but the more arbor gold she drank the more she shat until she was shitting brown water and nuncle smirked and bit into a lemoncake while capon-grease dripped down his chin onto the nipples of his breastplate and the boiled leather of his jerkin for did she not know words are wind and winter is coming and a lannister always pays her debts and you know nothing jon snow and dark wings bring dark tidings and oh my sweet summer child this is nothing but a mummers farce and she could be fricking lancel and moonboy for all nuncle knows and stick them with the pointy end but where do prostitutes go and the night is dark and full of terrors but nuncle is the blood of the dragon and the north remembers
>a filthy journo cribbing from irl Cinemaphile >nothing's good or evil absolutely >so nothing needs to be justified >describing diarrhea is the closes he comes to poetic language >socioeconomics and realpolitik >newspaper clippings and college textbooks >realism in fantasy trappings >modern in that it is from nothing to nothing >there is no greater principle than temporal power >humans are nothing but amoral animals that fight and frick
vs
>a doctor of languages cribbing from western canon Cinemaphile >there are absolutes >the language itself is poetic >even the Black Tongue is ur-Rammstein >nothing is more important than ultimate good and the fate of the world >genre-defining OG fantasy in mythic trappings >constructed within religious assumption >there is a glorious From and an exceedingly glorious To >there is a Point
grrm has an easier time because he lives in the shadow of jrrt's legacy. grrm looks down from the height of a mountain; jrrt is that mountain.
Lore: Tolkien
Inventing half a dozen fricking languages just for the hell of it: Tolkien
Characters: GRRM
Story: GRRM
Prose: GRRM
Poetry & songs: Tolkien
Actually finishing your main work: Tolkien (although people forget that he didn't actually finish the Silmarillion)
Cultural impact and longevity: Tolkien
My personal favorite: GRRM
Martin is the better writter but Tolkien legacy is too big for anyone to recognize that.
Tolkien is just >Le good are good >Le evil are evil
That makes is characters extremely boring
Martin sometimes feels like he has his head way deep inside is butthole with all the gray morals and shit but that makes his charactera 10 times better.
There is no a single characters in LOTR half as good as Jamie Lannister
Feanor, Boromir, Turin and Thorin are all gray characters with virtues and failings.
>That makes is characters extremely boring
The manichean archetypes are only boring you because you have seen them repeated ad nauseam in pretty much all fantasy media, but Tolkien originally invented them.
The last 2 decades of fantasy have seen most writers trying to "subvert" the genre only to produce complete convoluted dogshit 90% of the time with no real core substance (typically Malazan).
Tolkien characters are simple but it serves a greater purpose in his tales.
Martin makes great characterization and really invests you in them but it's at the expense of the plot focus, the proof is that he can't wrap things up because he has 2 dozens of POV setups with their own multi-layered motivations/identities but he's unable to make them all converge to a singular payoff, let alone a satisfying one, which is why he's procrastinating by writing one spin off after another with less characters and scope.
Well, I got bored with his Game of Thrones books after the first one and stopped reading them, while I've read The Lord of the Rings like six times in my life. So there's your answer.
Tolkien is the wen on the arse of fantasy literature. His oeuvre is massive and contagious—you can't ignore it, so don't even try. The best you can do is consciously try to lance the boil. And there's a lot to dislike—his cod-Wagnerian pomposity, his boys-own-adventure glorying in war, his small-minded and reactionary love for hierarchical status-quos, his belief in absolute morality that blurs moral and political complexity. Tolkien's clichés—elves 'n' dwarfs 'n' magic rings—have spread like viruses. He wrote that the function of fantasy was 'consolation', thereby making it an article of policy that a fantasy writer should mollycoddle the reader.
Tolkien had a greater respect for history by only doing broad allusions to prior kingdoms/empires and notable battles.
GRRM doesn't have as much nuance so he just does a simple cut/paste of the Wars of the Roses while hoping to create and even more monumental and lasting legacy. He wrote himself into a corner by getting ambitious and trying to write about every single facet of a medieval fantasy European continent. He got too big for his britches and simply sold out to HBO to enjoy his retirement.
God what a fat loser frick. You'd think a writer would be able to express himself better than some high school girl writing her thoughts down on a journal.
Both are good writers. (GRRM *really* is a good writer)
The difference is the genre. GRRM wrote (is writing) a soap opera that has painfully slow pacing. Dany's inevitable invasion of Westeros is what the ASOIAF is about, but why does that take 8+ books to tell properly? Again, it's like a soap opera, dragging out these plot points, adding in new characters for no reason.
Tolkien wrote the most epic story ever in three, rather short, books.
>HE MADE UP A BUNCH OF LANGUAGES!!11
Whoopeedoopeedoo. Where is the correlation between a linguist making up shit and good storywriting? Oh wait, there is none. And it shows. Tolkien wrote for children. Martin writes for manchildren. Read an actual fantasy book for adults.
A liberal homosexual feminist Protestant was teaching a class on George R.R. Martin, known hack
”Before the class begins, you must get on your knees and worship Gurm and accept that Planetos is the greatest fantasy setting of all time even greater than Arda!”
At this moment, a brave, patriotic, British WW1 veteran who had served 1500 tours of duty on the Somme and understood the necessity of war and fully supported all decisions made by Butcher Haig stood up.
”What are the linguistic differences among the peoples of Westeros?”
The arrogant proddie smirked quite schismatically and smugly replied “There is the Old Tongue and the Common Tongue, you stupid warmonger”
”Wrong. There should be hundreds of dialects. If the Wall is 8000 years old as you say, how can the Wildlings and Northmen understand one another?”
The HBO shill was visibly shaken, and dropped his chalk and copy of A World of Ice and Fire. He stormed out of the room crying those redditor crocodile tears. The same tears redditors (who today live in such luxury most can afford sex changes) cried when Missandei was beheaded. There is no doubt that at this point our sola scriptura-homosexual wished he had pulled himself up by his bootstraps and become more than a garbage pulp fiction fan. He wished so much he could die a glorious death in battle, but he had sworn to always be a draft dodger!
The students applauded and became Tolkien fans that day and accepted the Pope as their Lord and Master. A giant eagle named “Thorondor” flew into the room and perched atop the flag of Gondor and shed a tear on the White Tree. Beowulf was read in the original Old English several times, and Eru Ilúvatar himself showed up and enacted Aragorn's flat rate tax policy across the universe.
The Lutheran was fired the next day and sunset found him squatting in the grass, groaning. Every stool was looser than the one before, and smelled fouler. By the time the moon came up he was shitting brown water.
>If the Wall is 8000 years old as you say, how can the Wildlings and Northmen understand one another?”
Unironically a good point. Westeros has a very bad case of "eternal fantasy world" where literally nothing changes. Go back 8000 years and everyone is apparently speaking the same language, wearing the same armor, using the same names. The fricking pyramids were built 4,500 years ago.
I think when GRRM started writing, he didn't have a very good understanding of size or scale, which is why westeros is so fricking huge and all the castles are so gargantuan despite nominally really just being fantasy england.
LOTR was written by an intellectual and war veteran and is one of the greatest books ever written. It's unlike anything else in terms of its immense amount of detail and unforgettable characters.
GoT is smut in a fantasy setting.
Not even a fantasy setting. It's just "the Wars of the Roses, but there are zombies up in the north that everyone kind of forgot about until the fifth book".
It's not even that because then it might be a bit interesting. War of the roses was right before the early modern period, so they actually had a wild mix of gunpowder weaponry with medieval full plate. Longbows alongside early firearms shooting flame arrows that burnt to create blistering gas, they were doing all sorts of weird shit and plate armor was at it's peak aesthetics.
Really cool time period, but fantasy writers are scared of early firearms because they threaten to make magic swords, ice zombies and dragons obsolete. GRRM's biggest mistake was not having the setting be during the dark ages/early medieval period. Most of the lords then were barely a generation or less removed from being pagans, there were no crossbows and technology had collapsed after the western roman empire. The church hadn't gotten it's claws into everything yet. It really would have been the perfect period for game of thrones to be set in, but he wienered it all up.
If you read some of the HOME series you will realize that he was swapped in when Tolkien realized Glorifindel was too powerful and would ruin the tension of the fellowship/attract every evil thing Sauron had. So legalos was swapped from elf Jesus to a sheltered elf prince who hasn’t really seen things like death before.
Trotter also became strider /Aragorn and got powered up to fill some of the void made removing elf Jesus power level wise
I hated the GOT books and show, and the LOTR books. I liked the LOTR movies. I honestly prefer ya fantasy for a wide variety of reasons, the biggest of which is that they don't drown you in exposition on page 1.
ONE MILLION YEARS AGO, THE CHOSEN ONE USED HIS SKRIGNATH, WHICH IS LIKE A SWORD BUT COOLER, TO FIGHT THE DEMONS, WHICH CAME FROM A'BEL'LOR TO DESTROY THE WORLD OF MINJUS. WHICH IS LIKE EARTH BUT COOLER. THEY WERE BROUGHT BY THE FOUL SOURCERER KEL'TATH, WHO PRACTICED ONE OF THE FORBIDDEN TWELVE SCHOOLS OF MAGIC, NIXTHERIS, DERIVED FROM THE GOD OF EVIL, THERIS, WHO WAS CAST DOWN FROM JELLUS, WHICH IS LIKE HEAVEN, BUT WITH breasts
I don't read homosexual ass books, but both those men look like got mad old guy breath. You know that gross periodontitis smell. Ugh. I hate it.. So gross. They both have it, I can tell.
Dude, you Americans don't even know what an overthrow attempt looks like. What happened at the Capitol wasn't even remotely close to a real coup d'etat. It was literally Naruto-running @Area51 tier.
People who claim lotr is one of the greatest books ever likely never have actually read them. They are bad. It’s amazing how Peter Jackson was able to parse through all that nonsense of hobbit songs, nature descriptions and all that other bloat to find such a good story. I’d personally say lord of the rings was created by Peter Jackson. Jrr tolkien wrote a bunch of schizo nonsense. Jackson found the actual story there.
Im 35 and currently rereading lotr. Ive read got, the hobbit and silmarillion.
I dont get where this meme of tolkien being overly descriptive of stuff comes from. Maybe if you read this as a kid it could come off like that but not as an adult having read classics. He is detailed in describing the fellowships route but that just helps you visualize their journey. There's more descriptive scenery in blood meridian.
If these morons read any classic lit they’d be way more lenient on tolkien. Reminds of dante explaining for an entire canto how mantua wasn’t named after manta out of respect but just because her corpse was there. Pure autistic crap is an essential part of human epics.
I made the mistake of reading the name of the wind and the wise man's fear and enjoyed them to then find out the fricking hack is never going to finish his trilogy.
Guy was a sailor and a body builder. Died fighting like a chad in WWI. I think that is genuinely one of the greatest losses ever. Everyone ITT do yourself a favor and go read the Night Land. Guy did cosmic horror better than Lovecraft.
really apples to oranges but overall Tolkien created a much more interesting world
ASOIAF is very derivative of other fantasy series, it's basically Memory, Sorrow, and Thorn shaken up with some blatant Lovecraft and Elric of Melnibone references in lore and bits and pieces of several other fantasy series sprinkled on top with a bit of tasteless edginess. That being said I like the series but Tolkien did a lot more work in creating a beautiful world. And being inspired by mythology is different than taking ideas wholesale from fellow genre writers
Martin pisses off Chuds because he writes realistic characters.
Tolkien writes something that chuds who obviously idolized medieval times finds attractive, the idea that everything worked well there and every man in position of power was good, and not some corrupt piece of shit taking the oportunity to do depravate things
I don't know about realistic. He seems to write characters motives to lead you to believe they react and respond in a certain way then when you least expect it, he has them change to something completely opposite, or suddenly just as you're rooting for them, they die or get murdered. I did enjoy his books and I like how he made me care about some characters and want to keep reading on to their next chapter to find out what happens to them. Now I'm sad because he'll never finish the book story so who knows how my favs turn out. I rufuse to watch the show.
I'm a chud and Martin pisses me off for getting me invested into a series and then abandoning it, never finishing anything at all and angling up to his deathbed while people compare him to fricking Tolkien
>Every non-evil character is GOOD with NO FLAWS chud!
Confirmed for having never read the books. Isildur, basically a paragon of mankind and the best of humanity refused to destroy the One Ring and basically fricked Middle Earth over for ever.
I don't think that's really the same as a character flaw as literally every character in the series would have done the same. It is a flaw, but only in the sense that all beings can fall to temptation towards the ultimate power. Even frodo failed, in the end.
How is this even a question? Martin is just a fatass degenerate and uses his stories to try to excuse that. Bastards, midgets, and incest are all just metaphors for fat acceptance.
both are decent writers who put in a lot of work and their personal expertise in history, linguistics, politics and so on for the sake of creating a thoughtful creative deep world. However GRRM ultimately failed as he couldn't see his story through for literary / creative reasons (as opposed to health or other supeficial issues)
Reminder Tolkien unironically believed in shit like nobility and monarchism. >a closed off clique of people should rule because...umm their parents did idk lmao
He was a certified moron. George Martin is atleast smart enough to recognise how moronic monarchism is as a form of government.
JRR Tolkien no contest
Tolkien is an awful writer. He can't do characterisatuon at all. So he'll overcompensate by spending 15 pages describing the songs that the elves sing around the camp fire.
Atleast he can publish a book
he actually can't
>overcompensate
>characterisatuon
you're not meant reading Tolkien
For me, its the descriptions of fireworks, and random exposition that feels like the KJV. Its fricking hypnotic. Characterization is for women.
You don't notice good characterization.
Here's a characterization fit for your oh so high intellect.
>muh characters!
Actual idiot.
>he made a language bro!!!
Ok. Maybe he should have spent that time writing better.
He invented a whole language so the book is le good.
Anon, I don't belittle Tolkien's achievements and intellect.
However, he should have spent his time on things that make the story better like beter editing, better characterization, plot, etc instead of wasting his time on pointless endeavors like a new lanhuage
Even the names of his characters are shit: Sauraon and Sauronman ? A lying councilman by the name Grimma Wormtongue ? That is just child level like writing. It's laughable
>That is just child level like writing. It's laughable
total misunderstanding of intent. he studied folklore and history ad nauseum. made stylistic choices to emulate that. many cultures having nomenclature directly connected to its referent. this died out in English culture, so he revived it intentionally. He had a slavish dedication to the meaning and significance of names. this is not something done out of sloppiness.
another thing to keep in mind is many characters change names several times, often changed for them by others due to they’re perceived. Saruman is a good example of this.
total misunderstanding of intent.
Intent doesn't count in writing, it's the written word in the published book that is the only measure of quality.
>He had a slavish dedication to the meaning and significance of names. this is not something done out of sloppiness.
I never would accuse Tolkien of being sloppy. He was an amazing linguist and researcher. However, at the end of the day he named a lying character Wormtongue and we are supposed to take it seriously. If I named an evil character in my book Evylin Dhoer, every reader would rightfully make fun of it. And even that is more subtle than what Tolkien did.
>Intent doesn't count in writing
not sure why people say this when they’re engaging in critique of writing. if you’re examining his choices as an author it absolutely counts. if you’re just consuming it with no concern of the writing process, sure it’s not. but in context for what you’re doing, absolutely it matters.
>I never would accuse Tolkien of being sloppy
>it’s just child level writing
I’m confused, is that not indicating lack of competence?
>However, at the end of the day he named a lying character Wormtongue and we are supposed to take it seriously.
Yes, why shouldn’t you? it’s written in a particular format, it’s not some mystery thriller or political puzzle. it’s practically poetry.
again, you’re misunderstanding why they have those names or how they’re being utilized in-universe. they’re often dubbed as such by others, through reputation or common perception. if they’re being called something, it is in itself an action of the plot. it’s not like their legal name on an ID card in their pocket.
>I never would accuse Tolkien of being sloppy. He was an amazing linguist and researcher.
Even if Tolkien never wrote LOTR, he would still be famous in literary studies for his work on Old English literature, specifically his paradigm-shattering essay on Beowulf
What is GRRM known for besides his books and godawful HBO series?
>what is a person that made a famous thing known for except for the other things he made?
>However, at the end of the day he named a lying character Wormtongue and we are supposed to take it seriously.
he actually believed in the meme
>However, at the end of the day he named a lying character Wormtongue
Shit, if that's the case, why didn't Jaime call himself kingslayer when he hates it so much? and why did Aerys call himself the "mad-king"? Story is so dumb to have names so on the nose like that.
>is a king
>is mad
>called Themaad kiing
wow, bravo GRRM! *farts*
>Sauraon and Sauronman
This was never an issue, it's not unusual for cultures to have names that sound similar to one another.
>What so you're telling me this guy was called Johnny and he actually called a friend called Ronnie? What nonsense!
>so, let me get this straight
>this guy's named Thad
>and this one's Chad
>and Thad is a chad
>but Chad is a virgin?
>because he's trad?
>no no no
>that's his brother, Brad
>Brad is trad
>Chad is just a tard
>lad, you're mad
>how am I supposed yo remember all this crud?
>oh come on, it's not so bad
>just give them a chance, I think you're gonna like these guys
>they're, dare I say it,
>pretty rad
>dear god
>Brother Tard is a chad, and Trad is dead.
Saruman is not his real name it was Curumo. Saruman was just what the Rohirrim called him, it means "crafty man" or "wise man".
Wormtongue or Snaketounge was an actual title given to skilled Saxon poets.
GRRM does this too though. He actually goes out of his way to name like twelve characters after Robert Baratheon because naming your kids after the King is just a socially understood way of flattering the King, but fantasy authors all the time skip over this real thing because having 20 kids named Robert running around would be confusing. He does good things sometimes, many of which are also things Tolkien does, much of the criticism of GRRM are a result of his critiques of Tolkien seeming myopic and overfocused on qualities that he and Tolkien actually share, which suggests either a lack of self-awareness in Martin, or that he meant something deeper.
Remember the old, classic quote vis a vis Tolkien and Martin. It's Martin talking about how in the traditional kind of story that Tolkien wrote, and what Martin's beef with Tolkien really is is that Tolkien wrote from the philosophic world-understanding that essentially good governance means good, wise, kind, legitimate people holding rightful and limited authority. It's a hyper Anglo-Saxon, Tory sort of way of viewing the world, and what Martin seems to WANT to imply is that it's more complicated than that, but he doesn't show it, he has guys named Janos Slynt who are bad mean traitors, Janos Slynt isn't quite as Dunkelfalse Lugenshtabber as Grima Wormtongue, but Grima Wormtongue sounds like something a tricky northman might actually be named, Janos Slynt is like a cyberpunk villain. So I think Martin has essentially run into a problem where he's starting to become Tolkien despite himself, he's one inch away from a chosen one of an ancient bloodline saving Westeros already.
you’re bending over backward to defend a man that IRL thought a man in the sky dictated all morality versus a man that understands there is no such thing. tolkien is always going to have an inherently stupefying benighted quality because he existed in a cosmos that was like that
I don't think I've ever heard someone seriously critique Tolkien for having a parsimonious moral worldview.
How is it not serious? It’s a world emanating from a fundamentally incoherent view of reality and is therfore not relatable to modern human beings. It feels archaic because it is. How can a man who believed he was drinking magic blood every weekend craft a world that’s compelling to me or answers any of my questions or doubts about life? Tolkien can’t give a compelling answer to the world because in real life he chose denial and fairy tales. For all martins faults he’s living in reality and confronting reality by not resorting to muh god
You'll understand when you're older
I feel bad for you. Your abstract reasoning has been castrated by your obsession with materialism.
"The world is full of cathedrals for those with the eyes to see."
I want you to think about that quote, think about what you've just said, and think about what it says about you.
Christianity is trash.
Go back to whining about books that will never get released GRRMcucj
That's why your god failed.
What are you even on about? You’re seething about tolkien for being religious in a Cinemaphile thread, grow up.
>Christian Tolkien finished his magnum opus
>Atheist Martin will never finish his magnum opus
who failed?
Jesus did, bum.
if you’re just taking the guy as some schizo hobo he ended up with half the western canon devoted to him and some of the most breathtaking works of art in his name. he pretty much won at life
Like a bull before the matadore's cape. I'm not christian, I just wanted to show everyone you're a brainlet.
Bro you succeeded god damn
Because I disagree with a religion that condones slavery? Yeah, good job, buddy. You're definitely on the moral high ground now. Stupid mfer.
>The world is full of cathedrals for those with the eyes to see
>UHM HOW AM I SUPPOSED TO BELIEVE IN GOD IF BAD THING HAPPEN CHECKMATE SWEATY
Jesus Christ you people are so shallow and dumb like my frick your brain is smooth go play with your action figures you fricking moron.
I believe in God, I don't believe in THAT God, you moron. Read your book more often with some gusto, pussy. Then maybe you wouldn't be caught with your pants down defending a hamfisted God that sends people to war and floods the Earth to solve his problems, even though he's supposed to be Omniscient. Get a grip, loser.
>If God is real, why bad thing happen?
Real deep thinker here.
I believe in God, moron, I don't believe in a Hamfisted God.
Uhhh okay but Tolkien was a Catholic.
Yeah, because he was stupid.
>My God has no limits -- EXCEPT THESE ONES HERE IN THIS BOOK
I just know God isn't hamfisted, you fool. The fact that you're trying to defend this evil shit as "The Way" says they've got you by the nuts and you will stand for nothing. You'll even fight to have the right to defend evil just because it comes from someone you believe is God. Literally the walking contradiction you believe is God? Get help, dawg.
Yeah if you honestly think Tolkien was stupid because he didn't follow your particular brand of edgy new age religion that you and like 20 other people believe in idk what to tell you.
>Yeah if you honestly think Tolkien was stupid because he didn't follow your particular brand of edgy new age religion that you and like 20 other people believe in idk what to tell you
homie, Christianity is New Age, you idiot. It literally came from the New Age.
I was in a place he's never visited, buddy. And no, I don't mean Hell.
Are you not defending it?
I don’t think I am the arbiter of morality, no, I don’t think I have the right to judge every human on the planet based on shit I personally made up. I believe I am the result of language, culture and history in my thought, and that any validity in my moral views comes from centuries of tradition.
>I don’t think I am the arbiter of morality, no, I don’t think I have the right to judge every human on the planet based on shit I personally made up
How would you know if I made it up or not? Because what? You've never read about it? You measure your knowledge based on something someone else wrote and experienced? You know what? Don't even pay attention to me. Learn for yourself.
>you base your knowledge based on something else
Yes, all human beings do this. The first step to tricking people into accepting a moral system is to convince them they came up with it themselves. That’s not how human brains work at all. We are reactive, and the hard won products of tradition, not self creation. To argue otherwise isn’t gnostic at all, but enlightenment crap
You're talking about the idea of Revelation sharing. You obviously know less than you think you do, that's all I'll say.
Tolkien was stupid, that’s not up for debate. He existed in the 20th century and had medieval views
>but oxford!
He lectured a subject dying in modernity that no serious intellect cares about
You sound upset pilgrim. Where was thou at the foundations of the earth? Declare, if thou hast understanding.
you’re telling me what is evil as some sort of axiom that I don’t agree with
ie, you don’t believe in a god genuinely beyond yourself. you believe in a god that coheres with all your own little views on reality- that is to say, you believe in yourself as god. any actual god ought to make you uncomfortable, to orient your thinking to something more than you are. otherwise it’s an extension of human beings and not a thing beyond them. i will also add that gnostics still like jesus, who you accused of failing. gnosticism isn’t anti christ
If you honestly think the view of life tolkien had is evil and that the things he made are evil I think we just don’t have any common ground.
Pearls before swine.
Bless your heart little one. 🙂
>Here's something to think about that might suggest you are wrong.
>FRICK YOU
Really makes you think.
western civilization would disagree
everything unique about western civilisation is what it accomplished in spite of christianity i.e. liberalism and secularism.
>Reality is 21st century American pop culture
Grow up
>relatable to modern human beings.
Who and what is?
>How is it not serious?
>proceed to explain that you find completely banal 20th century Catholicism mystifying and alienating and cannot imagine anyone deriving any meaning from it
Either it is unserious, or you have some next level autism.
let me guess, you grew up religious and now youre super against it? is it cuz daddy made you wake up and go to church on sunday?
People used to be religious because there was frankly no good explanation for how things happened without a god.
>Why did the man in the trench in front of me get killed and not me
>god had a plan for me
Or if you go further back to pagan beliefs
>why did a storm occur?
>because thor willed it
Religion is, and has been for most of human history simply a way for humans to understand a world far beyond their comprehension. Tolkien was a product of his time and environment.
As for GRRM, his entire book series on a medieval society does it's very best to pretend nobody in that society except uneducated peasants believed in their religion, when that is absolutely not the case. Religion was incredibly important in medieval europe and throughout the entire world. So GRRM was the one choosing denial and a magic world where people are all le enlightened athiests for no discernible reason
>People used to be religious because there was frankly no good explanation for how things happened without a god.
There still isn't.
>absolutely everything came from absolutely nothing for no reason.
It's so moronic that physicists themselves know they have to kick the ball further down to court with multiverses.. but it still begs the question.
>There still isn't.
Just because we don't know how shit works doesn't mean there's a god shaped hole there. Granted there could be, but we can look at pretty much the entirety of history full of things we assumed were down to god(s) until we figured out the natural causes/mechanisms behind them. Our understanding of the universe overall is still very poor- there's an entire form of lightning that has never been captured on camera and we don't know how it's made.
It can only be a god shaped whole. Anything that can create out of nothing, let alone create something on this level, fits all the definitions of a god.
The only people can't come to that conclusion aren't very fascinated with the universe. It's wonderful.. but they turn into something mundane and passé. Even before any discussion of God comes up.
>It can only be a god shaped whole. Anything that can create out of nothing, let alone create something on this level, fits all the definitions of a god.
It could be literally anything. A "God" is a very human conception, generally some sort of sentient deity with a conscious mind similar to our own, that has engaged in deliberate acts of creation similar to our own, and can be communicated with similar to how we communicate with each other. The human conception of god is just us projecting our experiences onto the natural world and assuming that somewhere there is a being not unlike us who is causing things we don't understand.
Any sort of god that exists is much more likely to be sentient in the same way a forest of trees is sentient than a human being
You realize Tolkien fought at the fricking Somme, right?
>A lying councilman by the name Grimma, who people that don't like him call 'Wormtongue' because they've noticed he's a lair
Fixed that for you
Congratulations, you missed the point. Wormtongue was called wormtongue by other people, it was a nickname you spastic.
maybe if he used more caps lock and swearing I'd have gotten the point of how le epic and crazy this was from Tolkien.
that post belongs on reddit.
I had forgotten how fricking gay and reddit this place used to be. Never post that image here again.
it's mad that none of the replies to this actually engaged with the point and just started harping on about reddit or leposting/saying the writing is bad because it just is instead while also suggesting that this place is preferable now compared to when that post was made
you gotta realize that zoomers never even knew the good times so they just lash out at everything
>invented a language
it's a bastard language that is 80% welsh mixed with anglo-saxon spellings. I could ask chat GPT to do that for me right now
Yes, but but Viggo Mortenson and Liv Tyler will never memorize your gay ass aislop.
yeah but youre incapable of creativity. tolkien willed all this into existence and now youre seething at it
Coming up with a handful of words and phrases is not "creating a language."
No he has the whole language system in various appendices. Grammar and all
spbp
>bro he wrote a language and went to war and blah blah blah shit that has nothing to do with the writing quality
Tolkien was a more respectable man the George for sure, that seems to be all Tolkiengays can argue since they have no case for him being a better writer
My case is that Roverandom is better than anything Gout moron Moron has ever done.
>Bring up some random book nobody read to avoid admitting ASOIAF is better than LOTR
lol
>some random book nobody read
This is why you will always be a pleb, brainlet. You've been instructed time and time again to stop posting. Enjoy litslop, brainlet.
Yeah sorry no one read that shit lil bro
Absolutely nothing is better than LOTR. Furthermore, your crappy novels wouldn't even exist if it wasn't for LOTR.
>Absolutely nothing is better than LOTR
whoa calm down there m8 you better drink some hobbit juice to relax
It's undisputable. Just like Bach is the father of music, Tolkien is the father of high fantasy. Contrarian homosexuals like you are just gonna have to deal with it and the sooner you do, the better because you're just embarrassing yourselves.
yeah it’s just a total coincidence that both your picks here are christcucks. nobody is falling for it
It may or may not be a coincidence that the father of Fantasy was a Christian but he was, Tolkien basically invented the genre. You're still welcome to make your gay trans spinoffs of his work.
>music was invented by a christcuck
>fantasy was invented by a christcuck
pagans invented both actually. frick off
Fantasy is a modern genre, and yeah it was basically invented by Tolkien. No one knows who invented music, it's prehistoric.
you said bach did dishonest cuny
Bach perfected music, he didn’t invent it.
The modern concept of music as a tonal melody with a distinct beginning, middle, and end, capable of evoking an emotion or state of mind or even telling a narrative, instead of a series of disjointed noises meant to distract as a background to other entertainments, was in fact invented by Christian monks in the 600s-700s AD to organize their prayers. Musical notation was completely unknown before Gregorian monks invented it; at best, pre-Christian music was whatever random notes the player performed in order to give a rhythm to words of poetry being spoken.
>christcucks
What does that even have to do with anything? Go talk to people who write music for a living, Bach is their bread and butter, same goes with Tolkien for people who write high fantasy. It's just what it is. If you wanna fantasize about some rewritten history where pagans are the main characters, go ahead. Maybe you end up creating your own literary genere and pirated by some useless fat frick lol. You can name it "high pagan fantasy".
>pagancucks
no one cares homosexual
>no case for him being a better writer
He finished his books.
>being a better writer
At what? Tolkien's better at prose. All George has is he focus' more on each character's motivations, but that only gets you so far. At some point his obsession with characterization crashed his entire plot to the point that by AFFC that's all the books became to the detriment of literally everything else.
He does this and then morons think it's """world building""".
lmfao
And you think fatfrick can? Christ man, get some standards. At least Tolkien did worldbuilding to a degree that GRRM can only dream about.
tolkien>>>>
hard filtered by classic. Stick to Tom Clancy or Ian Flemming
he could have named them tik tak and tok. Who cares, he wrote an epic adventure story that few writers since have matched.
I like how Tolkien filter Sanderson trannies.
Lol, you don't know what characterization is.
>NOOOOOOOOOOO YOU CAN'T PUT POETRY IN LITERATURE!!!!!!
ffs...
Either that or he spends an entire chapter talking about the type of wood that the hobbits use to make their furniture.
What the frick are you talking about he changes tone in LoTR and the hobbit to represent being compiled by 4 different authors, you have bilbos voice in the hobbit and the first chapters, Sam and frodos voice in the LoTR main book with distinct shifts in optimism between Frodo and Sam’s accounts and it was all compiled by Sam’s daughter explaining again the changer in author voice in the appendix. It’s structured like books in the Bible. The characterization occurs in shifts of authorial voice.
What's the ratio of songs to pages ratio of lord of the rings vs food to pages in ice and fire?
>spending 15 pages describing the songs that the elves sing around the camp fire
Because he is a Linguist first and foremost. Songs tie into what he loves.
If you took a random line of dialogue from LOTR with no tags, could you tell that it was from:
>Frodo, Sam, Pippin, Merry, Aragorn, Boromir, Legolas, Gimli, or Gandalf?
IF so then he does characterization very well.
fpbp
Did this question really need to be asked?Tolkien is obviously a master storyteller whereas GRRM is a fat lazy hack.
Both are shit in different ways.
wow, such a modern learned opinion, you school much!
Tolkien stopped writing because he was dead. Germ stopped writing because he's a lazy, fat frick who lost the plot in volume 2 and since then just pulled shit out of his ass.
He lost the plot in the fourth book and it’s where ASOIAF nosedived in quality.
He’s based for draft-dodging the Vietnam war btw.
>one finished his series
>one didn't
>WWI Vet and Cambridge intellectual
>Fat disgusting slob
Billions must read
Well on one hand we have the WW1 veteran Oxford professor of literature who made up his own languages and on the other hand we have the degenerate obese sex pervert too lazy to finish his own series because he prefers sitting on his fat ass and being a TV producer.
It's a real tossup.
This. They don't even play in the same league.
Based? Clearly GRRM because he doesn't give any frick and does what he likes instead.
https://vocaroo.com/1oAadeMoX4Wn
GRRM is a terrible writer
>muh food
>muh sex
Didn't George invent a new middle name so that his initials would be similar to Tolkien?
Sounds like the guy has a huge inferiority complex tbh
Pretty sure it stands for Rotund moron
Lmfao
The white one.
>rapes Tolkien's son mercilessly after Tolkien makes a light-hearted comment about satyrs being degenerate sex pests in Greek mythology
did he go too far?
stop saying 'whom'
>spergs out about geology for no reason
>extradimensional eldritch horror aahhhh help me I'm going insaaane
>oh btw the anyone except people in my street are Black folk
>oh btw the anyone except people in my street are Black folk
glad we finally got an auteur who speaks directly to our deepest thoughts
Yes.
Ok and?
Howard Phillips Hatesanyonenotanglosaxon was also an atrocious writer hiding his inadequacies behind a florid vocabulary. His IDEAS were good, his writing was rubbish.
All he did was copy lord Dunsany
Black personMAN
I like the fact that Lovecraft was so racist that he made Robert E. Howard question his own racism and eventually stopped being racist
Lovecraft was only a philosophical racist, a racist in spirit, not a racist in practice. He was polite to Blacks, worshiped italian cuisine, and married a israelite. Racism was the cultured ideal to aspire to, not the boorish plebeian outburst of the animal instinct from a Southern lynch mob.
>we lick israeli boots because, errm, we are smarter than you
Iirc he became less racist and more worldly due to his wife. I wonder how he'd react to seeing america in 2024? It'd be like his worst nightmares realized in human form.
>heckin racism
He’s not wrong. No one wants to see the planet turned to Magna Asia
Lovecraft should have written, an effort at least, something less heroically nihilistic and more in like with Wagner but in New England. Like the American branch of old Tataria with its own Siegfried and Attila and Wotan and Donar.
Cormac Mccarthy already dethroned these hasbeens
You should be reading David Duke and David Irving
TLOTR and ASPIAF are both good in different ways
then it follows that LOTR and ASOIAF are both SHIT in different ways
GRRM is Tolkien for normies with no attention span and low intellectual ability. Basically a vaxxed and fully boosted version of Lord of the Rings.
Martin is still two books away and it will never be finished, his legacy is a failed tv show. It’s not even close.
gurrm the fat goblin will never come even close to the basedness that is tolkien
I don’t know but I do love them both. But in the end I love ASOIAF better.
There's no comparison. Tolkien wrote an entire mythology, and so much worldbuilding that it amounts to several extra books and a ton of it will never even be published. It even seems like he might have written a lot of it out of obligation to the story, rather than with the intent to publish it.
One made a series about fantasy and adventures. The other did the same thing, but obsessed over dicks.
George Martins work is essentially taking the politics of medieval England and adding some fantasy elements. Most characters are neither evil nor inherently good and ultimately just want peace and stability but with different methods of achieving it.
Tolkien on the other hand is basically just a fairytale where evil villain who is evil wants to take over the world and the heroes stop him. There's far more worldbuilding though so grown men can sperg out over whether heckin ancalagon the black could defeat ungoliant or whatever stupid shit
Neither of those populist conformists
He just mixed Conan the barbarian with hell raiser and was a huge weird mysteries pulp fiction fan hence names like SLAAN and UBIK
george martin write a Big good book
Roald Dahl
Martins understanding of Plantagenet history is sublime
>J "RR" Tolkien
>Geroge "RR" Martin
Who the frick writes this shit?
George himself, literally. He gave himself another middle name to make his initials more like JRRT.
that's bullshit but I believe it
I must know tax policies or I cannot take stories about dragons and witchcraft seriously
This unironically. Makes things more immersive. Manchildren seething
>UMM THIS IS HECKIN BORING WHERE ARE THE DRAGONS
you ain't read jack shit, homosexual
Gurm never once discusses the 7 Kingdoms tax policy, Littlefinger just constantly borrows money.
Pottery, just like real life
I think GRRM's point with the tax policy stuff is more that there's more to being a good king than simply being a good righteous person. As GRRM is more interesting in the practical machiavellian aspects of leadership.
The awkward thing is that ASOIF, despite being nominally based on medieval england has much more in common with the early modern period than the medieval one. In an actual feudal society, being a good king is one of the most important things because it means your subjects will trust you- which turns out is very important when your entire society is made up of a decentralized loose collection of powerful warrior aristocrats whose cooperation you needed to do anything. In fact, pretty much everything from the betrayals and massacres reeks of either archaic or certain eras of the Roman/Byzantine empire.
The funny thing is, if he'd actually written about a medieval society then he could have gotten away with no tax policy, because the medieval period was for the most part too decentralized for the large state apparatus needed for proper taxation. Taxation did exist but it was generally a flat land tax on nobles or something similarly simple. The Roman, Byzantines and states of the early modern period had advanced bureaucratic states which were able to raise large armies and collect taxes. Don't get me wrong, he's still an excellent writer but the setting is a bit anachronistic
Anyone else always gotten sex offender vibes from him?
That was Piers Anthony
>Writer of the most influential fantasy series of all time
>Perfectly blended mythology, modern fantasy, a reflection on a diminishing West, good vs evil, and a war story in one book
>Filled with supremely human characters and extraordinarily beautiful moments (e.g Sam talking about the stories that will be sung of them)
>Only flaw is that Wagner did it better earlier
vs
>Fat slob who can't even finish his damn books
>Only held up because of a hit tv show that eventually shit the bed
>Obsessed with sex and vulgarity
>Mildly more complex characters than Tolkien
Hm, tough one.
Both are barely fantasy writers to begin with
They make pop trash.
>Both are barely fantasy writers to begin with
Tolkien barely included magic in his story because his story is about the world slowly being demystified and Middle-Earth LITERALLY eroding into real world Eurasia.
GRRM barely included magic because he originally wanted to write sci-fi and the only reason he pivoted to fantasy is that he knew where the wind was blowing from, it was the only chance to save his failing career, and he saw a documentary about the War of the Roses on the boomertube one evening.
they’re both two different sorts of writers. tolkien wrote for himself. he had all the autistic mythology laid out and was literally going to do nothing with it- he only wrote LOTR because he first wrote the hobbit for his children and someone said he should publish it. he methodically completed his entire story as a packaged mythos which said everything he wanted it to say. other writers of that type historically were men like dante and melville, they are quite rare. most writers are like martin where they just gush out pages and pages in order to make a career- shakespeare was like that, so was dostoyevsky. they can shit out stuff at a prodigious rate when they need to and are lazy when they don’t.
just being dishonest for no reason. The point of Asoiaf is that the power of magic is slowly returning after a long period of hibernation.
We'll never know really since the fat man will not finish
You're literally black/brown if you don't like Tolkien
George Martin looks like a jovial albino black man.
Tolkien - invents fantasy as we know it.
Martin - wrote pseudo historic stuff we had for 2 centuries but with meme dragons so morons actually read it this time.
I'd go with Tolkien. Marty is good but he brought nothing new to culture.
>Tolkien - invents fantasy as we know it.
You mean he actually invented elves, orcs, trolls, dragons, fairies, etc ?
Yes he invented their now classic image and racial relations. Elves at least. And half-elves. Orcs too probably.
since this is a blu board, probably the fat cowardly draft dodging atheist cuck obsessed with Aragorns tax policies
Do any of you know what “characterisation” means? What aspects of the characters in LotR were you left confused by or thought was missing? What MORE did you want ?
I have no respect for obese people
>christcuck versus non christcuck
Martin wins every time.
LOTR has far higher literary merits, it's pretty much the perfect tale about virtues and it birthed an entire genre thanks to an autistic amount of thought put into world building from someone who was a renowned scholar in linguistic and mythology.
ASOIAF is a series made by someone who has a knack for drama but was too lazy to put the work to write historical fiction and went the easy way with fantasy.
LOTR will have more lasting impact over the next decades and maybe centuries while ASOIAF will probably lose relevance pretty fast, especially since we're still yet to see the ending.
How is this even a question?
Tolkien is for children. grrm is for people who think
>Libtard atheist struggles to understand people can simply be good
What did he mean by this?
Fat pink masts jutting into myrish swamps until her c**t became the world while nuncle broke his fast on black bread, bacon burned black, and mulled wine while around him the planks of the ship groaned like a fat man taking a shit and in the privy the princess cursed as she shat but the more arbor gold she drank the more she shat until she was shitting brown water and nuncle smirked and bit into a lemoncake while capon-grease dripped down his chin onto the nipples of his breastplate and the boiled leather of his jerkin for did she not know words are wind and winter is coming and a lannister always pays her debts and you know nothing jon snow and dark wings bring dark tidings and oh my sweet summer child this is nothing but a mummers farce and she could be fricking lancel and moonboy for all nuncle knows and stick them with the pointy end but where do prostitutes go and the night is dark and full of terrors but nuncle is the blood of the dragon and the north remembers
>a filthy journo cribbing from irl Cinemaphile
>nothing's good or evil absolutely
>so nothing needs to be justified
>describing diarrhea is the closes he comes to poetic language
>socioeconomics and realpolitik
>newspaper clippings and college textbooks
>realism in fantasy trappings
>modern in that it is from nothing to nothing
>there is no greater principle than temporal power
>humans are nothing but amoral animals that fight and frick
vs
>a doctor of languages cribbing from western canon Cinemaphile
>there are absolutes
>the language itself is poetic
>even the Black Tongue is ur-Rammstein
>nothing is more important than ultimate good and the fate of the world
>genre-defining OG fantasy in mythic trappings
>constructed within religious assumption
>there is a glorious From and an exceedingly glorious To
>there is a Point
grrm has an easier time because he lives in the shadow of jrrt's legacy. grrm looks down from the height of a mountain; jrrt is that mountain.
Lore: Tolkien
Inventing half a dozen fricking languages just for the hell of it: Tolkien
Characters: GRRM
Story: GRRM
Prose: GRRM
Poetry & songs: Tolkien
Actually finishing your main work: Tolkien (although people forget that he didn't actually finish the Silmarillion)
Cultural impact and longevity: Tolkien
My personal favorite: GRRM
point, set, match
>Story: GRRM
>Prose: GRRM
I respectfully disagree.
>Prose: GRRM
MMM, years. "Fat pink mast" so eloquent.
Martin is the better writter but Tolkien legacy is too big for anyone to recognize that.
Tolkien is just
>Le good are good
>Le evil are evil
That makes is characters extremely boring
Martin sometimes feels like he has his head way deep inside is butthole with all the gray morals and shit but that makes his charactera 10 times better.
There is no a single characters in LOTR half as good as Jamie Lannister
The death of Boromer inspired at least three spontaneous songs, their grief was so great.
Martin is a joke.
Feanor, Boromir, Turin and Thorin are all gray characters with virtues and failings.
>That makes is characters extremely boring
The manichean archetypes are only boring you because you have seen them repeated ad nauseam in pretty much all fantasy media, but Tolkien originally invented them.
The last 2 decades of fantasy have seen most writers trying to "subvert" the genre only to produce complete convoluted dogshit 90% of the time with no real core substance (typically Malazan).
Tolkien characters are simple but it serves a greater purpose in his tales.
Martin makes great characterization and really invests you in them but it's at the expense of the plot focus, the proof is that he can't wrap things up because he has 2 dozens of POV setups with their own multi-layered motivations/identities but he's unable to make them all converge to a singular payoff, let alone a satisfying one, which is why he's procrastinating by writing one spin off after another with less characters and scope.
George hasn’t written anything good since 1999
Well, I got bored with his Game of Thrones books after the first one and stopped reading them, while I've read The Lord of the Rings like six times in my life. So there's your answer.
Tolkien is the wen on the arse of fantasy literature. His oeuvre is massive and contagious—you can't ignore it, so don't even try. The best you can do is consciously try to lance the boil. And there's a lot to dislike—his cod-Wagnerian pomposity, his boys-own-adventure glorying in war, his small-minded and reactionary love for hierarchical status-quos, his belief in absolute morality that blurs moral and political complexity. Tolkien's clichés—elves 'n' dwarfs 'n' magic rings—have spread like viruses. He wrote that the function of fantasy was 'consolation', thereby making it an article of policy that a fantasy writer should mollycoddle the reader.
Bait thread. GRRM isn’t on par even if he finishes his book.
Tolkien had a greater respect for history by only doing broad allusions to prior kingdoms/empires and notable battles.
GRRM doesn't have as much nuance so he just does a simple cut/paste of the Wars of the Roses while hoping to create and even more monumental and lasting legacy. He wrote himself into a corner by getting ambitious and trying to write about every single facet of a medieval fantasy European continent. He got too big for his britches and simply sold out to HBO to enjoy his retirement.
God what a fat loser frick. You'd think a writer would be able to express himself better than some high school girl writing her thoughts down on a journal.
Use it, sir, to create more heroic art as only you can. We neef you
If a midwit like him can write, anyone can, just godda be patient.
Both are good writers. (GRRM *really* is a good writer)
The difference is the genre. GRRM wrote (is writing) a soap opera that has painfully slow pacing. Dany's inevitable invasion of Westeros is what the ASOIAF is about, but why does that take 8+ books to tell properly? Again, it's like a soap opera, dragging out these plot points, adding in new characters for no reason.
Tolkien wrote the most epic story ever in three, rather short, books.
Martin already finished the books. He’s waiting to release them so the rights stay in his family longer. Copyright laws.
The Hobbit enters the public domain in 2032.
2033*
>his family
He doesn't have any family, moron
>HE MADE UP A BUNCH OF LANGUAGES!!11
Whoopeedoopeedoo. Where is the correlation between a linguist making up shit and good storywriting? Oh wait, there is none. And it shows. Tolkien wrote for children. Martin writes for manchildren. Read an actual fantasy book for adults.
tolkien, obviously
A liberal homosexual feminist Protestant was teaching a class on George R.R. Martin, known hack
”Before the class begins, you must get on your knees and worship Gurm and accept that Planetos is the greatest fantasy setting of all time even greater than Arda!”
At this moment, a brave, patriotic, British WW1 veteran who had served 1500 tours of duty on the Somme and understood the necessity of war and fully supported all decisions made by Butcher Haig stood up.
”What are the linguistic differences among the peoples of Westeros?”
The arrogant proddie smirked quite schismatically and smugly replied “There is the Old Tongue and the Common Tongue, you stupid warmonger”
”Wrong. There should be hundreds of dialects. If the Wall is 8000 years old as you say, how can the Wildlings and Northmen understand one another?”
The HBO shill was visibly shaken, and dropped his chalk and copy of A World of Ice and Fire. He stormed out of the room crying those redditor crocodile tears. The same tears redditors (who today live in such luxury most can afford sex changes) cried when Missandei was beheaded. There is no doubt that at this point our sola scriptura-homosexual wished he had pulled himself up by his bootstraps and become more than a garbage pulp fiction fan. He wished so much he could die a glorious death in battle, but he had sworn to always be a draft dodger!
The students applauded and became Tolkien fans that day and accepted the Pope as their Lord and Master. A giant eagle named “Thorondor” flew into the room and perched atop the flag of Gondor and shed a tear on the White Tree. Beowulf was read in the original Old English several times, and Eru Ilúvatar himself showed up and enacted Aragorn's flat rate tax policy across the universe.
The Lutheran was fired the next day and sunset found him squatting in the grass, groaning. Every stool was looser than the one before, and smelled fouler. By the time the moon came up he was shitting brown water.
Not bad, but the liberal homosexual feminist Protestant should be an American.
Posts like these are why I stick around on this godforsaken site.
>If the Wall is 8000 years old as you say, how can the Wildlings and Northmen understand one another?”
Unironically a good point. Westeros has a very bad case of "eternal fantasy world" where literally nothing changes. Go back 8000 years and everyone is apparently speaking the same language, wearing the same armor, using the same names. The fricking pyramids were built 4,500 years ago.
I think when GRRM started writing, he didn't have a very good understanding of size or scale, which is why westeros is so fricking huge and all the castles are so gargantuan despite nominally really just being fantasy england.
inspired future copypasta, for sure.
LOTR was written by an intellectual and war veteran and is one of the greatest books ever written. It's unlike anything else in terms of its immense amount of detail and unforgettable characters.
GoT is smut in a fantasy setting.
Not even a fantasy setting. It's just "the Wars of the Roses, but there are zombies up in the north that everyone kind of forgot about until the fifth book".
It's not even that because then it might be a bit interesting. War of the roses was right before the early modern period, so they actually had a wild mix of gunpowder weaponry with medieval full plate. Longbows alongside early firearms shooting flame arrows that burnt to create blistering gas, they were doing all sorts of weird shit and plate armor was at it's peak aesthetics.
Really cool time period, but fantasy writers are scared of early firearms because they threaten to make magic swords, ice zombies and dragons obsolete. GRRM's biggest mistake was not having the setting be during the dark ages/early medieval period. Most of the lords then were barely a generation or less removed from being pagans, there were no crossbows and technology had collapsed after the western roman empire. The church hadn't gotten it's claws into everything yet. It really would have been the perfect period for game of thrones to be set in, but he wienered it all up.
Tolkien has better prose but Martin’s world is so much better.
both wrote modern slop, go read a real fantasy classic like the bible instead
Tolkien no contest he’s the grandfather of the entire genre and everything else is basically just a tribute to his work.
What is this shit meme that lotr has bad characters?
The idea that characters must be essays of tabula rasa golems that have been in interesting situations.
>GGGD0
Legolas is basically a non-character
yeah but he's like really cool n' shit. I mean he took out a massive elephant creature by himself!
If you read some of the HOME series you will realize that he was swapped in when Tolkien realized Glorifindel was too powerful and would ruin the tension of the fellowship/attract every evil thing Sauron had. So legalos was swapped from elf Jesus to a sheltered elf prince who hasn’t really seen things like death before.
Trotter also became strider /Aragorn and got powered up to fill some of the void made removing elf Jesus power level wise
I hated the GOT books and show, and the LOTR books. I liked the LOTR movies. I honestly prefer ya fantasy for a wide variety of reasons, the biggest of which is that they don't drown you in exposition on page 1.
Read Hawk of May by Gillian Bradshaw.
Don't read the sequels, you'll regret it.
>don't drown you in exposition on page 1.
What do you mean?
ONE MILLION YEARS AGO, THE CHOSEN ONE USED HIS SKRIGNATH, WHICH IS LIKE A SWORD BUT COOLER, TO FIGHT THE DEMONS, WHICH CAME FROM A'BEL'LOR TO DESTROY THE WORLD OF MINJUS. WHICH IS LIKE EARTH BUT COOLER. THEY WERE BROUGHT BY THE FOUL SOURCERER KEL'TATH, WHO PRACTICED ONE OF THE FORBIDDEN TWELVE SCHOOLS OF MAGIC, NIXTHERIS, DERIVED FROM THE GOD OF EVIL, THERIS, WHO WAS CAST DOWN FROM JELLUS, WHICH IS LIKE HEAVEN, BUT WITH breasts
Saved.
Hell yeah brother
>S U N S E T
>Q
>U
>A
>T
>T
>I
>N
>G
I don't read homosexual ass books, but both those men look like got mad old guy breath. You know that gross periodontitis smell. Ugh. I hate it.. So gross. They both have it, I can tell.
Imo Robert E. Howard.
Tolkien liked Howard
I can see why.
gonna post it
God, what a wanker
January 6 was Trump's attempt to overthrow the government
Dude, you Americans don't even know what an overthrow attempt looks like. What happened at the Capitol wasn't even remotely close to a real coup d'etat. It was literally Naruto-running @Area51 tier.
He should kill himself
What a gigantic homosexual, he has the intellectual depth of a female zoomer.
what a melodramatic weepy homosexual with no actual problems so he pretends to get stressed about the news
You decide! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XAAp_luluo0
People who claim lotr is one of the greatest books ever likely never have actually read them. They are bad. It’s amazing how Peter Jackson was able to parse through all that nonsense of hobbit songs, nature descriptions and all that other bloat to find such a good story. I’d personally say lord of the rings was created by Peter Jackson. Jrr tolkien wrote a bunch of schizo nonsense. Jackson found the actual story there.
This is some delicious bait, I commend you. Let's see how it plays out.
The one that actually finished a series
How is this even a question
Im 35 and currently rereading lotr. Ive read got, the hobbit and silmarillion.
I dont get where this meme of tolkien being overly descriptive of stuff comes from. Maybe if you read this as a kid it could come off like that but not as an adult having read classics. He is detailed in describing the fellowships route but that just helps you visualize their journey. There's more descriptive scenery in blood meridian.
If these morons read any classic lit they’d be way more lenient on tolkien. Reminds of dante explaining for an entire canto how mantua wasn’t named after manta out of respect but just because her corpse was there. Pure autistic crap is an essential part of human epics.
>the fedora is still at it
Genuinely sad
That dude left a long time ago. You're talking to a Gnostic here now, bud.
Oh I see, you’re schizophrenic. Best of luck with that
I made the mistake of reading the name of the wind and the wise man's fear and enjoyed them to then find out the fricking hack is never going to finish his trilogy.
Martin isn't even better than jordan let alone tolkein.
QUIBBLE
*eats bacon*
>nobody ITT has posted William Hope Hodgson
Guy was a sailor and a body builder. Died fighting like a chad in WWI. I think that is genuinely one of the greatest losses ever. Everyone ITT do yourself a favor and go read the Night Land. Guy did cosmic horror better than Lovecraft.
I will. Thanks.
really apples to oranges but overall Tolkien created a much more interesting world
ASOIAF is very derivative of other fantasy series, it's basically Memory, Sorrow, and Thorn shaken up with some blatant Lovecraft and Elric of Melnibone references in lore and bits and pieces of several other fantasy series sprinkled on top with a bit of tasteless edginess. That being said I like the series but Tolkien did a lot more work in creating a beautiful world. And being inspired by mythology is different than taking ideas wholesale from fellow genre writers
Martin pisses off Chuds because he writes realistic characters.
Tolkien writes something that chuds who obviously idolized medieval times finds attractive, the idea that everything worked well there and every man in position of power was good, and not some corrupt piece of shit taking the oportunity to do depravate things
I don't know about realistic. He seems to write characters motives to lead you to believe they react and respond in a certain way then when you least expect it, he has them change to something completely opposite, or suddenly just as you're rooting for them, they die or get murdered. I did enjoy his books and I like how he made me care about some characters and want to keep reading on to their next chapter to find out what happens to them. Now I'm sad because he'll never finish the book story so who knows how my favs turn out. I rufuse to watch the show.
I'm a chud and Martin pisses me off for getting me invested into a series and then abandoning it, never finishing anything at all and angling up to his deathbed while people compare him to fricking Tolkien
>Every non-evil character is GOOD with NO FLAWS chud!
Confirmed for having never read the books. Isildur, basically a paragon of mankind and the best of humanity refused to destroy the One Ring and basically fricked Middle Earth over for ever.
I don't think that's really the same as a character flaw as literally every character in the series would have done the same. It is a flaw, but only in the sense that all beings can fall to temptation towards the ultimate power. Even frodo failed, in the end.
>there are people who dislike the songs in lotr
amazing how easily some people are filtered
I'm adding songs into my own book just to filter the people who didn't like the songs. They're kino.
Fat man's books will be forgotten in a decade. Tolkien is eternal.
They'll be forgotten if he never finishes them. No one will bother reading 5 books when they know the story is unfinished.
Martin is more based. People can't criticize the ending to your magnum opus if it doesn't exist.
So it's more like a parvus opus
>still clinging to christcuck lit
let go
Please don't compare Professor Tolkien to that lazy, gluttonous degenerate.
If George manages to finish his main series we will compare them then.
George got a tv show to beta test his final books and is too creatively bankrupt to change it to something acceptable so he just quit.
Tolkien fought in the trenches during the ww1, martin is just a sack of fat complaining about the tax policy
Fat sack of shit can't even finish his series
Tolkien: homosexual elves
Martin: based men
/thread
>Gurmgays think they're in any position to shittalk LoTR Elves when most of their setting is dominated by inbred sisterfrickers who look like Elves
>Tolkien Elves
>homosexuals
Read the books.
How is this even a question? Martin is just a fatass degenerate and uses his stories to try to excuse that. Bastards, midgets, and incest are all just metaphors for fat acceptance.
>New Thronesshit season starting
>Instead of shitposting threads, we get these hackneyed ones giving the fat hack a modicum of credit
Tolkien finished his frickin story so I feel like he wins by default. Where's Winds of Winter, George??
Martin is a shit-obsessed yid
both are decent writers who put in a lot of work and their personal expertise in history, linguistics, politics and so on for the sake of creating a thoughtful creative deep world. However GRRM ultimately failed as he couldn't see his story through for literary / creative reasons (as opposed to health or other supeficial issues)
Best author ever vs fat weeb frick that can't finish his own story...
>Sword and sorcery fedora fat using whom incorrectly
Shocking
Reminder Tolkien unironically believed in shit like nobility and monarchism.
>a closed off clique of people should rule because...umm their parents did idk lmao
He was a certified moron. George Martin is atleast smart enough to recognise how moronic monarchism is as a form of government.
GRRM allowed his life's work to be pissed on while still alive and while it was unfinished.