|
|
Doomforge
Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
|
posted March 15, 2009 08:03 PM |
|
|
friendofgunnar, thanks for support 
Quote:
Actually, Sauron was an angel once who wanted to create a perfect world and was seduced with this ambition by Morgoth, but it's not about that. It's not about evil in LOTR! It's about the journey of the main cast to change something. To face corruption and dirt to come through in the end.
As much as you try, you can't deny that it's just another story about a journey to defeat "the evil". One way or another.
And it's very convenient to say that he was "just deceived". Takes away to explain WHY. Makes the bad guy another puppet.
____________
We reached to the stars and everything is now ours
|
|
Lexxan
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Unimpressed by your logic
|
|
posted March 15, 2009 08:10 PM |
|
|
Meh. Everyone has it's preferences. I like Tolkien, but dislike the Universe of Warcraft (which is based on Tolkien btw; like all Fantasy is). If someone else thinks the opposite, it's fine with me, though I won't fully understand why.
____________
Coincidence? I think not!!!!
|
|
DagothGares
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
No gods or kings
|
|
posted March 15, 2009 08:34 PM |
|
|
So...
Let's say that the story is totally about evil...
What now? Make the villain complex? That's a slippery slope, because the villain will wind up bing a deceived good guy in the end, no? Is he totally evl? Complexity down the drain...
I like villains as much as the next guy, but the lord of the rings isn't a villain story. The villains are just there to create a hardship for the ehroes to overcome and the heroes are the scope of the story.
Yes, I know how much it sucks that Tolkien didn't interrupt a chaptr or two to create a vicious scene of the wildmen pillage, cannibalise and rape an entire village, but that isn't what the story is about, plain and simple. It's not warhammer, it's something written just after WWII.
Do I need to draw a picture of how big the scope of fantasy literature was at that time? Terry Brooks was BORN, then. (in case you're wondering, Terry Brooks was the first best-selling fantasy author) (Tolkien was the first high fantasy author, I think)
I think this a weak argument and don't want to go down on that any further, since it might detract from what the discussion is about.
You say that LOTR is shallow. You then talked about the witcher and said that Geralt was like a pawn for higher person, etc.
Not everyone knows what it's like to be a soldier and I don't think that soldiers are necesarily something mature (quite the opposite sometimes  ). Now, Gamling was a soldier of Rohan. He commanded the Riddermark.
His king ordered him specifically to treat the forces of Saruman as an ally. What do you think he went through when he say all that happen? When he was forced to betray his country...
Or Faramir (lovely complex there) who wanted to do nothing but please his father and nearly rode to his own death to prove he was superior to his sibling?
When Elrond forged Narsil. Did he have to trust this human who already failed in his eyes with that powerful weapon, Did he need to make an effort for that? No, but his daughter persuaded him.
Gollum was a totally wicked character and you can never convince me otherwise.
Is a story mature when there is rape? is a story mature when chaotic massacres happen? Are those things the things that make the story?
Does a story need a well-accented villain? what if the story never showed the villain's POV? How can he be well-accented when the villain's POV is never shown?
____________
If you have any more questions, go to Dagoth Cares.
|
|
baklava
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Mostly harmless
|
|
posted March 15, 2009 08:54 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Evil MUST be dirty to seem and feel EVIL. It should be twisted and the more complex the motives are, the better. LOTR has the most shallow evil around - just another power-hungry maniac, evil because he's ... well.. evil.
Sauron isn't dirty and twisted?
Motives... What was Hitler's motive? What was Lucifer's motive when he rebelled against God? What's the motive of every main bad guy in epic stories? Or in history, while we're at it?
|
|
Doomforge
Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
|
|
posted March 15, 2009 08:55 PM |
|
|
Quote:
So...
Let's say that the story is totally about evil...
What now? Make the villain complex? That's a slippery slope, because the villain will wind up bing a deceived good guy in the end, no? Is he totally evl? Complexity down the drain...
There are many ways to make a villain interesting, trust me.
Quote:
Yes, I know how much it sucks that Tolkien didn't interrupt a chaptr or two to create a vicious scene of the wildmen pillage, cannibalise and rape an entire village, but that isn't what the story is about, plain and simple. It's not warhammer, it's something written just after WWII.
No, it's not that you need to see that kind of scenes, or that they are obligatory. You misunderstood me. I meant that if you want to show true evil, prime evil - you need a TWIST. Not just "he is evil, he killz peoplez!!!!1111!!". Such a character has no depth. It doesn't matter whether he is twisted due to his acts, or due to his... thoughts, mind, imagination. However, the latter is harder to write, and much more interesting. But rare.
Quote:
Do I need to draw a picture of how big the scope of fantasy literature was at that time? Terry Brooks was BORN, then. (in case you're wondering, Terry Brooks was the first best-selling fantasy author) (Tolkien was the first high fantasy author, I think)
Look, Homer's Iliad & Odyssey inspired COUNTLESS writers through all GENERATIONS. Does it make it a super fantastic top book to read? no. It's a weak argument, yes. Just because something was first doesn't mean it deserves all the hype. Respect, yes. But not the HYPE.
Quote:
You say that LOTR is shallow. You then talked about the witcher and said that Geralt was like a pawn for higher person, etc.
Not Geralt. The war in witcher was a secondary plot. Very interesting, though.
Quote:
His king ordered him specifically to treat the forces of Saruman as an ally. What do you think he went through when he say all that happen? When he was forced to betray his country...
It's not the same as showing how the king mercilessly gives orders. It's nowhere near showing what happens in his HEAD when he does so.
As for your other examples, I honestly don't remember, so I won't explain why they felt not-very-deep to me, and they certainly did. If anything captured my eye, I definitely would remember, like the Moria trip - incredible way of describing a dungeon, I'm still impressed by the sheer atmosphere of fear that place had.
Quote:
Gollum was a totally wicked character and you can never convince me otherwise.
Just a random greedy peasant. Even his character is screwed because Tolkien decided he can't be really EVIL by himself, he of course is spoiled by the ring. Yeah. Yawn. As if people couldn't be wicked without some stupid ring.
Quote:
Is a story mature when there is rape? is a story mature when chaotic massacres happen? Are those things the things that make the story?
No, mate, it does not. As I explained a few paragraphs above, evil needs a twist, though. It needs to be different than "I killz men". if it's not, it fails. Because it's the kind of "pointless evil". Evil for the sake of being evil simply sucks if there is no motive behind it, some twist of mind, past, dream. The deeper it goes into psychology, the better. A perfect "evil" in a fantasy book would be the one touching the very bottoms of our souls, the many taboo subjects that are usually omitted in books.
Quote:
Does a story need a well-accented villain? what if the story never showed the villain's POV? How can he be well-accented when the villain's POV is never shown?
Sometimes, the character's presence is simply noticeable without him appearing at all.
Bak: I know the motives of Hitler. Kinda interesting, try his biographies, documentaries. You may learn some cool facts
____________
We reached to the stars and everything is now ours
|
|
baklava
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Mostly harmless
|
|
posted March 15, 2009 08:58 PM |
|
|
You can also learn cool facts about Sauron throughout Tolkien's works.
But the main idea comes down to a power-hungry, demented, yet resourceful and skillful maniac.
|
|
Darkshadow
Legendary Hero
Cerise Princess
|
|
posted March 15, 2009 09:02 PM |
|
|
Quote:
But the main idea comes down to a power-hungry, demented, yet resourceful and skillful maniac.
The...Joker?
____________
|
|
DagothGares
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
No gods or kings
|
|
posted March 15, 2009 09:03 PM |
|
|
Why so serious everyone?
____________
If you have any more questions, go to Dagoth Cares.
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted March 15, 2009 09:28 PM |
|
Edited by TheDeath at 21:28, 15 Mar 2009.
|
Quote:
There are many ways to make a villain interesting, trust me.
Oh trust me when I say that your villains can be just as easily classified and then laughed upon for being repetitive... Oh, and nothing sort of more original or "uber greatness" in it either.
Quote:
I meant that if you want to show true evil, prime evil - you need a TWIST. Not just "he is evil, he killz peoplez!!!!1111!!".
and expect a lot of twists of course...
Things you call as fresh, as much cooler than Tolkien... were already done, are already ingrained in people's mind... it's not like you're going to have a revolutionary impact or something, give people more credit (I mean those who say Tolkien roxxor), they aren't just "ignoring" other "awesome" pieces...
You can search TV Tropes for more, and see how many stuff that you may think is "original" is already explained and given examples of. Some weren't even successful, guess why.
Now back on topic, no matter what, Tolkien does so with extremely good analogies in his stories, which the average joe doesn't "see" because, well, he is interested just in the "action". Most of other stories are just "made up" (including the snowty Warcraft Titans thing) instead of actually representing an allegory of a bigger message. I explained this in some thread (I think the Moral thread or the God thread when we discussed morals mainly), and posted links. For sure I wasted more than an hour back then (I think it was the end of 2007) and I'm not going to repeat it or search for it, sorry... you understand right?
____________
The above post is subject to SIRIOUSness.
No jokes were harmed during the making of this signature.
|
|
Doomforge
Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
|
|
posted March 15, 2009 09:38 PM |
|
|
It's no secret that everything in the world has been already discussed and done. You won't find uber new scenarios.
But there is still a difference between a shallow character, and a deep character.
____________
We reached to the stars and everything is now ours
|
|
mamgaeater
Legendary Hero
Shroud, Flying, Trample, Haste
|
|
posted March 15, 2009 09:40 PM |
|
|
Quote:
As much as you try, you can't deny that it's just another story about a journey to defeat "the evil". One way or another.
what story isn't about overcoming an obstacle... find me one
edit: is the witcher any good?
____________
Protection From Everything.
dota
|
|
Lexxan
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Unimpressed by your logic
|
|
posted March 15, 2009 09:40 PM |
|
|
Sauron isn't pure Evil. He's one of the Maiar Vanar, the (Minor) Elder spirits created by the God Ëa, and before he was Corrupted by Melkor, aslo known as Morgoth, he was Good. Tolkies stated that Nothing is born as an Evil Essence; There always is an element of Corruption.
In case of Melkor, he was corrupted by his own jealousy and search for Power, trying to Equal Ëa itself.
Sauron was corrupted under Melkor's influence and became as wicked as the Black Enemy. (evnethough it's believed that Morgoth was the Only Pure Evil that ever roamed Middle-Earth).
Orcs are Elves corrupted and mutalated by Morgoth, the Haradrim and Easterlings were consumed by Hatred for the Númenorian Lineage (Gondor).
Gollum was corrupted by the Ring, Saruman by Sauron.
All of Tolkien's villains are born/Created as Good creatures, but have been corrupted by either Power or an already existing Evil.
However, You cannot Compare Sauron to Golem, The Balrogs, the Easterlings or even Morgoth. There as different "fragrances" of Evil.
Gollum is the sneaking, slimy, sycophantical and lying type of Villain, while Sauron is the more Menacing and Overbrearing type. There is a difference.
____________
Coincidence? I think not!!!!
|
|
Doomforge
Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
|
|
posted March 15, 2009 09:46 PM |
|
|
I know the lore of LOTR.
Doesn't change my opinion.
It's boring and the characters are horrible.
____________
We reached to the stars and everything is now ours
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted March 15, 2009 09:49 PM |
|
Edited by TheDeath at 21:51, 15 Mar 2009.
|
Quote:
But there is still a difference between a shallow character, and a deep character.
Keep in mind that the "gray" characters will be considered shallow (and have started to have been these days as they gain popularity) if it becomes too popular too. That's what I meant.
Like e.g: "Hey, this guy is pure good, I already know he will NEVER betray his friends"
vs
"Hey, this guy is gray... I will surely expect a twist in his evilness to have some doubts regarding his actions!"
And it is even more predictable than that if you are experienced enough, especially with "villains" (i.e those who are the center of attention). But Tolkien's stuff was more of an allegory, a metaphor, an analogy (probably it's why I love it ). May not be more brilliant than a Black and Gray Morality world based solely on entertainment, but it has so-called "puzzles of mind and culture" so to speak, not sure how to explain.
It's not supposed to be an "action" book/movie/whatever alone.
Also, you know what I find boring? Complete uber imaginations creations without any such "hidden meanings" UNLESS they are extremely well done (there are examples). Most times it's just someone's ideas and "making stuff up" as they need (and mind you, if it's apparent to the reader, you can imagine how awful they must be). Such completely made-up worlds are interesting, but become boring as many start to have "their own version" even if it's totally different.
Behind imagination you must have something deep in its meaning to make you read it more or philosophize about it, not just a "adult story" 
____________
The above post is subject to SIRIOUSness.
No jokes were harmed during the making of this signature.
|
|
Lexxan
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Unimpressed by your logic
|
|
posted March 15, 2009 09:50 PM |
|
|
Tastes differ, I like it.
But that's because I'm a real mythology freak and I recognise elements for Norse and Greek mythology in it. I like it because It's complete and fitting. Not all invented Universes have it. Whether you like it or not, you cannot deny the Depth and the Effort Tolkien put in creating Middle-Earth.
Oh and the reason why my Knowledge of Arda (= Planet Middle-Earth) is so high is because I'm reading LotR atm.
____________
Coincidence? I think not!!!!
|
|
Doomforge
Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
|
|
posted March 15, 2009 09:59 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Behind imagination you must have something deep in its meaning to make you read it more or philosophize about it, not just a "adult story"
In case you haven't noticed Deathy, that's what I said. I never meant "adult situations" are mandatory ;p
____________
We reached to the stars and everything is now ours
|
|
blizzardboy
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Nerf Herder
|
|
posted March 15, 2009 10:07 PM |
|
|
Well I won't deny that some of his less popular books, like the Similarion (spelling?) are very long-winded and somewhat boring. But the Lord of the Rings trilogy itself (and the Hobbit) are very beautifully written. He has a unique style of writing that might not fit some people's taste, but I read LotR when I was your age and I loved it. You have to get used to his highly descriptive and feathery writing style; most contemporary writers are far more to-the-point.
____________
"Folks, I don't trust children. They're here to replace us."
|
|
Lexxan
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Unimpressed by your logic
|
|
posted March 15, 2009 10:09 PM |
|
|
I actually prefer the Hobbit to Lotr. The strength of the Novels isn't Tolkies writing (they are indeed long-winded), it is the Depths and Comlexity of the Universe. In essence, I like the Mythology behind the Novels, rather than the Novels themselves.
____________
Coincidence? I think not!!!!
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted March 15, 2009 10:17 PM |
|
|
I agree with Doomforge as well; and Tolkien hasn't invented Fantasy either. Many of his ideas were around at that time or had been mentioned. He just put care into working out his "world" with a lot of details.
The story is archetypical; everything Doomforge said about characters is true. The plot as such has basically become a blueprint for the really hollow US action movies. Characters are certainly not from this side of the world.
|
|
xerdux
Bad-mannered
Famous Hero
|
|
posted March 15, 2009 10:18 PM |
|
Edited by xerdux at 22:19, 15 Mar 2009.
|
Im glad that some of the people here agree that Tolkien isnt the God of Writing/Thoth 2.0 ...
Adrius; keep in mind that it was written in 2004.
The lore has developed and changed much since that.
With WotLK, were one of the sub-plots are about the Titans, it everything was really fleshed up.
Did you know for example that just like the Legion, the Titans have destroyed countless of worlds because of their imperfection.
5 years has changed the lore much, and thats basically a very small summary of it.
The Eredar thing there is no longer accurate for example. In the new lore the Eredar were good from the begining.
I will explain the new lore about the Titans soon. I find the new titan lore really cool and awesome.
I can imagine their huge rune ships destroying worlds like the Death Star
Sargeras failed to see the Titans campaign in ordering the worlds. He saw that the Titans were not perfect as they thought they were. He didnt like the concept of "Zomg the speices on the planet are waging war on each other, lets destroy the entire planet!"
But now Sargeras is gone, and the Legion is acting dumb.
|
| |
|
|
This thread is pages long: 
