I was wrong

[Chefe]

hello world

 

[Drakron]

Fantasy was alive long before Tolkien was even born. Grimm's Fairy Tales, anyone? Beowulf Saga? Homer's Odyssey? The fucking Gilgamesh Epic, even.

Ha ha ...

No.

People that read the Beowulf saga when it was written belived that was real ,same with almost all your other example except Grimm that were as you said "Fairy Tales".

The fantasy gender is relative new, Howard was one of the first (if not the first) that created fantasy books since they were neither belived to be real by its readers or aimed at children.

All Tolkien did was create a bunch of raving, foaming-at-the-mouth nerds who speak in Elfish. I mean "Elven". Or is that Elfin? Who gives a fuck.

Tolkien created a "english epic", it was a exercise of literature ... people simply taken it too far as they do with everything ... kinda like the Codex and Bethsoft press releases.

 

[MINIGUNWIELDER]

Fantasy was alive long before Tolkien was even born. Grimm's Fairy Tales, anyone? Beowulf Saga? Homer's Odyssey? The fucking Gilgamesh Epic, even.

All Tolkien did was create a bunch of raving, foaming-at-the-mouth nerds who speak in Elfish. I mean "Elven". Or is that Elfin? Who gives a fuck.

hey! HOW DARE YOU INSULT THE PNP! :twisted:

....i can speak some klingon and jaffa

 

[Sol Invictus]

One of the big problems I have with the LOTR books is the unrealistic characters and their interaction. What Tolkien is saying is that 'people are intrinsically good', driven to evil by the 'power of the ring', a fantasy device. That's pretty bullshit, and I just can't accept that sort of storyline/setting.

It's escapist fantasy. Not only is it 'fantasy', it's also a false representation of humanity. When I think of humanity, I don't just think of all the 'good parts' like love and friendship, I also think about the nasty parts you won't find in any Tolkien book, like depravity, violence, vendettas and sexuality.

When I think of antagonists, I don't think of some stupid eye floating in the middle of some ridiculous hell-hole looking place with legions of ugly monsters.

No, I think of a lord (he can be anything from intelligent, devious, gluttony or what have you) with an army of soldiers. A lord who keeps a harem of concubines and prostitutes that he readily puts to slaughter, should it pleasure him. Who kills innocent civilians if it fits his plans or brings more gold to his coffers. Who kills his best friend whom he suspects of plotting against him in order to save his own skin.

Hell, the 'bad guy' could even be a good king with only good intentions to preserve and expand his empire, who protects his own citizens but commits wholescale genocide on those who oppose him, if it is practical to do so. The Qin Emperor Shihuangde was like that, and a lot of people considered him brutal. You can even sympathize with a person or character like him, if you share his vision.

There's your realism. I don't care about some retarded floating eye that's EEEEEEEVIL just for the sake of it.

 

[Sol Invictus]

*snip

Hey, you conveniently left out Homer's Odyssey. What about Shakespeare's Midsummer's Night Dream for that matter? Did people believe that too?

 

[MINIGUNWIELDER]

One of the big problems I have with the LOTR books is the unrealistic characters and their interaction. What Tolkien is saying is that 'people are intrinsically good', driven to evil by the 'power of the ring', a fantasy device. That's pretty bullshit, and I just can't accept that sort of storyline/setting.

It's escapist fantasy. Not only is it 'fantasy', it's also a false representation of humanity. When I think of humanity, I don't just think of all the 'good parts' like love and friendship, I also think about the nasty parts you won't find in any Tolkien book, like depravity, violence, vendettas and sexuality.

When I think of antagonists, I don't think of some stupid eye floating in the middle of some ridiculous hell-hole looking place with legions of ugly monsters.

No, I think of a lord (he can be anything from intelligent, devious, gluttony or what have you) with an army of soldiers. A lord who keeps a harem of concubines and prostitutes that he readily puts to slaughter, should it pleasure him. Who kills innocent civilians if it fits his plans or brings more gold to his coffers. Who kills his best friend whom he suspects of plotting against him in order to save his own skin.

Hell, the 'bad guy' could even be a good king with only good intentions to preserve and expand his empire, who protects his own citizens but commits wholescale genocide on those who oppose him, if it is practical to do so. The Qin Emperor Shihuangde was like that, and a lot of people considered him brutal. You can even sympathize with a person or character like him, if you share his vision.

There's your realism. I don't care about some retarded floating eye that's EEEEEEEVIL just for the sake of it.

yes give me some corrupt politician any day
but if he wrote a book that showcased both the good and bad in people...the saga wouldnt'a sold

 

[Drakron]

*snip

Hey, you conveniently left out Homer's Odyssey. What about Shakespeare's Midsummer's Night Dream for that matter? Did people believe that too?

The Odyssey is the same as Beowulf saga.

As for Midsummer Night Dream is a theater play, its not a book ... its the same as using Wagner Ring triology as a example (and that would be a good one since its full of old german folklore and myths but its a opera)

 

[merry andrew]

What Tolkien is saying is that 'people are intrinsically good', driven to evil by the 'power of the ring', a fantasy device.

Not really. It was about power and greed. I don't honestly don't remember any 'good vs. evil' in the plot, but oke.

It's escapist fantasy. Not only is it 'fantasy', it's also a false representation of humanity. When I think of humanity, I don't just think of all the 'good parts' like love and friendship, I also think about the nasty parts you won't find in any Tolkien book, like depravity, violence, vendettas and sexuality.

I remember stuff like that in the books, in the movies even. As soon as they arrived at the first human settlement (in the books).

(rant about how Middle Earth isn't exactly like Earth)

Duh? Did Harry Potter disappoint you too because the teachers weren't molesting the students?

 

[Naked_Lunch]

Duh? Did Harry Potter disappoint you too because the teachers weren't molesting the students?

In all honesty, yes.

 

[Sol Invictus]

Middle Earth is, as I said, too far out. I don't like escapist fantasy. There's no depth to it. It's idiotic.

 

[merry andrew]

Middle Earth is, as I said, too far out. I don't like escapist fantasy. There's no depth to it. It's idiotic.

You find no depth to it, yes.

 

[Sol Invictus]

Yes, it's retarded. Who's he writing for? 5 year olds? Let me tell you, Terry Pratchett's "young adult" books have more viciousness and grit than that.

 

[TheGreatGodPan]

Tolkien's books are good. Some other good fantasy written around that time are Lord Dunsany's stuff. Not really "gritty" in any sense, but he's the most talented writer I've ever read (not necessarily my favorite author though).

If you want to get to the origins of fantasy, I suggest the stories of Arthur (they've got roots in Irish and Welsh mythology, but it's the English who've had the biggest effect on literature, which might have something to do with them being the most powerful country on earth for some time). They start out fairly simple as part of a section in "History of the Kings of Britain", that seem fairly believable (except the proto-Merlin stuff, which is more prophecy that could be dumb luck). As time goes on they get more and more fantastical, especially when the French start adding stuff. You get this perfect place called Camelot, a round table of knights (often foreigners, added by other foreigners), a sword in the stone, a lady of the lake, a search for the holy grail instead of a military expedition to Rome, and a run-of-the-mill usurpation by a right-hand man turns into a story of incest, adultery, jealousy and revenge. And that's the story everyone knows, whether by Thomas Malory, Alfred Lord Tennyson or T.H. White. Why doesn't anyone remember Geofry of Monmouth's version? Because people don't find it that interesting.

 

[MrSmileyFaceDude]

My favorite take on the Arthur legend is still Stephen Lawhead's "Pendragon Cycle."

 

[Naked_Lunch]

For Arthurian stuff, can't go wrong with "The Mists of Avalon". Damn fine book, I tell ya.

 

[Twinfalls]

Howard was one of the first (if not the first) that created fantasy books since they were neither belived to be real by its readers or aimed at children.

No. No way. Lord Dunsany's work was written around the turn of the century - well before Howards (and was much better. It's still some of the finest pure fantasy around).

But before either of them, William Morris was writing books like The Wood Beyond the World, in the late 19th century.

 

[Saint_Proverbius]

Not really. It was about power and greed. I don't honestly don't remember any 'good vs. evil' in the plot, but oke.

Um, what? Most evil people out there are serving power and greed.

 

[Chefe]

hello world

 

[Twinfalls]

Med armor is definitely gone, but I thought speechcraft and merc had simply been conflated, so only mercantile had effectively been done away with.

Would it be a revolutionary (or heretical) thought for Beth to come up with one or more *new* skills?

 

[Twinfalls]

<snip>

 

[jiujitsu]

Ok, I think it's time we let this thread die and never return.

 

[merry andrew]

Not really. It was about power and greed. I don't honestly don't remember any 'good vs. evil' in the plot, but oke.

Um, what? Most evil people out there are serving power and greed.

He was saying that there was "evil" in LOTR just for the sake of it. No 'human' motivation really.

 

[Sol Invictus]

There was some human motivation, but it was depicted as being caused by the lure of the "precious" rather than good old human greed. Boromir acted like he was under a spell.

I don't think Sauron counts as human.

 

[merry andrew]

There was some human motivation, but it was depicted as being caused by the lure of the "precious" rather than good old human greed. Boromir acted like he was under a spell.

I don't think Sauron counts as human.

The "precious" was a ring of invisibility. They were lured by the power of a ring of invisibility. Sauron, as well as the riders, were exaggerations of what people can become when their lust for greed and power consume them. The same power even overwhelmed Saruman; he succombed to Sauron simply because of the sheer force he wielded.

Boromir was under a spell: conflicting interests. He couldn't turn away from an opportunity to obtain a great power, and in the process betrayed his friend, which he realized, and then attempted to redeem himself.

 

[vrok]

Moving back to Oblivion, I was just browsing their forums and came across a small list of things not being included...

Medium Armor and the Speechcraft/Mercantile skills are also out? First crossbows and throwing stars, then the Nine Divines and Imperial Legion, then the dagger/shortblade skill, then axes, then melee staves.... and now this?

Axes are out completely? Or just merged with the Blade skill? Guess spears are probably out aswell then. Wooo swords and hammers.