Can Tolkienfags actually refute a single thing he's said?

Based

>Language is hard. This was maybe my answer to Martin, whom, as much as I admire him, I do quibble with. A Song of Ice and Fire had a very modern philosophy: that if the king was a good man, he would get his dick chopped off. We look at history and it’s not that simple. Martin can say that Bran became king and reigned for a hundred years, and he was wise and good. But Martin doesn’t ask the question: How was high Valyrian conjugated? Does the pluperfect tense of bravosi derive from the suffix? How did dragons understand the verb, “dracarys”? And what about all those lost westerosi languages? By the end of the war, the night king is gone but all of the autists aren’t gone – they’re in the Godswood, watching beautiful sisters be beautifully raped. Did Bran pursue a policy of monolingualism and kill all other languages? Even the little baby dialects in their little dialect regions?

Attached: Bran.png (376x573, 185K)

>Sunset found her..

I didn't know Armond was reviewing literature now.

>Yes. Game of thrones is less realistic and more black and white that anything Tolkien wrote.
lmao

>puts a whore tax in one Tyrion chapter no one remembers
>haha suck it Tolkien! This is what real *braaaap* oof that was a real stinker! oh like I was saying *buurp* oooh. Like I was saying this is what real worldbuilding looks... AAAAARGH! *dies*

there's nothing to refute really. GRRM didn't have the knowledge or skills (or passion) to create something like Tolkien did, so he didn't even attempt that. I don't think their works should be compared to each other too much.
Compare the influence that languages have in their stories. With Tolkien it permeates everything, and indeed is the genesis of the story (within the story itself and in how Tolkien came to write it)

Attached: 1557782136290.jpg (599x625, 47K)

>Tom Bombadil is a merry fellow! Bright Blue his jacket is, and his boots are yellow!
BRAVO tolkien

What is there to refute? A fantasy author's opinions of another fantasy author's works? What a waste of intellectual space. What a shit thread.

>Compare the influence that languages have in their stories.
you mean all this terrible songs and poems in lotr and the hobbit?

>yes. Game of thrones is less realistic
Confirmed Tolkienfags didn't actually read a single book of Tolkien

I don't have to prove anything to you.

Attached: captain-marvel-brie-larson-1549560332.jpg (480x480, 22K)

based Tommy B. triggering Martin-eunuchs

Attached: 1_JOKoLzSvZ2uoPb8YH2ZjhA.jpg (1024x768, 241K)

Attached: 1532026735906.png (1903x246, 116K)

>Daily reminder that Tolkien wrote a protagonists who kills his best friend, tortures people, has sex with his own sister making her kill herself, has sex with many women, raping some etc and he's still the good guy of the story

who?

tom bombadil *puffs* now THATS a proper fantasy character

Attached: pipe-fedora.jpg (750x751, 70K)

hear hear

>Daily reminder that Tolkien wrote a protagonists who kills his best friend, tortures people, has sex with his own sister making her kill herself, has sex with many women, raping some etc and he's still the good guy of the story

so its ok when tolkien writes degenerate fiction, but not when grrm does it. interesting example

forget the characters name but he's probably talking about Children of Huron

Patrician taste, treats lore as backdrop for a more important story about specific characters.
Plebs think autismo, boring, lore shit take precedence. Tolkein was the George Lucas before film.

Attached: 1292015122583.jpg (200x180, 10K)

*Hurin

but the lore is a backdrop my illiterate friend. He doesn't go into detail about it in Lord of the Rings. The Hobbits only get glimpses of the greater history.

>Yes. Game of thrones is less realistic and more black and white that anything Tolkien wrote.
Yeah, Sauron is definitely a grey character.

>South Gondor (now a debatable and desert land)
What's so debatable about it?

The banal is what makes the magical aspects more interesting.

Attached: 18845E1E-D549-45A4-956F-1C6557F5899B.jpg (1021x592, 442K)

>but the lore is a backdrop my illiterate friend.
Then why is it that any time you Tolkein nerds get criticized for anything, your first scapegoat is B-B-BUT MUH LORE! MUH LANGUAGES!?

I wouldn't quibble with the philologist and professor of English language on the proper usage of the English language.

Attached: 9SH1kWw.png (384x303, 30K)

he had a point until he introduced comically evil villains like Ramsay Bolton

Turin Turambar, THE main protagonist of the entire Tolkien legendarium and the one who kills the main bad guy when the world ends.

Yes because GoT doesn’t explain a tax policy either and has other shit it doesn’t explain, like how the hell the Ironborn have a massive fleet of ships when they barely have any lumber

At least Tolkien was an expert in something (languages) and manifests that in his work through the creation of entirely fictional languages that are actually plausible.

Ramsay is fine, it's the addition of superhero garbage like THE DARKSTAR and DAEMON BLACKFYRE that ruin the setting

>Degenerate fiction

It's not degenerate. Their lines were cursed and this is the result of objective evil.

Tolkien never wrote "fat pink mast" or "sunset found her squatting". You're a fucking moron. Unironically have sex.

My main problem with Gurm is that he seems to have a massive rape fetish and thinks that the standing army moving across the landscape raping and murdering and pillaging was in any way realistic in an historical sense.

then you just weren't paying attention, do you not remember rorge and biter? the sack of saltpans was supposed to be one of the worst atrocities during the war of the five kings. that happened well before we know ramsay is a torturing psychopath

>Ironborn have a massive fleet of ships when they barely have any lumber

they get wood from the coast, there's a giant forest in the north

People take “tax policy” as literally meaning tax policy and not just an example of something seemingly banal that could potentially be interesting.

Armond would praise Martin and criticise Tolkien. Don't be retarded, if you're gonna meme, meme right.

Underrated

Attached: sniff.jpg (747x960, 106K)

reminder that if you have not read the entirety of the Lord of the Rings and A Song of Ice and Fire you are not allowed to have an opinion on either of these two as authors, and you certainly aren't allowed to compare them.

Are you stupid? Armond thinks even Jackson's movies are a butchering of Tolkien's work, what do you think he'd say about dreck like ASOIAF?

>It's not degenerate
>rape and sister fucking aren't degenerate
so by your own logic, grrm does not write degenerate fiction.

Fucking lazy fat fuck

Tolkien writes about this stuff as part of a large tragedy of a bloodline affected by a dark curse
Martin writes about this shit to jerk off and try to pass off as normal in medieval times

yea but lotr can't even stand alone as a story because every fanatic tolkien autist in this thread has to talk about bullshit from the silmarillion.

>tolkien writes degenerate fiction
>martin writes degenerate fiction
thanks for clearing that up

GRRM is a bigger fan of Tolkien than anyone here

I unironically agree, but tax posting makes me laugh.

Armond is a contrarian. Grow up.

Seething capeshitter detected

What's the point, his ending is lotr except the people of middle earth elect Gandalf to be king of Gondor.

there is no doubt he is the physically largest Tokien fan.

>Daily reminder that Tolkien wrote a protagonists who kills his best friend, tortures people, has sex with his own sister making her kill herself, has sex with many women, raping some etc and he's still the good guy of the story
Which book was this?

Based incel contrarian

The one he shamelessly copied from Finnish mythology.

Martin doesn't say shit about his character's tax policy either. He really needs to take a finance class before Winds of Winter. Tolkien is dead so he can't fix this glaring omission, but there is still time for Martin.

He doesn't apply his criticism to his own work.

Childten of Hurin. Originally appeared in The Silmarillion, but a more complete version was eventually released as a standalone novel.

>this is the result of objective evil
Did you miss that part you fucking braindead twat?

Have sex.

Attached: 1555507973358.jpg (438x569, 47K)

I shouldn't be surprised the incels of Yea Forums are too stupid to get Martin's meaning with his famous diatribe, yet I find myself perplexed. He wasn't actually stating disappointment with the fact we don't to hear Aragon's stance on interest rates and fixed APR; he was expressing a bit of disappointment with the fairy tale concept that since Aragorn's a good guy everything will be happy go lucky and right as rain from there on out, he was expressing disappointment with the boring, pure evilness of the orcs and any kind of resolution on how life actually progresses after the fall of an entire "dark" country. He didn't really want a chart showing how Aragorn was going to mandate the growing seasons or how Gondor's sewage was handled.

Attached: 1558558657907.gif (723x723, 3.44M)

>shamelessly copied from Finnish mythology.
he was pretty open about his inspirations for Children of Hurin desu

Heh heh heh!!

Attached: jLN8QGy.jpg (625x625, 157K)

Children of Hurin.
Turin Turambar unknowingly knocked up his own sister . Though he never raped any women nor had sex with many of them. The only one we know he slept with was his sister. Though an elf woman had a crush on him, she died before anything really happened.
Though CoH is generally a lot more gruesome than most of his works. Easterlings enslave the women of Turin's people and "forcibly" take them to wife. Turin kills a would-be rapist and it's implied that elves hunted petty-dwarves (a dwarven sub-species) like animals which probably meant they ate them.
There's also that part before the Battle of Unnumbered Tears where an elf is dismembered in front of his brother (they cut out his eyes and remove the legs and arms before finally chopping his head off).

You call us incel but we have read the books and the appendices that discover this, honestly is painfully obvious that both you and Martin have only ever seen the films.

Well these are parts of storytelling that Tolkien is clearly much better at than GRRM, so it's not so crazy that they would be mentioned. GRRM didn't really focus on the languages at all, so it's not even a comparison. I think some other people were hired to expand some of the languages so they could make the TV show.
The history of Westeros is that not well developed, the same houses are somehow in control of the same areas for thousands and thousands of years, which would never happen in real life, whereas Tolkien mapped the entire history of Gondor and Arnor in the appendices of LOTR. Again, the details don't have to concern the average reader, but the history and the languages lend authenticity to the actual story, from names to how the people relate to each other when they recognize that they speak a similar but long-diverged language, for example. If the names aren't just random fantasy names the author thought up, but have meaning and are clearly part of a history and culture, the story feels more real.
The people of Minas Tirith thought Pippin was a great prince of his country because the formal way of addressing people had disappeared from use long ago by the rustic Hobbits and Pippin was going around addressing everyone, including the Steward, with the familiar form. The story itself didn't go into detail about that.

Attached: Numenorean kings start using their own language and regnal names after doubt against the Valar has b (855x671, 62K)

>read the entirety of A Song of Ice and Fire
thread over, none of us are authorized to talk here

NUMENOREANS GODS WHAT STUPID NAMES

hahahAHAHAHA

I do call you incel and also you are incorrect. I've more Tokien that you even know exists.

>it's implied that elves hunted petty-dwarves
It's outright stated, not implied. This is one of the (many) reasons why there's animosity between Elves and Dwarves.

He literally is though, you goddamn moviefag.

Clearly not enough though, because you are asking questions that have been answered.

>quibble
Kek

Why is this a bad statement?

You're right. My bad. Don't know why I wrote that. But do other dwarves know of it? I thought their sour relationship was due to the Nauglamir affair?

Gandalf was important to the confrontation with Saruman.

>But do other dwarves know of it?
They learned of it through scheming petty Dwarves that went around speaking of this, though it wasn't as great a catalyst as the slaying of Thingol was. That alone would lead to thousands year long hatred between them to the point where even unrelated Dwarves (e.g. Gimli, who was from the Line of Durin) would shout profanities (he yelled he would "spit upon your grave" to Haldir, for example) to Elves so long after it happened.

there is nothing wrong with taking things from real history

forget tax policy, tell my why does a dragon even want all the gold

"I did begin a story placed about 100 years after the Downfall, but it proved both sinister and depressing. Since we are dealing with Men, it is inevitable that we should be concerned with the most regrettable feature of their nature: their quick satiety with good. So that the people of Gondor in times of peace, justice and prosperity, would become discontented and restless — while the dynasts descended from Aragorn would become just kings and governors — like Denethor or worse. I found that even so early there was an outcrop of revolutionary plots, about a centre of secret Satanistic religion; while Gondorian boys were playing at being Orcs and going around doing damage. I could have written a 'thriller' about the plot and its discovery and overthrow — but it would have been just that. Not worth doing."
-J.R.R. Tolkien, on why he didn't write A Song of Ice and Fire

Attached: Tolkien.jpg (2000x1000, 171K)

>Mordor is literally a square like it was made for a video game map

>why does a dragon even want all the gold
For the same reason Sauron loves jewelry. It's a thing that attracts evil creatures, same reason why after a dragon sits on a pile of gold, said pile becomes infected with a "dragon sickness", which makes the people who own it even more greedy.

Dragons are inherently evil because they are distorsions of creation by the hand of Melkor. Ergo, they do evil things and lust over evil things. What is so hard to understand about this?

there is nothing wrong with that, Tolkien based his stories on European and Finnish legends as well.
Dragons wanted gold because they were almost a manifestation of greed. In Medieval depictions, dragons were usually greedy.

he has NOT quibbled with Tolkien. They did not exchange emails, they did not sit down and debate over coffee. They did not know each other like that.

And Numenor is star-shaped because it, too, was made by the gods.
Actually I'm not sure how much of the shape of Mordor was influenced by Melkor.

I can.

Dear fat guy:

Yes, ruling and writing are hard. Tolkien was not stupid, he knew those small details like taxes would drag down the story and would add little to nothing. So he conciously decided to adhere to the old myth of "if the king is good the kingdom will do fine". Its more simple but given the context and the setup it works. No one changes the tires of the batmobile as Morrison said.

The problem arise when one fat fuck thinks he is smarter than anyone, and that the previous people where stupid, instead of skillful storytellers that made compromises in the plot. Then you become a fat fuck that tries to explain in vain who brushes the theet of the dragons, but by the end of the story you realize the realistic variables are so big and complex that its futile to try making them sense. And after you complained about Aragons tax police you have no other option to put an omniscient dude as king as a lazy cop out to finish your story. Because ruling, and writing, ARE actually hard.

It amuses me that GRM never thought thay maybe Tolkien wasnt that naive or retarded to think that ruling was easy.

It's easy to understand, it's just also very stupid.

I missed the part where Martin called Tolkien an idiot. Could you point it out to me.

or ya know, its square because its poorly cartographic in universe

Explain how a river is supposed to cross a mountain range then. Or why some rivers split instead of converge.

>Ruling is hard blablabla
He was calling Tolkien a simpleton who couldnt write a realistic kingdom setup

He was saying that those aspects are interesting to him. That he would like to read about that. Not that excluding those aspects is wrong.

No, he was subtle but there was a clear jab. It all came from a sense of superiority.

Tolkienfags can't even file their own taxes

I've never really seen him disparage Tolkien.

>tolkien made everything up by himself
>he never touched any historical or mythological books and copied shit 1:1 from it
Based redditrard, showing once again why everyone is laughing at you.

> Not that excluding those aspects is wrong.

Why then did he quibble with Tolkien? Specifically he uses the word quibble, as in, he finds there to be a deficiency in Tolkien's writing.

This is the problem with older books. Words shift over time. It would never be put in these terms today, they would have say 'contested'. But it's perfectly proper, if a bit archaic, and a not-uneard of term at the time.

>it's just also very stupid.
Solid criticism brah. Do better.

Or he was genuinely interested. Not everything that has ever happened is an attack you know.

Quibble as in a difference of opinion. Martin would write about the political stuff if he wrote LOTR because it interests him. A quibble doesn’t mean he dislikes Tolkien for excluding those aspects, or that he thinks the story is any less for excluding it.. It just means he has different interests. That’s why it’s a quibble (a difference of opinion) and not a complaint (a criticism).

>let me enslave this entire world and destroy everything because I want order and because my master Morgoth told me so, heh
mhm, so much depth. Why are you faggots so good at sucking Tolkien's balls?

Martin loves Tolkien and said that his books had an "immense" impact on him. Martin and Tolkien are just different kinds of writers.

yes, the picture is a silly meme. I've already mentioned his influences in this thread.

Based contrarian autist incel retard

Exactly. The people in this thread are just a bunch of reactionaries.

I wouldn't say that's a problem, especially in this case. I think the language of Tolkien's stories was at points by design archaic or evocative of something older even when he was writing them.

Did he say so? Maybe he is setting the seven kingdom up for disaster.
Also the polish commonwealth never had an omniscent king.

Where does he say that?

One of them is clearly more talented and influential than the other though. No one is trying to argue that they had the same vision. Reading the first page from either of their books would make that incredibly obvious.

you probably just identify more strongly with hobbits because youre a manlet LMAO

Martin can't be considered a writer until he finishes the series

yea and you identify with Tyrion for the same reason ROFL-LOLLERZ

Attached: 1547511870000.png (412x371, 110K)

Anyone that writes something is a writer.

>moviefag

>Even the little baby dialects in their little dialect regions?
I'm dying

Attached: i can't stop laughing.gif (588x588, 3.4M)

>Martin doesn't say shit about his character's tax policy either
He does though. There's heavy talk about the Iron Throne's economic situation in Tyrion's chapters in the second book.

I literally just gave you what his motivation is in the books, you absolute imbecile

Boomerdweebs treat Tolkien like God's last and greatest prophet, but his works are all uninteresting and overrated.

Who listens to what this fat fuck has to say? Game of Thrones will never be completed and the show was a boring soap opera.

This post made me laugh irrationally too much

GRRM seems to me like the kind of guy who watched a shitty documentary on medieval times on American TV once and then started to write

Reminder that medieval historians fucking hate GRRM because he's spreading a bunch of bullshit and everyone thinks it's "realistic." Also note that his fanboys will always fall back on "oh it well it is a fantasy series so it's ok" if you push them on anything, but the second you leave them alone they go right back to circle jerking about "realism."

>but his works are all uninteresting and overrated.
This. It's just medieval capeshit, really. Good guys vs bad guys. I don't get the appeal. There's no subtlety, no nuance in his books whatsoever. The good guys eventually win because they... well, good. If I wanted to watch capeshit, i'd go watch the Avengers.

he reads historical fiction because history books are boring.

Mordor is actually that way because it is a super volcano, retard. It makes absolute sense. Look up Yellowstone National Park

Sauron repented after the War of Wrath and tried to surrender to Eonwe you fucking retard

But when I was a kid it excited me.
I had a plastic sword and would hop up and down on the couch watching the animated version joyfully.

>the age old story of good against evil is now capeshit

>umm sweaty, GoT is much better than Token because it's much more realist-

medium.com/migration-issues/westeros-is-poorly-designed-3b01cf5cdcaf

Attached: american tolkien.jpg (645x729, 124K)

No, he didn't. He asked for mercy because he knew he was fucked after his master's death. If he truly repented he wouldn't have ran and then started the "world domination" shit again while still worshipping Morgoth.

Is Middle Earth based on the Sahara desert?

>age old
kek
Good ol Tolkien preserving the age old tale that enchants and inspire us all, aye milord?

uh yea, it is a fantasy series, are you a fucking baby? what a pathetic loser

No, Middle Earth is based on an aging Brit's construed fantasies about Scandinavia.

Tolkien's works come from the position of someone who has a higher concept of life and existence, therefore they focus on idealistic heroes and epics about their accomplishments, rather than talking about Aragorn jerking off in the bushes while everyone else is asleep. The idea is to create idealized beings people strive towards, have you ever read about Achilles taking a runny shit before a battle? Didn't think so.

GRRM writes with the mindset of the modern soulless hypermaterialist world, with a penchant for the scatological and deranged. His philosophy reeks of it, and is almost diametrically opposed to Tolkien's.

GRRM despises idealized characters, mainly because they make people like him feel inadequate, flawed, and generally offensive to him. GRRM is not the kind of person who reads about Achilles and thinks of it as something to strive for, rather he will immediately try to attribute flaws and drawbacks to him to lessen the distance between them by bringing Achilles down rather than lifting himself up. Without even looking it up, I can tell you GRRM is an atheist.

Attached: 1550512377910.jpg (600x599, 45K)

Are you saying that good against evil is not one of the oldest stories or what? I guess you're just making a strange attempt at an insult.
I'm not saying there's something wrong with subtlety either.

Attached: 1527211695869.jpg (290x293, 25K)

Same reason as Jews.

Lmao imagine going through life being this much of a joyless, incel contrarian baby.

Literally HAVE SEX

>The fundamental story of Good vs Evil is now considered capeshit
This planet has outstayed it's welcome

>GRRM is not the kind of person who reads about Achilles and thinks of it as something to strive for, rather he will immediately try to attribute flaws and drawbacks to him to lessen the distance between them by bringing Achilles down rather than lifting himself up.
Part of the reason why he's a lazy fatass. Tolkien was pretty fit and loved nature. Martin was out of shape already in the late 80s.

His points are idiotic, just skipped through 3 of them.

1. Size of Westeros - moot point, he has nothing to say here besides "it's too big" for no reason.

2. Armies - He talks like Westeros is Europe. It is its own world that has taken many things of Medieval Europe as an inspiration, but still - it's not Medieval Europe. The army size, given the fact that Westeros is much bigger than Europe, is pretty accurate.

3. During Basil II's reign Constantinople had a population of nearly a million. I don't know from where he pulls that "100,000" shit from. Unless we're talking about Constantinople's last decades, but obviously that wasn't the city it once was, if we do.

4. The density situation depends entirely on the climate, on the terrain, etc. You can't just estimate density based on just size of a country. That's why Mongolia barely has any people even though it's bigger than any European nation. Or China who has way more than the entirety of Europe even though the size is roughly the same

5. Has some point, but he ignores that Westeros, unlike Europe, has been united for most of its history and has a very different history than Europe. It's more akin to China and its linguistic differences than anything.

6. This is pure bulslhit. You can't compare the Targaryens to any other dynasty because they practically had free nukes at their disposal. The kingdom not ending after their extinction is like saying that after Emperor Gaozu, the Han should have collapsed. Westeros has been united for hundreds of years by that time.

The guy is a total brainlet even though he repeatedly "prides" himself in history. Arguably he's even more ignorant than most of the people in this thread.

Attached: Screen Shot 2019-05-16 at 15.04.09.png (684x467, 86K)

So the fat fuck is basically saying in the most polite way possible he won't finish the books?

Why are GoTlets always so desperate to defend Martin, if Tolkien were so blatantly inferior surely it would be fairly simple to dismantle his work with Martin's shouldn't it?

Holy fuck he's literally delusional.

First of all, Tolkien considered his writings a HOBBY, not his life's work. He considered TEACHING his work and he was tremendously passionate about it.

Second of all, Martin is writing everything BUT the main story right now. Tolkien finished the most important part of his hobby that would cement him for generations to come in the collective consciousness of people who love Fantasy. Martin is struggling to finish his LIFE'S WORK.

What an arrogant prick. People like who can't see the arrogance Martin displays are retarded. It's not even just arrogance, for that is coupled with an extreme inferiority complex.

GRRM is a virgin and Tolkien is not, as such, Tolkien beats GRRM. It's that easy.

This. Endless words devoted to poetry, songs, describing fucking streams, whilst combat was just a list of how many the characters had killed. (Only read the first 3ish books).

>implying streams and poetry aren't more interesting than fantasy combat

Gosh get a clue pleb.

GURM is a hack.

Attached: Gurm BTFO..png (1838x2202, 647K)

poems are gay you gaylord

>lo and behold, I am the best writer there is, on the level of every classic I just listed!
that intellectual eunuch should hang...

>Westeros, unlike Europe, has been united for most of its history
They've only been united for 300 years.
I think it's silly that in a place that large and disunited everyone still speaks the same language. Even beyond the fucking Wall.

these threads are made by amazon shills to try and get you excited for the lotr amazon show. prove me wrong

Yes, all of it. Very easily

Turin, the most Chad character in any fantasy series.

Attached: turinhelm.jpg (900x900, 78K)

>SIMARILLION

Also GRRM is a coward conchie and Tolkien was a hardened Great War vet.

For people that agree with Georgie Porgie, I point them to the book, Moby Dick. I challenge them to read it in its entirety, then come back and muse on the meaning of unnecessary exposition.

>Reminder that medieval historians fucking hate GRRM
No they don't, no one gives a fuck about fantasy shit, especially one that is not based on earth. Fucking Tolkienfags.
Nah, those are the critics that think watching youtubers makes them history experts.
Fire & Blood has a lot about taxation.

They aren't. If Tolkien had some of Bernard Cornwall's talent for evocative battle description LOTR would be worthwhile.

like clockwork

Calm down George, don't strain your heart.

Based and mega based

>First of all, Tolkien considered his writings a HOBBY, not his life's work. He considered TEACHING his work and he was tremendously passionate about it.
Tolkienfags can't read.

you're surprised by that? they're obsessed with books for children lol

This would be solid if it wasn't for this retarded feminist shit he tried to pull

>Martin writes about this shit to jerk off and try to pass off as normal in medieval times

All his books are like this. He's a genuinely fucked up person but has only gotten away with it because he's too obese to do anything and puts on the "oh i'm a loveable grandpa" voice

so what you're saying is that Tolkien was extremely based?
HOWEVER, I would say that his description of the Battle of the Pelennor Fields was even more emotionally rousing than the Peter Jackson movie version. It certainly wasn't a list.

Attached: 1553665068805.jpg (900x500, 124K)

>Can Tolkienfags actually refute a single thing he's said?
I am sure there would be plenty of competent advisers Aragorn could call upon, how many millennias old those kingdoms were again?

Attached: 1291180332293_doggo_wew_lad.jpg (123x125, 2K)

>To add, where is the obviously very involved and highly-sophisticated clothing industry based? Are the textile industries nationalized or publicly owned?

honestly, have you even read the books? You don't think the Battle of the Pelennor fields was evocative?

I'll have to concede that, I stopped reading long before. As I said I only read around the first 3 books, ie stopped midway through the two towers.

Turin son of Hurin, problem is he forgot to add that is all narrated in a very "greek tragedy" way, it's not just done as if it were the most normal thing ever as in Gurrm books.

>Compare the influence that languages have in their stories.
Not to contradict your general point but this heavily biases in favor of Tolkien. There's more to storytelling than the influence of language.

No they can't, LOTR is Fantasy capeshit, all they can do is post the same sunset found her squatting passages.

Settle down, George. You're going to give yourself another stroke.
Finish your books and then maybe you can pretend to hang out with the big boys.

>This. Endless words devoted to poetry, songs, describing fucking streams, whilst combat was just a list of how many the characters had killed. (Only read the first 3ish books).
>Only read the frist 3ish books
Clearly didn't get to pelennor fields now did I? Which would be in book 5 or 6?

>First of all, Tolkien considered his writings a HOBBY, not his life's work. He considered TEACHING his work and he was tremendously passionate about it.
He says this very thing in the image you quoted.

>Fatty misspelled Silmarillion

Attached: 1558474666415.gif (500x400, 996K)

are you so seething that you didn't even read the image?

Wow I actually wasted time reading this shitty essay by a discord tranny that hasn't even read the books.

youtu.be/PH31spKQ0Ls

yeah how arrogant. Yea Forums just hates martin because they're seething contrarians who are mad the thing is popular and so desperately flock to Tolkien ( probably the only other fantasy writer they know ) to set up some Martin vs Tolkien rivalry that doesn't exist

>comparing yourself to Tolkien, Fitzgerald, Dickens and Peake
For fuck's sake.

They all finished at least ONE STORY though, and I'm pretty sure Fitzgerald is remember for a certain book called The Great Gatsby.

Martin has completed books before though. Fevre Dream was pretty solid though Armageddon Rag was kind of whatever.

>the standing army moving across the landscape raping and murdering and pillaging was in any way realistic in an historical sense.
It was only really realistic if you're talking about an army out for revenge, barbarians, and other things like that.

Why would anyone pillage when they could just seize the local treasury, hand out a few coins, and let the men go to the whore house?

>They all finished at least ONE STORY though
Martin has finished stories too, what's your point?

Attached: grrmbooksfeat.jpg (1000x600, 258K)

a complete copy is not an inspiration, not to mention the entire moral ambiguity of kullervo's story being thrown into LOTR contrasts badly with the rigidly victorian shit on display elsewhere

irrational stories seem irrational because they started out formulated by schizoid minds that make no sense whatsoever to us (look at virtually any belief system a tribe holds or how abos interpret john the baptist as a hermaphrodite sky bird) not because of people changing details for the keks

Martin hasn't finished the books he himself call his Magnum Opus

true.
Though I have to say just in terms of worldbuilding it's silly that all of Westeros speaks the same language, even beyond the Wall, which has been isolated for thousands of years. The kingdoms were only united for 300 years when the story begins. GRRM could depict this without actually inventing any languages (just translate everything to English).

this

I don't think it's the army that does most of the raping of the land but random looters and cutthroats who move through the land after it's been thrown into chaos from all the war.

>GRRM is not the kind of person who reads about Achilles and thinks of it as something to strive for
I fucking hope no one strives to be like that weepy godmode faggot

Attached: 1498562884399.png (748x756, 168K)

>Martin hasn't finished the books he himself call his Magnum Opus
Right. He's a lazy fatass who can't write to save his life.

Tolkien's work is roughly 1,000 pages. Some people might think that the songs need to go or that Tom Bombadil is a cunt, but pretty much anyone can appreciate them.

Martin takes hundreds of pages to get to the inciting incident.

This is retarded. There's room for stories with idealized characters and ones with conflicted characters.

Attached: 1498562881330.jpg (504x539, 48K)

>The kingdoms were only united for 300 years when the story begins
user, who controls the education and communication of the continent?

you know that even age old tales have gray characters right?

the mahabharata for example has many gray characters the most notable being karna. but despite this there's a clear good side and bad side.

These threads are always the same with the same points and arguments being made. It's pretty clear people on this board just ignore or refuse to acknowledge what other people say in case it challenges their predisposed views which they hold fanatically.

>just retelling the most basic fundamental story that cavemen could come up without any nuance
yes this is capeshit tier

Welcome to 4channel

You just got triggered and said the same shit GEORGE was saying. You can't read, this is the issue with Tolkienfags, you faggots fail to understand a quote,fail to understand the point of said quote, fail at basic reading comprehension AND THEN you want people to pay attention to your opinions about how good or bad some fantasy work is. You lose any right to be heard the minute you got buthurt at fucking taxes.

I visit these threads in case a new quibblepost appears.

I didn't say old tales only have good or evil characters. Besides, there are gray characters in Tolkien's writings as well.

Tolkienfags are a mix of tribalistic autists and contrarians that think fantasy writers are football teams. They are the problem.

le quibbling man doesn't even outline his rulers tax policies

>the crown is six million in debt

>fuuuuck that's deep! not a fairy tale kingdom but one with bills just like me!

is this some jew thing?

George please, your blood pressure. You still have two books to finish.

he wasn't literally implying a writer should intricately detail one's tax policy you autist. how can people fail to understand such a basic quote?

there are retards in both camps, as you can see from this thread. But yes, the quibbling quote is obviously taken out of context and used mainly to trigger these retarded threads.

I don't see how you are any different desu

Attached: 517441A3-D56D-4E5F-8A46-F711099488DE.png (500x743, 227K)

mount doom can make gold so the currency gets debased thats aragorns fiscal policy

i understand but it doesn't change the fact he can't even write about taxes, bud. people here do it all the time.

his details are pages of food description you dickhead

Because they are, as you said, autistic

but that's the point isn't is. old tales have gray characters in the battle of good v evil. Haven't read all of Tolkein's works but LOTR has the good side being good and little else and the bad side being bad and little else. that's why the defense of good v evil being an ancient tradition doesn't work.

it wasn't about taxes, the quote has nothing to do with taxes. he was just saying he didn't think tolkien got into enough detail about ruling aside than "the ruler was just and good and fair", and gave taxes as an offhanded example.

His other examples are arguably more absurd like killing the baby orcs in the little orc cradles.

yep as i just acknowledged in the post you quoted. grrm readers can't actually read.

Are you seriously implying there's only good guys and bad guys in LOTR and nothing else? The whole point of Gollum's character is that someone can do both good and bad things.

But bran the broken sure is a great example am I right?

name one westerosi king tax policy, go ahead.

quora.com/Who-are-the-most-morally-ambiguous-characters-in-Tolkiens-Legendarium

extremely based post

He truly repented, Tolkien wrote in his letters that Sauron truly and genuinly repented. Read it. And Eonwe said he could be forgiven if he came back to Valinor. Sauron didn't do it because he was ashamed. About his motivation, you are right, he did want an order. But he didn't become truly evil until he corrupted Numenor. Literally after that he lost the ability to take beautiful appearance as a sign of his fall.

the entire point of gollum is that he's a decent guy overtaken by the evil of the ring. he literally fights with himself about his evilness. he's bipolar. not a gray character but a character that exists to portray the duality of morals. think striped rather than gray. name one good thing sauron does or an evil think aragorn does.

If we're speaking about LOTR, I'd only agree with boromir. He's not evil per se but allows his worst instincts to take hold. but he dies hero and pays the price for being an morally ambiguous character on the good side. imagine that, the only questionable good guy is also the only good guy who dies.

The important thing to keep in mind about LOTR (and more obviously, the Hobbit) is they aren't even the biggest wars or events in the histories of those worlds. Sauron and Saruman are pale shadows compared to the horrors caused by Melkor.

Meanwhile ASOIAF/GOT has the most important battle ever against the biggest evil ever that will determine the future for all mankind, the reincarnation of the greatest hero ever (Azor Stannis), etc.

Don't even bother trying to quibble with this.

Is Children of Hurin worth the read considering the Silmarilion tells the same tale?

The most important stuff in the ASOIAF universe happened in The Age of Heroes though.

Gandalf's resurrection was an important acknowledgement of Saruman's fall from grace by Eru Iluvitar. And a bit of tipping the scales on Iluvitar's part.

Kinda, the andal culture is pushed by the religion, the religion of the seven is key to control the population.
There's no such thing as martinfags, at least not in this board.
You are autistic if you believe he is actually talking about baby orcs
Not a martin character.

so to sum up the thread Tolkien=soul and GRRM=soulless
like there was every any doubt

>There's no such thing as martinfags, at least not in this board.
I'd describe you as one.

sam & frodo >>> merry & pippin > gandalf > aragorn >>> boromir > gimli & legolas

in terms of importance to the story and its focus. tolkiens preferred title for ROTK was "The War of the Ring" (and said war was led by gandalf as seen from pippin's POV, and ended by the actions of frodo, sam, & gollum)

Not at all. Also, the other are not evil.
Everything is worth reading. If you find it interesting do it, if you don't, it's a waste of time.

I think Eonwe said he didn't have the authority to judge Sauron, so he should go to the Valar. That's when he changed his mind.
The corruption of Numenor was plan B, he shit himself when he saw how powerful they were.

>he was expressing a bit of disappointment with the fairy tale concept that since Aragorn's a good guy everything will be happy go lucky and right as rain from there on out, he was expressing disappointment with the boring, pure evilness of the orcs and any kind of resolution on how life actually progresses after the fall of an entire "dark" country.
The only person who doesn't understand is martin, since those things are patently false.

There are a number of kings in middle earth who are good people yet still have terrible things happen on their watch. Like Arvedui, last king of arnor, who despite being shwon to be a good guy, made a number of stupid decisions which led to the witch king destroying arnor. Aragorn is shown throughout the books to not be just a good guy, but a great leader, which is why he led his kingdom to prosperity. Moreover, Tolkien even considered writing a book about how after a while the reunited kingdom would grow corrupt, but decided not to because he thought it wasn't worth doing.
Orcs are never depicted as "pure evilness," tolkien in fact notably struggled with that notion. Orcs were hunted down when they caused problems, but for the most part they just fled in the fourth age. His comment about the babies is stupid because nobody knows how orcs reproduce.
Tolkien does go into a good amount of detail about the after math of the fall of sauron and how Aragorn and Éomer dealt with it, including how mordor became empty for the most part, but parts were given to the freed slaves of nurn and defeated foes of gondor, and how aragorn and Eomer pursued campaigns against the easterlings and haradrim, adding some of them to the reunited kingdom.

Moreover, tolkien even does go into a bit about Aragorn's tax policy, noting the shire was exempt from tribute

KYS faggot, martin is an idiot who doesn't know nearly enough about tolkien to make the baseless criticisms he does

Attached: 1543546798821.png (1064x983, 1.55M)

>Ten years from now, no one is going to care how quickly the books came out. The only thing that will matter, the only thing anyone will remember, is how good they were. That's my main concern, and always will be." -GRRM, Jul. 22nd, 2007

Attached: pipe.jpg (310x444, 36K)

Becuase you are a tribalist manchild

The "final" battle between the living and dead, at least as portrayed in the show is more important and consequential than anything in the Age of Heroes. Most of the things there were just setup for what would happen later (the wall exists so the NK can destroy it, etc).

>KYS faggot, martin is an idiot who doesn't know nearly enough about tolkien to make the baseless criticisms he does
Martin knows more about Tolkien than you. But again, this is all about autistic people who can't understand a quot, and have shitty reading comprehension talking about what writer they like, and since they have reading comprehension their opinions are worthless regardless of what the opinion is.

You used the term "tolkienfag" yourself, what does that make you?

>history is written by the victors
>LOTR is an in-universe document by the victors
>The Tale of Aragorn and Arwen was written by a grandson of faramir, who's Pinceship of Ithelien was given by Aragorn
>The Thain's Book was a copy of the Red Book of Westmarch made in the Shire and later augmented with additions made in Minas Tirith.
>>>later augmented with additions made in Minas Tirith
Wake the fuck up

>the wall exists so the NK can destroy it, etc
There's no NK in the books.

>TFW Tolkien actually went into greater detail about foreign policy, taxation, and government than Martin did in a shorter story.

Attached: 1421364266767.jpg (800x800, 163K)

>evil think aragorn does
he doesnt tell frodo who he is because he wished frodo would like him personally because lonely and emo, which delays their travels and leads to the ringwraiths catching up and so on

The Age of Heroes also has a war with the Others, it's when men first came to the country as well as a war with the Children of the Forest. It's described as an age with the longest winter and blackest of nights. It's most definitely more important than the current era.

>implying

Attached: NightsKing_by_Oriana_Wiesner.jpg (950x1365, 140K)

>Daily reminder
>Daily reminder
>Daily reminder
You don't need to use that phrase like a sputtering autist, just make your point you tard.

The Silmarillion wasn't finished in Tolkien's lifetime so all the versions of all its content are worthwhile.

It has a war with the others but it ends in a stalemate of sorts. The war in the books/show has the final destruction of the Others and is more important.

The other stuff is just fluff.

>didn't even bother to read what was written
Martin complains about things that are explicitly addressed in the appendix and Tolkien's letters.
>this is all about autistic people who can't understand a quot, and have shitty reading comprehension
>Martin knows more about Tolkien than you
Seeing as he complains about things that are outright addressed in LotR, I'm going to have to disagree with you there. It's not like these are things spread out in other books, Appendix A alone addresses most of those points
Like you? Since again, a number of the complaints you listed that martin really meant are also addressed by Tolkien.
No matter how you take the quote, either literal complaints or symbolic of deeper points, it's wrong either way

I'm reading the Silmarillion for the first time currently

Yesterday, I was actually choked up by the beauty of Tolkein's description of Menegroth, the hewn stone city of a thousand caves built by the Sindarin Elves and Khazâd Dwarves together (!), the beauty of which no king's city east of the sea would ever surpass.

I dont recall any of Martin's books doing that to me.

Attached: 76E04C68-7CE8-4D6E-938A-FEC3A491D56B.jpg (978x1575, 417K)

Ok, I'm thinking this is based

My problem is that some elements of GRRM's worldbuilding are great, like every ethnicity having its own legend of the Long Night where the sun set for years and the world froze over, except for those that live on Valyria's meridian.
I like how he takes the time in A Knight of the Seven Kingdoms to focus on the coming and goings of small lords with tiny shitty holdings and worries that make sense like the nearby steam drying up. I like how they sometimes call their king "our Robert" or how Craster's wives call the Others "the sons". It's very accurate to the way rural people speak, which writers usually tend to fuck up by just having everyone speak in high lofty language.
But then at the same time some of the shit he writes is just fucking dumb.
>all of westeros speaks the same language, including the wildlings
>westeros = west, essos = east
>lannisters rich because they have gold!

Really makes me think...

Attached: shadow_of_mordor.jpg (460x215, 79K)

Someone that is a fan of Tolkien and knows the difference between people like Martin, a huge fan of Tolkien and retarded tolkienfags in this board. Tolkienfags have been a thing since the 60's, seething is the natural state for the tolkienfag, from children's book like harry potter to Dungeon and Dragons, the tolkienfag sees anything popular not by tolkien as a treat. The quote reveals something pretty clear: Tolkienfags will feel attacked even when there's no reason to.

Night's King and The Night King are different characters
>Martin complains about things that are explicitly addressed in the appendix and Tolkien's letters.
The compliants are not the point. But you are autistic.

>My problem is that some elements of GRRM's worldbuilding are great
Yep. Martin has some very good ideas going on, and ASoIaF certainly has a good deal of potential. The real main issue with his world building is it's simply inconsistent, which I would argue is because he doesn't spend enough time thinking it out before hand. One of the reasons tolkien is so great is because of how many years he put into developing middle earth.
Martin also isn't too great prosaically, but that;s more a problem with the books than with the world building
Oops, this should have been:
>this is all about autistic people who can't understand a quot, and have shitty reading comprehension
Like you? Since again, a number of the complaints you listed that martin really meant are also addressed by Tolkien.
No matter how you take the quote, either literal complaints or symbolic of deeper points, it's wrong either way

My bad

Martin has actually acknowledged he wasn't great at writing languages for the series

>"Language is one of the defining characteristics of his work, and he set a very high bar for all of us other fantasists. He invented entire languages, I just fake it. When I sold Game of Thrones to HBO, they said, 'There are entire scenes here in Dothraki. Can you send us your Dothraki book and syntax and rules?' Tolkien would have responded promptly with a gigantic thing...whereas I had to say, 'I invented like eight words.'"

>M*lkor
It's Morgoth you nimrod. No one but maybe his most ancient servants calls him by that name anymore.

He is. Read the fucking letters.
>Sauron was of course not 'evil' in origin. He was a 'spirit' corrupted by the Prime Dark Lord (the Prime sub-creative Rebel) Morgoth. He was given an opportunity of repentance, when Morgoth was overcome, but could not face the humiliation of recantation, and suing for pardon; and so his temporary turn to good and 'benevolence' ended in a greater relapse, until he became the main representative of Evil of later ages. But at the beginning of the Second Age he was still beautiful to look at, or could still assume a beautiful visible shape – and was not indeed wholly evil, not unless all 'reformers' who want to hurry up with 'reconstruction' and 'reorganization' are wholly evil, even before pride and the lust to exert their will eat them up.
His transition to evil didn't happen momentarily. He wasn't considered a real Dark Lord until the end of the Second Age. Even though he fought against the Elves in the First Age already.

Does it frustrate other people as much as me when the silhouette of someone's hair is curved on one side and straight on the other? Looks dumb, why didn't that dumb bitch fluff up the geometric looking side of her head and then reshoot this?

>The real main issue with his world building is it's simply inconsistent
what a bunch of bullshit, name one thing that is inconsistent with the world building in asoiaf. tolkiens world building is all over the place with all types of vague nonsense thrown around everywhere. i can ask a simple question like 'what does the one ring do' and every single person will have a completely different headcanon answer.

Is there an ASOIAF character stronger than Celebrimbor?

And I'm not talking about canon Celebrimbor. I'm referring to treacherous Bright Lord Wraith Celebrimbor with the freshly forged New Ring.

Attached: 356190_20190307152213_1.png (1920x1080, 1.72M)

Stannis is better than any of Tolkien's characters.

>The compliants are not the point.
Doesn't matter, the surface level complaints and deeper point are wrong.
As you said:
>he was expressing a bit of disappointment with the fairy tale concept that since Aragorn's a good guy everything will be happy go lucky and right as rain from there on out, he was expressing disappointment with the boring, pure evilness of the orcs and any kind of resolution on how life actually progresses after the fall of an entire "dark" country.
Which again, is wrong, since tolkien EXPLICITLY addressed the fact that:
>good men do not always make good leaders, as shown numerous times in the appendix.
>everything was not "right as rain from there on out", see
>orcs were not pure evil, at all, tolkien hated this notion
>How the new king dealt with the fall of a dark country and what was essentially a world superpower.
All of that and more is addressed. There an entire history of Gondor and Rohan in the appendixes, including of events barely mentioned in the books, like the fall of arnor. LotR is in no way just some fairy tale, it's got far far more history and world building than ASoIaF, tolkien just put it all in the appendixes since LotR is not about aragorn, it's about the hobbits, and it made no sense to end with talking about aragorn in a series in which he is not the main focus.
Both the surface level complaints and deeper point are wrong

That's what Tolkien wrote about Sauron's motives. He even cared about the well-being of his subjects. He was a very complicated character and slipped to the evil unnoticeably even to himself. He view himself as a right ruler.
>Sauron had never reached this stage of nihilistic madness. He did not object to the existence of the world, so long as he could do what he liked with it. He still had the relics of positive purposes, that descended from the good of the nature in which he began: it had been his virtue (and therefore also the cause of his fall, and of his relapse) that he loved order and coordination, and disliked all confusion and wasteful friction. (It was the apparent will and power of Melkor to effect his designs quickly and masterfully that had first attracted Sauron to him.) Sauron had, in fact, been very like Saruman, and so still understood him quickly and could guess what he would be likely to think and do, even without the aid of palantiri or of spies; whereas Gandalf eluded and puzzled him. But like all minds of this cast, Sauron's love (originally) or (later) mere understanding of other individual intelligences was correspondingly weaker; and though the only real good in, or rational motive for, all this ordering and planning and organization was the good of all inhabitants of Arda (even admitting Sauron's right to be their supreme lord), his 'plans', the idea coming from his own isolated mind, became the sole object of his will, and an end, the End, in itself.
>But his capability of corrupting other minds, and even engaging their service, was a residue from the fact that his original desire for 'order' had really envisaged the good estate (especially physical well-being) of his 'subjects'.

youtube.com/watch?v=6CfRJSKk2Ls
I like this

>what a bunch of bullshit, name one thing that is inconsistent with the world building in asoiaf
Inconsistent in quality you dumbass, not with other parts of the world building, read the previous post before you make an ass of yourself next time

Fuck off with this shit.

That's what the last book will be about

>Both the surface level complaints and deeper point are wrong
Except you still don't get the "deeper point".

Morgoth just wanted to fuck shit up, Sauron wanted to rule

Bilbo

in quality hahaha. what does that even mean. idiots cant even explain what the one ring does and you consider this quality world building?

That's it. And Sauron was a good ruler in the Second Age, at least for Men in Middle-earth, because they genuinely worshipped him. Their admiration was one of the things that brought him to his downfall, because he became very pride of himself.

I recognise your autistic style of writing. That's just a retarded bait.

Fuckin based

Attached: FB_IMG_1556040101462.jpg (550x361, 28K)

i hope you do because i enjoy coming into these threads and laughing are manbabbies

Alright then genius, what do you think the deeper point is? You already said:
>he was expressing a bit of disappointment with the fairy tale concept that since Aragorn's a good guy everything will be happy go lucky and right as rain from there on out, he was expressing disappointment with the boring, pure evilness of the orcs and any kind of resolution on how life actually progresses after the fall of an entire "dark" country.
But apparently you didn't actually think THAT was the deeper point.

Perhaps you think the deeper point was what martin went on to state his exact point was when answering that question:
"In real life, real-life kings had real-life problems to deal with. Just being a good guy was not the answer. You had to make hard, hard decisions. Sometimes what seemed to be a good decision turned around and bit you in the ass; it was the law of unintended consequences. I’ve tried to get at some of these in my books. My people who are trying to rule don’t have an easy time of it. Just having good intentions doesn’t make you a wise king."
Except if THAT's the deeper point, then it still falls flat, since again, there are numerous examples of exactly that happening in tolkien's lore. Don't even need to go to the appendixes for that, denathor in the books alone is an example of a man with a good will who is faced with "hard, hard decisions." but who ended up experiencing "what seemed to be a good decision [turning] around and bit [him] in the ass"

Either state what YOU seem to think the deeper point is or fuck off, just saying "no you don't get it" is not an argument

You write like a landwhale from tumblr. Pathetic.

>idiots cant even explain what the one ring does and you consider this quality world building?
Except that's wrong. In letter 131 tolkien states:
"The chief power of all the rings was the prevention or slowing of decay (change viewed as negative); an Elvish motive. But they also enhanced the natural powers of the possessor, approaching "magic" and leading to a lust for domination. And they had other powers, such as invisibility and making the invisible world visible. The Three Rings of the Elves were beautiful and powerful, directed to preserving beauty and did not confer invisibility. But in secret Sauron made the One Ring, the Ruling Ring that contained all the others' powers and controlled them, making their owners' thoughts known, governing what they did, and eventually enslaving them. But the Elves became aware of his plan and hid the Three Rings, and tried to destroy the others. "

Tolkien
>wrote a bunch of myths due to his interest in them irl, linguistically and such
>got massive success with a somewhat mythological childrens story
>rewrote his myths into a single narrative
>began to write a sequel to the childrens story, but decided to really make it the sequel and finale of the myths narrative
>500k words long great novel of deliverance from evil influenced by the most powerful story in human history (Christianity) anchored in the broadly germanic northern european peoples' cultural myths
>so broadly appealing even lefty antiwar american college kids and women loved it despite tolkien being an aristocratic conservative at this point and the work having very few female characters

GRRM
>fat
>lives and breathes fantasy, scifi, and capeshit ghetto junk-literature
>obsessed with football and hugo awards drama
>decides to write a fantasy trilogy because those are popular
>first book spirals into three long books, then he gets caught up for 11 years writing a two-part filler book
>has spent 8 years writing the second act and will die before finishing the third
>the work only gains popularity by riding the mature TV wave started by better shows like the sopranos, the wire, and deadwood
>producing like ten garbage genre shlock tv shows RIGHT NOW

Not worthy to eat gandalfs shit

He also states in the letter 183 that the Ring is mostly a mythological symbol. I guess it's too difficult for brainlets to understand.
>You cannot press the One Ring too hard, for it is of course a mythical feature, even though the world of the tales is conceived in more or less historical terms. The Ring of Sauron is only one of the various mythical treatments of the placing of one's life, or power, in some external object, which is thus exposed to capture or destruction with disastrous results to oneself. If I were to 'philosophize' this myth, or at least the Ring of Sauron, I should say it was a mythical way of representing the truth that potency (or perhaps rather potentiality) if it is to be exercised, and produce results, has to be externalized and so as it were passes, to a greater or less degree, out of one's direct control. A man who wishes to exert 'power' must have subjects, who are not himself. But he then depends on them.

that explanation doesn't even work because he couldn't control the dwarves when he put the one ring on. its all vague inconsistencies stacked on vague inconsistencies.

t. didn't read The Silmarillion
Aulë created the dwarves to be more hardy and resistant to magic because of the fact that middle earth was ruled by melkor at the time

He couldn't control dwarves because they turned out to be resistant to the rings power. Sauron is not omnipotent, he isn't Eru. He failed with the dwarves. But it also might have to do something with the fact, that the Dwarves were created by his original master, Aule.

fluffy non-answer, if you can't see that you're a smooth brain. by all means keep sucking his dick, fanboy

what a pathetic dark lord wow he couldn't control midgets that dig up shit lmao wow this lore is so bad

See, that's why I said that this lanwhale is simply baiting. Stop feeding her.
>lmao
Get the fuck out.

>he was expressing a bit of disappointment with the fairy tale concept
He isn't. He is saying he chooses to focus on human nature and how said nature develops in a fantasy setting and between characters with extremely different view points, that's why he also writes from characters POVs, what happens in the realm, the anger of a farmer, and the butthurt of former slaves are as important to the STORY (not worldbuilding) as the the clash between the Others and the night's watch. Tolkien fantasy is wrote in the form of myth, how mythology would be told if someone fills the blanks, George on the other hand thinks what you do with the baby orcs and how the people you rule take it is as important as the big battle, the hobbits are just point of views, and Tolkien's story is a excuse to explore his world, George thinks what human interactions are worth telling as much as faux myths.

It seems more like you feel attacked desu

Make way for the best modern fantasy. sits perfectly between Tolkien and Martin

Attached: s-l1000.jpg (1000x611, 185K)

It sits between neither of them, this is pure anime

sunset found her squatting

nah

Attached: hrctd4a1uhp21.jpg (720x840, 65K)

REEE STOP MAKING FUN OF MY HERO REEEEEEE

Malazan sits several leagues above Tolkien and GRRM. I love LOTR as much as anyone else, but the stories and characters aren't that great. They were well done and different which made them influential.

i meant on a scale between "black and white" if we're really saying that about the two authors. Memories of ice is a perfect example of the brutal realism of medieval combat and sacking cities coupled with the higher ideals of hope and goodness that tolkien made such a good example of

>what was sauron's tax policy? did he have one? would his desire to design, build and order engage him to enact grand scale acts of public works, which would signify need massive fiscal spending? was this why he enlisted the orcs into his service, as being able to use them as cheap coolie labor would allow him to build public works without having to pay them and thus benefitting middle earth? would science and technology be invested in, or would the syphoning of surplus wealth be used to merely reaffirm a standing army for all of middle earth? would conscription be voluntary? would Sauron make his face known and otherwise engage with his subjects? wouldn't there be an orc rebellion, as orcs in their natural state are unorganized and unnatural?

Attached: george_rr_martin_photo_mark_davis_wireimage_via_getty_images_164117282_resized.jpg (1022x1200, 217K)

It’s hard not to, the works are interwoven on purpose. To critique pieces of the legendarium and all of George’s work is silly.

>Eight lawyers there are here, yet nine there were sent out from the company's office in Rivendell. Tell me where is Gandalf, for I much desire to launder money with him.
>He was taken by both state and chain... an Audit of Morgoth.

>>what was sauron's tax policy? did he have one?
Tolkien mentions several times in the letters that Sauron cared about the 'economical' well-being of his subjects. Meaning that taxes must have been pretty low, at least for the ordinary people. But for the nobles taxes could have been higher.
>would his desire to design, build and order engage him to enact grand scale acts of public works, which would signify need massive fiscal spending?
Yes.
>was this why he enlisted the orcs into his service, as being able to use them as cheap coolie labor would allow him to build public works without having to pay them and thus benefitting middle earth?
Yes.
>would science and technology be invested in, or would the syphoning of surplus wealth be used to merely reaffirm a standing army for all of middle earth?
He would definitely invest into science and technology, actually it's stated in Silmarillion that Numenorians learned how to make ships with engines because he tough them.
>would conscription be voluntary?
Most likely no, there would be regular army.
>would Sauron make his face known and otherwise engage with his subjects?
His face was known, he didn't hide when he still had pretty face.
>wouldn't there be an orc rebellion, as orcs in their natural state are unorganized and unnatural?
That's up to discussion. Tolkien never made his mind upon the subject of orcs. They kind of don't have a free will, but still. Morgoth was their original master and they not necessarily obey Sauron