/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.23057651]

Is he right?

[Anonymous No.23057707]

>>23057651
Yes and no.

[Anonymous No.23058058]

>>23057651
This is the most misunderstood quote in history. He's talking about the differences in their creative processes and what they care about.

[Anonymous No.23058096]

>>23057651
Fiction is meant to transmit ideas about the real world, right? It’s meant to entertain while also elevating some moral, or some lesson. Well LotR certainly does that, however one topic of great interest to Martin is “what makes a good ruler,” specifically in practice and not just broadly in terms of character traits, and Tolkien doesn’t touch on it very much (this is fine by the way. You’ll find no bigger Tolkien fan than me, and it’s ok to admit he doesn’t dive deeply into this particular moral question. He doesn’t have to.).

Martin is using Tolkien as just a point of reference to make an argument by analogy. Again I love Tolkien but there’s nothing wrong with saying he created a caricature of evil as far as enemy armies are concerned—this is fine, there is nothing wrong with it, since that’s not related to the points and morals Tolkien was trying to make and elevate—and all Martin wants to do is address, via fiction, what good and evil means when you have realistic enemy armies. There’s no real-world comparison to orcs, a “people” so self-evidently evil that no one would mind genociding them. Even Palestinians today garner some sympathy since they’re not uniformly Hamas supporters. Should we eradicate them with merciless bombings? Should we show mercy on their children? These are real-world questions of good and evil we need to ask, but you can’t ask them if they are subhuman orcs. Martin wants to address it. Tolkien didn’t, and that’s fine. So, in the context of this argument, it really doesn’t matter what the history of orcish biology and breeding is. It’s beside the point, because Martin isn’t critiquing the esoteric aspects of Tolkien legendarium. He’s just trying to illustrate a point via comparison.

[Anonymous No.23058164]

>>23058058
Who misunderstands that?

[Anonymous No.23058176]

>>23057651
>Man who dodged war, who writes about war
>Tries to tell a man who fough in a war about war

[Anonymous No.23058200]

>>23058176
>a war about war
Kind of redundant, eh? All wars are about war.

[Anonymous No.23058220]

>>23058200
Please learn to read, you fucking retard.

[Anonymous No.23058227]

>>23058058
no one misunderstands that. the reason this quote is so reviled is that it reveals what grrm valeus and many people find it pretentious, purposeless and indicative of needless bloat. "needless bloat" is also ironically key as grrm is yet to finish his shitty series.

[Anonymous No.23058268]

>>23058058
He's trying to set himself up as some kind of rival to Tolkien. Which is absolutely fucking laughable.

[Anonymous No.23058276]

>>23058268
No he’s not

[Anonymous No.23058277]

>>23058096
It's forgivable that you can't tell the difference between high and low fantasy.
Given his profession, it's absolutely unforgivable that Gurm can't.

[Anonymous No.23058280]

>>23058227
grrm himself could be called "needless bloat"

[Anonymous No.23058282]

>>23058276
>GRRM lacks reading comprehension
Colour me amazed.

[Anonymous No.23058310]

>>23058280
haha get it cause he's fat lmao

[Anonymous No.23058353]

>>23058227
The basic fucking tenants of world building are not needless bloat.

[Anonymous No.23058357]

>>23058353
>tenants of world building
Can any Gurm fans actually display basic literacy?

[Anonymous No.23058365]

>>23058357
I'll just wait until you actually have an argument.

[Anonymous No.23058383]

>>23058365
You exhibit low levels of literacy, which explains your predilection for pulp fantasy trash.
How amusing that you couldn't infer this from the context.

[Anonymous No.23058397]

>>23058383
I'm still waiting for your actual argument.

[Anonymous No.23058399]

>>23058397
That's because you didn't even notice it.
Absolutely LMAO'ing my ass off here. Stay confused, GRRMfag.

[Anonymous No.23058408]

I know when I read fantasy I always look forward to an extensive explanation of the nuances of tax law and the fantasy land legal statutes that govern it. Gets me rock hard.

[Anonymous No.23058426]

>>23058408
>>23058399
>>23058164
It's really interesting how hellbent retards like you are on keeping fantasy shit. Any other fanbase of any other setting normally wants their setting to be good and interesting. They want to see it's history, characters, factions, political situation, culture, religion and concepts developed, sensible, believable and cool. Except for you retards. You want stories shit.
No wonder why Marvel movies were so successful at one point. No wonder why so much mainstream sci-fi and fantasy are absolute dogshit. Any worldbuilding, good storytelling, or anything remotely complex seems to cause literal, physical pain in you fucks. It's unbelievable really.

[Anonymous No.23058430]

>>23058227
needless bloat is the essence of worldbuilding, grmm is simply the rebellious child of tolkien

[Anonymous No.23058455]

>>23058426
please explain how tax policy discussion is interesting. if you want a nuanced fantasy novel with good worldbuilding, just do something like legends of the galactic heroes but circa early 19th century france. ya got the monarchists, nationalists, republicans, socialists, anarchists, etc all duking it out.

[Anonymous No.23058751]

>>23058058
This is the same man that has taken 13 years just to release one book and probably never will.

His addiction to detail over efficiency is why he can never do what JRR Tolkein did.

[Anonymous No.23058864]

>>23057651
What would this fat fuck know of war?

[Anonymous No.23058889]

>>23058176
>GRRM a man who saw the Vietnam war as the bullshit lost cause it was and a tragic pointless waste of life avoids the draft
>Tolkien a man who volunteered to fight in WW1 for king and empire and didn't see it is a tragic pointless waste of life until he saw it in front of him first hand and its shadow followed him for the rest of his life
Both Tolkien and GRRM were disgusted with the waste of life that war caused. The tragedy or the young men whose lifes were cut short and the horror inflicted on people, GRRM just saw it ahead of time

[Anonymous No.23058920]

>>23058889
He didn't experience war. Tolkien did. That's the point. George does not really understand war but writes about it.
Knowing that it is bad doesn't substitute for the direct experience.

[Anonymous No.23058928]

>>23057651
Tolkien's objective was not an examination of politics, but of Virtue, Good, and the Nature of Man. Besides, Martin sucks.

[Anonymous No.23058934]

>>23058920
GRRM's view on conflict is that of a Xitter moralfag. Not someone that experienced hardship.

[Anonymous No.23059018]

>>23058889
Since you too are retarded I shall repeat myself.

>Man who fled from war tries to argue against man who fought in war about the subject of war

[Anonymous No.23059077]

>>23059018
>>23058920
>Tolkien fought in the war
>was a runner boy who spent the battle of the Somme in a room with hundreds of type writers and hours to kill between orders so he started writing the hobbit there
Tolkien didnt see combat

[Anonymous No.23059081]

>>23058934
He is a neurotic politics junkie like me!

[Anonymous No.23059122]

>>23058176
Alright, this shit slaps so fucking hard

[Anonymous No.23059286]

>>23058864
Sonless behavior.

[Anonymous No.23059301]

>>23058058
Based, only intelligent post in this thread. For some reason everyone seems to think gurm is saying that lotr would somehow be a better book if it included fucking and shitting.

[Anonymous No.23059489]

>>23058934
I really don't understand what GRRM is trying to say here. You wrote a near nihilistic story from beginning to end in ASOIAF, the message that you have given people is a very bleak one. The main message would be don't care or participate because no matter who wins the small people suffer, if there was a message.

[Anonymous No.23059498]

>>23058426
If you think talking about a king's tax policies makes a fantasy story better in any way you are insane.

[Anonymous No.23059512]

>>23058096
>Again I love Tolkien but there’s nothing wrong with saying he created a caricature of evil as far as enemy armies are concerned

This is just objectively wrong. Its simply not true. The books deal multiple times with the issue of different human tribes fighting each other and how both sides probably feel they are the good guys. e.g. Rohan and the Hill tribes, or when Sam witnesses Gondor fight the Haradrim in Ithilien.

[Anonymous No.23059514]

>>23058353
>the tenants of world building
lol

[Anonymous No.23059516]

>>23058426
>They want to see it's history, characters, factions, political situation, culture, religion and concepts developed, sensible, believable and cool.

You're a fucking moron. Tolkien when so far into this shit he even wrote a whole different book just to provide background to his world. He invented all of the things you mention.

[Anonymous No.23059568]

>>23058426
Why is that anime girl beating a poor defenseless anon?

[Anonymous No.23059640]

>>23057651
>The end of the fiscal year found him squatting in the grass, groaning. Every collection was looser than the one before, and smelled fouler. By the time his courtiers came up he holding brown coinage. The more he collected, the more he shat, but the more he shat, the niggardly he grew, and his greed sent him crawling to the village to collect more taxes.

[Anonymous No.23059851]

>>23059516
>>23059514
>>23059512
The difference is that all of GRRM's characters are driven by real motives and goals you can emphatize with, whether you agree with them or not.

For example, Ramsay is completely evil. He's a psychopath, but you can get where he is coming from. He's had a shitty life, a shitty father who he seeks the approval of and never had any guidance to be better combined with his own genetic fuckery.

Tolkien's characters, on the other hand, are driven by unrealistic and unfathomable motives. Well ,why does Sauron wants to enslave the world? "Duh, he wants order and shieet" And that's how practically 99% of the characters in LOTR can be summed as. They're caricatures, not serious, realistic human (or otherwise) beings
I can't for the life of me believe the majority of LOTR characters can exist. They are caricatures, not beings with actual emotions, feelings, faults, strengths, weaknesses, drives, goals, motivations, you name it.
Realism is good because that's what makes a story and characters. And I'm not talking about realism purely in the confines of whether a story and characters are fantastical in nature or not, just in whether their motivation, background and story is believable. Take a look at Homer's works - fantastical, gods and such, yet everything about the Iliad or Odyssey feels "alive" because the characters and story are written masterfully and realistically.

In LOTR there are no stakes. Some evil masked guy wants to rule the world and enslave everyone and his band is made of cannibalistic savages while the good guys have zero flaws apart from the deus ex machina plot device of the ring who makes them do bad. Riveting storytelling indeed.

[Anonymous No.23059872]

>>23059851
Yes, LotR would be much improved if Aragorn was a rapist.

[Anonymous No.23059921]

>>23059872
I too, love reductionism into strawman.

[Anonymous No.23060041]

>>23059851
All a bunch of incoherent nonsense. I feel you have never actually read Lord of the Rings.

>Ramsay is completely evil. He's a psychopath, but you can get where he is coming from. He's had a shitty life
How is this realistic? Doesn't make any sense at all. 90% of humanity has a shitty life but they don't turn into psychopaths. I think you're just a midwit really.

[Anonymous No.23060803]

>>23059301
see
>>23058164
>>23058227
>>23058268

[Anonymous No.23060966]

>>23057651
He's an an obnoxious demagogue and his work is enjoyed by semi-illiterates...No,he's not right.

[Anonymous No.23060980]

>>23057651
>>23058058
The only misunderstanding that's happening here is Martin not understanding that not every story needs to feature an autistic amount of details. The reason we don't see any of the question from OP in LOTR is because LOTR's story doesn't need to address them. Martin needs to realize that sometimes, skipping over this kind of stuff is actually a good thing.

[Anonymous No.23060990]

>>23058353
>muh worldbuilding
LMAO
Faggots like you are exactly what's wrong with modern fantasy.

[Anonymous No.23061405]

>>23058426
Kill yourself, Moorefag.

10 pages of blather about the politics of noplace is not remotely interesting or worth reading.

[Anonymous No.23061432]

>>23057651
If the story is the kind that delves into those details or even cares about them? Yeah.
If not? Then no, and he's a retard for assuming it'd matter.
That's all there is to it. The implication that all stories should follow a similar approach to characterization or how they're told is the most asinine and retarded thing I've ever heard from an author. Don't give a shit what he's written, that's stupid as hell.

[Anonymous No.23061463]

>>23058426
>Marvel
>worldbuilding

[Anonymous No.23061466]

>>23060990
>>23060980
>>23061432
Why do you presume some kind of dichotomy here? Explanations and "exposition dumps" are not devoid of "themes, character, tone, ideas". Quite the opposite; the setting explained within the story can enrich it by introducing additional context or nuance to the story. ""Worldbuilding"" and ""frivolous detailing"" has been a part of literary fiction since time immemorial. Ever read the Odyssey?
>Writers make stories, not worlds
Insofar as perception is concerned, what is the difference? A story is a certain narrative describing the world as it appears. There is not only no dichotomy here but I'd go as far as to say that it'd be difficult to make a story without making some kind of "world". Especially if that story deals with the political aspects of said world. All of these things are important in any setting meant to feel real.
>>23061405
>This is bad because I say so okay!? Fiction should only be written based on my own preferences and what the average person finds interesting!
Okay, enjoying marvel slop then.

[Anonymous No.23061472]

>>23061463
Yeah. Marvel has shit or flat out zero worldbuilding. Did you think I disagreed with that?

[Anonymous No.23061713]

>>23061466
I said it depends on the story, retardAnon. If it is the kind that would bother and be served well with the explanations of those themes, in whatever amount would best suffice, then it is an splendid thing. If it is not, then it's unnecessary detail.
Writers make worlds, that is true, but the idea that we need to know everything about it in complete detail is as retarded as it is annoying to read. Anyone with enough literacy to understand what's being said would immediately know that a "good and wise" king would have taxes that are dependent on a lot of factors tied to one's land and income and doesn't squeeze commoners dry, if there are even some—Which can be simply mentioned offhandedly in passing. No need for more details.
You are the one that's bringing up a weird dichotomy by implying that to make a story you have to, again, delve into the minutiae of that setting, when you can just leave it up to interpretation. You yourself said "If the story deals with the political aspects of said world." Stop being a retard, anon. Not all settings have to feel real, and not all stories are the kind that need details of everything.

[Anonymous No.23061740]

>>23061466
It can also clog your story half to hell. Aragorn's tax policy is not important to LOTR, so Tolkien didn't include it.

>The Odyssey
>Thence we went on to the Aeolian island where lives Aeolus son of Hippotas, dear to the immortal gods. It is an island that floats (as it were) upon the sea,[83] iron bound with a wall that girds it. Now, Aeolus has six daughters and six lusty sons, so he made the sons marry the daughters, and they all live with their dear father and mother, feasting and enjoying every conceivable kind of luxury. All day long the atmosphere of the house is loaded with the savour of roasting meats till it groans again, yard and all; but by night they sleep on their well made bedsteads, each with his own wife between the blankets.
Look, a whole paragraph about this guy and his family and castle. Look at all the detail we get about his tax policy and the life-stories of his servants.

[Anonymous No.23061747]

>>23058353
nobody likes taxes even in the real world. why the fuck would anyone care what a fictional ruler's tax policy is? no author needs to flesh out a world to that degree unless its specifically relevant to a plot point and that just brings us back to: WHY THE FUCK WOULD ANYONE WANT TO READ ABOUT A FICTIONAL TAX POLICY

[Anonymous No.23061818]

>>23057651
GRRM is an average worldbuilding autist. Tolkien, while being the originator of the very idea of meticulous worldbuilding, and pulling it off with unsurpassed skill, understood that it is first and foremost a setting for a beautiful story, while Martin reminds one of the slightly tarded nerd for whom the Macguffin is the most important part about a narrative.

And with all his endeavors to make his own creation le complex and realistic, he poured so much shit into it that he doesn't want to return to his world himself! He can't fucking finish his series, not that it's surprising.

Martin is quintessentially American: obsessed with sex, violence, hedonism, power fantasies, getting a Puritanical thrill from being dirty and brooding over economic questions and technicalities. Also, he's fat.

[Anonymous No.23062332]

>>23061747
>No rebuttal

[Anonymous No.23062342]

>>23057651
Killing orcs is the same as flushing poop.

[Anonymous No.23062686]

>>23062342
Racist.

[Anonymous No.23062692]

>>23061818
>while Martin reminds one of the slightly tarded nerd for whom the Macguffin is the most important part about a narrative.
So just like the ring in LOTR?

[Anonymous No.23062815]

>>23059851
>>23058426
Why are ASOIAFbros like this?

[Anonymous No.23062832]

>>23057651
>>23058096
Little does GRRM know but Tolkien wrote extensively about Aragorn's tax policy down to the last jot and tittle of crop yields each year of his reign. Christopher Tolkien found it all written out in a notebook, but even he found it so tedious, he burnt the notebook instead of publishing yet another addendum.

[Anonymous No.23062865]

Why are people so autistic about things they don’t like? It’s ok to not like something, you don’t have to sorry out about it

[Anonymous No.23062917]

>>23062692
>ring constantly affects everyone around it throughout the quest and drives the plot via the details of its interaction with the eye
You don't know what a MacGuffin is.

[Anonymous No.23062931]

>>23062686
Yes.

[Anonymous No.23064153]

>>23059851
>He's a psychopath, but you can get where he is coming from. He's had a shitty life, a shitty father who he seeks the approval of and never had any guidance to be better combined with his own genetic fuckery.
lol that sounds like capeshitters making up "reasons" for why the bad guy is bad with a hefty dose of soap opera level pseudo-Freudian "psychology".
Funny how Tolkien's stance that evil exists just 'cause turns out to be much more realistic.

[Anonymous No.23064173]

>>23061818
I agree. Martins world building is very bad. He can create interesting things only by keeping some aspects mysterious. That mysterious mess is what most of the fans find interesting about his world building if you look at YouTube videos discussing his world. But his actual world is bad. It’s either bland or over the top weird. For instance the mountain tower of the eirie is so dumb. I remember reading the trek up to the castle for the first time and thought how unrealistically challenging and dangerous it was to get to the castle. How could anyone ever get food to the castle with such a dangerous path? It’s just ridiculous to think such important people would have to risk their lives in such a way to get to the castle. It was just hard to believe in his world when I kept getting pulled out of his bland realistic take to then these high fantasy parts that made no sense. I get what he was doing. Taking a realistic fantasy world that is living on the remains of what used to be this incredible fantasy world.

And then the eastern lands across the sea from Westeros were so unusual in a way it just seemed like Martin had them just be random and silly to make them seem interesting. Nothing about the eastern lands immersed me. They were usually just annoying.

[Anonymous No.23064265]

>>23064153
>>23060041
I love how nobody can actually make a valid counter argument against this post.

[Anonymous No.23064270]

>>23064265
It’s just a different world view. Tolkien see good and evil as metaphysical things that exist within people and it is through the agency of people that good or evil are able to exist and transmit to the world. Martin is someone who believes good and evil come about through the environment, not through the moral agency of people. So with Martin good and evil come about through the circumstances of people. Morality is just an effect of the world.

[Anonymous No.23064273]

>>23057651
He is right that tolkien didn't ask any of that shit, because it didn't pertain to the story he wanted to tell. I don't think that is what you are looking for though.

[Anonymous No.23065267]

>>23062832
Link?

[Anonymous No.23065271]

>>23065267
You'd have to look in his ass for that

[Anonymous No.23065358]

Let's answer GRRM's questions

We can't know for certain what Aragorn did but if he was wise Total Orc Death is the policy of a wis king. Orcs will never form a functional civilization that it's safe to be around. Like the bugs in Starship Troopers.

Imagine if there was a race of feral, physically strong, low intelligence and high aggression humanoids, and all it took to make them extra dangerous was a crafty and manipulative backstabbing who could infiltrate prominent institutions to lower the defenses of the host nations and unleash the flood, there's no way you could tolerate that and have a future

[Anonymous No.23065804]

>>23057651
Yes

[Anonymous No.23065903]

>>23057651
Tolkien is concerned with lofty ideals and that's his charm. A good work of art doesn't need to be realistic, edgy, visceral, violent, whatever in order to be good

[Anonymous No.23066170]

>>23059640
kek

[Anonymous No.23066235]

>>23058096
When asked if he believed in absolute evil, Tolkien said he didn’t believe in absolute evil, but does believe in absolute good. This question was asked in his interview and it’s clear that he was also applying this view to the Hobbit and Lord of the Rings. Tolkien’s only ‘caricature’ of evil is his own views of what evil is.