/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.3315085]

J. R. R. Tolkien/LOTR according to TUMBLR:
>They’re clunky. They’re too detailed in places where they really don’t need to be. There are large passages that could be taken out or condensed with literally no harm done. Almost everyone I know confesses to skipping huge swathes of flowery prose.

>Like, beyond all the commentary of the problematic bits of the series, because that’s being talked about all over the place by people who are far more capable to talk about racism in media than I am — talk to people about the books. Not the story, not the world, but the books: these are three separate things that can’t really exist without the other but that can definitely be discussed separately. Few argue that the storytelling or worldbuilding are sub-par, but talk about the actual words on the page to fans of the books.

>People who adore these books talk about them like they just got home from a tour of duty. “Oh, I made it through the Battle of Helm’s Deep.” “I just got through the Two Towers.” “I can see the light at the end of this Tom Bombadil passage!” Most of what people say while they’re reading Lord of the Rings isn’t “I can’t believe it’s almost over”, it’s “oh thank god they’re finally out of Shelob’s lair oh no why is there more walking”.

>That is not the mark of good writing.

>Good writing should entice you along, should make it difficult to put the book down instead of difficult to get through two pages without a bathroom break. That having been said: It’s a mark of good storytelling and worldbuilding that people still read them. But if you’re talking specifically about the words, the writing and not the actual subject matter, I’d be willing to bet you’ll find far more people who find it bad than good, even among fans who reread the trilogy every year.

tl;dr
fangirls are too lazy to read so he's a bad writer

[Anonymous No.3315090]

And the point of the thread is?

[Anonymous No.3315093]

>>3315090
you're lazy

[Anonymous No.3315097]

>the battle of Helm's Deep or Tom Bombadil being boring in any way
>Tumblr confirmed for giving up on reading LOTR halfway through Fellowship and sticking to fangirl-ing over Martin Freeman and Orlando Bloom

[Anonymous No.3315098]

It makes sense; teenagers have the attention span of a goldfish.

[Anonymous No.3315099]

Also, I bet these are the same teenagers who can' even get through The Great Gatsby.

[Snaerugla No.3315102]

WHAT THE FUCK DID I JUST READ?!

[Anonymous No.3315108]

but they're right. tolkiens strengths are in his world building, this is a critique of his prose which is fair enough.

[Anonymous No.3315110]

>>>/tg/

[Anonymous No.3315136]

>>3315108
This.

His prose are too flowery for my taste but then again the last time I read LOTR was in my sophomore year of high school. Many people share the same complaint, it is just that Tolkien wasn't a very good writer but he was a good linguist and world builder.

[Anonymous No.3315561]

>>3315085
>beyond all the commentary of the problematic bits of the series

please enlighten us why Middle Earth is a racist backwater and LOTR must be purged of offending passages lest childrens all over the globe be exposed to this vile "literature"

these people are a cancer. Precisely the reason why studying literature in Uni is a gargantuan waste of money, time and valuable consciousness.

[Anonymous No.3315577]

>Lord of the Rings
>well written

lol

Those girls are right and you're a butthurt faggot.

[Anonymous No.3315581]

Before I came to /lit, I had no idea people had trouble reading Tolkien. I got through Silmarillion when I was around eleven. I've just never felt that there's anything superfluous about his prose, and I don't think I'll ever understand that feeling.

[Anonymous No.3315584]

let's not pretend this isn't a very common point of view on /lit/ itself. even i would say that tolkien's prose isn't always a strength of the novel, and i'm higher on Tolkien than just about anyone is.

although it's dead wrong to say that Lord of the Rings is "only good because of the worldbuilding"

[Anonymous No.3315587]

>>3315085

[None !m9jxTLhLcw No.3315592]

>Good writing should entice you along, should make it difficult to put the book down instead of difficult to get through two pages without a bathroom break. That having been said: It’s a mark of good storytelling and worldbuilding that people still read them.
Well, I agree 100% with this part.

[Anonymous No.3315600]

>>3315587
Ah, yes, BioWare admitting that they're doing their best to appeal to the lowest common denominator. A classic. Say, has anyone tried to compile an internet canon?

[None !m9jxTLhLcw No.3315602]

>>3315587
>not another generic boring fantasy
>unlike the works of Rowling or Meyer
ok, this made me rage a little.

[Anonymous No.3315603]

All clueless teens aside, Tolkien is a terrible writer and was racist as fuck.

Orcs- Blacks
Dwarves= Jews

Italians etc. It's trivial teenage escapism and tries to force Tolkien's narrow-minded Christian philosophy by making progression and any sort of intellectual advancement as evil.

[Anonymous No.3315610]

>>3315603
That's dumb as shit. Tolkien was certainly conservative but you're still dumb as shit (for one thing, his description of orcs draw much more on WWI-era depictions of German soldiers than on blacks in any way). Not to say that there aren't elements of LotR that aren't somewhat problematic from a racial standpoint but 'Orcs=Black' is not one of them and, oh yeah, you're a dibshit for calling something "trivial teenage escapism" because you disagree with the author's philosophy.

[Anonymous No.3315614]

>>3315587
That quote can't be real.

[Anonymous No.3315615]

>>3315603
>is a terrible writer
>was racist
So he's finally denounced his racist beliefs, towards the end of his long, long life?

[Anonymous No.3315627]

>>3315603

>he's bad because he's racist!

Get out of here, culture-less liberal.

[Anonymous No.3315644]

>>3315603

imo tolkien's mythos is more vital than the norse myths which inspired him and as much a part of our cultural history

[Anonymous No.3316065]

How is the story and the world *not* 'the books'? I take it you're purely referring to writing style here. Not really sure what you're on about with it not being a page turner either - sure it's a long novel - and there might be an element of pride to getting through a long novel if you aren't normally a 'reader' but it's by no means a difficult book. I first read it when I was 8 or 9, and if I'm honest a lot of the battles bored me at that age, but I was terrified about what was happening to Frodo and Sam and that kept me page turning (well past bedtime...)

[Anonymous No.3316087]

>>3315581
ditto.

[Anonymous No.3316119]

I agree with >>3315085

[Anonymous No.3316131]

>They’re clunky. They’re too detailed in places where they really don’t need to be. There are large passages that could be taken out or condensed with literally no harm done.

Tolkien himself agreed. He was going to go back and rewrite the Ring trilogy from the beginning to make the earlier parts more in line with the later where he had discovered a more suiting style. Or so I've heard.

[Anonymous No.3316154]

Why didn't the eagles just fly the dwarves to Erebor?

[Anonymous No.3316172]

>>3316154
Because of Smaug. Also, Eagles are notoriously lazy.

[Anonymous No.3316180]

>>3316154
It says in the book. I haven't read it in a while so my memory might be a little fuzzy but it was something like how the eagles where eating this guys sheep or something and then if they go farther than the carrock or hoh.wever you spell it the farmers would try and kill them so yea

[Anonymous No.3316214]

Everyone talks so much shit on Tolkien. He made amazing story's and had an awesome imagination. And you say he is a terrible writer that's probably because he isn't a novelist hes a fucking linguist and why the fuck would he care how he wrote it because he did write the books the way he wanted them to be written he didn't care how other people thought it was, because he wrote them for himself, and if he care what other people thought the it would of probably been a lot better.

[Anonymous No.3316239]

>>3316214
>why would a linguist care about how his book is written
I'm not sure if this makes sense or not.

[Anonymous No.3316284]

>>3316239
I think he meant why would he care how it was written for other people.

[Anonymous No.3316285]

>>3316239
He was a linguist, not a stylist.

[Anonymous No.3316323]

>tolkien
>good

[Anonymous No.3316364]

>>3315614
It is.

Also her quote about how she hates playing video games.

[Anonymous No.3316377]

>skipping sections of the book you're reading

I regret that I have but one shiggy to diggy.

[Anonymous No.3316380]

Tolkien's writing style does get a lot of flak actulaly. The man was an academic first and always, never a professional author. He was more in his element writing a highly technical essay on linguistics than he was telling a story.

Still, for sheer imagination I think that he's a literary genius. Tolkien really was, as they say, "the creative equivalent of a people."

[Anonymous No.3317092]

>>3316285
>>3316284
>>3316239
>>3316214

[Anonymous No.3317214]

>>3317092
Knowing that a post of mine amused you is the best thing I've gained from browsing 4chan tonight. Thank you and live a good life.

[Anonymous No.3319582]

bump

[Anonymous No.3319605]

Can someone please explain how LOTR is racist? Is this another case of modern-day self-righteous liberals trying to apply their 'post-colonial' and 'critical theory' nonsense to books written in a different era?

[Anonymous No.3319608]

You know why tumblr girls do this? So they can justify being fans of something while not reading the source material.

All the Avengers fan girls said similar stuff about Avenger comics. "Hurr durr girls focus on emotions of characters and men only care about characters power levels, it is impossible to read them in any order" etc etc.

Ultimately those on tumblr seek to sexualise and fantasise about what they are fans of. They only care about the few hot men, yet try to invest themselves into something by digging in and creating a "fandom" (I HATE that word). Then they try to defend their shallow interest when they lack the enthusiam to actually learn about the stuff they "like" and would rather look at hot men.

[Anonymous No.3319614]

>>3319605
>let us form a fellowship of white people to go and fuck up some black people shit

[Anonymous No.3319617]

>>3319605
I've read in many places how the Lord of the Rings is an allegory for WW2 and that Tolkien paints evil as often having a high sense of industry/imperialism maybe because Tolkien himself enjoyed the rural life of England.

People just get mad because they think all film should present modern society. And its not realistic to have no black people.. even in a fantasy film.

[Anonymous No.3319624]

>>3319617
>And its not realistic to have no black people.. even in a fantasy film.

The events in Middle Earth take place in a land with a climate equivalent to Europe. So yes, it is realistic.

[Anonymous No.3319629]

>>3319624
There's been black people in Europe since always.

[Anonymous No.3319633]

>>3319624
I know, I was just paraphrasing what peoples problem is.

[Anonymous No.3319634]

>>3319629
God you're stupid... If the whole place has a climate like Europe, there wouldn't be any black people at all.

[Anonymous No.3319635]

>>3319629

They didn't originate in Europe. And I doubt there was more than a few thousand before 1950.

>>3319633

Whoops, sorry.

[Anonymous No.3319640]

>>3319629
I was talking to some Italian and we both agreed there shouldn't have been a black Norse god in the Thor film but then he started to get angry about the idea that someone might someday have a black James Bond at which point I left.

[Anonymous No.3319654]

>>3319634
Don't mind this guy then.

[Anonymous No.3319656]

>>3319605
Well in the books there is a passage talking about the Haradrim or Southrons that calls some of them black (or something like that it has been ages).

But movie wise there are no black people and here in lies the problem. Black people will only watch a film with black people in it, no matter how good it is. Star Wars? They didn't like it. Empire Strikes Back? Well shit nigger that has Billy Dean Williams. Same reason why Samuel L Jackson is in the prequels.

[Anonymous No.3319660]

>>3315108
>>3315136
>>3315577
>>3315584
>>3316131

This. Tolkien's prose is far too detailed and overdone. Maybe it's a stylistic thing, but I enjoy prose like Hemmingway's a lot more.

[Anonymous No.3319661]

>>3319635
>They didn't originate in Europe.
Beside the point, our ancestors way back were black, black people came here. In Britain, at least, there's clear evidence for Black people going back to the Romans.

[Anonymous No.3319712]

People have trouble with Lord of the Rings? You can safely say that Tolkien does't not have the mastery of prose of the great classics but I can't imagine anyone having trouble with it. It's plain english. What is the point of building a world that huge if you aren't going to describe it?

Besides, anyone who has some understanding of the great epics of greco-roman antiquity knows that description is a HUGE FUCKING DEAL. Homer is absolutely incapable of introducing a character without giving it's origin and purpose. Everything has to clear and evident.

What is with people today that you simply have to be frugal with words to be considered good? That the whole "realism" worship...

[Anonymous No.3319733]

There are white orcs. The easterlings were white too.

[Anonymous No.3319737]

>>3319617
>And its not realistic to have no black people.. even in a fantasy film.
What? That depends entirely on the setting, you nitwit. Do you think it would be unrealistic to have no black people in a film about a society of sentient birds living on Saturn? No? Then it's stupid to complain about the (near) lack of black people in LotR, as there simply aren't that many of them in the places where the films (and books, for that matter) take place.

[Anonymous No.3319740]

>>3319737
See:
>>3319633

[Anonymous No.3319744]

>>3319737
We have to admit, though, that there are no black characters which are important. I always saw the haradrim as more arabic/semitic than black. Then again, why is there a problem with not having black people in LotR?

[Anonymous No.3319750]

>>3319608
This is the only issue.

[Anonymous No.3319762]

>>3319640
He's entitled to his own opinion and it's also the opinion that I hold as well. James Bond was supposed to be an all-around English man in everything including an English ethnic background. I'm not against someone making a similar series with a black protagonist but twisting a cultural icon for the sake of being PC is wrong.

[Anonymous No.3319769]

>>3319605
> Can someone please explain how LOTR is racist? Is this another case of modern-day self-righteous liberals trying to apply their 'post-colonial' and 'critical theory' nonsense to books written in a different era?

There's quite a lot of wanton, unbridled and very unsettling violence in the books.

Modern-day stupid people interpret it as 'Tolkien being racist', even though in reality it is a commentary by Tolkien on what the horrors of war do to even good people.

[Anonymous No.3319806]

>>3319640
I thought Black Bond was called Shaft.

[Anonymous No.3319825]

>>3315085
wtf, I read Hobbit when thirteen years old, it still stands as the book that gave me the greatest experience ever.

lotr read when 16-18 yo, that was in 1999-2001 before the movies, and I fucking loved them. Tumblr hipster writing this shit are lacking important parts of their brain.

I fucking loved Tom Bombadill :D

[Anonymous No.3319841]

>>3315085
mr. vain hipster on tumblr.

[Anonymous No.3319843]

Didn't Tolkien hate literary interpretations of his works?

I don't have any sources but hopefully it might ring a few bells

[Anonymous No.3319848]

>>3319825
I read The Hobbit when I was six, and I second that it was one of my best reading experiences.

I guess that's nostalgia speaking, but hey ho.

[Anonymous No.3319883]

>>3319848
My mother read it to me when I was 5 or something.

[Anonymous No.3319892]

>>3319883
Oh yeah? Well my mother read it to me when SHE was five.

[Anonymous No.3319898]

>>3319883
>>3319892
I actually read it when I was six though, both of you calm the fuck down.

[Anonymous No.3319907]

>>3319898
I am not competing with you. She really read it to me every night. It is one of my fondest childhood memories.

[Anonymous No.3319943]

>>3319907
Is it now...

[Anonymous No.3319978]

> “I can see the light at the end of this Tom Bombadil passage!”

I know that feel so hard.

[Anonymous No.3319998]

>>3319843
No, he just hated being accused of allegory.

[Anonymous No.3320087]

>>3316380
>He was more in his element writing a highly technical essay on linguistics than he was telling a story.
That's an interesting way of describing it. You might even have convinced me to read his books which I never did since the movies were pretty meh to me.

[Anonymous No.3320108]

>>3319883
>you will never have a mother who reads you fantasy novels while you are child

I envy you

[Anonymous No.3320123]

I never had a problem with Tolkien's writing style.

It's not like his prose is the greatest ever, but I've judged books to be good & worth reading even when the prose is much worse.

[Anonymous No.3320389]

>>3319898
My dad read me and my brother The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings. Then he took us to see the The Fellowship of the Ring when it came out
>8 years old
>THE WORLD IS CHANGED
>mfw

[Anonymous No.3320402]

>>3320087
In the Appendices, Tolkien fleshes out the conceit that Lord of the Rings was translated from Middle-Earth languages, doing things like stating that Westron was translated into English, but other languages were translated into equivalent European languages rather than just left as is. And this includes the derivation of words For instance, "hobbit" is an "English" word that Tolkien made up as a derivation of "holbytla", an actual Old English word meaning "hole-dweller". And in the text, he say that hobbits borrowed the word "holbytla" from the Rohirrim and then it became "hobbit".

See how that works? In the fiction, the Rohirrim speak Old English and have the word "holbytla", and Tolkien said, "So what if this word were borrowed into English as the name of a people, what would it look like?" and came up with "hobbit".

Except all of that is translation of the real languages Tolkien made up - he actually has the Rohirrim speaking Rohirric, a language he made up entirely, where the word for "hole dweller" is Kûd-dûkan, and hobbits speak Westron, where the word for their people is "kuduk". So really, Tolkien took "Rohirric" and represented it with Old English, and "Westron" and translated it with modern English, and translated his made-up word Kûd-dûkan with the real word "holbytla" and his made-up word "kuduk" with the made-up word "hobbit".

[Anonymous No.3320546]

>>3320402

3deep6me

[Anonymous No.3320573]

This pisses me off so much.

This is how great writers fall into obscurity.

Impatient kids trying to jump a bandwagon and falling victim to their own lack of comprehension and laziness, are in no way a valid assessment of literature.

[Anonymous No.3320604]

>>3315099
But Gatsby is fucking awful.

[Anonymous No.3320608]

>>3320604
you win 4 epic trollys

[Anonymous No.3320619]

He's got easy, engaging prose though. It's not like Lovecraft or Melville where the prose is archaic and occasionally too dense to breeze through.

[Anonymous No.3320674]

>>3320402
I've always appreciated how well Tolkien based his work off of ancient languages and myths.

[Anonymous No.3320678]

>>3320674
some of the names of the 13 Dwarves are also found in the Poetic Edda (Norse mythology).

[Anonymous No.3320686]

>>3320573
If Tolkien was going to fall into obscurity it would have long since happened

[sage No.3320805]

>>3320678
As well as Gandalf's name too!

[Anonymous No.3321075]

>>3319762
He's half swiss, half scottish....

[Anonymous No.3321166]

>>3320805
indeed

[Anonymous No.3321192]

this is why i prefer cslewis to tolkien, some deep ideas put succinctly, whether you agree with them or not

eg world between worlds

time before the stars

the unspeakable word

the worshiper of tash, still being redeemed as he was still honourable

im not a reiligfag

but lewis could write

[Anonymous No.3321212]

>>3316364
That's disingenuous. The full quote never gets posted on /v/ because they're all a bunch of gullible cunts, but she says something to the effect of 'I hate playing games, I like experiencing narratives', or something.

/v/ just posts that shit because it has a hard-on for girl video-game dilettantes, because they haven't realized that the only real difference between a gamer and a non-gamer is buying things (and they think being a 'nerd' affords them some 'social credit' and thus defending the position is 'worth it'), and they're mildly sexist.

Someone should post this on /v/, but instead of this huge post, put:

"/v/ [...] is mildly sexist"
~/lit/

and watch them prove my point.

[Anonymous No.3322621]

>>3319654
>>3319661

lel what have you been reading? realhistoryww.com?

[Anonymous No.3322632]

>>3321192
CS Lewis still sucks, and even if he didn't suck, he'd be much worse than Tolkien. But I think we've had this argument before.

[Anonymous No.3322974]

I just realized I'm a rare reader in that I love descriptive prose "flowery prose". I find dialogue to be novels weakest points and went there did that style writing to be boring as fuck.

I can kind of see why my opinion on books is different to a lot of people now :/

[Anonymous No.3323004]

>>3321212
you are the maddest fuck

[Anonymous No.3323025]

I thought having flowery prose was kind of the point. Tolkien loved old mythology and the poetic edda and what have you, and loved reading that kind of stuff. It stands to reason that he would write his own mythology in the same way. What goes in must come out, as they say. Also he was trying to emulate the old myths and poems and present his like it was similar to the old stories; he was trying to make his own myth. Old mythological writing is full of this kind of flowery stuff.

[steezy peezy !TxVGZ2n8pE No.3323027]

>>3322621
Mozart's physical appearance was described by tenor Michael Kelly, in his Reminiscences: "a remarkably small man, very thin and pale, with a profusion of fine, fair hair of which he was rather vain". As his early biographer Niemetschek wrote, "there was nothing special about [his] physique. [...] He was small and his countenance, except for his large intense eyes, gave no signs of his genius."

[Anonymous No.3325387]

bump

[Anonymous No.3325511]

It's funny to think how Tolkien must have spent the rest of his life after the publication of LoTR explaining the events were not an allegory of the World Wars and the Orcs were not an allegory of Barbarians or of Blacks or what-have-you and so on.

[Anonymous No.3325746]

Why does no one here bring up his dialogue/monologue?

I feel like the insight he puts into the characters of the elves, Lady Galadriel, Lord Elrond, and higher characters like Gandalf etc. are shining examples of thoughtful prose and rather cultured composition.

Its not meant to be a unified piece, which is why Hobbit dialogue differs so greatly then say the dialogues of Men but they very well convey the values of each race as well as the innate understandings of each.

Yet, in his tangents about the world, geography, and things of this sort I would maintain that this is another form of dialogue he enters to estrange the reader from the natural elements of his book, which i feel he himself found very important. The modern reader is indeed lazy but these are all tools to discern perspective rather than transmit a gestalt style, perhaps also why Bombadil was brought in and removed so early in the story, to acclimate the reader with the shift if povs but maintain an observant perspective.

There are fellows on this board more read than I, WHAT SAY YOU?

[Anonymous No.3325912]

>>3315085

Well, what did you expect from a typical latter-day Tumblr user? Not more than shitty fanfiction, I hope.

[Anonymous No.3326580]

>>3325511
I'm pretty sure he kept hanging out with his bros, reading shitty poetry for purpose of ridicule and studying his interests.

[Anonymous No.3326597]

>>3315581
It's more irritating than troublesome, it just doesn't make for an enjoyable read.

[Anonymous No.3326599]

>>3321212
If you like experiencing narrative, you should be making movies. She is not making movies, she is fucking up games.

[Anonymous No.3326658]

>>3325746

He was indeed very good at showing instead of telling but i think that his long colorful descriptions of the world were there mainly because he wanted to show us the world. I don't think he actually cared about some readers thinking it's uninteresting. I think he just wanted to share Middle-earth to us.

[Anonymous No.3326728]

It's weird that people call Tolkien racist. If they'd just had read his Wikipedia article then they could easily find a quote proving the contrary. And he also criticized the fire bombing of Japan and the war crimes in Dresden.

[Anonymous No.3326738]

What were you expecting to find on a slut's Tumblr page - an arbiter of culture?


Should I ask a construction worker for his thoughts on ballet?

[Anonymous No.3326767]

>>3315108
>>3315136

Are you actually retarded? Half the point of reading tolkien is the wonderful prose

[Anonymous No.3326771]

>>3315603

Let's just forget that in actuality Orcs=cyclops and Dwarves=dwarves because Tolkien really fucking loved the norse mythos?

[Anonymous No.3326776]

>>3321212

I like experiencing books, but I hate reading. That's why I watched the movies.

~/tv/

[Anonymous No.3327806]

bump

[Anonymous No.3328002]

They should read "A Song of Ice and Fire" instead.

[Anonymous No.3328006]

>>3326771
Cyclops? In Norse mythos? What the fuck are you smoking, man?

[Anonymous No.3328008]

Why is this dumb thread still active, let alone on the front page

[Anonymous No.3328301]

>>3328008

Bump, just for you

[Anonymous No.3330987]

>>3319605
I think a lot of it is just how in LOTR your imaginary fantasy race (elf, dwarf, orc, etc.) determines your personality and even whether you're good or evil? Whether you can draw a reasonable connection from that to real-world racism is more than questionable. The "races" on Middle Earth seem as much like different species as anything. But if one applied Tolkien's moral standards to humans, things could get problematic.

There's also some vaguely racist stuff about the Haradrim and the Southrons but nobody gives a shit about them.

[Anonymous No.3330995]

>>3322621
>"lololol there were never any black people in Europe, are you a tumblrfag or something?"
>mfw all you dumbasses obviously never read Shakespeare
>mfw Othello

[Anonymous No.3331017]

>>3328006

actually suareons eye is the cymphane, or odins eye hanging in the tree.
the orcs are pagans and the elves are christians wipeing them out. actually suaren is the good guy, and tolkien was so brainwashed by xtianity that he was unable to clear the distortion of the atavistic history he was remembering for us.

[Anonymous No.3331019]

>>3331017
You listen to a lot of Viking black metal, don't you.

[Anonymous No.3331043]

>>3330987
I think it makes sense, as they are evil not because they're foreigners and foreigners are evil, but because Sauron could influence them because they were different and already in conflict with Sauron's enemies because of this. They were just a lot more convenient for him. But they don't really mention that much in LotR.

[Anonymous No.3331106]

>>3330995
Othello was based on a visiting moor

[Anonymous No.3331118]

>>3330995

Moors weren't/Aren't black though

[demiurge No.3331160]

>>3331118
they're brown, apparently that's enough for americans to decide they're "black".

the lighter colored sand people are the persians. north africans (moors) are quite brown.

[Anonymous No.3331208]

>>3331160
Persians are aryans. Arabs and blacks are not.

[Anonymous No.3331485]

>>3319614
>Automatically assuming the violent marauders are an analogue for blacks.

Those vocally opposed to racism are often some of the most racist fuckers you can meet.

[Anonymous No.3331492]

>>3331485
But the fellowship are all white and the violent marauders all share cultural and aesthetic traits with the popular perception of African tribes-people.
The second bit of your post is true but I'm not sure it's entirely relevant in this case.

[Anonymous No.3331506]

>>3331492
Please share these cultural and aesthetic traits with the class.

[Anonymous No.3331518]

>>3331492
>But the fellowship are all white
Actually, no. Most of them are hobbits, and there's no reason to believe they are either black or white.
Some aren't even human beings.

> and the violent marauders all share cultural and aesthetic traits with the popular perception of African tribes-people.
No they don't. The culture and aesthetics of the marauders are not described by Tolkien at all.
This isn't a commentary on race, it's Tolkien's treatment of how war warps our perceptions and morality.

[Anonymous No.3331523]

>>3331506
Barbarism, low intelligence, long arms, like monkeys or apes, cannibalism, the uruk-hai even have black skin.
Before you accuse me of being racist too, that would be missing the point. One doesn't have to agree with a point of view in order to recognise it. The assumption that one does is clinically retarded.

[Anonymous No.3331529]

>>3331518
Wow fuck me way to totally miss the point entirely. Talk about selective reading.

[Anonymous No.3331539]

>>3331492
Just cutting in half way through the argument, but I'm pretty sure Orcs & Uruk-hai are the Germans in WWII, though the Dwarves are very obviously Jews.
>>3319605
Just to mitigate your hatred towards liberals, as a modern Liberal Socialist, I think of course Tolkien had a bit of a stereotyping streak in him but that in no way lessens his achievements as both a linguist and an author.

[Anonymous No.3331549]

>>3331523
"I am going to make the assumption that this book is built upon racial stereotypes and anyone that disagrees with me is clinically retarded because they disagree with me."
Do I have to start quoting fallacies at you?
My point is that while you believe others (used to) associate these attributes with blacks there is no evidence to believe the book is inspired by these stereotypes as opposed to the various mythologies with credible links and references in the text. I am not calling you a racist, I am calling you an idiot.

You are projecting; there is no bogyman under the bed.
>>3331529
Yeah, its almost like he is interpreting a text in a way that agrees with his pre-conceptions. Oh wait.

[Anonymous No.3331567]

>I’m Drew, a 22-year old living in Toronto, Canada. I’m white, read as a cis male and usually use the pronouns assigned to me at birth, and was born in the country where I make my home; I’m also bisexual, genderqueer, and pagan. I don’t identify as cisgender, but I also don’t feel comfortable identifying under the trans* umbrella, because I’m aware that I’m read as cis and I use male pronouns. I identify as pro-feminist, and I’m perfectly comfortable being called a race traitor, a heterophobe, a misandrist, and so on.

Jesus fucking christ.

Tumblr is literally crawling with these people. That piece of shit site has become a parody of itself.

[Anonymous No.3331587]

>>3319762
James Bond isn't even English, you racist cunt.

[Anonymous No.3331589]

My favorite scene is when frods and sam were walking through the woods of ithillien and they see the decapitated statue of a past king. The description is beautiful, and evoked a strong emotion sadness/hope. Without minor, semi-poetic scenes like this the book would be unreadable

[Anonymous No.3331629]

>>3331567
Sometimes I go through these bouts of hope were I honestly believe in human endeavour and revel in the potential our species possesses. I have to read something like this every now and then to bring me back down to reality.

[Anonymous No.3331632]

>>3331549
At no point in this conversation have I said that the book is inspired by those things. What I have quite clearly been saying is that it's not impossible to see why people might think it was, and that does not make them racist.
Do you need me to restate this yet again or do you understand yet?

[Anonymous No.3331633]

>>3331587

As a Scotfag, Fleming changed the 'background' of bond because he enjoyed Sean Connery's portrayal of the character so much

[Anonymous No.3331637]

>>3331567
Jesus christ, where did you read this?

[Anonymous No.3331641]

>>3331587
>James Bond isn't even English, you racist cunt.
Yes he is. Just because Sean Connery played him, and the new film (not written by Fleming) depicted a rural Scottish upbringing, doesn't mean he wasn't English.

[Anonymous No.3331644]

>>3331567
They post on /lit/ sometimes too. Usually in a Virginia Woolf thread

[Anonymous No.3331651]

>>3331632
It may not be impossible in the same way it’s not impossible to see why some people think the earth is flat or the illumanati control the world. It’s a stupid interpretation.
Also, perceiving racial stereotypes in every creative work DOES make these people racist. This coming from a self-confessed racist.

[Anonymous No.3331665]

>>3331651
You might think it's stupid, but it still happens.
Not talking about *every* creative work, just this one.

[Anonymous No.3331681]

>>3331637
The tumbler where OP's quote originates from.

[Anonymous No.3331703]

>>3331681
Which is?
I'm sorry, but I've never used this tumblr thingamajig.

[Anonymous No.3331730]

>>3331651
>self-confessed racist

Save yourself the pain of living, kill yourself now.

[Anonymous No.3332056]

>>3331703
All you need to do is google part of the quote, buddy.

Here ya go http://shorm.tumblr.com/post/39555969528/since-i-see-a-lot-of-talk-about-tolkien-and-feel-like

[Anonymous No.3332080]

you guys really want to rage? read reviews of moby-dick on amazon