controversial movie/book/non-metal music opinions thread

[Blind Guardian]

I don't think that's what he meant. I think he was saying (and I tend to agree) that classical music does not evoke the same kind of emotions that most people want from music. Correct me if I'm wrong mattson.

Pretty much. What i'm trying to say is that there's not much in classical music which i can relate to modern life today, that isn't necessarily a bad thing if you don't want that from music either of course.

 

[Cythraul]

classical music does not evoke the same kind of emotions that most people want from music.

Most people are simpletons. Coincidence?

 

[Einherjar86]

Tolkien was a shit writer.

He is one of the best mythology creators in modern times though.

You're entitled to your opinion, but I'd like to hear your explanation of how exactly he was a shit writer.

Tolkien was great at world-building, but bad at characterization IMO.

Tolkien is certainly overrated as a writer, but his influence is undeniable. He's like The Beatles of fantasy literature.

His characterization is miles behind his contemporaries; but then again, Tolkien wasn't as worried about his characters as he was about the world and mythology he was creating. Tolkien's purpose wasn't to contribute to the echelon of character-driven literature and drama. He was concerned with philology and mythology, and these were his primary tools in creating Middle Earth.

If we choose to look at Tolkien's writing in comparison with contemporary fantasy, he actually is unique in that his narrative is very removed from any character's perspective. Most contemporary writers (Erikson, Bakker, Martin, Goodkind, even Jordan) all use limited third person (to a degree), which results in a narrative style similar to first person but without the "I." Tolkien opts for a much more omniscient narrator. Most contemporary writers also opt for the idea of the anti-hero, tragic hero, or "flawed" hero. Tolkien's epic was much more romanticized in its portrayal of good and evil.

I, for one, am not fond of Tolkien's writing style. I appreciate him for what he did in the genre of high epic fantasy. Almost all contemporary fantasy writers acknowledge Tolkien as a primary influence. Even Moorcock, although he purposely tried to rebel against what Tolkien did, must admit that he was responding to Tolkien when he began the Elric Saga.

 

[Carcassian]

You're entitled to your opinion, but I'd like to hear your explanation of how exactly he was a shit writer.

Tom Bombadil ? I mean, seriously ?

He's also an extremely dry writer. I find his writing style to be almost devoid of any sense of pacing or urgency.

A wonderful plot, but by fuck, does he labour it.

Were that I could have been his editor, I would have returned it with "GET ON WITH IT, TOLKIEN, YOU CUNT" in the margins of most pages.

 

[Carcassian]

...or a very dry, uninteresting history.

Of something that didn't happen.

 

[Blind Guardian]

In difference to the bible

 

[Dak]

Most people are simpletons. Coincidence?

.

I don't listen to classical really because it takes time out from listening to metal, but I would much rather listen to classical than 99% of non-metal/hard rock.

 

[Vilden]

He's also an extremely dry writer. I find his writing style to be almost devoid of any sense of pacing or urgency.

I kinda agree with this, that's why I don't think LOTR is nearly his best work, because of the more in depth style it is written in makes the dryness you pointed out more tendious. While on the other hand with some of his other works like for example Silmarillion or The Books of Lost Tales his writing style kinda adds to the atmosphere that you are reading an ancient myth or something like that instead, in the way Mattsson pointed out.

 

[Carcassian]

I have read LOTR trilogy (once as a teen, tried again when the films came out and remembered what a slog it had been way back when), the Silmarillion and The Hobbit.

The only one I really enjoy to any huge extent is The Hobbit, which is really a perfect childs adventure story. I plan to read it to my eldest at bed times when he gets a year or so older.

 

[challenge_everything]

You're entitled to your opinion, but I'd like to hear your explanation of how exactly he was a shit writer.

Pretty much what everyone else just said.

His writing style is juvenile, dry, unsubtle and boring. The plot doesn't unravel with any seeming control, it just "happens", predictably, except for the occasional random side-excursion which has no thematic relevance and the odd burst of song. The characters are thin and unlikable.

I give no credit for "creating a world", anyone can do that. You compare it to the other "big" fantasy series of that era, the Dune novels, and there's no comparison. Frank Herbert doesn't just create a world and a hero who obviously saves the day, he litters it with political intrigues and interesting characters and profound thought.

 

[Vegard Pompey]

I'll agree that The Hobbit is better than Lord of the Rings, and I like both.

 

[Vilden]

I give no credit for "creating a world", anyone can do that.

Oh really? Then I would like you to point out those "anyone" who has created a world and creation mythos spanning from the beginning of time to present day with detailed history on pretty much everything in between and several roughly complete langagues to go with it. The depth of Tolkiens world is just something else than what most other authors has come close to.

If you go by numbers, I think the feat of writing a decent novel is much more common. ;-)

 

[challenge_everything]

It just demonstrates a banal and tedious obsession, not talent.

 

[Death Aflame]

In terms of writing style I always thought Tolkien was channeling the fairly banal style of the Norse sagas.

The best example of this is Children of Hurin--which I also think is his best work that I have read (I have read it, The Hobbit and LOTR).

 

[skeptik]

I absolutely love Tolkien's writing style. It often very consciously recalls the writing style of his ancient influences, so it makes sense that he would choose to write the way that he did, especially given his interests as well as his profession. I also never have once felt his descriptions overlong or intrusively unnecessary. I'm not ashamed to admit that the man is above criticism for me. He was the first novelist I've ever read and loved, and I assume that he will always be my favorite author.

Another writer whose style I love, though most others seem to view as his weakness, is Lovecraft, btw.

 

[V.V.V.V.V.]

I adore Lovecraft's style...I don't get how anyone could fault him.

 

[Vimana]

Lovecraft ftw. Although on rare occasion he can get a little too wordy. But those occasions are very few and far between.

 

[Thoth-Amon]

classical music does not evoke the same kind of emotions that most people want from music.

well most people are idiots so i could care less what they want from music

 

[Vimana]

Pretty much what I was going to say. I don't listen to a whole lot of classical myself though. Only Beethoven really.

 

[V.V.V.V.V.]

well most people are idiots so i could care less what they want from music