the "classics" are sometimes crap

[monoxide_child]

i've read both the eragon series and LOTR and i personally would say that the eragon series is better

everyone just thinks of LOTR as "classic" because everyone else already thinks of it as "clasic"
to me this is a really great example of "groupthink"
people just agree with the group

many (if not most) of the people that refer to LOTR as being "classic" and "awesome" are people that read abridged versions, or read "graphic novel" versions, or listened to it on an audio book, or just simply watched the freaking movie, as opposed to the people like me that actually read the whole unabridged version, and actually honestly thought about it in comparason to other fantasy works, but just because it was an "early" example of it's type of "epic" fantasy, all of the newer "epic fantasy" stories are just considered "rip-offs" by people that don't even stop to consider the idea that a newer fantasy book might actually be better than the "original" "classic" LOTR series
as a person that actually analysed the content and structure and flow of the stories, i personally think that a great deal of the "fantasy" written AFTER LOTR was actually in fact better, with some of the authors actually seeming to learn from Tolkien's mistakes, although, to imply that Tolkien's LOTR series even had any mistakes to begin with is something that will prolly start a flame war

Eragon series >>> LOTR

 

[tagradh]

Such insight.

You're so much better than everyone else man. LotR is probably overrated to an extent, but it shits on Eragon.

Your taste sucks, and you're a pompous twat.

 

[monoxide_child]

Such insight.

You're so much better than everyone else man. LotR is probably overrated to an extent, but it shits on Eragon.

Your taste sucks, and you're a pompous twat.

i meant also
that groupthink is responsible for a lot of what we refer to as "classic" not merely LOTR, not merely fatasy genre, and not merely books

the movie "gone with the wind" sucked, the movie "casablanca" sucked

when the "watchmen" movie came out, the internet and all the anime cons were filled with the hard-core watchmen comic fans bitching about Zack snyder making all those differences between the comic and the movie, and to me, it seems obvious that alan moore sucked as a comic writer, because when i saw the watchmen movie, and i saw the alterations that zack snyder made, it seemed obvious that alan moore had made a lot of mistakes and zack snyder fixed them, but for some reason, when a movie is noticeably different than the source material, it's totally taboo to even hint at the idea that maybe the movie did it better

the movies "watchmen" "daredevil" "ghostrider" the "blade" trilogy "the wizard of OZ" etc etc were all BETTER than the source material

 

[pack1fan4life]

Listen, Tolkien spent his LIFE working on the world he created. Yes, created. Nearly every aspect about Middle-Earth was original. He even created a freaking LANGUAGE for it! And his writing was truly inspired and made you feel like you were in story, watching what's going on from behind a rock or bush or something. I have not come across anything nearly that good, except maybe the Wheel of Time series or Harry Potter. Certainly not Eragon.

 

[monoxide_child]

Listen, Tolkien spent his LIFE working on the world he created. Yes, created. Nearly every aspect about Middle-Earth was original. He even created a freaking LANGUAGE for it! And his writing was truly inspired and made you feel like you were in story, watching what's going on from behind a rock or bush or something. I have not come across anything nearly that good, except maybe the Wheel of Time series or Harry Potter. Certainly not Eragon.

yes i understand the concept of world-building, and yes i get that tolkien was one of only a handfull of people that have ever done it single-handedly

but
if you talk to people that actually read both sets of books (instead of all those people that merely saw the movies) i think you'll find people other than me that would say that Eragon is at least slightly better than LOTR

also Eragon >>>>>> Harry Potter
partially because if you read all the Potter books and then go back and re-read the first one, it's unmistakeable that the first book was clearly written with the intention of it being made into a movie, the first movie matched the first book so completely because the first book looks as if it was written as a screenplay
you don't really see that with the first Eragon book, Paolini spent his whole life reading fantasy books non-stop and wrote a book that he himself would have enjoyed reading, Eragon was written as an actual book, not a screenplay

 

[JakeAC5253]

You use the term "groupthink" loosely. Are you sure you understand its true meaning and aren't just saying it because you heard someone else say it?

 

[Dak]

monoxide never knows what he is talking about. And Eragon was absolutely horrible. Couldn't make it past the first chapter of the book or the first ten minutes of the movie. Potter is also horrible but that is irrelevant.

 

[Blowtus]

Future derivative works can improve on certain aspects, yep. Quite the logical leap from there to 'the work that defined the genre now sucks'.

Classics that are only so because of their ideas are not nearly as good a read these days (imho) as those that are classic for the style, characters, etc, because classic ideas get borrowed and extended and we become familiar with them... quality writing (ie Lolita) doesn't get old

 

[monoxide_child]

i still stand by my asertation that there are "epic fantasy" books better than LOTR

examples
the Robert Jordan Wheel of Time series
the George RR Martin series that got made into the HBO series "Game of Thrones"
Brian Herbert's "Dune" books
the DragonLance books published by Wizards of The Coast

 

[monoxide_child]

the point that i'm trying to make is actually really applicable to all other entertainment genres too, as opposed to just merely "epic fantasy"

sci-fi for example

everyone keeps refering to Star Trek TOS as "a classic TV show"
i'm pretty sure i've spent much more of my life watching sci-fi TV shows than anyone else on this forum
and the Star Trek with James T Kirk is really the crappiest sci-fi that's ever been on TV
everyone just gets thinks it's awesome because everyone's been spending the last 50 years telling each other that it was awesome
but it wasn't, i'm even going to say that the original Star Trek was actually even crappi-er than the pre-Star Trek telivised sci-fi
Kirk was a badly done character, James T Kirk was really nothing but James Bond in space, if you take away the rest of the Enterprise crew, Kirk would look as stupid as Tek Jansen, and Tek Jansen is actually supposed to look stupid Tek Jansen is a flat-out parody of crappy sci-fi heroes

 

[AllShallFall]

i've read both the eragon series and LOTR and i personally would say that the eragon series is better

everyone just thinks of LOTR as "classic" because everyone else already thinks of it as "clasic"
to me this is a really great example of "groupthink"
people just agree with the group

many (if not most) of the people that refer to LOTR as being "classic" and "awesome" are people that read abridged versions, or read "graphic novel" versions, or listened to it on an audio book, or just simply watched the freaking movie, as opposed to the people like me that actually read the whole unabridged version, and actually honestly thought about it in comparason to other fantasy works, but just because it was an "early" example of it's type of "epic" fantasy, all of the newer "epic fantasy" stories are just considered "rip-offs" by people that don't even stop to consider the idea that a newer fantasy book might actually be better than the "original" "classic" LOTR series
as a person that actually analysed the content and structure and flow of the stories, i personally think that a great deal of the "fantasy" written AFTER LOTR was actually in fact better, with some of the authors actually seeming to learn from Tolkien's mistakes, although, to imply that Tolkien's LOTR series even had any mistakes to begin with is something that will prolly start a flame war

Eragon series >>> LOTR

Both absolutely suck and overall "epic fantasy" crap sucks big time. Science fiction will absolutely beat out fantasy any fucking day.

 

[monoxide_child]

Both absolutely suck and overall "epic fantasy" crap sucks big time. Science fiction will absolutely beat out fantasy any fucking day.

i actually agree here
Sci Fi > "epic fantasy"

 

[AllShallFall]

Anyone read Fahrenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury? Although it's a classic, it's an excellent book

 

[monoxide_child]

i want to see Testicle Milkshake's thoughts on this subject
and all the other philosopher threads too, for that matter
philosopher's forum would be so much better if Testicle Milkshake came back

 

[Spiderchrist]

Anyone read Fahrenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury? Although it's a classic, it's an excellent book

Great taste, my friend.

 

[Spiderchrist]

I don't read many stories. I'm more into religious, occult, or philosophical books. I've studied the Necronomicon, the Satanic Bible (for some reason), the Torah, the Egyptian Book of the Dead, Sumerian scripts, the Bible...I'm currently reading the Book of the Law by Aleister Crowley, and it is quite difficult to grasp. I'll be working on that book for a while.

 

[BlackMetalWhiteGuy]

I've noticed this same blind reverence toward other categories of classics, particularly classic cars and classic rock.

EDIT: I should clarify that I'm not indiscriminately demeaning classic cars and classic rock. I'm sure there are plenty of reasons for liking either one, but "because it's a classic" isn't an acceptable argument. It's truly irritating when I ask someone why they like something and this is the conversation that follows:

Them: "...because it's a classic, man."
Me: "And what about that appeals to you?"
Them: "Didn't you hear me? It's a classic!"

It's such a clear tautological fallacy that you might as well just admit that you only like it because you've been taught to like it, because you're phishing for the approval of others who like it, or because you're attempting to socially elevate yourself through some symbolic cultural appreciation that others "just wouldn't understand."

 

[BroughtToTheirKnees]

tl;dr

... just like books.

 

[AllShallFall]

Great taste, my friend.

 

[AllShallFall]

I don't read many stories. I'm more into religious, occult, or philosophical books. I've studied the Necronomicon, the Satanic Bible (for some reason), the Torah, the Egyptian Book of the Dead, Sumerian scripts, the Bible...I'm currently reading the Book of the Law by Aleister Crowley, and it is quite difficult to grasp. I'll be working on that book for a while.

I'm thinkin of reading most of those things (except the Bible), especially the Satanic Bible and the Book of the Law