the "classics" are sometimes crap

[monoxide_child]

I'm completely with you on this, except that I like some Metallica. As I mentioned previously, I feel like most of the people who cite "because it's classic" as their reason for liking something are actually just forcing themselves to enjoy it because they feel like they have to for social purposes. To like something that also happens to be a classic is totally legit, but to like something because it's a classic is a self perpetuating feedback loop of idiotic conformity, which makes it rather ironic that so many high-schoolers with black nail polish have throbbing nerd-boners for AC/DC and Black Sabbath.

thank you for apearing to go inside my head and write down my thoughts in a way that's so much more eloquent and articulate than any post i myself actually write

also
BlackMetalWhiteGuy came back
woo-hoo

 

[ArcipreteTifone]

Eragorn BETTER than LOTR? Easily the most retarded thing I've read this year... And Harry Potter is the gayest fucking crappy movie/book series I've ever heard of, obviously made for children under 12 in mind. LOTR is MUCH more complex and interesting than anything in this thread, especially the books. Tolkien fucking created everything and to say any of the crap that is pretty much a copy of his work is fucking outrageous.

^^^That.

Tolkien was a genius. If something is awesome and it so happens to be liked by many, doesnt mean its necessarily a case of group thinking. What would you do if your favorite band became incredibly popular and liked by millions? Would you call yourself a "group thinker"? I think not

 

[Carmen_Rock]

The difference between Tolkien and his work, and the posterior works and writers, as Eragon, is that Tolkien was original at his time and created that world and that stories. The writers and works that came before, took Tolkien's ideas and "imitated" them. So, Tolkien's work is more valuable for this.

 

[monoxide_child]

The difference between Tolkien and his work, and the posterior works and writers, as Eragon, is that Tolkien was original at his time and created that world and that stories. The writers and works that came before, took Tolkien's ideas and "imitated" them. So, Tolkien's work is more valuable for this.

except for his writing style was annoying as fuck

so, while i understand the whole concept of "first one is better than the copies"

i still say Eragon better that LOTR just simply because it's a hell of a lot easier to read

also
LOTR movie >>> than the books because of Tolkien's annoying writing style

 

[orcslayr23]

also
LOTR movie >>> than the books because of Tolkien's annoying writing style

I agree that the LOTR movies are superior to the books. In the 10 years or so that i've been into LOTR i've only read the books twice. I want to read them again but my list of books to read/reread is incredibly long, so I might not get to it for a while.

 

[Carmen_Rock]

except for his writing style was annoying as fuck

so, while i understand the whole concept of "first one is better than the copies"

i still say Eragon better that LOTR just simply because it's a hell of a lot easier to read

also
LOTR movie >>> than the books because of Tolkien's annoying writing style

I think Tolkien's style of writing is quite good, but there are many people who dislike it because it's rather descriptive, and sometimes, Tolkien dedicates too much lines to describe for example a tree. This kind of descriptions are disliked by some people, but in spite of this, i find Tolkien' style kinda good because I don't care about that.
It's a matter of what are you searching for when you read a book, but I consider that to say Eragon is better than LOTR is to exaggerate a bit.

 

[orcslayr23]

It's a matter of what are you searching for when you read a book, but I consider that to say Eragon is better than LOTR is to exaggerate a bit.

It also depends on what you mean by "better". I've read both and Eragon is pretty poorly written and not overly original, lifting many of its plot points from other works of fiction. If you're referring to what is actually a better piece of fiction, LOTR is by far.

In Monoxide's case, it's personal preference. Tolkien's style isn't overly accessible, which can definitely alienate readers. Eragon is more accessible, and many of its readers enjoy the story just fine regardless of the points i've made in the previous paragraph. It would probably make more sense to say "I enjoy Eragon more than I enjoy LOTR" or something to that effect than to say "Eragon is better than LOTR".

I love Sonic Syndicate, and I know they are neither overly original or technically proficient. I went to see Soilwork the other day and Jeff Loomis was one of the opening performers. Sure he's wicked talented and can shred like nobody's business, but I was really bored during his set because instrumental music that's just shredding and solos does nothing for me. Would I say that Sonic Syndicate is "better" than Jeff Loomis? From a technical standpoint, definitely not, but I personally prefer SS to JL.

 

[monoxide_child]

In Monoxide's case, it's personal preference. Tolkien's style isn't overly accessible, which can definitely alienate readers. Eragon is more accessible, and many of its readers enjoy the story just fine regardless of the points i've made in the previous paragraph. It would probably make more sense to say "I enjoy Eragon more than I enjoy LOTR" or something to that effect than to say "Eragon is better than LOTR".

yes
exactly
Eragon is definately much more accessable than LOTR, in terms of writing style

but i also want to say that

first is not neccassarrilly the best

Tolkien's fans go on and on about how Tolkien spent his whole fucking life Creating the whole "middle-earth" universe
i, for one, personnally think that there's definately such a thing as putting too much effort into a creative work

imagine for a moment how much more accessible "the lord of the rings" would have been if the trilogy had been written in the 1st person from Frodo's POV

 

[monoxide_child]

I respect that. I personally think that Tolkien is a great writer, but while he essentially laid the blueprint for modern fantasy, there are many fantasy books I prefer to LOTR. I agree that just because you may have set the groundwork for a certain genre doesn't mean everyone "has to love it".

this^^^

also
when reading "fantasy"
i prefer Drizzt Do'Urden books because
as mentioned in another thread
Drizzt Do'Urden books always have a "good guy vs evil guy" type story-arc in them,
where it reminds me of "superhero" stories but in a "fantasy setting"

also my "problems" with Tolkien's writing Style are simmilar to the problems i have with the works of George RR Martin's fire and ice series and Steven Ericson's Malazan books

 

[orcslayr23]

imagine for a moment how much more accessible "the lord of the rings" would have been if the trilogy had been written in the 1st person from Frodo's POV

That would probably suck; you'd basically cut out half of what happens in Two Towers and Return of the King.

 

[monoxide_child]

That would probably suck; you'd basically cut out half of what happens in Two Towers and Return of the King.

yeah
you would be cutting a lot out
maybe even cutting out enough that the new smaller size makes it more accessible to those people that don't read it just because it's a really really long book trilogy

i think if it had been written in a first-person
it would have been more accessible to "random people of the street"

when Sean Astin got casted as Samwise Gamgee and was told the movie was based on a book, he had never even tried to read LOTR and didn't even realize that "the book" was actually a fucking trilogy

 

[Beastly_Brew]

While I understand where you're coming from, comparing Eragon to Lord of the Rings is a bit out there imo.

I feel like the unabridged Lord of the Rings, may just come across as difficult to read/comprehend for some people which leads to people just going with it being a classic as opposed to reading it. The Inheritance Series is well written, Paolini did a great job, I just don't think it's quite on the same level as LOTR.

 

[orcslayr23]

yeah
you would be cutting a lot out
maybe even cutting out enough that the new smaller size makes it more accessible to those people that don't read it just because it's a really really long book trilogy

i think if it had been written in a first-person
it would have been more accessible to "random people of the street"

when Sean Astin got casted as Samwise Gamgee and was told the movie was based on a book, he had never even tried to read LOTR and didn't even realize that "the book" was actually a fucking trilogy

That sounds like an awful idea. Plus LOTR has millions and millions of fans worldwide, so it doesn't really need to be made 'more accessible'. And it's only an average sized trilogy; i've read longer. The first 3 Eragon books are probably longer than LOTR, so that argument (especially coming from you) doesn't really make sense.

 

[monoxide_child]

That sounds like an awful idea. Plus LOTR has millions and millions of fans worldwide, so it doesn't really need to be made 'more accessible'. And it's only an average sized trilogy; i've read longer. The first 3 Eragon books are probably longer than LOTR, so that argument (especially coming from you) doesn't really make sense.

yeah
Eragon series is more individual words
but my theory still stands

for a great many Americans first-person is a hell of a lot more accessible than 3rd person

also
when you look at sales figures for each individual month of the year, you'll notice that most copies of LOTR are purchased between Holloween and Christmas, Tolkien's distinctive writing style is (for many poeple) instantly annoying from the first page, and i'm willing to say that the number of people that actually read the trilogy is actually a hell of a lot smaller than the number of copies being sold, there's a whole hell of a lot of people who recieve LOTR as a fucking Christmas present and then never actually read past the first page

 

[monoxide_child]

While I understand where you're coming from, comparing Eragon to Lord of the Rings is a bit out there imo.

I feel like the unabridged Lord of the Rings, may just come across as difficult to read/comprehend for some people which leads to people just going with it being a classic as opposed to reading it. The Inheritance Series is well written, Paolini did a great job, I just don't think it's quite on the same level as LOTR.

i wasn't trying to say they were "equal" or even "comparable"

i was actually saying Eragon was flat-out better

 

[orcslayr23]

When you look at sales figures for each individual month of the year, you'll notice that most copies of LOTR are purchased between Holloween and Christmas, Tolkien's distinctive writing style is (for many poeple) instantly annoying from the first page, and i'm willing to say that the number of people that actually read the trilogy is actually a hell of a lot smaller than the number of copies being sold, there's a whole hell of a lot of people who recieve LOTR as a fucking Christmas present and then never actually read past the first page

Speaking of sales figures, I can't imagine Tolkien Enterprises would want to modify LOTR in any way considering it is the second best-selling book of all time (150 million copies sold, second only to "A Tale of Two Cities"). I imagine if LOTR was everything you said it was (and that half the sold copies have never been read because people give up after reading the first page) it would've been forgotten 10 years or so after it was published.

 

[matt schrauben]

I hate reading

 

[monoxide_child]

Speaking of sales figures, I can't imagine Tolkien Enterprises would want to modify LOTR in any way considering it is the second best-selling book of all time (150 million copies sold, second only to "A Tale of Two Cities"). I imagine if LOTR was everything you said it was (and that half the sold copies have never been read because people give up after reading the first page) it would've been forgotten 10 years or so after it was published.

a lot of people are just reading it because everyone is already refering to it as awesome

LOTR is one of the greatest examples of groupthink ever

everyone's become to chickenshit to say it's crap because everyone else has already said that it's awesome

 

[orcslayr23]

LOTR is one of the greatest examples of groupthink ever

everyone's become to chickenshit to say it's crap because everyone else has already said that it's awesome

Stop. Just stop. You aren't going to win. You COULD do what i've done and accepted that everyone has different opinions and tastes, but now you're just embarassing yourself by saying essentially EVERYONE but YOU is stupid because they enjoy LOTR and you don't. Believe it or not, people who don't share your opinion are not 'wrong'.

a lot of people are just reading it because everyone is already refering to it as awesome

It's called word of mouth. If you enjoy something, you are generally going to want to tell people you know about it.

I should've checked out of this conversation a long time ago but i'm kind of curious as to what "argument" you're going to use next. I'm putting my $5 on "Tolkien was a poopyhead."

 

[monoxide_child]

Stop. Just stop. You aren't going to win. You COULD do what i've done and accepted that everyone has different opinions and tastes, but now you're just embarassing yourself by saying essentially EVERYONE but YOU is stupid because they enjoy LOTR and you don't. Believe it or not, people who don't share your opinion are not 'wrong'.

EVERYONE HAS DIFFERING OPINIONS
you can't just bash me because you love something that i found flaws with

It's called word of mouth. If you enjoy something, you are generally going to want to tell people you know about it.

i agree with this
word of mouth spreads the news of the existence of something
but you can't say something is awesome just because someone else said it first

I should've checked out of this conversation a long time ago but i'm kind of curious as to what "argument" you're going to use next. I'm putting my $5 on "Tolkien was a poopyhead."

If you go back and re-read all the posts i made, i never actually said anything negative about the plot's conflict resolution (which i really do have a problem with) or the characterazations/character development,

my main bitch was just this

with most authors, you could take a random page full of text from a random book and another random page of text from a different, randomly chosen book by the same author, and the text from the 2 pages is instantly recognizable as being from the same author

Tolkien is no exception

and his writing STYLE is as annoying as fucking hell

the movies were awesome, faithfully adapted, but just Tolkien's writing Style was annoying