Prove it to me...casting call to all LotR lovers
- Thread starter Zero
- Start date
Well i dont have any resons other than it has a good story and is fun to read, and that sood enough for me. Aparently thats not enough for you. But on thursday im planning on listening to a professor give a talk on why LOTR is the most popular book of the 20th century. I imagine he'll have a few good points but im sure you wont be convinced.
Victory?
Zero, you have an opinion. This negative opinion does not make this statement fact. I cannot shake an opinion by merely using letters and numbers, and I doubt that because of your baseless stubborness that anyone could convince you that The Lord of the Rings is a masterpiece of literature. In any case, I have no doubt that among readers of the book, the majority enjoyed doing so, it does happen to hold the title of Most Read Book of the 20th century, second to the Bible. Although you may have an unwavering opinion, it is one of the minority, and therefore defunct.
Zero, by stating that a "victory" over me was "too easy" you have thus concluded to me that you have nonexistent debating skills for this subject in particular.
Zero, you have an opinion. This negative opinion does not make this statement fact. I cannot shake an opinion by merely using letters and numbers, and I doubt that because of your baseless stubborness that anyone could convince you that The Lord of the Rings is a masterpiece of literature. In any case, I have no doubt that among readers of the book, the majority enjoyed doing so, it does happen to hold the title of Most Read Book of the 20th century, second to the Bible. Although you may have an unwavering opinion, it is one of the minority, and therefore defunct.
Zero, by stating that a "victory" over me was "too easy" you have thus concluded to me that you have nonexistent debating skills for this subject in particular.
Zero,
Well my history lecture ran long so ended up not able to go, but i do have a few points of my own.
Your constant calling LoTR "cliche" is wrong. It may look cliche now but only because it has been copied so many times. When it came out back in the 50s the fantasy genre didnt really exist. LotR was the casue of modern fantasy.
Well my history lecture ran long so ended up not able to go, but i do have a few points of my own.
Your constant calling LoTR "cliche" is wrong. It may look cliche now but only because it has been copied so many times. When it came out back in the 50s the fantasy genre didnt really exist. LotR was the casue of modern fantasy.
The "masses" always have been and always will be the best and only judge of literature or any other art form. Art as a whole is a field with no absolutes at all, so the only way to tell the "good" from the "bad" is by people's opinions of it.
Fantasy genre?? There IS no separate "Genre". Calling fantasy a "genre" is glorification of something that blandly copies the good versus evil format. It's mythology. Mythology made up or compiled by people like Tolkein.
LotR was NOT a new piece of lit. It copied the good versus evil format that came from virtually any source you can think of. The bible, Zoroaster, myths, etc you name it. I call it cliched because it deserves that description. As for the idiots who imitated Tolkein, well, there is no term scornful enough to apply to them. Since when did LotR contain anything meaningful? It doesn't have anything meaningful, profound, or realistic. It's nothing. It's a synthetic product by stuffing Norse mythology with other myths from various places into a blender and cranking it out into three books. It contains NOTHING new. Try to prove that otherwise.
The masses are not judges of literature. The judges of literature are professional writers, professional critics, professors of English, etc. The public, on average, (especially in a country like the US where the illiteracy rate is very humbling) is not well read, nor does it have the knowledge/experience to even begin judging literature. The masses, judges of literature? It's a joke.
LotR was NOT a new piece of lit. It copied the good versus evil format that came from virtually any source you can think of. The bible, Zoroaster, myths, etc you name it. I call it cliched because it deserves that description. As for the idiots who imitated Tolkein, well, there is no term scornful enough to apply to them. Since when did LotR contain anything meaningful? It doesn't have anything meaningful, profound, or realistic. It's nothing. It's a synthetic product by stuffing Norse mythology with other myths from various places into a blender and cranking it out into three books. It contains NOTHING new. Try to prove that otherwise.
The masses are not judges of literature. The judges of literature are professional writers, professional critics, professors of English, etc. The public, on average, (especially in a country like the US where the illiteracy rate is very humbling) is not well read, nor does it have the knowledge/experience to even begin judging literature. The masses, judges of literature? It's a joke.
Zero,
Your own arrogance and total contempt for everybody who disagrees with you does not help prove your arguement.
This is beautiful, i mean really it is. Are you a professional writer, professional critic, or english professor? If the answer is no, by your own logic you are not entitled to even have an opinion on LotR. You're just part of the "masses" you have so much contempt for. And guess what, the majority of professional writers, professional critics, and english professors actually like LotR. Even though i completely disagree with you about who is allowed to judge literature, the "qualified" judges prove your own point wrong.
Have you read any fantasy books? That statement makes me think you have absolutly no clue what you're even talking about.
It has a good plot in a very well designed universe with interesting (if somewhat shallow) charaters, and is fun to read. To me thats enough. I guess you need something more, but thats just your opinion (but are you even qualified to have one?).
Everyone who reads and is capable of forming an opinion is by definition a judge of literature. It takes no special knowledge to decide whether or not you like a book and why. LotR is the most popular book of the 20th century (even in the minds of critics), there must be something good about it.
Your own arrogance and total contempt for everybody who disagrees with you does not help prove your arguement.
This is beautiful, i mean really it is. Are you a professional writer, professional critic, or english professor? If the answer is no, by your own logic you are not entitled to even have an opinion on LotR. You're just part of the "masses" you have so much contempt for. And guess what, the majority of professional writers, professional critics, and english professors actually like LotR. Even though i completely disagree with you about who is allowed to judge literature, the "qualified" judges prove your own point wrong.
Neither are any of you, so we're talking here as layman to layman. Since when did the masses, with an illiteracy rate as high as it is in the US, possess any knowledge to even begin contemplating a judgement of literature?
If the masses like something, it is NOT literature. It just sells well.
Just because they LIKE something does not mean they think it's brilliant. Is it so hard to see that difference? You can LIKE sex but you might not find any profound philosophy in it. My dad LIKES science fiction novels but he doesn't consider them good literature. He just reads them because he likes them. I LIKE Lord of the Rings, but I don't consider it literature.
Have you read any fantasy books? That statement makes me think you have absolutly no clue what you're even talking about.
For one thing, I dig LotR for the same reason I dig comic books. I know it's not good lit, but it is entertaining. I also dig the Bazil Broketail series. Also the Sword of Shannara series. Loved those. Among zillions of other internet-based series fantasy.
It has a good plot in a very well designed universe with interesting (if somewhat shallow) charaters, and is fun to read. To me thats enough. I guess you need something more, but thats just your opinion (but are you even qualified to have one?).
The plot is decent enough to entertain. And he's done a good job of creating a universe. It is fun to read. But it will never be literature.
Check the character descriptions in LotR and things like Ivanhoe. Compare.
Everyone who reads and is capable of forming an opinion is by definition a judge of literature. It takes no special knowledge to decide whether or not you like a book and why. LotR is the most popular book of the 20th century (even in the minds of critics), there must be something good about it.
Then who distinguishes works like Les Miserables from LotR? Which would you consider to be true, authentic, profound literature? Would you place the two on the same level?
Your own arrogance and total contempt for everybody who disagrees with you does not help prove your argument.
I was feeling a tad snappish after a session of duking it out with Green_World. He’s a Muslim fanatic sciforums invader. Him after whatsupyall. Apologies if I sounded harsh. Not "everyone". Everyone who claims LotR is fine literature.
No worries. I have read most of the green_world threads (i read alot more than i post) I imagine actualy trying to argue with him would make anybody irritable.
First of all illiteracy rates in the US are irrelevent. The book is popular internationaly. Hell, Tolkien was British. And obviously I dont mean that illiterate people are qualified judges of lit. IMO anybody capable of reading, understanding, and being able to form an opinion of a book is a qualified judge of that book.
Then why say that its worthless? Isnt the enjoyment you get from it wort something?
Anyone who's read both books.
Well Les Miserables has much more social comentary in it, but in this case i think its mostly interesting from a historical standpoint. I agree that LotR dosent have any great philisophical insights, but i did enjoy reading it more. I really like both books i dont think id really say one is better than the other they're just very different.
Is LotR literature? Who knows? You say it isnt, I say it is. Art can only be judged by peoples opinion of it. There is no real answer.
Not sure of your point here. The illiteracy rate in the US is only 3%. Certainly that's not a figure to be proud of, it should be nil, but with a world % of about 17 to compare with, it isn't abnormally high.
I do agree with you, however. I don't think Tolkien was attempting to make a point or to impart any sort of wisdom, nor do I think he was attempting to create any sort of parallel or any other "good vs evil" struggle in history. From statements he made before his death, I'm not even sure Tolkien expected anyone to take his work that seriously. I think he would find it humorous that this debate would even be going on today. And I don't think it matters. While the Hobbit was written specifically for kids (his grandchildren, if I remember right), I think he wrote LoTR and the Silmarillion for his own entertainment more than for anyone else. I doubt he was even much concerned about making money.
So LotR is enjoyable. The satisfaction is worthwhile. But it's not literature. I might want to clarify the post there. LotR is worthless as literature, not plain worthless.
We can get satisfaction from comic books, a cup of coffee (if you like coffee that is), an orgasm, or a kiss. Or a bunch of flowers on V's Day.
The satisfaction gained from LotR can be found anywhere. LM, however, has unique historical perspectives, and it also happens to have a plot a heck of lot more complex than the rigid-straight "evil marches, good rises to meet it, a spectacular fight ensues, good prevails unless author plans to make sequel" story plot. The characters are described much more skillfully, and are much more deep and realistic.
Would you consider LotR to be literature along the same level as LM?? I do not think so.
We can get satisfaction from comic books, a cup of coffee (if you like coffee that is), an orgasm, or a kiss. Or a bunch of flowers on V's Day.
The satisfaction gained from LotR can be found anywhere. LM, however, has unique historical perspectives, and it also happens to have a plot a heck of lot more complex than the rigid-straight "evil marches, good rises to meet it, a spectacular fight ensues, good prevails unless author plans to make sequel" story plot. The characters are described much more skillfully, and are much more deep and realistic.
Would you consider LotR to be literature along the same level as LM?? I do not think so.
After reading this entire thread is has come clear to me Zero, that you are an arrogant, condesending, egotistical person. I mean, christ, people read the literature to pull away enjoyment. It is your opinion alone that stands that all literature should have an overall powerful, original, lasting feeling. And as said previously, most modern day professors believe this to be an exemplary piece of writing, whether you think it is or not carries very little weight in the scheme of things.
The thing that really upsets me is your attitude that since you can not be swayed in opinion, your OPINION is clearly the correct one. Oh, i'm sorry, it isn't! An opinion isn't fact! It is an idea or prefrence. Fine, only read writing that you feel is to your taste and let us alone with ours. Good versus evil is the obvious theme in it but that does not mean it is wrong. Good verus evil is a concept that has been debated since Homer and Soppocles. I'm no scholar or writer, merely a 14 year old trying to prove a point. But your own opinion is no more important then any of ours, and your constant bombardment of your own egotistical, unthoughtful views does not help prove your point to us, only to yourself and your own shallow mind.
So fine, have fun with your Les Miserables. I'll keep JRR Tolkien.
The thing that really upsets me is your attitude that since you can not be swayed in opinion, your OPINION is clearly the correct one. Oh, i'm sorry, it isn't! An opinion isn't fact! It is an idea or prefrence. Fine, only read writing that you feel is to your taste and let us alone with ours. Good versus evil is the obvious theme in it but that does not mean it is wrong. Good verus evil is a concept that has been debated since Homer and Soppocles. I'm no scholar or writer, merely a 14 year old trying to prove a point. But your own opinion is no more important then any of ours, and your constant bombardment of your own egotistical, unthoughtful views does not help prove your point to us, only to yourself and your own shallow mind.
So fine, have fun with your Les Miserables. I'll keep JRR Tolkien.
Welcome to SciFourms Vertigoll. Too bad your post wont accomplish anything.
Ill just say dont let Zero turn you off Les Mis. It is an excelent book, just not in the same way as LotR.
Thanks Neutrino. I wasn't trying to undermine Les Miserables, I was merely trying to point out that if Zero does not wish to even consider any of the ideas that were given, and given very well by individuals like Pollux, then don't even try to "debate" it. We have no reason to battle one who will not even give into consideration. Some of Zero's points are fine indeed, but that does not mean he is the "winner". It's not so much as a game as Zero believes it to be. A serious debate wouldn't make one a sore-winner and others sore-losers, because of the losing party was to give in, they would see what the "winner" was trying to say and understand that. But look what we have here, no one has given in. People have just grown tired of Zero and his constant babbling about his opinions.
Or at least, I think they have. And, after reading through 5 pages of thread, I certainly have.
Or at least, I think they have. And, after reading through 5 pages of thread, I certainly have.
No matter what you say, Zero shall not be convinced. He sticks to opinions, not facts.
Originally posted by Pollux V
"You present your arguments as fact, when they are instead merely opinions. That is the flaw behind this entire thread"
I agree with that entirely.
Originally posted by Pollux V
"You present your arguments as fact, when they are instead merely opinions. That is the flaw behind this entire thread"
I agree with that entirely.