Agreed, also we should admit that all fantasy is cringe as fuck. I'm reading Salammbo right now. Anyone who wants this kind of story could find it there, better written, bloodier, and based in reality.
LOTR is the only required reading from the genre. If GRRM ever finishes ASOIAF then perhaps that too but only the show is really in the cultural zeitgeist.
It ruined the genre by being too good. But the Fantasy that preceded it, such as the Conan stories, Lord Dunsany, weird tales by Ambrose Bierce, etc. are excellent, and in some cases I would argue are just as good as if not better than LOTR.
I could never get through any fantasy other than maybe a couple of Conan stories (Howard's other stuff being slightly better).
Genre fiction in general is just very fucking stale and monotonous to read, this book in particular being arduous and far too "dry" to get through. It feels like eating unseasoned and boiled chicken; sure it's chicken, but it's bland as all hell and near inedible. Reading the actual medieval stories are much more interesting than reading its emulation, that being this book.
I read a long time ago that someone described Lord of the Rings as basically the right wing version of Harry Potter, and that couldn't be more accurate. Everything, down to the characters, and plot, and the setting, are endlessly obsessed about, just like Hogwarts and those characters that walk through those halls. It's almost like a personality to them, and who obviously both fandoms have a Peter Pan Syndrome, and who can't seem to move on to better things. I just want to scream at those retarded fans: >Your story isn't fucking interesting. Your characters are NOT characters, they are one-dimensional cardboard cut outs, their motivations are one note and your characterization is beyond laughable. Your characters have no interesting aspects other than "he is good, he is evil, that's it and nothing changes". Your setting is utterly fucking boring and better stories have done it in the past, through mythology or stand alone novels. How the absolute fuck is this a classic? It doesn't even stand close to the actual classics that we have cherished for centuries? And why the fuck are you assholes saying that this shit is equal to, or even BETTER, than said cherished classics? Are you mentally 14 years old?
Pop culture and cinema are an absolute fucking plague on the arts, and I wish more anons on LULZ would talk about its detrimental effects. It really did a ton of damage, and nobody even seems to notice it, other than a small percentage (all of them being on here and small unknown forums).
Sure. It has first mover advantage. It's still better than most fantasy though, even with its flaws. I can't think of many books I would say we're better in the genre. Maybe Shadow of the Torturer (tough comparison), and I would but the later ASOIAF books ahead, although GOT starts very slow. I would put R. Scott Bakker ahead, but he's the apex of the genre. I can't think of much else.
If you add sci-fi, there is more though: Dune, Hyperion, not to mention more literary sci-fi/fantasy like Brave New World or Borges, but those don't seem like genre fiction to me.
>Why does LULZ hate fantasy so much?
It's well worth reading if it's all you've got on a desert island, or maybe if you're a teenager who isn't ready for anything much deeper. Otherwise you're throwing your finite reading time in the toilet.
I'm on the fence. The hobbit was a nice tale and lotr is entertaining. But lotr feels like a waste of time. It's a myth without any connection to reality. Is it really just "time sink literature" ?
Both the Hobbit and Lord of the Rings are really good adventure stories, stone classics; if you are looking for something like that, especially for kids/YA, there isn't much competition imo. LotR also has some philosophical/theological/linguistic ideas which give it some "depth" beyond the narrative, and that's true but these aren't "philosophical novels" by any stretch. If you are looking for non-braindead entertainment they are both cozy, and there aren't 60 sequels so there's a hard limit to how much time you can sink into them. But if you are looking for something else, you have to look elsewhere.
No.
I was a quarter of the way through Two Towers when I started finding actually great authors. Never touched it again.
There's no reason to read Tolkien after Bakker. Bakker is the new golden standard of fantasy.
It was the first of its kind but the genre has surpassed it.
Fantasy is shit precisely because it can't get out of LOTR's shadow.
>e90.jpg
It's time to admit that the jannies have completely given up on this trash board.
Agreed, also we should admit that all fantasy is cringe as fuck. I'm reading Salammbo right now. Anyone who wants this kind of story could find it there, better written, bloodier, and based in reality.
I read about one hundred pages of Fellowship before I gave up. The amount of ancillary nonsense was too much.
It's great fantasy book, but the genre itself is eternally relegated to middle brow.
Filtered.
>soulless angloid crap
Average is generous
I still haven't read any fantasy better than LOTR. And majority of fantasy books are derivative of lotr.
LOTR is the only required reading from the genre. If GRRM ever finishes ASOIAF then perhaps that too but only the show is really in the cultural zeitgeist.
It ruined the genre by being too good. But the Fantasy that preceded it, such as the Conan stories, Lord Dunsany, weird tales by Ambrose Bierce, etc. are excellent, and in some cases I would argue are just as good as if not better than LOTR.
Just like your mother when she had sex with me last night
There has never been a good work of literature created by an Englishman, so average is too generous
>Poo poo pee pee I can't read
t. OP
It's ok but more interesting for the world than for the actual storytelling. As a storyteller Tolkien peaked with Hobbit.
I could never get through any fantasy other than maybe a couple of Conan stories (Howard's other stuff being slightly better).
Genre fiction in general is just very fucking stale and monotonous to read, this book in particular being arduous and far too "dry" to get through. It feels like eating unseasoned and boiled chicken; sure it's chicken, but it's bland as all hell and near inedible. Reading the actual medieval stories are much more interesting than reading its emulation, that being this book.
I read a long time ago that someone described Lord of the Rings as basically the right wing version of Harry Potter, and that couldn't be more accurate. Everything, down to the characters, and plot, and the setting, are endlessly obsessed about, just like Hogwarts and those characters that walk through those halls. It's almost like a personality to them, and who obviously both fandoms have a Peter Pan Syndrome, and who can't seem to move on to better things. I just want to scream at those retarded fans:
>Your story isn't fucking interesting. Your characters are NOT characters, they are one-dimensional cardboard cut outs, their motivations are one note and your characterization is beyond laughable. Your characters have no interesting aspects other than "he is good, he is evil, that's it and nothing changes". Your setting is utterly fucking boring and better stories have done it in the past, through mythology or stand alone novels. How the absolute fuck is this a classic? It doesn't even stand close to the actual classics that we have cherished for centuries? And why the fuck are you assholes saying that this shit is equal to, or even BETTER, than said cherished classics? Are you mentally 14 years old?
Pop culture and cinema are an absolute fucking plague on the arts, and I wish more anons on LULZ would talk about its detrimental effects. It really did a ton of damage, and nobody even seems to notice it, other than a small percentage (all of them being on here and small unknown forums).
True. The Hobbit, however, is GOATed.
Sure. It has first mover advantage. It's still better than most fantasy though, even with its flaws. I can't think of many books I would say we're better in the genre. Maybe Shadow of the Torturer (tough comparison), and I would but the later ASOIAF books ahead, although GOT starts very slow. I would put R. Scott Bakker ahead, but he's the apex of the genre. I can't think of much else.
If you add sci-fi, there is more though: Dune, Hyperion, not to mention more literary sci-fi/fantasy like Brave New World or Borges, but those don't seem like genre fiction to me.
Why are you guys so weird
Why does LULZ hate fantasy so much?
Because landfill fantasy is so awful, even by the standards of by-the-numbers mass produced genre slop it is notably braindead. And that's most of it
>Why does LULZ hate fantasy so much?
It's well worth reading if it's all you've got on a desert island, or maybe if you're a teenager who isn't ready for anything much deeper. Otherwise you're throwing your finite reading time in the toilet.
I'm on the fence. The hobbit was a nice tale and lotr is entertaining. But lotr feels like a waste of time. It's a myth without any connection to reality. Is it really just "time sink literature" ?
Both the Hobbit and Lord of the Rings are really good adventure stories, stone classics; if you are looking for something like that, especially for kids/YA, there isn't much competition imo. LotR also has some philosophical/theological/linguistic ideas which give it some "depth" beyond the narrative, and that's true but these aren't "philosophical novels" by any stretch. If you are looking for non-braindead entertainment they are both cozy, and there aren't 60 sequels so there's a hard limit to how much time you can sink into them. But if you are looking for something else, you have to look elsewhere.