How come Sup Forums uses lotr for, political memes

How come Sup Forums uses lotr for, political memes.
and tumblr the opposite of Sup Forums uses harry potter. Does that explain why I fucking hate harry potter?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=PuHwwI0QOC4
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

Example of tumblr Harry Potter memes?

no example but every leftist uni student here in canada also typically goes to quidicks or however the fuck you spell it and goes to bubblebeer fests, and just shoehorn harry potter to everything

>Lotr PG-13
>Harry Potter PG
Liberals believe the world should be PG

LoTR is about a group of people who have to embark on a quest for the good of the world despite not having any special abilities (in fact, they are weaker than everything they face). The group makes strong alliances but ultimately accomplish the goal on their own.

Harry Potter is about a bunch of kids who are born with magic powers and overcome evil because they are special snowflakes.

You hate HP because it is liberal and like LoTR because it is based.

Harry Potter is for children and leftists have childish minds.

...

Wow. That's BETA AS FUCKKKK

Because LoTR is unretarded and not a story literally written for children.

A multi ethnic team of heroes set their differences and defeat a threat wanting to destroy them all. Then all come back to their homes.

Because Tumblr doesn't even know what "moloch" is.
That's how little they know about how horrific our world is right now.

This.
They wouldn't get the deeper messages.

the LotR posting was also conceived as satire of people on the left who see politics through the lens of young adult literature

-Ronald Weasley
Hey Harry! Wanna play with my wand?!
-Harry Pothead
Sure Ron!

*Slurp Slurp*

...

And elves and dwarves are awesome.

>and tumblr the opposite of Sup Forums uses harry potter

If you've been on the internet the past couple decades, you'd have noticed that Harry Potter fandom/fanfiction was major on LiveJournal, which went on (eventually) to Tumblr before blasting out on Facebook/Twitter/etc. It was mostly preteen/teen girls, who still can't think about anything but Harry Potter into their late 20s, early 30s. This is basically now the major internet political force for the left: people who read and wrote Harry/Snape/Ron threesomes.

WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU REEEEEEEEEEEEE

I am sorry I'm a fucking elven male!!

Exactly! NOW SHOW SOME RESPECT THIS BEAUTY, If you may have intercourse with her. Remember she needs to say yes to every thrust!

ASK if you may
sorry I fucked up my meme.

>Be Me at 18
>Have immigrant (white) Qt gf
>dyed red hair and pale skin.
>Names her Black dog Nigger because it's funny.
>Doesn't believe in the holocaust because "jewish gypsies tell lies."
>Get her to wear my replica SS cap and she giggles when she says Heil Hitler.
>Years later and my heart twinges with nostalgia watching Murdoch-Murdoch
>Replay some of the scenes of Murdoch-Chan giving a roman salute.

I miss her.

WHY WOULD YOU LET HER GO

It wasn't my choice.

WHY WOULD YOU FUCK IT UP THEN

*gulps* Yes Matriarch! I must atone for my sins.

*Then proceeds to die under 4 tons of beef curtains*

comma, usage

Stephan Fry ha really let himself go.

SERVES YOU RIGHT RACIST
Cut me a break it's 6 am here, and I have not gone to bed yet, also I am a bit tipsy

Both of them are poor literature, does't fucking matters wich one you pick, you'll keep being consumed by this sad and mediocre shit that most of people think that have any value.

LoTR poor literature
Proceed here and neck yourself please

LoTR is a masterpiece. GTFO!!!!!!!!!!!!

Because LOTR was intentionally a mythologisation of eruopean history up to the great war

lotr is bassed desu

LOTR is great literature though. To say otherwise is just ignorance on the subject of literature. Tolkien was a scholar and a masterful writer, while Rowling is just a liberal hack.

Arguments, please. And don't use that old "but Tolkin created a huge universe" shit. Art should not be judged by what you feel about it, but by what it is objectively. So, proceed with some solid literary theory at least.

do they even use it for politics

The deathly Hallows tattoo is a giveaway that a girl is an insane leftist

because 4chans memes are actually funny.

theirs consist of "DRUMP IS LITRULLY VOLDIMORT, WE ARE LARRY POTTERS!"

LOTR is literally a cautionary tale about the heebs. Stfu, kike.

not the time boy
going to bed in 5

I did use a lotr reference once, so guilty as charged

Because Harry Potter is for fags

Tolkien didn't know nothing about literary aesthetics. Was a huge Intellectual, but that doesn't make you a good writer. Pick some of the great, for example: James Joyce, Flaubert, Shakespeare. They are miles away from Tolkien.
Rowling can really make Tolkien looks like a genius, but he's not.

Doesn't make him****
Fuck

youtube.com/watch?v=PuHwwI0QOC4

...

You actually just answered my question perfectly.
This just embodies what I have been thinking.
It's so simple but yet so complicated, That FAG scream, just says everything.
I am being serious

I've got a solid literary theory.

You're gay.

Yeah, anything written here will pale in comparison to the countless works by literary scholars about Tolkien.

And before you ask for them, use google you fucking huehuehue monkey.

Great shit, user. You should really consider any list you find on the internet.
Yeah I suck big juicy balls

one of my favorite South Park truth nuggets, even tho they're LARPing as hobbits, at least they can still dismiss the Harry Potter kids

...

Harry Potter is a real Mary Sue-fest, much like the new Star Wars with Rey. It's attractive to people who wish they were Mary Sues. In other words, want the ability to be all-powerful and talented with the least amount of effort. You're just born special. You'll find the same general pattern in most mainstream shows and children's movies. There's also more of a nostalgic factor with Harry Potter, because it was always a go-to movie for schools, say band trips, substitute teachers, etc. and it's easier for kids to relate to, because the characters are kids and go to school. More people saw it an age of easy influence, and more recently too.

Lord of the Rings is a story of little ordinary people saving the world in the most dire of times, armed primarily with courage and hope, who band together with their peers in struggle to drive back an insurmountable evil. It's more attractive to people who want to fight for something, people who like heroes with bottomless willpower. There is some relative plot armor, but it's less obvious, and manages to border on believable enough. I'd say it's more of an average man's/woman's movie, aimed at people older than 18 (excluding The Hobbit). The PG-13 rating meant you didn't get to watch it between your indoctrination sessions as a kid at public school, and so it made less penetration into the average person's thought process/memory.

You really consider you're self an intelectual for reading Tolkien? You may think Cornwell is a great writer as well. Read Aristotle's Poetics, you should at least try to understand literature, and should try this at first.
Not just literature btw, but you sound a bit pretentious, so educate you're self before, you fat ignorant.

It's not quite memetics; it's just that they often make parallels with teenage fiction books when talking about politics - not just Harry Potter. They often use that one book with the 13 districts and whatnot, too. I don't care enough to remember the name

>the huehue cannot into literature.
Well colour me fucking shocked

Harry Potter is a whiny pussy ass faggot who never does anything and only wins because he has magic Mary Sue powers.

In the HP books having any form of determination, cunning, or will makes you automatically evil.

On the other hand Harry Potter is automatically good because "his mommy loves him"

You can tell a woman wrote it.

>PG-13 rating meant you didn't get to watch it
In Bulgaria, while it didn't really do well in cinemas, everyone knows about LotR - at least some parts of it. Everybody has been pirating the fuck out of movies for god knows how long - and this hasn't stopped at all today.

>Does that explain why I fucking hate harry potter?
No. That is the case because you have any shred of taste.

LOTR was written by a talented war veteran and portrays some of Tolkiens experiences/traumas in artistic fashion, Harry Potter was written by a female liberal who never struggled for anything in her life.

>despite not having any special abilities
>wizard
>master bowman
OK then
Also they went born with magic they had to learn it at hogworts

Point me some aussie writters then, user. Rhonda Byrne? Great one

They were born with magic you daft cunt, have you actually read HP? They're separated by muggles and magical folk, as in, some are born able to do magic and some aren't.

>heebs
Like I said, unretarded.

lotr is awesome, hp is for cucks

if you unironically prefer hp you are not white and should kys for being a beta

OK but they still have to learn to use it there not automatically good

Well... That's a bummer. But it not being your choice to end it is better than blowing it, kid.

>Redditors make"orcs are nigs" memes and post all over LOTR subreddits
>"hey guise so 4chin uses lotr memes right haha"

...

We would use the far more esoteric and patrician WH40K cannon desu. That's what happened in the meme war.

>Sup Forums loves Spongebob
>Facebook loves Spongebob
>Tumblr loves Spongebob
>Reddit loves Spongebob
>Twitter loves Spongebob

Can Spongebob be the force that unites all the communities on the internet in peace?

>James Joyce
>I was a Flower of the mountain yes when I put the rose in my hair like the Andalusian girls used or shall I wear a red yes and how he kissed me under the Moorish wall and I thought well as well him as another and then I asked him with my eyes to ask again yes and then he asked me would I yes to say yes my mountain flower and first I put my arms around him yes and drew him down to me so he could feel my breasts all perfume yes and his heart was going like mad and yes I said yes I will Yes.
James Joyce was a hack.

LOTR is a traditionalist masterpiece where kings and environment triumph over modern industry and greedy merchants/empire.

Harry Potter is trash tier progressive crap.

It makes sense.

I've never watched Spongebob, just the YTPs of it.

I applaud your timely efforts to accuse Rowling of lazily using offensive stereotypes, but can even that irony prevent it from being one the dullest franchises in the history of movie franchises? Seriously each episode following the boy wizard and his pals from Hogwarts Academy as they fight assorted villains has been indistinguishable from the others. Aside from the gloomy imagery, the series’ only consistency has been its lack of excitement and ineffective use of special effects, all to make magic unmagical, to make action seem inert.

Perhaps the die was cast when Rowling vetoed the idea of Spielberg directing the series; she made sure the series would never be mistaken for a work of art that meant anything to anybody?just ridiculously profitable cross-promotion for her books. The Harry Potter series might be anti-Christian (or not), but it’s certainly the anti-James Bond series in its refusal of wonder, beauty and excitement. No one wants to face that fact. Now, thankfully, they no longer have to.

>a-at least the books were good though
"No!"
The writing is dreadful; the book was terrible. As I read, I noticed that every time a character went for a walk, the author wrote instead that the character "stretched his legs."

I began marking on the back of an envelope every time that phrase was repeated. I stopped only after I had marked the envelope several dozen times. I was incredulous. Rowling's mind is so governed by cliches and dead metaphors that she has no other style of writing. Later I read a lavish, loving review of Harry Potter by the same Stephen King. He wrote something to the effect of, "If these kids are reading Harry Potter at 11 or 12, then when they get older they will go on to read Stephen King." And he was quite right. He was not being ironic. When you read "Harry Potter" you are, in fact, trained to read Stephen King.

Yes, Tolkien is obviously nowhere near writers like James Joyce. But to outright call Tolkien a bad writer is just ridiculous. He is just about the only fantasy writer that can be said to be literary and not just genre garbage. He knew about aesthetics, but that was not really what he strove for. And I can agree that his prose, especially in the later novels that Christopher edited, can be a bit tiring.

James Joyce is also my favorite writer, and Portrait of the artist my favorite book, so it's not like I don't understand where you're coming from.

Flow of thought, I do not know exactly how this term is translated, but it's a literary technique. Are you even trying?

>James Joyce

Pretentious bullshit. No one actually like his writing, they just pretend to.

Anyhow, not fair to compare Tolkien to Shakespeare.

Tolkien writes stories and makes up universe, he gives no shit about "literary" crap.

That shit is for leftist.

Ask fucking homer or the greeks if they care about proses, no, they want to tell fuck awesome stories.

He's talking about the Hobbits obviously. You know, the main protagonists.

Harry Potter is one of the dullest franchises in the history of movie franchises. Seriously each episode following the boy wizard and his pals from Hogwarts Academy as they fight assorted villains has been indistinguishable from the others. Aside from the gloomy imagery, the series’ only consistency has been its lack of excitement and ineffective use of special effects, all to make magic unmagical, to make action seem inert.

Perhaps the die was cast when Rowling vetoed the idea of Spielberg directing the series; she made sure the series would never be mistaken for a work of art that meant anything to anybody?just ridiculously profitable cross-promotion for her books. The Harry Potter series might be anti-Christian (or not), but it’s certainly the anti-James Bond series in its refusal of wonder, beauty and excitement. No one wants to face that fact. Now, thankfully, they no longer have to.

>a-at least the books were good though
"No!"
The writing is dreadful; the book was terrible. As I read, I noticed that every time a character went for a walk, the author wrote instead that the character "stretched his legs."

I began marking on the back of an envelope every time that phrase was repeated. I stopped only after I had marked the envelope several dozen times. I was incredulous. Rowling's mind is so governed by cliches and dead metaphors that she has no other style of writing. Later I read a lavish, loving review of Harry Potter by the same Stephen King. He wrote something to the effect of, "If these kids are reading Harry Potter at 11 or 12, then when they get older they will go on to read Stephen King." And he was quite right. He was not being ironic. When you read "Harry Potter" you are, in fact, trained to read Stephen King.

It's stream of consciousness.


I genuinely love everything he wrote and worship the man. It's time to accept that you're just a pseud who knows nothing about literature, user.
That passage is a masterpiece and absolutely sublime, though. And it's quite famous for being so. If you can't understand why that passage is good, you really should not be talking about literature at all.

Agreed, user. Completely.

youtube.com/watch?v=PuHwwI0QOC4

Lotr is and Harry Potter are both bottom of the barrel fantasy ficion tho

Homer, and most of the Greeks, wrote in lyrical meter and not prose, though, so that's not a very fair assessment. Plato was also a great prose stylist.

LOTR is the modern day Beowulf, that is not bottom of barrel fiction, and I will slap anyone who says that.

This is why Joyce is garbage, because the level of shilling and apologia from his fanboys is absurd. Worse than fucking CTR's Hillary campaign.

"Literarycrap". Sad litlle user. Also, leftists are destroying literature

Homer and Tolkien have a lot more similarity than fucking Shakespeare.

Homer, Tolkien tell/write fucking mythological epics, Shakespeare writes DRAMAS with some epics (the English kings series).

LotR is sophisticated and redpilled compared
to HP.

I wonder if Tolkien would shitpost so fucking hard on twitter the way Rowling does. probably not. he'd just smoke his pipe and read and prepare to write another decent book.

Literary crap is about leftists who mesmerizing themselves over stupid ass proses and rthyms i.e. fucking /lit/.

While we ring wingers talk about the rage of Achilles and the labours of Hercules.

Beowulf is a solid narrow story. Lotr and Potter are universes that are poorly constructed. GoT has the right essence, even tho the series is turning shit

>both are british writers

>bottom of the barrel fantasy ficion
>LotR

I'm not a big LotR but LotR is literally the definite hallmark for fantasy literature history.

So an author having followers that are genuinely passionate about their writing makes them garbage? I don't really understand the point that you're trying to make. Perhaps you should just come to terms with the fact that if people are so passionate about him, there's probably a good reason why. Comparing an academically and critically acclaimed author to politics is also a rather retarded analogy.

How the fuck is LOTR universe "poorly constructed"?
>GoT has the right essence, even tho the series is turning shit
GoT is shit and has always been shit.

>I genuinely love everything he wrote and worship the man.

This is how I know you're lying. You see, there's never a casual fan of Joyce. People either claim to never had read him (usually saying he's on their list and it's something they have to do), or they claim he's God on Earth and needs to be worshiped. This leads me to believe that no one actually likes his writing or that they get any kind of enjoyment out of it, just that it's something they read, and thus having read it, his intellect.

Call me a pseudo. But Joyce himself thought you guys were dumb, which is why he intentionally made Ulysses long and complex just to cause literary scholars to analyze his work. That isn't art.