JRR.Tolkiens VS GRR. Martin

JRR.Tolkiens VS GRR. Martin

Who is your favourite?

youtube.com/watch?v=XAAp_luluo0
youtube.com/watch?v=XAAp_luluo0

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=QmKhGqWcJGY
rollingstone.com/tv/news/george-r-r-martin-the-rolling-stone-interview-20140423?page=4
dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3110466/Game-Thrones-creator-defends-rape-scenes-Author-says-dishonest-boring-leave-sexual-violence.html
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

Red dragon in the picture
>triggered

youtube.com/watch?v=QmKhGqWcJGY

They're almost nothing like each other aside from Martin using tropes that Tolkien created. Middle Earth is an exercise in mythology and language for the Tolkiens, Westeros is a soap-opera style drama with edge and grimdarkness cranked up to 'high' because Martin is American.

EAGLES
A
G
L
E
S

Lemoncakes and brown water

Tolkein was an educated gentleman, and fought in one of the bloodiest battles in history.
GURM is a lazy fat hippie who got bullied and cucked repeatedly, and writes about underage interracial rape.

BRAVO.

Tolkien of course, GRR is a hack with no real storytelling capabilities aside of shock value and muh political sexual happenings

Tolkien made a fucking histoy book for his universe and elaborated on things like gods, the old days, races and real motives for his characters, also while his characters might seem one dimensional to the casual reader at first you can find that each one has struggles of their own, for example Feanor to the casuals might seem like a vengeful fuck because of muh gems, but when you see that his oath doomed his entire bloodline it adds complexity

also Tolkien knew how to make a children's book (the hobbit) evolve into a mature minded series while Martin just thrives on controversy and sex because he is a hack

Lets be honest here Tolkien is just a glorified children's book writee

I remember years back when I watched Game of Thrones on an actual telly-nelly they did a kind of extra show after; they were comparing the two then the show host pressed this woman for a hard answer as to who was the best and she said George R.R. Martin.

Martin's less edgy Dunk & Egg stories are better than Song of Ice and Fire and could easily be changed to have no edge while still retaining the heart of the stories. There's a decent storyteller in him, but aSoIaF sells on sex and violence and the execution ranges from decent drama to Mexican soap opera-tier.

Tolkien's the real deal though. His Middle-Earth writings are Gilgamesh-tier.

this

exactly, Tolkien managed to create not only a literary masterpiece, but also a modern age mithology to back up his works, most people do not dwell into the mithology of middle earth but when they do most become baffled by how one man could create such an organic world

rollingstone.com/tv/news/george-r-r-martin-the-rolling-stone-interview-20140423?page=4

>Ruling is hard. This was maybe my answer to Tolkien, whom, as much as I admire him, I do quibble with. Lord of the Rings had a very medieval philosophy: that if the king was a good man, the land would prosper. We look at real history and it’s not that simple. Tolkien can say that Aragorn became king and reigned for a hundred years, and he was wise and good. But Tolkien doesn’t ask the question: What was Aragorn’s tax policy? Did he maintain a standing army? What did he do in times of flood and famine? And what about all these orcs? By the end of the war, Sauron is gone but all of the orcs aren’t gone – they’re in the mountains. Did Aragorn pursue a policy of systematic genocide and kill them? Even the little baby orcs, in their little orc cradles?

>The war that Tolkien wrote about was a war for the fate of civilization and the future of humanity, and that’s become the template. I’m not sure that it’s a good template, though. The Tolkien model led generations of fantasy writers to produce these endless series of dark lords and their evil minions who are all very ugly and wear black clothes. But the vast majority of wars throughout history are not like that.

dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3110466/Game-Thrones-creator-defends-rape-scenes-Author-says-dishonest-boring-leave-sexual-violence.html

>'But if you’re going to write about war, and you just want to include all the cool battles and heroes killing a lot of orcs and things like that and you don’t portray [sexual violence], then there’s something fundamentally dishonest about that.

How can one man be so based?

Not Tolkien's fault that 99% of genre fiction writers have no creativity.

Yeah The Hobbit should have Bilbo getting raped in the ass by Smaug.
Bravo GURM.

>purposefully missing the point of Tolkein's work just to try and sound smart
When will he die bros?

There's no fucking comparison, GURM is an illiterate peasant compared to Tolkien.

>tolkien created his own languages with grammar, syntax and tenses belonging to different developed language trees to give life to his works
>GURRM just made up some word after choking on a chicken bone

Tolkien, because he has actually talent.

GRRM is a fucking hack

>a HBO pornography show had to invent his languages for him
How JUST can one man possibly be?

>>'But if you’re going to write about war, and you just want to include all the cool battles and heroes killing a lot of orcs and things like that and you don’t portray [sexual violence], then there’s something fundamentally dishonest about that.

Right. You need to have long, descriptive passages about people taking a dump.

And let's not forget numerous, and highly suspicious continual references to child abuse / pedophilia.

And gay sex, lots and lots of gay sex. Can't be honest without tons of shit fucking sodomy.

Oh and dicks and castration, because GRRM really seems to be obsessed with dicks.

>Sam found him squatting in the grass...

I ran into martin at a coles at port augusta in south Australia, he drinks nescafe.

This is my story.

i don't believe you've actually read any of these books. there's a lot of drama in LOTR. reducing it to mythology and linguistics sounds like you're just repeating shit you've heard second hand

.......All that is well and good, but, he DOES know he is a FANTASY writer, right? Fantasy...that genre where you escape reality, and don't have to deal with all those things? Sure, its interesting but hardly a fair criticism. Dumb ass.

I haven't actually read LotR in a while but I still remember the gist of it. I understand that it isn't just an encyclopaedia/history book of middle-earth and actually follows a story, but there's a difference. Martin's story has pretty much devolved into plot happening for the sake of it while Tolkien's world-building made everything feel like a significant part of a greater whole.

>fantasy = escapism
REEEEE STOP HOLDING GENRE FICTION BACK FROM ITS POTENTIAL!

I like Tolkiens originality and creativity, but I also like GRRMs gritty violence and realism.

Easy bro, I am not saying it cant have all that stuff, I think there is a place for it more than all the milions of high-fantasy typical black and white worlds out there, I am, a fan of the grey. just thats its not a fair criticism, especially of someone who went as deep as Tolkien with his world building, He knew what he was doing. Its allll good.

>When will he die bros?

In half a year, from cholesterol induced heart attack, before he manages to come close to ending his series. And nothing of value will be lost.

>realism
>Tyrion is about to survive his third battle
All because muh witty self-insert.

>I haven't actually read LotR in a while but I still remember the gist of it. I understand that it isn't just an encyclopaedia/history book of middle-earth and actually follows a story, but there's a difference. Martin's story has pretty much devolved into plot happening for the sake of it while Tolkien's world-building made everything feel like a significant part of a greater whole.
GRRM has a screenwriting background, it seems to me that he's kept closer to cinematic conventions than to literary conventions. This is something that's kinda common with modern writers who aren't really academics in literature. JK Rowlings books also read like novelized films.

>Tolkien writes his magnum opus as an epic heroic romance
>Martin asks: 'muh taxes'

i think it will be better for the series if he cannot end it. people will be talking about what would have happened for ages.

>there has never been any figure in history to survive a couple of battles
>he's keeping a character alive because he's popular REEEEEE
easy there, autismo. I meant realism within a realm of fantasy. As in you get a sword through your belly your dead and don't get no magic elvish healing for instance.

Find me a fucking midget who has survived a couple of battles on the front lines.

They aren't even comparable

Tolkien is on another level

Still like reading asoiaf tho

This desu.

that's like comparing Plato with Larry Flynt

He is right though. His main problem with Tolkien is not the man himself but the terrible following that he left after him. I'm sure this comes from the years of frustration that comes from trying to find some kind of deepness or truth in your favorite genre and being unable to. That frustration led to him writing the thing himself and becoming rich in the process so it all worked out well.

> Fantasy...that genre where you escape reality, and don't have to deal with all those things

Everything aside from meditation is "escapism". No, i don't go into the fantasy to escape reality, i go there because it's an exciting part of it that I enjoy deeply and yes, you can find some truth about life in there. What do you want to escape from, anyway? Your lack of money or social accomplishment? Embrace that shit, improve at it and enjoy the ride, and enjoy fucking everything else in life, fantasy included and don't whine in CAPITAL LETTERS.

They're both good for diffrent reasons, but Tolkien is a far better writer.

That being said, I'm more fascinated by Martin's world than Tolkien.

Tolkien admitted his work was escapism but that it represented the 'escape of the prisoner' and not 'the flight of the deserter'.

for being escapism he wrote damn good books, hell most of modern fantasy is derived from his works, from Dungeons & Dragons to Game of Thrones

I'm sorry, did you hit your head at a young age? Reading awfully deep into what I said. ILL SUCK YOUR DICK IN CAPITAL LETTERS THOUGH.

This

Indeed

Finished in 3? He wrote it all in one go over 12 years.

Well, in the books he almost didn't. He survived losing his nose.

>nescafe
Yet he published them in the span of 1 and a half years, unlike GURM who still haven't managed to end his series 20 years after it was first published, and probably never will.

>Tolkien finished in three years
He began writing in the late 30's, and his position as teacher and academic extended that period until 1950. He also never finished The Silmarillion, but that doesn't make Tolkien a bad writer, just a very methodic and detail-driven one. On the other hand, GRRM is a way worse writer than Tolkien, but I kind of get him: He has worked very hard not only on ASoIaF, but also a buch of other material; only recently he focused again after the success of GoT. Right now he is enjoying what little he has left of life, and problably works at snail pace because of it. If I was a successful writer making a bazzillion dollars forever, I would procrastinate too.

Sapkowski

yep

to be fair, ASOIAF only has lesbian sex scenes

the fag shit is D&D's addition

Yes but he spend most of his life developing it, all the way back to his late teens where he first created his language.

Well, he also has implied homosexual relations. Since it kinda is a minor plot point.

ffs have you even read grrm's books? There is very little sex and no homosex in them other than allusions.

kek

I think the only POV character who is implied to be gay is Jon Connington

GRRM is a faggot.

Unfortunately his shitty GoT series will be immortalized and likely never finished

>Robin Hobb
I love her books but they aren't without their own problems.

The Fool should not have magically come back to life at the end of the Tawny Man. That was completely stupid.

while I like Sapkowski's Witcher series, he is in no way above Tolkien, althought he is miles better than martin

Yeah I agree, that was pretty weak. I've read the first book of her new sequel trilogy to the Tawny Man and holy shit it was fucking terrible.

tolkien is rolling in his fucking grave

What you have to understand about Martin is that his story writes itself, he just creates the world for the narrative to flow through. This isn't a defence of the man's style or anything but this is the method he's chosen to do it with so I can see where it's all gone wrong for him in the last few books.

Basically what I mean by this is that Martin creates the world for his characters to inhabit and then asks "given a man of this intelligence in this situation with this character what might be a reasonable course of action for him to take" he thinks about it and then plots out what consequences this has on the world and what if any intersections it might cause with other relevant characters. He doesn't have the whole story mapped out in advance, what he has are key points that he wants to get to which is why he gets bogged down in between them, because the way he is writing lends itself to endless and exhaustive description of every little thing going on in the world.

For evidence of this, see the mere existence of something like the Mereneese knot and how Martin ultimately figured out the answer to it. To wit, it was three narrative arcs mixing in Mereen and Martin wasn't quite sure how he wanted them to mix, how did he fix this? He literally wrote three different versions of the book and picked the one he liked best. In interviews he says "Chapter" of course but this is nonsensical for the length of time spent on it, it's exceedingly obvious that Martin had to plot out whole swathes of the later half of the series moving on from that point to ultimately decide which one he liked best and then move on with that which is what took him so long.

>he doesn't have the whole plot mapped out in advance

He's said dozens of time he has so what are you basing this off of? You literally just BS'd this entire paragraph about his process.

He absolutely doesn't.

Like look up how Martin expected the series to go in his original few drafts, hell look at the fucking laminated copy of the letter he sent to publishers trying to get the series picked up back in the 90's, it's wildly divergent from the series as it now stands.

That's what I mean when I say that Martin doesn't have the whole story mapped out in advance, he has major plot points that he knows he wants to take the story to.

E.g

X character will sit the throne (probs dany at this point)

X character will fight off the others (probably jon at this point)

etc. other major landmarks in the series he knows for sure but the things in between, especially later in the series, he has no idea of.

He ruined that when greed overtook him and he allowed HBO to make the shitty show that will have a shitty ending everyone will remember and be regarded as canon unless he shits out the last book before hamburger time.

He knows on a large scale how the story progresses--very roughly, but he is a "gardener", not an "architect" writer.
There's nothing wrong with being either extreme; it's just stylistic choice.

GRRM's books are more entertaining but no one will be studying them as notable literature in fifty years time.

>GRRM's books are more entertaining

virgin

>Tolkien
>Originality and creativity
You must be talking about the languages right?

Tolkien's writing is still more fucking complex than this shit's
>entire continent speaks same language, with no difference in dialect, even the Rhoynar in the south and the first men in the north
>dynasties that have ruled for 8000 years
>one person rules a south american sized kingdom in feudal sometimes

The only reason you don't think he's either original or creative is because you think his books are cliched, when you're forgetting that he himself wrote all those cliches and everyone else is just copying him