Get crowned King of Gondor

>get crowned King of Gondor
>start singing out of nowhere

Was it autism?

Other urls found in this thread:

dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3110466/Game-Thrones-creator-defends-rape-scenes-Author-says-dishonest-boring-leave-sexual-violence.html
georgerrmartin.com/bibliography/
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._R._R._Tolkien_bibliography
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

>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.

>Even the little baby orcs, in their little orc cradles?
Orcs are elves corrupted by Melkor. What a fucking hack.

All this shows is that Martin can't view fantasy through any lens beyond gritty realism. It's almost insulting that he implies that Tolkien's work isn't a good look into war and it's effects.

Basically he views a mythology in pure sterile terms. Why does Aragorn's tax policy matter?

>Why does Aragorn's tax policy matter?
Because Martin thinks that what makes good fantasy literature is politics and gratuitous fucking.

The books are fucking infested with songs. Literally everyone sings at one point or another. Like or not, it's accurate to the books. Whether you think it was a good idea to bring that into the movies I guess is a matter of opinion.

I will never not post in these types of threads

Does he even mention the tax policy of Westeros? How about the Free Cities? A lot of his criticisms for LOTR seem unfounded because he's guilty of the exact same shit.

>being crowned king of Gondor before claiming the kingdom of Arnor

Aragon was a dumbass

He basically took everything from english history and added ice zombies.
At least Tolkien had original ideas for a context for his wacky languages.

>medieval fantasy books have medieval philosophy about kings

Imagine that. Fucking kys Martin, you pretentious hack.

>a map of Westeros even looks like England
Did he even fucking try?

GRRM is such a fat fucking idiot.

Wonder how long he would have lasted in the trenches of WWI, fat fucking piece of shit.

The problem with Martin and a lot of other fantasy writers is that they view a fantasy world as a simulation of a world. You can see this kind of autism on /tg/ where all they care about is making sure the rivers are right.

This kind of view doesn't see the place of metaphor. To them, a kingdom is just a kingdom, the one ring is just a magical ring and so on, these things don't represent wider concepts or ideas to these people.

To be fair, Tolkien's Legendarium WAS just mainland Europe. Not just that the topography matched up, Middle Earth was Europe in the distant past.

>Even his manhood was ugly, thick and veined, with a bulbous purple head
>And suddenly his cock was out, jutting upward from his breeches like a fat pink mast
>The queen slid a finger into that Myrish swamp, then another..
>Sunset found her squatting in the grass, groaning. Every stool was looser than the one before, and smelt fouler. By the time the moon came up, she was shitting brown water. The more she drank, the more she shat, but the more she shat, the thirstier she grew.

Bravo George, you sure showed that hack Tolkien

No, all I remember is the little bit where the Lannisters have no cash so they have to borrow from Braavos

Always start singing out of nowhere, it always is better than writing out of somewheres. Xxxnt

TOKEN BTFO AGAIN!!!!!!!!!!

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.

well it's the same as Howard's world in Conan, it's like a whole phase of prehistory on continents before they formed into the current layout. Only Tolkiens continents changed five times at least before the present.

Man, Gurm really has a hate boner for Tolkien, this is funny as shit

SOMEONE POST THE MAP OF MARTIN'S WORLD ALREADY, KEKS MUST BE HAD

What WAS Aragorn's tax policy?

He was crowned King of Gondor and Anor.

Holy fuck, I had no idea I hated this faggot this much. It's a goddamn fantasy world. Tolkien could say that an anthropomorphic gopher was behind the one ring all along and it wouldn't be "dishonest". GRRM absolutely let the fame go to his fat fucking head. I hope he dies before he can finish his series.

...

It's so obvious that he had a rough design for Essos up to about Yunkai and then didn't know how to continue it so he just kept going with the retarded rectangle. Also

Same. I knew he'd allegedly said some dumb shit about "what about aragorn's tax policy?" but I didn't think much of it

basically wtf i hate grrm now

Agreed.
LOTR could have used more squatting and shitting.

*also Westeros looks dumb and unrealistic, it's an endless thin finger going for thousands of miles

How does this fat hack know that the orcs had a rape culture?

How does he have the fucking nerve to be so arrogant?
It's one thing if he wanted to just write fantasy he thought the world was lacking but to go and claim ALL fantasy that isn't just like his (or ONLY his) is 'dishonest' or invalid is the height of hubris for a guy who's done essentially nothing with his life.

>Sunset found her squatting in the grass, groaning. Every stool was looser than the one before, and smelt fouler. By the time the moon came up, she was shitting brown water. The more she drank, the more she shat, but the more she shat, the thirstier she grew.

Yeah, tell the WW1 veteran how he doesn't know shit about war

Tax the fuck out of every real estate on Minas Tirith
This lead to a building boom in Osgiliath and the Anduin valley that consequently resulted to the repopulation of the old lands and a farming boom backed by extensive irrigation canals
Truly genius if you ask me

Lewd, isn't it?

>you are aware that the Fellowship left a 600-mile trail of scat across Middle-Earth

Do elves have to shit?

Westeros is just the british isles with a bit more edges

They shit gold

Yes if Scotland never stopped until it reached the north pole

>>Sunset found her squatting in the grass, groaning. Every stool was looser than the one before, and smelt fouler. By the time the moon came up, she was shitting brown water. The more she drank, the more she shat, but the more she shat, the thirstier she grew
Braaaaap

>Literally arguing with a man who died 44 years ago
Why is Martin so autistic?

He's angry that Tolkien wrote an entire universe in the time it takes Gurm to write 4 chapters

Only if it was Arwen scenes

That's only on the show, the lannisters in the books still have working gold mines

>conscentious objector and journalism teacher trying to school professor of english literature and philologist who personally fought in the most terrible war to date on what "real war" is like
Pottery.

Pretty much.
And Essos is just a rectangle.
BRAVO MARTIN

Yeah, Lord of the rings would've been a lot better if they had spent 10-20 minutes going over Aragon's tax plan.

>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.

What an appaling simplification. Does Tolkien play around with ideas and myths like the Fisher King? Yes (so does Martin, see "a Stark in Winterfell). Does he stick to such a philosophy rigidly? No. There are many good and just rulers in Tolkien's works, Dior, Ecthelion, various kings of Arnor and its successor states, who nevertheless preside or the decline or fall of their lands. If a good ruler was all you needed then Inziladûn would have redeemed Númenor, but he didn't (and if we're just talking strictly about prosperous in terms of materialism, which I suspect Martin is, then his son was one of the most evil rulers described and yet conversely he achieved the greatest material success of any kingdom ever before his sudden fall). Tolkien describes plenty of complicated rulers that are simply "good" facing complicated situations with no easy answers. Denethor, Thingol, damn near every descendant of Finwë.


Continued...

>But Tolkien doesn’t ask the question: What was Aragorn’s tax policy? Did he maintain a standing army?

It is of course supremely arrogant of Martin to declare what Tolkien did and did not think about. As to why Tolkien does not give a detailed account of Aragorn's reign it is incredibly simple: Aragorn is not the main character of Lord of the Rings (for example Tolkien once mentioned if he had been writing the Saga of Aragorn he would have given a live narrative of the Path of the Dead, but since he wasn't a recap by Gimli and Legolas sufficed). Aragorn is an important character, but his importance has actually ended by the time he becomes king, hence why he drops out of the narrative almost immediately. Tolkien's aftermath is not fixated on the fate of kings but the fate of the hobbits. In the appendix we do get a lot on Aragorn's life, but there we see Tolkien's focus is more on fleshing out say Aragorn's relationship with Arwen than his rule, which is kept at a very high level.

And this opens up the obvious question: where are Martin's tax policies and standing armies? Martin's narrative is absolutely about the detail of ruling, both by his own remarks and by the structure of his books. King's Landing is the most common and featured location, and 3 of the 5 books have the ruler of King's Landing as the most prominent character. And yet his descriptions of finances are incredibly vague. So vague people are able to construct elaborate conspiracy theories in the gaps (e.g. was Robert actually a bad ruler who spent too much, or was it all just another supervillain-esque scheme of Littlefinger?).

I could go on about Martin's armies and how they help expose his faux realism with questions about their size, composition and his use of the myth of levied peasantry, or about how a reasonable reader can figure out what happened to orcs, but the post size limit is hitting me again.

How long would you? What kind of fucking argument is this?

Tolkien fought in the trenches of WW1 and Martin is shitting on his idea of what "real war" is like. Martin being a man who did non-military service rather than going to Vietnam.

>le everyone is edgy and blood and guts oh the horror

Tolkien writes about the shit wars does to you, the average Joe
The guy that is easygoing and carefree, but when he goes to war and comes back he never is the same (the wounds that do not heal)
Even if he believes he fights for a better world against absolute irredeemable evil, even when he wins and makes it back with all his friends the burden of what he went through never goes away
But then again Tolkien had seen war and new that the worst part is not about gruesome deaths

This is exactly why writers/artists shouldn't be critics and vice-versa
His points are actually quite good; Lord of The Rings is painfully childish in its portrayal of a mythical war against the dark lord of all evil.
Considering that Tolkien wrote TLOTR to be his grown up stories compared to the Hobbit (and even wanted to rewrite the Hobbit as more grown up after he finished lotr), it's weird that people will defend him with "it's fantasy, it's not supposed to be realistic"

But GRRM is guilty of the exact same things, arguably to a worse extent since his themes come off as a teenager obsessed with the grittiness of real war.
Every excursion and battle and political meeting has to have some rape and backstabbing for GRRM; literal backstabbing, not just betrayal. And his descriptions of all sex acts seem a little too focused. One wonders if we need such a detailed description of the random whores being fucked.
And despite this, he doesn't mention tax policy, or what good leadership actually requires. In his defense, he hasn't finished. But he's written more books than Tolkien did and all he's done is establish that everyone sucks dick (literally and metaphorically), and if a character isn't a cunt, then a cunt will kill them.
Maybe that's GRRM's statement; that only cunts can survive politics. But it's a very bleak and cynical statement.

Where GRRM criticises Tolkien for creating this model of the forces of good vs the forces of evil, GRRM should be criticised for creating a model where main characters are killed off arbitrarily to create momentary shock.

>The guy that is easygoing and carefree, but when he goes to war and comes back he never is the same (the wounds that do not heal)
>Even if he believes he fights for a better world against absolute irredeemable evil, even when he wins and makes it back with all his friends the burden of what he went through never goes away
>But then again Tolkien had seen war and new that the worst part is not about gruesome deaths
Fucking hell this is so on point.
Why do people think that the only way to accurately depict the effects of war is with gritty realism? Tolkien captured the mental scars left by war millions of times better than Martin ever did.

>GRRM has written more books than Tolkien

Erm, no.

Yes? Not even by a close margin.

>wounds do not heal
Literally Linkin Park tier
Kill yourselves

He's butthurt that he'll never escape tolkiens shadow as a high fantasy writer.

GRRM is a hack whose work will not stand the test of time compared to Tolkein. That's plain as day to anyone but his biggest fans.

lol, writes a soap opera and thinks that qualifies him to trash talk the legends

is this b8?

No, unless screenplays for TV series are now books
georgerrmartin.com/bibliography/
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._R._R._Tolkien_bibliography

Were your links supposed to prove anything other than me being right?

>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._R._R._Tolkien_bibliography
Most of those are short stories or poems (in the fictional stories section)
One of them is even sheet music

If you want to include all that crap, sure. But that's kinda missing the point
And if we're including Tolkien's plays (which are listed) then yeah, we're including GRRM's screenplays

>reality is Linkin Park tier

Have you literally never heard of PTSD or do you think everyone who has it are pussies or something?

He's been writing since the 80s and had written way more shit than asoiaf

Get back on masturbating over scat porn fiction faggot

It's fiction

GRRM has written more fiction books, Tolkien has written more books in total, because he had an actual job as an academic

thank you user, well put.

I think you've cracked the secret of Little Finger user.

Wrong again. Most of Tolkien's academic works were not published in books (at least until after his death when they have been published in various compilations).

>That's only on the show, the lannisters in the books still have working gold mines
They do on the show also, just the yield is decreasing.

Who cares about this SJW catering irrelevant fat fuck.

No, in the show they are stated to have been empty for years.

what he's singing are the legendary words of Elendil when he came to the shores of Middle Earth after the downfall of Numenor, so it's not any song he's breaking into, it's a mythological precedent for his assuming the kingship of Gondor

Et Eärello
Endorenna utúlien
Sinome Maruvan
ar Hildinyar tenn' Ambar-Metta

Translation:
Out of the Great Sea to Middle-earth I am come.
In this place I will abide, and my heirs, unto the ending of the world.'"

from oldtown to the eyrie is literally ireland rotated 180 degrees, plus the dornish penis.

>Lord of The Rings is painfully childish in its portrayal of a mythical war against the dark lord of all evil
Why? What would LoTR need to have to not be childish in his portrayal of war? It just imitates the way war is described in classic European epic literature, are the Chanson de Roland and Ilyad childish too?

Why are the verses in LotR so based, dudes?

>Where now the horse and the rider? Where is the horn that was blowing?
>Where is the helm and the hauberk, and the bright hair flowing?
>Where is the hand on the harpstring, and the red fire glowing?
>Where is the spring and the harvest and the tall corn growing?
>They have passed like rain on the mountain, like a wind in the meadow;
>The days have gone down in the West behind the hills into shadow.
>Who shall gather the smoke of the dead wood burning,
>Or behold the flowing years from the Sea returning?

Tolkien was a master at capturing the feeling of melancholic nostalgia.

Compare this

>Stern now was Éomer's mood, and his mind clear again. He let blow the horns to rally all men to his banner that could come thither; for he thought to make a great shield-wall at the last, and stand, and fight there on foot till all fell, and do deeds of song on the fields of Pelennor, though no man should be left in the West to remember the last King of the Mark. So he rode to a green hillock and there set his banner, and the White Horse ran rippling in the wind.

> Out of doubt, out of dark to the day's rising
> I came singing in the sun, sword unsheathing.
> To hope's end I rode and to heart's breaking:
> Now for wrath, now for ruin and a red nightfall!

>These staves he spoke, yet he laughed as he said them. For once more lust of battle was on him; and he was still unscathed, and he was young, and he was king: the lord of a fell people. And lo! even as he laughed at despair he looked out again on the black ships, and he lifted up his sword to defy them.

To these

>It's almost insulting that he implies that Tolkien's work isn't a good look into war and it's effects.

It's not though. The point GRRM is making is that war gets so much uglier on all sides. It's rarely so cleanly good vs. evil that Tolkien made it out to be. Orcs are just.... evil? No matter what right? So what do you do with them? Germans aren't evil no matter what, so..... you let them live, right? The effects of WWI lead to WW2, which lead to the korean war, and the cold war and so on. Tolkien is much more idealistic. GRRM is speaking slightly in jest about "tax policy" he really loves Tolkiens work, but it is one sided and did lead to the copycats he suggests. There is nothing wrong with Tolkiens work, GRRM was clearly inspired by it. A song of fire and ice is the ending after the ending. That all these armies that worked together to defeat evil have been settled, but what happens next? How does the new king see over them? Does everyone get what they want? Are the ones ravaged more harshly treated fairly? Who pays more, or less, WHAT IS THE FUCKING TAX POLICY?!

One interpretation is that the orcs are viewed as so nasty and evil because it's a biased interpretation.

If you look at propaganda depicting Germans during WWI, it's a similar thing. That might be too allegorical for Tolkien though. I don't really buy into that theory, but my point is that you should look beyond the surface.

Not to mention that Tolkien said that orcs aren't inherently evil. You even overhear some orcs and while they seem brutal, they don't seem like mindless evil monsters. Plenty of them don't want to go to war and hate their masters. Even Sauron wasn't originally evil, and Boromir and Saruman both show shades of grey.

The aftermath that is relevant to lord of the rings is the personal aftermath, not the societal one. Why do we need to know much about how Aragorn ruled? The hobbits are the central characters. It's much more interesting to see how war effected them, and we see that it isn't such clean-cut happy ending.

true, but tolkien never intended to reflect upon the horrors of war, and he actually fought in one. he wanted to, by his own admission, create a legend for the british people akin to the scandinavian and germanic legends as he felt his beloved homeland lacked in this department. saying "but tolkien didn't talk about economy" is like saying the big lebowski doesn't explain the rules of bowling.

grrm isn't making any sense, not because of whatever he feels about tolkien, but because he completely misses the point, or purposefully ignores it to make a statement about his own work, which is false, because grrm never sets out a proper economy either. his work is much more grounded though, i'll give him that.

that and iirc tolkien wanted to revisit the orcs and make them less shallow by exploring their culture and society. you can only come up with so many things before you die of old age, especially when you live a normie life.

>A song of fire and ice is the ending after the ending. That all these armies that worked together to defeat evil have been settled, but what happens next?
What the fuck are you talking about? GRRM's story will clearly end after they've beaten all the White Walkers, and it will clearly end with Dany and Jon ruling together happily ever after.

The claim about Tolkien being the more idealistic one is particularly laughable. Tolkien's philosophy was that of the "Long Defeat" while GRRM is clearly a typical liberal believer in the idea of progress (not bad by itself, but his open declaration of the wonders of universal governments no matter how they are achieved is).

Giving this fat fuck a platform was a mistake.

Just because you write softcore pornography for millenials who can't even read a book without an adderall prescription doesn't make you an authority on what is good fantasy writing. Tolkien is a God and this faggot is a screenwriter who dreams up edgy material for HBO

>his work is much more grounded though, i'll give him that.
Not really.
How do people survive when seasons have an arbitrary length?
Why are the seasons fucked up anyway, is there a legit astronomical explanation, or did the dragons do it?
How come fucking crocodiles live in the Neck, when it's so up North?
Why would you castrate children that are supposed to become elite warriors?
How can the Iron Isles be a naval power when they don't even have forests to build ships out of?

>GRRM's story will clearly end
>He still thinks we're ever getting the last novel

childhood is idolising GRRM
adulthood is realising Tolkien makes more sense
true enlightenment is realising Henry Darger is the only true path

they are comparatively more grounded, despite not answering those questions.

some of those questions are retarded

LOTR is mythic, even religious

ASOIAF is realist, and "gritty"

they're not even comparable

>ASOIAF is realist
Why do people keep repeating this bullshit?

Not him, they all seem like reasonable questions to me. If they're so dumb, then answer them. I've never read the books or seen the show so I'm just curious.

>15k pages by a rambling madman
>worthwhile

well it's your time to spend ...

>mfw I have the smallest land area and population
>mfw poor af
>mfw I build a thousands ships out of twigs
>mfw I somehow muster 15k men to sail them and sustain them on salted fish
>mfw the most populous kingdom barely massed 10k men for their war
>mfw all this is possible because I have a big cock

They are probably retarded, but the seasons thing always bothered me

they're stupid in the sense that as it's a fantasy setting, things like dragons and magic will not be explained scientifically, and don't need to be for the purpose of being comparatively more realistic than the tolkien existence. this is the case with the second and third questions.

as for the first one, people survive the way they survived unexpected shit irl. peasants farm, they store excess goods, consume the rest, when something bad happens lots of people die, the survivors rebuild. the winter doesn't hit the south as bad, so the south can still to some level farm and produce. also hunting and fishing.

the iron isles used to be larger and had claim over the forests in the north. they are at the point in the books not a naval power as an army, but most are employed as sailors or pirates or traders, and there is trade within the seven kingdoms, so they still have access to limber. most of the ships they get later on in the series are those that arrive with theon's uncles, who were out pirating in many other seas, with many captured ships.

>Harry, did I ever tell you about time-turners? They are magical devices that allow the user to travel back in time! This incredible power can even be used to save loved ones, as you and your friends discovered when you saved Buckbeak. Although the Ministry had a whole closet full of time-turners, it never occurred to us that we should use one to stop Voldemort. It would've been as simple as showing up after he attacked, using the time-turner, and cathching him! Although we could've saved thousands of lives, your parents among them, we just didn't want to risk it! Meddling with time is a dangerous affair, you see. They should only be used in the rare case a little girl wants to take extra classes in a semester. And only if she is a good friend.

You are the kind who shits on capekinos like BvS because they are childish on their plots

you just don't get it, i suggest start watching westerns and go from there to gangsters to capekino