|
So many times I've found myself temp banned
By Chill, Kadaver, Moonbear, GM too -
But every time I formulate a plan
To not get TL minus, it gets screwed.
For posting dirty pictures in the thread,
For misfires there and in the Thread of Thrones,
For reading posts and posting memes instead
I still, somehow, can call this site my home. (page).
Yet I still bet 2 TL- days
On trifles - if Jaedong gets killed next game -
Two days' silent anguish. I'm amazed
How it sucks... but still, I bet the same.
Thus I would stake my very life upon it,
Today's is my most indecisive sonnet.
 
|
Better than Shakespeare (if I could understand him)
|
On February 19 2014 13:05 NeuroticPsychosis wrote:
Better than Shakespeare (if I could understand him)
Haha, I found that quite funny, considering that I always support Tolkien in Shakespeare vs Tolkien discussions
Edit: ofc, funny op aswell, gj!
|
On February 19 2014 15:05 Muffloe wrote:Show nested quote +On February 19 2014 13:05 NeuroticPsychosis wrote:
Better than Shakespeare (if I could understand him) Haha, I found that quite funny, considering that I always support Tolkien in Shakespeare vs Tolkien discussions Edit: ofc, funny op aswell, gj!
I don't even know how this would come about.
|
In typical internet fashion I fucked up .. I thought sonnets had 12 syllables. They only have 10. Thank you memory
btw you cannot use thrones at the end, it destroys everything .. we would have to pronounce it thron-ES
EDIT : 10 syllables now.
Many times I've been temp banned by the man
GM, Kadaver, Moonbear and even Chill
But every time i formulate a plan
Do not get TL minus, hopes alive still
For posting pictures in a thread of lore
For misfires there and finest Thread of Thrones,
Reading posts although posting memes galore
Forever my home, never liked cheap clones.
|
On February 19 2014 18:16 Jerubaal wrote:Show nested quote +On February 19 2014 15:05 Muffloe wrote:On February 19 2014 13:05 NeuroticPsychosis wrote:
Better than Shakespeare (if I could understand him) Haha, I found that quite funny, considering that I always support Tolkien in Shakespeare vs Tolkien discussions Edit: ofc, funny op aswell, gj! I don't even know how this would come about.
Star Trek > Gandhi... because... internet.
|
On February 19 2014 18:34 Daswollvieh wrote:Show nested quote +On February 19 2014 18:16 Jerubaal wrote:On February 19 2014 15:05 Muffloe wrote:On February 19 2014 13:05 NeuroticPsychosis wrote:
Better than Shakespeare (if I could understand him) Haha, I found that quite funny, considering that I always support Tolkien in Shakespeare vs Tolkien discussions Edit: ofc, funny op aswell, gj! I don't even know how this would come about. Star Trek > Gandhi... because... internet.
Well, it is not that strange. Is is simply comparing the supposed masters of the pen.
|
|
|
On February 19 2014 18:26 Tufas wrote:
In typical internet fashion I fucked up .. I thought sonnets had 12 syllables. They only have 10. Thank you memory
btw you cannot use thrones at the end, it destroys everything .. we would have to pronounce it thron-ES
EDIT : 10 syllables now.
Many times I've been temp banned by the man
GM, Kadaver, Moonbear and even Chill
But every time i formulate a plan
Do not get TL minus, hopes alive still
For posting pictures in a thread of lore
For misfires there and finest Thread of Thrones,
Reading posts although posting memes galore
Forever my home, never liked cheap clones.
No, I just used "in" twice by accident and missed it due to the HTML
For-MIS fires-THERE and-IN the-THREAD of-THRONES
|
On February 19 2014 18:26 Tufas wrote:
EDIT : 10 syllables now.
Do not get TL minus, hopes alive still
This is actually 11 syllables.
Do-Not-Get-T-L-Mi-Nus-Hopes-A-Live-Still
Actually, so is "GM, Kadaver, Moonbear and even Chill".
G-M-Ka-Da-Ver-Moon-Bear-And-E-Ven-Chill
|
If someone posted a shakespeare sonnet and said it was his another still might say "better than shakespeare"
|
On February 19 2014 20:10 Muffloe wrote:Show nested quote +On February 19 2014 18:34 Daswollvieh wrote:On February 19 2014 18:16 Jerubaal wrote:On February 19 2014 15:05 Muffloe wrote:On February 19 2014 13:05 NeuroticPsychosis wrote:
Better than Shakespeare (if I could understand him) Haha, I found that quite funny, considering that I always support Tolkien in Shakespeare vs Tolkien discussions Edit: ofc, funny op aswell, gj! I don't even know how this would come about. Star Trek > Gandhi... because... internet. Well, it is not that strange. Is is simply comparing the supposed masters of the pen.
do you really consider tolkien a master of the pen, as in his writing? what always made tolkien great in my eyes was the universe he created. but comparing him to shakespeare in terms of their writing? no way. you also have to take into account the times they lived in. shakespeare was a revolutionary in regards to forming the english language. tolkien constantly loses himself in complicated and exhausting formulations.
if you mean that tolkien is "easier" to read, then i wont disagree with you, but take into account when they both lived. tolkien does not measure up to shakespeare in terms of importance or quality.
|
Haha what an adventure seeing all those banned posts you linked.
|
On February 20 2014 02:57 qotsager wrote:Show nested quote +On February 19 2014 20:10 Muffloe wrote:On February 19 2014 18:34 Daswollvieh wrote:On February 19 2014 18:16 Jerubaal wrote:On February 19 2014 15:05 Muffloe wrote:On February 19 2014 13:05 NeuroticPsychosis wrote:
Better than Shakespeare (if I could understand him) Haha, I found that quite funny, considering that I always support Tolkien in Shakespeare vs Tolkien discussions Edit: ofc, funny op aswell, gj! I don't even know how this would come about. Star Trek > Gandhi... because... internet. Well, it is not that strange. Is is simply comparing the supposed masters of the pen. do you really consider tolkien a master of the pen, as in his writing? what always made tolkien great in my eyes was the universe he created. but comparing him to shakespeare in terms of their writing? no way. you also have to take into account the times they lived in. shakespeare was a revolutionary in regards to forming the english language. tolkien constantly loses himself in complicated and exhausting formulations. if you mean that tolkien is "easier" to read, then i wont disagree with you, but take into account when they both lived. tolkien does not measure up to shakespeare in terms of importance or quality.
Sounds like writing = language? Well, Tolkien is the creator of languages, bro  Shakespeare come out on top in influence tho, but I think we can agree on that both brought a new standard to the table. Also, isn't there some kind of inconsistency in
"tolkien constantly loses himself in complicated and exhausting formulations" and "if you mean that tolkien is "easier" to read, then i wont disagree with you"? ^^
|
On February 20 2014 07:26 Muffloe wrote:Show nested quote +On February 20 2014 02:57 qotsager wrote:On February 19 2014 20:10 Muffloe wrote:On February 19 2014 18:34 Daswollvieh wrote:On February 19 2014 18:16 Jerubaal wrote:On February 19 2014 15:05 Muffloe wrote:On February 19 2014 13:05 NeuroticPsychosis wrote:
Better than Shakespeare (if I could understand him) Haha, I found that quite funny, considering that I always support Tolkien in Shakespeare vs Tolkien discussions Edit: ofc, funny op aswell, gj! I don't even know how this would come about. Star Trek > Gandhi... because... internet. Well, it is not that strange. Is is simply comparing the supposed masters of the pen. do you really consider tolkien a master of the pen, as in his writing? what always made tolkien great in my eyes was the universe he created. but comparing him to shakespeare in terms of their writing? no way. you also have to take into account the times they lived in. shakespeare was a revolutionary in regards to forming the english language. tolkien constantly loses himself in complicated and exhausting formulations. if you mean that tolkien is "easier" to read, then i wont disagree with you, but take into account when they both lived. tolkien does not measure up to shakespeare in terms of importance or quality. Sounds like writing = language? Well, Tolkien is the creator of languages, bro Shakespeare come out on top in influence tho, but I think we can agree on that both brought a new standard to the table. Also, isn't there some kind of inconsistency in "tolkien constantly loses himself in complicated and exhausting formulations" and "if you mean that tolkien is "easier" to read, then i wont disagree with you"? ^^
i won't disagree with you, because a lot of people seem to have serious issues with reading old english. i dont, i massively enjoy reading shakespeare, more so than tolkien. creating a language noone speaks is not all that much of an achievement, i dare say most linguists would be able to create their own language.
tolkiens choice of focus was something that always irritated me. even as frodo and sam were carrying the ring through mordor, there was time to describe every little silly detail he could come up with. a good writer knows what he can let out, and what he needs to do to make the reader get immersed. tolkien is too much scientist even when writing to be a perfect author. i'm not saying i dont like tolkien, i really like his works and consider them great books, but comparing tolkien and shakespeare is not something you should do. i am also not the only one who thinks tolkien is not that great an author.
he did not bring "a new standard to the table" in terms of language or narration. what tolkien did was give one genre (fantasy) a lot of new ideas. he massively influenced every bit of fantasy literatue that came after him. but that's it.
shakespeare changed the english language. and that is something way bigger.
|
On February 20 2014 08:47 qotsager wrote:Show nested quote +On February 20 2014 07:26 Muffloe wrote:On February 20 2014 02:57 qotsager wrote:On February 19 2014 20:10 Muffloe wrote:On February 19 2014 18:34 Daswollvieh wrote:On February 19 2014 18:16 Jerubaal wrote:On February 19 2014 15:05 Muffloe wrote:On February 19 2014 13:05 NeuroticPsychosis wrote:
Better than Shakespeare (if I could understand him) Haha, I found that quite funny, considering that I always support Tolkien in Shakespeare vs Tolkien discussions Edit: ofc, funny op aswell, gj! I don't even know how this would come about. Star Trek > Gandhi... because... internet. Well, it is not that strange. Is is simply comparing the supposed masters of the pen. do you really consider tolkien a master of the pen, as in his writing? what always made tolkien great in my eyes was the universe he created. but comparing him to shakespeare in terms of their writing? no way. you also have to take into account the times they lived in. shakespeare was a revolutionary in regards to forming the english language. tolkien constantly loses himself in complicated and exhausting formulations. if you mean that tolkien is "easier" to read, then i wont disagree with you, but take into account when they both lived. tolkien does not measure up to shakespeare in terms of importance or quality. Sounds like writing = language? Well, Tolkien is the creator of languages, bro Shakespeare come out on top in influence tho, but I think we can agree on that both brought a new standard to the table. Also, isn't there some kind of inconsistency in "tolkien constantly loses himself in complicated and exhausting formulations" and "if you mean that tolkien is "easier" to read, then i wont disagree with you"? ^^ i won't disagree with you, because a lot of people seem to have serious issues with reading old english. i dont, i massively enjoy reading shakespeare, more so than tolkien. creating a language noone speaks is not all that much of an achievement, i dare say most linguists would be able to create their own language. tolkiens choice of focus was something that always irritated me. even as frodo and sam were carrying the ring through mordor, there was time to describe every little silly detail he could come up with. a good writer knows what he can let out, and what he needs to do to make the reader get immersed. tolkien is too much scientist even when writing to be a perfect author. i'm not saying i dont like tolkien, i really like his works and consider them great books, but comparing tolkien and shakespeare is not something you should do. i am also not the only one who thinks tolkien is not that great an author. he did not bring "a new standard to the table" in terms of language or narration. what tolkien did was give one genre (fantasy) a lot of new ideas. he massively influenced every bit of fantasy literatue that came after him. but that's it. shakespeare changed the english language. and that is something way bigger.
I definately see your point, although what may seem to be meaningless descriptions may actually be something else. I'm just gonna quote a forum post here, as it was so well-phrased
" Tolkien's message in The Hobbit is also quite clear. “In a hole there lived a Hobbit.” This statement is CLEARLY a denial of reality and a statement of dark philosophical preponderance. Tolkien has the word “hole” appear as the first noun in the entire work! Such weight of precedence is clear to all who read it!A “hole” is nothingness. It is nihilism bleaker than any abyss, deeper than any darkness."
|
On February 20 2014 17:35 Muffloe wrote:Show nested quote +On February 20 2014 08:47 qotsager wrote:On February 20 2014 07:26 Muffloe wrote:On February 20 2014 02:57 qotsager wrote:On February 19 2014 20:10 Muffloe wrote:On February 19 2014 18:34 Daswollvieh wrote:On February 19 2014 18:16 Jerubaal wrote:On February 19 2014 15:05 Muffloe wrote:On February 19 2014 13:05 NeuroticPsychosis wrote:
Better than Shakespeare (if I could understand him) Haha, I found that quite funny, considering that I always support Tolkien in Shakespeare vs Tolkien discussions Edit: ofc, funny op aswell, gj! I don't even know how this would come about. Star Trek > Gandhi... because... internet. Well, it is not that strange. Is is simply comparing the supposed masters of the pen. do you really consider tolkien a master of the pen, as in his writing? what always made tolkien great in my eyes was the universe he created. but comparing him to shakespeare in terms of their writing? no way. you also have to take into account the times they lived in. shakespeare was a revolutionary in regards to forming the english language. tolkien constantly loses himself in complicated and exhausting formulations. if you mean that tolkien is "easier" to read, then i wont disagree with you, but take into account when they both lived. tolkien does not measure up to shakespeare in terms of importance or quality. Sounds like writing = language? Well, Tolkien is the creator of languages, bro Shakespeare come out on top in influence tho, but I think we can agree on that both brought a new standard to the table. Also, isn't there some kind of inconsistency in "tolkien constantly loses himself in complicated and exhausting formulations" and "if you mean that tolkien is "easier" to read, then i wont disagree with you"? ^^ i won't disagree with you, because a lot of people seem to have serious issues with reading old english. i dont, i massively enjoy reading shakespeare, more so than tolkien. creating a language noone speaks is not all that much of an achievement, i dare say most linguists would be able to create their own language. tolkiens choice of focus was something that always irritated me. even as frodo and sam were carrying the ring through mordor, there was time to describe every little silly detail he could come up with. a good writer knows what he can let out, and what he needs to do to make the reader get immersed. tolkien is too much scientist even when writing to be a perfect author. i'm not saying i dont like tolkien, i really like his works and consider them great books, but comparing tolkien and shakespeare is not something you should do. i am also not the only one who thinks tolkien is not that great an author. he did not bring "a new standard to the table" in terms of language or narration. what tolkien did was give one genre (fantasy) a lot of new ideas. he massively influenced every bit of fantasy literatue that came after him. but that's it. shakespeare changed the english language. and that is something way bigger. I definately see your point, although what may seem to be meaningless descriptions may actually be something else. I'm just gonna quote a forum post here, as it was so well-phrased " Tolkien's message in The Hobbit is also quite clear. “In a hole there lived a Hobbit.” This statement is CLEARLY a denial of reality and a statement of dark philosophical preponderance. Tolkien has the word “hole” appear as the first noun in the entire work! Such weight of precedence is clear to all who read it!A “hole” is nothingness. It is nihilism bleaker than any abyss, deeper than any darkness."
The text does support this reading, however, gandalf's arrival signifies an omen to adventure. Omens of course are counter to nihilism sentiment as they give purpose to life.
For someone who is a writer in the strictest sense, as in a painter is a painter in the strictest sense, I think shakespeare is more important. There is so much to learn from his use of language. He does everything so perfectly and in ways that others would not even dream of doing. Shakespeare is a very good writer because not only is it very good it seems to teach other writers how to write very good. It's like he found pandoras box and then he learned how to use the contents of the bounty. It's like he had the ring to rule them all and he ruled them all and was
.....immortalized
In terms of art appreciation Tolkien is probably just as good. Those songs the dwarves sing are pretty and characters and settings are well vivid
|
On February 20 2014 17:35 Muffloe wrote:Show nested quote +On February 20 2014 08:47 qotsager wrote:On February 20 2014 07:26 Muffloe wrote:On February 20 2014 02:57 qotsager wrote:On February 19 2014 20:10 Muffloe wrote:On February 19 2014 18:34 Daswollvieh wrote:On February 19 2014 18:16 Jerubaal wrote:On February 19 2014 15:05 Muffloe wrote:On February 19 2014 13:05 NeuroticPsychosis wrote:
Better than Shakespeare (if I could understand him) Haha, I found that quite funny, considering that I always support Tolkien in Shakespeare vs Tolkien discussions Edit: ofc, funny op aswell, gj! I don't even know how this would come about. Star Trek > Gandhi... because... internet. Well, it is not that strange. Is is simply comparing the supposed masters of the pen. do you really consider tolkien a master of the pen, as in his writing? what always made tolkien great in my eyes was the universe he created. but comparing him to shakespeare in terms of their writing? no way. you also have to take into account the times they lived in. shakespeare was a revolutionary in regards to forming the english language. tolkien constantly loses himself in complicated and exhausting formulations. if you mean that tolkien is "easier" to read, then i wont disagree with you, but take into account when they both lived. tolkien does not measure up to shakespeare in terms of importance or quality. Sounds like writing = language? Well, Tolkien is the creator of languages, bro Shakespeare come out on top in influence tho, but I think we can agree on that both brought a new standard to the table. Also, isn't there some kind of inconsistency in "tolkien constantly loses himself in complicated and exhausting formulations" and "if you mean that tolkien is "easier" to read, then i wont disagree with you"? ^^ i won't disagree with you, because a lot of people seem to have serious issues with reading old english. i dont, i massively enjoy reading shakespeare, more so than tolkien. creating a language noone speaks is not all that much of an achievement, i dare say most linguists would be able to create their own language. tolkiens choice of focus was something that always irritated me. even as frodo and sam were carrying the ring through mordor, there was time to describe every little silly detail he could come up with. a good writer knows what he can let out, and what he needs to do to make the reader get immersed. tolkien is too much scientist even when writing to be a perfect author. i'm not saying i dont like tolkien, i really like his works and consider them great books, but comparing tolkien and shakespeare is not something you should do. i am also not the only one who thinks tolkien is not that great an author. he did not bring "a new standard to the table" in terms of language or narration. what tolkien did was give one genre (fantasy) a lot of new ideas. he massively influenced every bit of fantasy literatue that came after him. but that's it. shakespeare changed the english language. and that is something way bigger. I definately see your point, although what may seem to be meaningless descriptions may actually be something else. I'm just gonna quote a forum post here, as it was so well-phrased " Tolkien's message in The Hobbit is also quite clear. “In a hole there lived a Hobbit.” This statement is CLEARLY a denial of reality and a statement of dark philosophical preponderance. Tolkien has the word “hole” appear as the first noun in the entire work! Such weight of precedence is clear to all who read it!A “hole” is nothingness. It is nihilism bleaker than any abyss, deeper than any darkness."
are you serious? even if every last bit of a book is loaded with some cryptic meaning doesnt mean it's well written... (btw the hobbit is damn well written, far better book than the lord of the rings imo) if we start interpreting stuff, i think the hole is a far clearer metaphor for the female womb, giving bilbo comfort and security, until the 13(!) dwarves and one wizard invade that innocent place. notice how tolkien stays away from female protagonists and any serious love stories? he obviously has some kind of oedipal mother-issues, being scared of women in general, longing to return to the safety of her womb.
|
Baa?21248 Posts
Shakespeare did not write in Old English, nor did he write in Middle English. He wrote in (Early) Modern English.
To deny that Shakespeare is, in all senses of the word, a greater author than Tolkien is absurd.
Tolkien is an immensely important author, and a much better writer than people seem to give him credit for. There is a growing trend of armchair critics who do not have real understanding of the field proliferating the misguided view of "Tolkien is a poor author, he's only a world-builder." The two are intertwined.
Freudian, Jungian, and in general psychoanalytic readings of Lord of the Rings/Tolkien are absurd.
Please stop making ludicrous claims regarding topics you don't understand.
|
On February 21 2014 01:49 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:
Freudian, Jungian, and in general psychoanalytic readings of Lord of the Rings/Tolkien are absurd.
kind of my point.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
