EFFORTPOST THE AMERICAN TOLKIEN :marseythegrey: :soyjakyell: :marseygeorgerrmartin: :marseyit:


								

								

https://time.com/archive/6675462/books-the-american-tolkien/

A common discussion in Fantasy online circles seems to be "who's the new Tolkien?", this article by Time magazine dates from 2005 and is responsible for popularizing the idea that George RR Martin is the "American Tolkien".

What really distinguishes Martin, and what marks him as a major force for evolution in fantasy, is his refusal to embrace a vision of the world as a Manichaean struggle between Good and Evil. Tolkien's work has enormous imaginative force, but you have to go elsewhere for moral complexity. Martin's wars are multifaceted and ambiguous, as are the men and women who wage them and the gods who watch them and chortle, and somehow that makes them mean more. A Feast for Crows isn't pretty elves against gnarly orcs. It's men and women slugging it out in the muck, for money and power and lust and love.

Now I have to say a like ASOIAF a lot, but I never understood why those two authors get compared to each other. They both write Fantasy and love (loved in Tolkien's case) world-building and lore but that's it, their writing styles are different, their stories are different, their themes are different. Is it just because :#marseygeorgerrmartin: has a "double R" on his name (the second R which he added by the way). Is it because the "what's Aragorn's tax policy" quote? :soyjakfat:

The article talks about Robert Jordan too @kaamrev :marseysoypoint: and what's funny is that it comes as a review for "A Feast for Crows" which is… well, ranked low among ASOIAFcels, most fans feel the series peaked in "A Storm of Swords" and AFFC can be a slog for many.

I think it can be argued GRRM is currently the best Fantasy author alive (I guess this speaks more of the current state of fantasy but many would claim it is :marseyrowling:), there's a lot of his writing which is good but also what is bad tends to be very bad

Like this:

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

Daenerys last chapter on ADWD lmao

Or this from AFFC which I don't know if it is good, bad, funny or what

Ten thousand of your children perished in my palm, Your Grace, she thought, slipping a third finger into Myr. Whilst you snored, I would lick your sons of my face and fingers one by one, al those pale sticky princes. You claimed your rights, my lord, but in the darkness I would eat your heirs.

Cersei describing licking Robert's c*m instead of finishing inside her, she says that while anally fingering a woman. Maybe we can qualify it as a realistic :marseywomanmoment:

Then there are the thematic differences, Tolkien's Legendarium is mythology, which was Tolkien's life passion, he gets criticized for making "black and white" characters instead of "morally grey" ones but the thing is his main themes are "Good vs Evil" on a cosmic battle, envy (Morgoth) and the will to dominate (Sauron) are the ultimate evil, he's not aiming at historical accuracy as mythology is always anachronistic. ASOIAF is an attempt at European Medieval History but "what if dragons and evil ice elves existed?" Is not good representation of Medieval Western Europe either as medieval peasants were just passive NPCs which lords like the Boltons could skin alive without repercussions, the evil characters of ASOIAF like the Boltons, the Mountain or Tywin get away with too much shit. The high lords of Westeros are also weirdly and modernly atheistic or irreligious, so for all of GRRM's talk about his saga being "historically well grounded" it doesn't seem better than any other fantasy novel, not that it is a problem as it doesn't affect writing quality and storylines just something to point out.

A good way to conclude is that GRRM is not the American Tolkien, in fact no one is and that's ok. An author should be it's own thing, they shouldn't live under the shadow of another author to be compared and I feel like every time the media or fans say stuff like "X IS THE AMERICAN Y" :marseysoylentgrin: or "A IS THE NEW B" :marseysoyhype:they're doing X and A a disservice.

Here are some reddit threads on it

https://old.reddit.com/r/Fantasy/comments/hw0ls4/the_american_tolkien_isnt_george_r_r_martin_its/

Here this redditor argues the American Tolkien is not GRRM but Stephen King :marseyxd:

And here's Robert Jordan's thread

https://old.reddit.com/r/books/comments/61k1v0/robert_jordan_the_american_tolkien/

I never read Jordan so maybe their fans can tell us if that's an apt comparison but I'm certain having Jordan just be Jordan is much better

https://old.reddit.com/r/gameofthrones/comments/1fim7a/no_spoilers_the_american_spectator_is_george_rr/

The Game of Thrones sub (normiest ASOIAF sub ever).

!bookworms !ringbearers

68
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

!comicshitters Jack Kirby has more claim to being "The American Tolkien" then GRRM. While Stan Lee was interested in the relatability and melodrama of his characters Kirby was obsessed with the epic and mythic. Just how Steve Ditko viewed the comic book as a form of education wherein a flawed lad named Peter Parker would learn Aristotlean virtue and grow up, something Stan Lee turned into the endless churn of the illusion of change, Kirby imagined the superhero as vector for modern day mythology with definite beginning middles and ends, The New Gods series at DC started off as a idea for Thor where in all the Asgardians would die in Ragnarok and be replaced with the new gods something Stan disparaged of.

https://i.rdrama.net/images/17226222803862135.webp https://i.rdrama.net/images/1722622280448269.webp https://i.rdrama.net/images/17226222825434854.webp https://i.rdrama.net/images/17226222807561858.webp https://i.rdrama.net/images/17226222815822585.webp https://i.rdrama.net/images/17226222818959298.webp https://i.rdrama.net/images/17226223857452595.webp

In his mind he was making instant Myth:

https://i.rdrama.net/images/1722622280567328.webp

Some seething over the fascist content of Kirby reminds me a lot of when People accuse Tolkien of fascism minus the specific art style comments:

https://www.hoodedutilitarian.com/2012/09/funky-flashman/

Jack Kirby's superhero comics are Manichean. Reality is seen in black and white in these primary colored comics. From a purely visual point of view this means that the baddies are ugly (as seen above) and the goodies are mostly good looking. [...]

Kirby's graphic style is a cubo-futurism that underlines and glorifies, technology, youth and violence. [...]

Giving us not only a fascistic glorification and aestheticization, but also a sanitized version of violence Jack Kirby's work is the perfect embodiment of kitsch.

Quite literally is there anything more emblematic of American exceptionalism then making pure pulpy bottom of the barrel trash and dead serious thinking its on par with Homer?

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

https://i.rdrama.net/images/17226226016817179.webp

Isn't this the plot of "American Gods"?

Jack Kirby's superhero comics are Manichean. Reality is seen in black and white in these primary colored comics

NOOOO YOU CAN'T DEPICT THE BAD GUYS ARE UGLY AND IRREDEEMABLE!!! :marseysoycry:

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Darkseid wasn't just ugly and irredeemable. He was also a recognizable sapient being as well as being the dark lord. Modern writers forget that, at his heart, Darkseid was a sad confused old man who had alienated all his children, lost the only creature he ever loved, and was surrounded by an entire planet of enablers. He also expressed respect for those clever and strong enough too defy him and once slapped Desaad down for daring too think a worm like him could ever break a brave strong man like Orion. His tragedy was deeper than the current palestinian lives matter crap.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

That quote is from First issue Special #1 from the 70s. Its a common enough idea imo. Neil Gaiman's whole thing is that all stories are valid in real in how they help people and thats what magic is or something. Its something Dave Sim makes fun of him for in Cerebus. Neil Gaiman is basically the corporate friendly Alan Moore since he doesnt oppose Kitsch like Moore does.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

What the heck is kitsch?

I know that odd nerdrum guy is all about but I don't get it

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Kitsch refers to poor taste/tacky art

But I'm not sure if it means the same to comicshitters @KatserKitty1987

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Its like tacky and lol quality art. I mean more Gaiman would say all art is valuable as long as it means something to someone while Moore views the west as having caused a massive cultural decline.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Alan Moore does seem like an elitist

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

He's a midwit who was worshipped as a genius by people who think palestinian lives matter. A crueler fate is hard too imagine.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I think in this case it's pretty much the same idea. There's a lot to mock about Gaiman, but I've always liked the core idea of his writing: that anything has a meaning to it's existence, as long as it matters to someone. Even in The Sandman, he includes the weird superhero versions of the character from the past as part of the story, and one of those characters is literally the catalyst for the climax of the series.

It's a pretty prevalent concept in his stories, probably most obvious in American Gods, where oddball roadside attractions are explicitly stated to have a spiritual/magical power to them. The whole thing is, admittedly, pretty pretentious in it's lack of pretentiousness, but I do like it.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I'm not reading this entire thread but George RR Martin is the post-60's American Tolkein, and that's why he's kitsch and constantly talking about gross sexual encounters and forces everyone into a position of deep moral ambiguity to project a relativistic worldview.

Almost all media sucks now. We should all feel ashamed and turn back but it's probably not happening. :marseyshrug:

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Being a peepee like his nobles were would lead too them getting murdered by peasants. Palestinian lives matter was not yet a thing and medieval peasants were not as pathetic as palestinians.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

The league literally drowned in r-slurred palestinian lives matter kitsch.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Ummm buts its cool old public domain stuff look Alan Quaterman btfos James Bond and Mira from Dracula btfos Harry Potter and public domain british superheroes btfo the JLA :marseynerd2:

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

That had such potential but he had too drag it init modern day and have his palestinian lives matter opinions ruin everything.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

@Grue is right. Everything you say is always wrong.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

My point isnt even that Jack Kirby comics are as good or high lit as Tolkien. Tolkien was far smarter and more educated then Kirby whose takes on mythology are often self aggrandizing and uneducated (this is something Art Spigalemen , the Maus guy, would always rag on about with Kirby). I think too many people askig this question think of it like "Which author is writing fantasy as quality as Tolkien?" when I am looking very literally at who is as influence as Tolkien in American culture and I think the King of Comics is a contender. His comics have had a massive influence on all facets of pop culture, they feature Manichean morality, a heavy focus on mythology, and are deadly sincere. You can take my commentary as an indictment of American culture if you want im just taking the proposition literally rather then based on value.

because people are very kuch feeling capeshit fatigue after 2 decades of nonstop releases

Id also argue the movies just arent representative of the comics. They are average blockbusters with a shared universe gimmick. Nothing about them is particularly epic lore wise (they go out of their way to claim the Asgard gods are just aliens) nor are they very moralistic or background lore heavy. Its all just quippy attractive people doing crazy stunts with lots of explosions, which is what most US blockbusters are.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Link copied to clipboard
Action successful!
Error, please refresh the page and try again.