Is that a “resume virtue” or a “eulogy virtue”?
1 Like
It is a good story and that so many find a way through the tedious bits really is a testament. I was really surprised how well The Hobbit came out in three movies. It made me appreciate the tale more.
BTW I don’t get into beers or coffee drinks either. Beer very rarely on a hot day especially with hot spicy food. Coffee I’ll have two or three times a week but only because I have a sweet tooth and I like to get a scone out about that often. But I like a medium roast black without all fancy stuff when I do have it. The barista at our local joint and I joke about my wife’s extra extra Carmel latte made with oat milk with light foam whenever I pick up for both of us. What I really abuse us black tea, something grew up drinking with my mother. I probably have three cups a day minimum and much more if I spend the reading. I should drink more water.
2 Likes
Your wife and I would probably have similar coffee preferences. The only way coffee could possibly get at least partially redeemed for me would be to essentially turn it into chocolate milk.
But I could drink it to enjoy company or at least be polite - as I did once in Haiti. In a family setting where we were served coffee that I’m told was especially strong compared to what Americans are used to - I did drink it all since we weren’t about to turn up our noses at anything the generous hosts offered us.
1 Like
I hear you. And even share in your judgments even though in some senses - I am that kid. Sort of. What I mean is I recognize in myself the same proclivities to do (or not to do) some things that for some reason I just have a mental block against doing. I can recognize this in myself or among certain beloved friends or family members that either through their genetic wiring on the spectrum or through social media environment conditioning - or likely a combination of both; there are just certain things that require a significant conquest of a very real mental block. And regarding those things they / we haven’t yet hit our “Bilbo being forced out of the shire” moment yet. It likely takes a survival level event or something that so excites their passions of pursuit that they are forced to face the challenge and overcome. So how does one finesse the fine line between kind and loving help (which might be enabling) vs. letting the consequences take over - which may be or seem cruel?
I loved GoT although the violence was over the top. For all its faults, at least religion was taken very, very seriously in GoT. The religion was sometimes horrible, but still important.
Venezuelan-style (i.e. half coffee half milk or cream) is about how I like it on the few occasions I have had coffee.
2 Likes
My reaction to the Hobbit movies generally alternated among “Why did they change this?” “This is pretty good.” and “Can we get on with the plot, this fight/battle scene was getting repetitive after 5 minutes, and now it’s been going for 15. If there were some lines, that would break up the tedium.” The last one was essentially my reaction to about two thirds of the extended edition of the third movie.
4 Likes
Of course I read it a very long time ago so I’m really only comparing the movies to my dim memory of the book, essentially:
-
Hobbit is visited by exotic wizard
-
Hobbit is enlisted to help pushy dwarfs
-
On the way Hobbit finds magic ring
-
Hobbit used ring to compensate for limitations
-
Adventures ensue
-
Hobbit returns to Shire to get fat, grow old and tell stories.
2 Likes
While a couple of these posts were referenced in the Penner thread, it may be interesting for some to look at this 60 episode series of posts on LOTR and Hobbits and such. They came up pretty much at random on my search, but perhaps if you will you can make sense of it all. Experimental Theology: Search results for Hobbits
1 Like
Yeah - I was exasperated how they couldn’t find time in the movies for such “trivial” characters like Tom Bombadil, but they found all sorts of time for (as you say) repetitive CGI tedium of battle scenes, and added in what passes for “romance” among movie directors today - who wouldn’t recognize any true romance if it was served them on a silver platter.
I know movie directors feel obliged to “make their own mark” on the story or I gather would be thought droll if all they did was “merely” stuck with the narrative the author provided. But however good the LOTR movies were, the cinematic alterations notwithstanding, it is all mere child’s play compared to the grown-up world of the real literature and the deep heroism and real romance that infuses the entire written story.
…And what stories they were! Your synopsis may not be too bad as far as it goes - but the books are powerful for the conversations and commentary to be had there too.
2 Likes
GoT shows how the world works without God. It is realistic. All these power grabs and what the authors describe are obvious if we look at wars, slavery, land stealing and so on throughout history. The brutal nature of humanity is on full display in GOT. I absolutely loved GOT. Best show of all time.
LotR is definitely more hopeful and has the good will triumph over evil vibe. GoT presents a bleak and nihilistic look at life whereas LOtR offers a theology of hope.
It’s not all or nothing. You can’t portray every character as evil. That would be a horrible story. The occasional character that makes good choices and survives does not change the general nature of the narrative which is not a “good triumphs over evil” story.
I generally share the author’s sentiments comparing the two stories.
Vinnie
2 Likes
If there were lines, wouldn’t somebody have to pay the actors more?
I don’t think its the details that make it different but certainly how something is presented does alter our interpretation. GRRM said: “I wanted to combine the wonder and image of Tolkien fantasy with the gloom of historical fiction.”
The author linked above writes: "Instead, I want to talk about the spirit of the two authors, and the ethos of their two worlds, and why America desperately needs to remember Tolkien again. . . . Aside from the fight against the White Walkers in the north, the heart of the story wasn’t a classic tale of good and evil, but rather something far more grim. As I wrote, the show (and books) depicted an “amoral society, unmoored from its traditions and full of entitled and ambitious men and women who compete for power with unrestrained viciousness.”
That is spot on. It is literally called “Game of Thrones” and is largely centered around humans seeking power and to retain it regardless of the cost. There were certainly good people in the story but there was no real grand narrative of good triumphing over evil. Everything kind of just “is.” The wheel crushed everyone with indifference.
Vinnie
Yes it does. For good or for ill, religion is important in the lives of the characters. Most series ignore religion. Battlestar Galactica was another series where religion was important to most of the characters. It had a definite Latter-Day Saint influence.
An “aimless” post:
-
Very near the end of French and Chang’s podcast, linked to above, I heard Chang praise commitments to “Institutions” and thought: "Well, heck, there’s a possible solution to the dilemma of “the Unchurched”.
-
Recently, my youngest brother’s dedication to activities sponsored in his Non-denominational Church up in Placerville, began to shame me more than previously. For whatever reason, he is active: (a) “Food Pantry”-related activities: receiving, storing, bagging, and distributing food-stuffs to drive-by recipients; (b) feeding the homeless, at special sites or in their camps outside of Placerville, (c) accompanying medical teams who visit the homeless camps and offer medical care; (d) going so far as going with a team of members all the way to Tiajuana to construct a dormitory for Widows and Orphans WHEN THE WORLD ASKS WHAT GOD IS LIKE, WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO SAY, “LOOK AT THE CHURCH”
-
And I realized, none too soon, that just because I am un-churched, I don’t have to be “un-committed”. All I need to do is find a working institution and decide on how I can serve.
-
I seem to be getting a steady diet of “Word” every time I turn around. Now, all I think I need is the Sacrament, and–by God–I’m meaningfully churched again, … in a way I never imagined I can be.
3 Likes
And the the enchantments of the Shire are harmony with nature, domestic life and the daily magic of friendship and good food.
I think my metabolism was pretty enchanted and could probably have handled breakfast, second breakfast and elevenses okay to start off each day in my first quarter century but I would split in two if ate like a Hobbit these days.
5 Likes
I agree with this assessment.
George R.R. Martin has a very mixed relationship with the material his series is satirizing. Part of The Lord of the Rings is fundamentally a mythic tale of culture and tradition being handed down through the ages through stories. Martin laments the moral simplicity of Tolkien’s vision of the world. He famously snidely asked, “What was Aragorn’s tax policy?” As such, part of the idea of Game of Thrones was to rip some of it’s more romantic notions of legend and tradition apart. Martin disagreed with Tolkien’s worldview and wanted to use his story to question the implicit moralism, religiosity, and patriarchal norms Tolkien’s work never commented upon. George R.R. Martin is agnostic. He views the world in materialistic terms, numbers, and bodies. The HBO adaption of his series reflects this with an innate focus on the human body as a tool to give and receive sex and violence. While there is magic in Game of Thrones , it’s heavily implied there isn’t an afterlife and death is mere nothingness.
1 Like
I was going to react to something you observed earlier - but I see you’ve probably withdrawn from the discussion.
I think some have a higher tolerance for darker themes in their entertainment, while others of us seem to be more sensitive to any implied morals (or absence of any moral lesson - at least of the good sort) and want to see villains get their “comeuppance” or feel assured that they will. Authors like Tolkien may give us a long haul to get there, but we can rest in a kind of confidence that we know he won’t leave the evil tyrants in power at the end of things. Other authors (the ones holding mirrors up to the world they see) don’t give that kind of moral confidence - probably because they don’t see it. For better or worse, some of us want that reassurance in our fictional narratives. It’s probably the difference between readers’ expectations, some of whom want their fiction to be descriptive (accurate), but others want prescriptive (edifying). The latter want a hero they can look up to, be inspired by, emulate. The former want reality shown with any and all dismal detail pushed in our faces - to confront us. While I suspect you are the latter sort, and perhaps surrounded here by a lot of us more of the former sort (at least I am), that doesn’t mean your sort of literature doesn’t have its necessary place. The Bible certainly gives us both when you looks at various parts of it in isolation.