|
Post by Maerin on Apr 2, 2009 16:03:19 GMT -5
Can we all agree that hell is other people and move on? ;D In the short history of the Internet, or the somewhat longer history of religion, when exactly has that ever occurred?
|
|
|
Post by Ghost Bear on Apr 3, 2009 1:27:42 GMT -5
Can we all agree that hell is other people and move on? ;D NO. I love you all. Peace man. -Sunbeam
|
|
|
Post by Samildanach on Apr 8, 2009 1:43:08 GMT -5
Well, Vonotar is almost a copy from Saruman, and as far as i know "The Lord of the Rings", "Lone Wolf", and "Star wars" are tales where the bad guys are very bad, and the good ones are very good. Of course there are traitors, some of the bad guys were good in the past and the heroes are doubting sometimes. But they are tales with very clear simplifications. Again, this seems to come down to 'This is the case because I say it is.' You state that all these stories are clearly divided into strong light and dark sides, but you offer no examples to support this view. I never actually finished Lord of the Rings, so I can't comment on that, but the light/dark division in Star Wars is far from clear. The names are clear - Jedi, Sith, Dark Side, etc - but many people fall to the dark side, or return to the light side, or both...and it's not necessarily clear that it's simply a matter of 'evil'. After all, why does Anakin become Vader? Because his mother, wife and unborn baby all die, and he holds himself at least partly responsible for all of it. Seems to me that he's too young and immature to cope with the grief, and the rage at his own failings, and these emotions come to dominate his view of the world. He doesn't fall to the dark side because he lusts for power for its own sake; it's because he wants the power to make things right. Just now, I gave my opinion on the state of the light/dark division in one of the sources you mentioned, then I used examples to illustrate why I believe that. I think your arguments would be more easily understood if you, too, presented some solid examples to illustrate your case. What is it in Star Wars that makes you say there's a simple light/dark dichotomy? Which specific parts of Lone Wolf make you believe there is a message that darkness won't last? I disagree with you, but if you can give examples I'll at least respect your opinion. As it is, the only evidence you've offered is your own conviction. Can we all agree that hell is other people and move on? ;D NO. I love you all. Peace man. -Sunbeam Your life and your post end here. You awake to find yourself stranded in the Plane of Darkness. From a shadowed corner, Naar himself scuttles forth. 'I love you too, Ghost Bear,' he slurps. Then proves it.
|
|
|
Post by joshua on Apr 8, 2009 14:12:30 GMT -5
I´m afraid i won´t get your respect although my argument would be right or wrong. But if you request me examples, i´ll give you examples.
Why we say that a yellow flower is yellow? -Because it is yellow. Why George Lucas is childish? -Because he is not mature (mentally). Why "The Lord of the Rings" is for children (although it can be nice for adult people)? -Because Tolkien invented that world while he was telling fairy tales to his sons. Why the division between Right or Wrong, Light or Darkness is simple and clear at these stories? -Because they are tales where each figure represents not only a heroe or a bad warrior...they represent A CATEGORY itself. Lone Wolf, Luke Skywalker or Aragorn are not only heroes... They are THE HEROISM. And Vader,Saruman, Vonotar are the Dark side of this category.
And i agree with you that they became bad for a guilt complex, and they cannot be mature. Yes, if you feel guilty, probably you will be guilty. The difference between real life and a tale is that these categories are blurry in real life. It´s very difficult to find a clean heroe in real life, and probably no one is completely good or completely bad. The success of a tale is its universality, using clear examples with a clear definition.
And a bad guy, a dictator like Hitler...They realised they are bad? Or they try to mend things to his way? I don´t know. But a powerful Dark Vader, Saruman or Vonotar always find a creep court beside them or a justification to their actions. My opinion is that someone like Hitler got a great power of conviction not only to other people but to himself. A bad person needs to convince himself to justify his facts. They need lie to his soul.
|
|
|
Post by zipp on Apr 8, 2009 14:52:32 GMT -5
Back to the original point, I brought up Christianity which sent us on a spin into what has been, at times, an interesting discussion. But in truth, I should've just said what I truly thought and thus avoided all this banter.
My real thoughts on the passage Joshua submitted?
I think it's wordy, disgustingly flowery, and barf-inducing. It was terrible writing, and had I seen such awfulness in the original LW books, I wouldn't be part of an LW community today.
In less harsh tones, the things which made Dever's writing good was that they were written in the voice of a GM. Dever stuck to description and fact, which let us make LW into the kind of character we wanted him to be. Many of us stole purses and acted in the best interests of a cut-throat when we played through the books, AND THAT WAS OKAY. The kingdom saw us as a hero, but that's only because so very few lived through a meeting with LW, much less a partnership.
Similarly, when LW died, it stuck to description. Your soul is trapped on the planes of eternal darkness. Your body melts in acid. Your quest ends here.
It's not so much for me, as I originally implied, whether LW goes to an after life, it's the directness with which you told the reader in your passage what you wanted them to feel. That's all wrong for an LW book. A passage where LW dies would play out something like this:
"The enemy is overwhelming and though you fight bravely and kill many of them, there is no hope of winning through. Your final wish as an arrow pierces your heart is that you've held them off long enough for the captain and his regiment to break the seige. Your life and your mission end here"
See? Subtlety. You can throw in there that LW is fighting to relieve a seige because that's what the player's mission would be. But there's no reference to the sun shining like marigolds on a blue hill, or eagles soaring with your soul into the sky. It's all too silly.
This is war. It's plain. It's simple. It's painful. It's deadly. There is no honor for the fallen, not that they can enjoy.
Remove flowery prose. Remove references to eagles and symbolism. Because eagles might symbolise something for one person and something else for another. And that takes away from the ability of many people to play LW and make him what they want.
Furthermore, you can't send LW to an after life because then the mission wouldn't be over. You'd want to play him in the afterlife and get him out of there so he could go back to doing his part for good in Magnamund.
With the exception of the infamous Kalte death, all LW endings are ENDINGS. There is no question YOU ARE DONE.
|
|
|
Post by Beowuuf on Apr 8, 2009 15:14:57 GMT -5
Probably time to agree to disagree and move on to an entirely new topic of discussion I think...
Most people have stated their points of view. So unless anyone new has a different comment, I think small comments or new tangents aside we're probably looking at diminishing returns on now replying to points of someone's points with new points or clarifying points.
|
|
|
Post by joshua on Apr 8, 2009 17:28:39 GMT -5
Back to the original point, I brought up Christianity which sent us on a spin into what has been, at times, an interesting discussion. But in truth, I should've just said what I truly thought and thus avoided all this banter. My real thoughts on the passage Joshua submitted? I think it's wordy, disgustingly flowery, and barf-inducing. It was terrible writing, and had I seen such awfulness in the original LW books, I wouldn't be part of an LW community today. In less harsh tones, the things which made Dever's writing good was that they were written in the voice of a GM. Dever stuck to description and fact, which let us make LW into the kind of character we wanted him to be. Many of us stole purses and acted in the best interests of a cut-throat when we played through the books, AND THAT WAS OKAY. The kingdom saw us as a hero, but that's only because so very few lived through a meeting with LW, much less a partnership. Similarly, when LW died, it stuck to description. Your soul is trapped on the planes of eternal darkness. Your body melts in acid. Your quest ends here. It's not so much for me, as I originally implied, whether LW goes to an after life, it's the directness with which you told the reader in your passage what you wanted them to feel. That's all wrong for an LW book. A passage where LW dies would play out something like this: "The enemy is overwhelming and though you fight bravely and kill many of them, there is no hope of winning through. Your final wish as an arrow pierces your heart is that you've held them off long enough for the captain and his regiment to break the seige. Your life and your mission end here" See? Subtlety. You can throw in there that LW is fighting to relieve a seige because that's what the player's mission would be. But there's no reference to the sun shining like marigolds on a blue hill, or eagles soaring with your soul into the sky. It's all too silly. This is war. It's plain. It's simple. It's painful. It's deadly. There is no honor for the fallen, not that they can enjoy. Remove flowery prose. Remove references to eagles and symbolism. Because eagles might symbolise something for one person and something else for another. And that takes away from the ability of many people to play LW and make him what they want. Furthermore, you can't send LW to an after life because then the mission wouldn't be over. You'd want to play him in the afterlife and get him out of there so he could go back to doing his part for good in Magnamund. With the exception of the infamous Kalte death, all LW endings are ENDINGS. There is no question YOU ARE DONE. You know nothing about Christianity. You know about the trauma of Churchs. That´s very different. I repeat, i like Lone Wolf, but there is a philosophical problem in the passage i refer, which is against the spirit of the warrior legends. Yes, i don´t want to repeat old arguments,too.
|
|
|
Post by zipp on Apr 8, 2009 17:37:10 GMT -5
You know nothing about Christianity. You know about the trauma of Churchs. Two things. First of all... what are you talking about? The statement doesn't even make sense. If what you think you're trying to say is that I know the history of Christianity as opposed to the spirituality of Christianity, you're very wrong. I'm awesome enough to know about both. But it's all beside the point. I JUST POSTED saying that my problems with your suggestion have nothing to do with Christianity but more with the fact that the paragraph you wrote wasn't good. As you said... That's very different.
|
|
|
Post by joshua on Apr 8, 2009 20:21:14 GMT -5
Because you are the only one who absurdly talks about Cristianity, when in my post there is no mention about it. The paradise is a universal concept. You despise hope,ok it is your problem. You know something... I think you are suggesting you got a morality trouble, and i don´t wish enter in that sad country. it is the same if i ask you: "what time is it?" and your answer is: "I don´t like coffee". I go on talking about the hour, and finaly you say: "what a disgusting coffee you made!".
|
|
|
Post by Samildanach on Apr 8, 2009 20:36:48 GMT -5
Probably time to agree to disagree and move on to an entirely new topic of discussion I think... Most people have stated their points of view. So unless anyone new has a different comment, I think small comments or new tangents aside we're probably looking at diminishing returns on now replying to points of someone's points with new points or clarifying points. I agree. No-one is persuading anyone else. There have been some interesting points, but we are denegenerating into repetition.
|
|
|
Post by Beowuuf on Apr 9, 2009 1:16:29 GMT -5
And repetition!
|
|
|
Post by zipp on Apr 9, 2009 1:36:51 GMT -5
Because you are the only one who absurdly talks about Cristianity, when in my post there is no mention about it. The paradise is a universal concept. You despise hope,ok it is your problem.You know something... I think you are suggesting you got a morality trouble, and i don´t wish enter in that sad country. it is the same if i ask you: "what time is it?" and your answer is: "I don´t like coffee". I go on talking about the hour, and finaly you say: "what a disgusting coffee you made!". But now I've gone back and admitted that I was wrong, that it was pointless to talk about Christianity in a passage which didn't really reference it (though I still think the passage is poorly written). Have you even been reading my latest posts? When did I say I despised hope? Point it out to me. Seriously. QUOTE ME. Where did I say it? Can you answer me that? Lesson here: Don't say I said something unless I actually said it. If there's one thing in this world that pisses me off, it's pomeranians. But a close second would be people misrepresenting me. Alright, my piece is said. I think you know where I'm coming from. People have made it clear this thread is making them uncomfortable, so I won't reply again. And I'm sorry that I replied this time, but I had to make myself clear before I signed off. Sorry to anyone who I've made uncomfortable.
|
|
|
Post by Ghost Bear on Apr 9, 2009 3:18:56 GMT -5
If I were a Mod. This would be closed. Can we let it lie please?
|
|
|
Post by Samildanach on Apr 9, 2009 3:37:14 GMT -5
Your life and your topic end here.
(Yes, I've made that joke before, on this very page. And yes, this would be my locking message if I were a mod.)
|
|
|
Post by Beowuuf on Apr 9, 2009 4:00:46 GMT -5
I hate to lock a topic, but I think GB is absolutely right
|
|