The Unpopular Opinions

[McTahr]

Yeah, just like, implying that LotR was written with the same intentions as Twilight and Harry Potter is like implying that Karen Katz has the same intentions and goals as Stephen King when she sits down at her desk.

When you experienced it and the formula of the plot have nothing to do with the target audience. Old time-y mysteries are some of the hokey-ist kiddie shit you see how there and yet I don't see the teens lining up to buy'em.

[Kim]

Originally Posted by Solid Snake

I'm drawing the line there between "fantasy materials with mature content" (like George R.R. Martin's Song of Ice and Fire series) against "fantasy materials that follow a stereotypical children's good against evil, good always wins in the end formula" (which LotR follows to the letter.)
I also read LotR first when I was, like, twelve or thirteen.

That really doesn't say anything about what audience it was written for. I really hate the idea that something isn't intended for a mature audience unless it's graphic in some respect, which isn't what you mean but definitely seems to be a subtext to your post.

[Solid Snake]

*shrug* Y'all are over-analyzing what are my very subjective and biased opinions in a thread explicitly asking for subjective and biased opinions.

Thirteen-year old Snake read the Prydain Chronicles around the same time he read Lord of the Rings and Harry Potter entered into the realm of popular fantasy shortly thereafter. Yes, LotR is 'better written' than Harry Potter, but it's still a very similar idealistic formula. Good triumphs over evil after sacrifices, the worst aspects of medieval societal life are ignored, it's written more fantastical and less 'realistic.' LotR is easier to compare to Potter or Prydain than Song of Ice and Fire, which is dripping with sex and violence. I'd let a bookworm thirteen year old hypothetical child of mine read any of the former, definitely not the latter.

Yes, including LotR and Twilight in the same sentence is extraordinarily offensive to Tolkien in and of itself, but the point of my sentence was just to flout my unpopular opinion that Prydain Chronicles was better than either, not to assert that LotR and Twilight were by any means of similar merit as works. An objective rating by me would rank Prydain and LotR far higher than the others, but why stress that when it's not such a minority opinion and that's not what the thread is asking for?

[Loyal]

Ed, Edd, and Eddy was a great cartoon that actually tried a lot of inventive concepts while keeping to the same formula.

Yes.

Batman Beyond: Return of the Joker is the best Batman movie ever made.

And yes.

[McTahr]

I'm not even talking about offense. Like, if you had simply claimed it was better written than any of the others you listed, I would let it go simply because I've no right to judge the series I haven't read, which is quite frankly all of them aside from LotR. I personally couldn't care which is better of the group, mostly because I couldn't care less for Tolkein's describe-the-fuck-out-of-everything writing style. (Because he's trying to establish his world for his language etc, hey-ooo.)

It's that I'm not over-analyzing so much as questioning your implication that the book written purely for a scholarly endeavor of encapsulating Tolkein's made-up language was instead geared for the teen and young reader audience.

I work in a bookstore, yo. That young reader section, where you find Harry Potter, where you are implying Tolkein wrote for? It's loaded with books that still limit the words per page and use big text.

Edit: In summation, your opinion is perfectly shibby with me. I'm just nitpicking as I'm wont to do on occasion. Don't take it personally or anything.

[Solid Snake]

Originally Posted by McTahr

I work in a bookstore, yo.

So did I, part-time from 2001 to 2004.
While I worked there I saw LotR on high school reading lists and I saw younger kids purchase the title.
I never saw Song of Ice and Fire or similar works merited with such a distinction.
...I'm not even sure why I'm arguing this, by definition this is an unpopular opinions thread and people should be entitled to hold onto their unpopular opinions here. >.>

[Kim]

I'm not sure an unpopular opinion thread is, by its nature, a thread wherein we aren't allowed to tell people their unpopular opinions are wrong.

I read the Hot Zone in high school and the Andromeda Strain in middle school. I wouldn't say either was *written* for teens.

[McTahr]

Pretty much my entire last post, over again.

I'm not questioning your opinion. I'm questioning the stipulations that surround it. If you want to say that such and such series is better for teens than LotR, whatever. Like I said two times now, I've never read them and couldn't care for Tolkein's style anyway. I'm not defending him.

I'm questioning the implication that Tolkein is written for that specific audience. I just don't see it.

Re-read me, yo. You've been welcome to your opinion from the get-go and there's no need to get defensive.

E: Just like, the entire thing Non and I are getting at I think is this:

Originally Posted by Solid Snake

So did I, part-time from 2001 to 2004.
While I worked there I saw LotR on high school reading lists and I saw younger kids purchase the title.

Does not mean "Tolkein is written for teens and younger kids."

[Solid Snake]

Originally Posted by McTahr

I'm questioning the implication that Tolkein is written for that specific audience. I just don't see it.

It was an utterly supplementary component to my argument that I barely put two seconds into given the fact that this isn't a 'Serious' thread, to be quite honest.
As for me misinterpreting you I'll just note that I posted my most recent response before I had the chance to read your Edit, which made things perfectly clear.

EDIT: Like from my perspective you and NonCon are basically 100% right from a serious scholarly perspective, but I didn't actually post my initial comment with any intention of labeling Tolkien as 'written for children,' and though I suppose my initial argument was poorly worded I didn't expect in a joking thread about subjective unpopular opinions that I'd actually be grilled and talked down to for mislabeling Tolkien as 'kiddy fiction' when I in fact intended to start a number of more juvenile, less serious arguments about the subjective quality of certain series. Interpreting my post from a serious objective perspective and then blasting me for failing to correctly articulate the argument you nonetheless apparently knew I was trying to make subsequently took the fun out of things.

[McTahr]

Originally Posted by Solid Snake

It was an utterly supplementary component to my argument that I barely put two seconds into given the fact that this isn't a 'Serious' thread, to be quite honest.

But somebody is wrong on the internet!!!

Originally Posted by Solid Snake

As for me misinterpreting you I'll just note that I posted my most recent response before I had the chance to read your Edit, which made things perfectly clear.

Cool cool. I desire no beefsicles or other bovine products. I just spaz edit sometimes. Understandable that one could go un-noticed.


Anyway! On to the topic.

I don't like Christopher Nolan or anything he does. My friends are appalled by this, and refuse to acknowledge knowing me should I profess my opinions in public.