Before I begin, just a reminder: you have until November 30 to vote in the Clive Staples Award – Readers Choice for the best Christian speculative novel published in 2008 by a royalty paying publisher.

Also, you have until December 2 to vote for the November CSFF Top Tour Blogger. Lots of really, really good posts. I’ll be honest. I still have to vote because I’m having a hard time making up my mind.

- – -

Some while ago, as I prepared a post over at Spec Faith, I stumbled upon something interesting in a Wikipedia article about J.R.R. Tolkien. Some scholars claim this great fantasy writer owed a debt of influence where he claimed none.

Due to the common use of the same textual sources employed by Tolkien and [Richard] Wagner there are a large list of close parallels between The Lord of the Rings and the Der Ring des Nibelungen. Several critics have made the assumption that the novel was directly derived from Richard Wagner’s operas.

Despite the similarities of his work to the Volsunga saga and the Nibelungenlied, which were the basis for Richard Wagner’s opera series, Tolkien dismissed critics’ direct comparisons to Wagner, telling his publisher, ‘Both rings were round, and there the resemblance ceases.’ According to Humphrey Carpenter’s biography of Tolkien, the author held Wagner’s interpretation of the relevant Germanic myths in contempt.

In the contrary sense, some critics hold that Tolkien’s work borrows so liberally from Wagner that Tolkien’s work exists in the shadow of Wagner’s.

J.R.R. Tolkien, derivative? So those critics claimed.

I find that to be thoroughly ironic because the great accusation against writers of high fantasy today is that their work is derivative, a mere shadow of, you guessed it, J.R.R. Tolkien.

While Tolkien denied taking his ideas from Wagner, he did not hesitant to mention others who influenced him such as William Morris, H. Rider Haggard’s novel She, and S. R. Crockett’s historical novel The Black Douglas.

So what’s the difference between derivative work and that which has come under the influence of another?

Whether Tolkien mentioned it or not, his work bears clear markings of Finnish, Anglo-Saxon, and Norse mythology. Some think there’s even a dose of Celtic mythology, though Tolkien claimed a distaste for those works.

But “derived”? Only the similarities to Wagner seem to have stirred this accusation?

Maybe the easiest way to come at this would be to identify what did not illicit the derivative accusation.

1. Including mythical creatures such as elves and dwarfs.

2. A fictive world pitting good versus evil.

3. Similarities between Hobbits and the “table high” characters in Edward Wyke-Smith’s work.

4. Monsters apparently influenced by such works as Beowulf.

5. A paraphrased Anglo-Saxon poem as an illustration of the poetry of one people group in Tolkien’s fantasy world.

6. An adapted Shakespearean scene.

7. Intentional imitation of Morris’s prose, style, and approach.

8. Borrowed setting elements such as Mirkwood and the Dead Marshes.

If none of these earned Tolkien the accusation of derivative, what then, qualifies as such? I have some ideas I’ll share next time, but I’m interested in what you think. Thoughts?

Ya estamos ad portas de la Navidad y es tiempo de decidirse! O traes algo que de verdad quieres o te conformas con lo que encuentras en Chile… no creemos que sea muy difícil elegir.

Pero como uno nunca esta muy seguro de lo que busca te ofrecemos un par de ideas para regalar Literatura… si, libros, porque somos adictos a ellos!

Star Wars Encyclopedia, $61.000.-

Desata el lado ñoño de la fuerza con esta maravilla! La “Star Wars Encyclopedia”. Todo absolutamente TODO lo que debes saber acerca de la saga de ciencia ficción más importante de todos los tiempos en tres tomos de tapa dura que incluyen cientos de ilustraciones y referencias a los más mínimos detalles del universo Star Wars.

Divine Comedy de Dante Alighieri, $20.000.-

Ultimate Hitchhiker's Guide Deluxe Edition de Douglas Adams, $20.000.-

The Complete Works of Lewis Carroll, $20.000.-

The Complete Works of William Shakespeare, $20.000.-

The Complete Tales and Poems of Edgar Allan Poe, $20.000.-

Todas estas ediciones vienen en tapa dura cubierta de cuero y con ilustraciones. Son posiblemente las mejores ediciones que podrás encontrar por este precio. Son nuestra mas importante recomendación para quienes estiman las ediciones bien cuidadas de las mas grandes obras de la literatura universal.

Necronomicon I de H.R. Giger, $39.000.-

Necronomicon II de H.R. Giger, $39.000.-

El trabajo de Giger inspirado en la obra de H.P. Lovecraft recopilado en dos tomos extraordinarios, tapa dura.

Children of Hurin Deluxe Edition, J.R.R. Tolkien, tapa dura y cubierta protectora, $45.500.-

"The Lord of the Rings", Edición del 50 Aniversario, tres tomos en uno, tapa dura y cubierta protectora, incluye tambien "The Book of Mazarbul" del cual Gandalf lee un extracto en la tumba de Balin en Moria, un apendice para decifrar los escritos enanos y más, $50.000.-

The Histories of Middle Earth de J.R.R. Tolkien, $25.500.-

Tolkien en todas sus expresiones, ya sea en su obra más importante como en las historias que la rodean. Todo recopilado en las ediciones más codiciadas de la tierra…

Star Wars Box Set, los 6 episodios originales hechos novela, $22.500.-

Star Wars: The Ultimate Visual Guide, la mas completa recopilacion fotografica de la saga de George Lucas, tapa dura, $20.000.-

Más Star Wars, porque el cine simplemente no sería lo mismo sin Darth Vader.

The Treasures of Dali, una coleccion de memorabilia de lujo, incluye fotografias y reproducciones de sus obras, $22.500.-

The Complete Calvin and Hobbes, en tres tomos tapa dura, una joyita imperdible, $99.000.-

Estas son sólo sugerencias de lo que puedes encontrar por precios increíbles en internet. Si encuentras algo que desees cotizar envíanos el link a kthulu.shop@gmail.com y te responderemos a la brevedad.

Kthulu Shop, acerca a tus manos lo que está más allá de la pantalla!

Va cer ajutorul intr-o chestiune de viata si de moarte . Ce credeti, ce ar trebui sa incep mai intai, dupa terminare cartii TUNELE 3: IN CADERE LIBERA – romanul acesta este exceptional, o sa il devorez in timp record – la care am terminat deja prima parte?

1. SFIDAREA de SUZANNE COLLINS

2. CIRCUL FANTASIA de MARGARET MAHY (la care nu am apucat sa citesc decat 50 de pagini pentru ca apoi a sosit – neasteptat de repede, spre fericirea mea – TUNELE3)

3. SPLIT de TARA MOSS (pe care am tot amanat-o atata timp…)

4. QUANTICO de GREG BEAR

5. THE BOOK OF LOST TALES VOL. 1 de J. R. R. TOLKIEN

6. EVADATE DIN CASTELUL CANT de K. P. BATH

7. REGINA MARGOT de AL. DUMAS

8. DUNE de FRANK HERBERT

9. THE GREAT GATSBY de F. SCOTT FITZGERALD

10. UN VEAC DE SINGURATATE de GABRIEL GARCIA MARQUEZ

11. THE LORD OF THE RINGS de J. R. R. TOLKIEN (de recitit a treia oara pentru ca maestrul TOLKIEN scrie exceptional)

Nu-i asa ca este greu de decis?

It’s like in the great stories, Mr. Frodo. The ones that really mattered. Full of darkness and danger, they were. And sometimes you didn’t want to know the end. Because how could the end be happy? How could the world go back to the way it was when so much bad had happened? But in the end, it’s only a passing thing, this shadow. Even darkness must pass. A new day will come. And when the sun shines it will shine out the clearer. Those were the stories that stayed with you. That meant something, even if you were too small to understand why. But I think, Mr. Frodo, I do understand. I know now. Folk in those stories had lots of chances of turning back, only they didn’t. They kept going. Because they were holding on to something.

What are we holding onto, Sam?

— J.R.R. Tolkien & Peter Jackson’s Film Adaptation: Screenplay for LOTR

Upon the hearth the fire is red
Beneath the roof there is a bed
But not yet weary are our feet
Still round the corner we may meet

A sudden tree or standing stone
That none have seen but we alone
Tree and flower and leaf and grass
Let them pass! Let them pass!

Hill and water under sky
Pass them by! Pass them by!
Still round the corner there may wait
A new road or a secret gate;
And though I oft have passed them by,

Home is behind the world ahead
And there are many paths to tread
Through shadows to the edge of night
Until the stars are all alight
Then world behind and home ahead
We’ll wander back to home and bed

A day will come at last when I
Shall take the hidden paths that run
West of the Moon, East of the Sun.

— J.R.R. Tolkien

We have come from God, and inevitably the myths woven by us, though they contain error, will also reflect a splintered fragment of the true light, the eternal truth that is with God. Indeed only by myth-making, only by becoming ’sub-creator’ and inventing stories, can Man aspire to the state of perfection that he knew before the Fall. Our myths may be misguided, but they steer however shakily towards the true harbour, while materialistic ‘progress’ leads only to a yawning abyss and the Iron Crown of the power of evil.

— J.R.R. Tolkien

… in the end the Shadow was only a small and passing thing: there was light and high beauty for ever beyond its reach.

— J.R.R. Tolkien

All that is gold does not glitter,
Not all those who wander are lost;
The old that is strong does not wither,
Deep roots are not reached by the frost.
From the ashes a fire shall be woken,
A light from the shadows shall spring;
Renewed shall be blade that was broken,
The crownless again shall be king.

Sangue novo

A estreante Stephenie Meyer conquista o público adolescente ao misturar dilemas jovens com vampirismo

Rodrigo Turrer

29/04/2008 – 20:57 – Atualizado em 20/05/2008 – 16:49

Quando o britânico J.R.R. Tolkien publicou seu O Hobbit, em 1937, deu início não apenas à série de O Senhor dos Anéis – o segundo livro em inglês mais vendido na História, logo atrás da Bíblia –, como também desencadeou uma febre de aficionados por magia e universos fantásticos que o furacão editorial Harry Potter só fez amplificar desde que chegou às livrarias, em 1997.

A nova saga que arregimenta uma horda maior de fãs a cada dia é Crepúsculo (Intrínseca, 416 páginas, R$ 39,90), da americana Stephenie Meyer, de 34 anos. Primeiro livro dela, começo de uma trilogia traduzida para mais de 20 idiomas que vendeu milhões de cópias pelo mundo, Crepúsculo tinha dois fã-clubes um ano antes de ser lançado no Brasil.

“Achei importante debater com outros fãs”, diz a estudante Laís Scrivani, de 19 anos. Ela criou um dos fã-clubes, que tem mais de 20 mil acessos diários e integrantes fervorosos, como a estudante do ensino médio Larissa Huayck Lobo, de 15 anos. “Meus amigos e minha família nem sabem do que trata o livro, então é bom conversar com quem conhece”, diz.

Crepúsculo narra a história da jovem Bella Swan, uma garota de 17 anos, filha de pais separados, que se muda para a chuvosa e monótona Fork, o último lugar em que um adolescente gostaria de viver. Enquanto tenta se habituar à nova vida com um pai quase desconhecido e se adaptar à rotina provinciana e aos constrangimentos da pouca amabilidade dos colegas de escola, conhece Edward Cullen, um fascinante garoto que guarda um segredo: não envelhece desde 1918, quando se tornou vampiro. Os dois, claro, se apaixonam perdidamente.

Como se a condição sobrenatural do rapaz não fosse empecilho suficiente, a família dele passa a caçar Bella graças ao apetitoso aroma de seu sangue, nunca antes sentido por aquelas bandas. Esse cruzamento de Romeu e Julieta com Drácula soa como uma versão adolescente de Anne Rice, outra escritora que explorou com sucesso o mundo dos vampiros. Rice largou o tema – trocou Drácula por Jesus. Melhor para Meyer: mais pescoços se curvarão para ler seus livros.

Eles são idolatrados

Escritores canonizados pelo público e cultuados com fã-clubes

J.R.R. TOLKIEN

Com a saga O SENHOR DOS ANÉIS, Tolkien iniciou a era de aficionados por magia e universos fantásticos, e ganhou leitores fanáticos pelo mundo

J.K. ROWLING
Um dos maiores sucessos editoriais da História,HARRY POTTER causou frenesi entre os fãs, que a cada lançamento se engalfinhavam para garantir o livro

ANNE RICE
A autora de ENTREVISTA COM O VAMPIRO e suas continuações recriou o universo dos sugadores de sangue. Depois largou seus fãs à própria sorte

PAULO COELHO
Verdadeiro fenômeno editorial no Brasil, o autor de O ALQUIMISTA arrebanhou fãs até no exterior, que mantêm sites para discutir sua obra

http://revistaepoca.globo.com/Revista/Epoca/0,,EMI3265-15220,00-SANGUE+NOVO.html

]]> http://culturespub.wordpress.com/2009/11/23/j-r-r-tolkien-du-hobbit-au-silmarillion/ Mon, 23 Nov 2009 00:01:55 +0000 Lien Rag http://culturespub.wordpress.com/2009/11/23/j-r-r-tolkien-du-hobbit-au-silmarillion/

J’avais envie de recycler ici une étude universitaire que j’ai réalisé il y a quelques années. Il s’agit d’une étude sur Tolkien, où est analysée l’évolution de son style. En effet, comment est-il passé d’un conte pour enfants (le Hobbit) à une œuvre majeure de la littérature adulte qui a “créé” l’heroïc fantasy (le Seigneur des anneaux), pour finir avec une œuvre quasi biblique (le Silmarillion). Est-ce l’assurance, le succès, la maturité ou la vieillesse, qui est responsable de cette évolution ? La réponse est un peu plus complexe. Une fois publié sur le blog, l’article est très long, j’ai donc fait plusieurs coupes et je n’ai pas abordé certains thèmes. Ceux qui voudront lire l’étude entière (en anglais) la trouveront ici.
.

Tolkien nait en 1892 en Afrique du Sud (cf. cette séquence mémorable de Suck my Geek). Après la mort de son père, il rentre en Angleterre et passe son enfance dans la verte campagne autour d’Oxford (Oxfordshire). Les gens simples et calmes, ainsi que la nature, le marqueront profondément, au point que la comté (the shire, justement) en sera la représentation dans le Seigneur des Anneaux, lieu idéal et menacé (notamment par le progrès et l’industrialisation, cf. la fin du SdA, et par la guerre, voir la suite). A cette même periode, Tolkien se passionne pour les langues. Outre les langues vivantes ou mortes, il est fasciné par les langues particulières comme le Gallois ou le Finnois.

En 1916, Tolkien part pour la 1e guerre mondiale – là encore, on peut retrouver cette influence dans ses œuvres. Il tombe malade dans les tranchées. A l’hôpital, il commence à créer ses propres langages pour passer le temps. Il s’agit de vrai langues, avec syntaxe, conjugaison, etc. Rentré en Angleterre, il a son premier enfant, et, quelques années plus tard (1924/25), grâce à sa passion pour les langues, il rentrera à l’université d’Oxford, en chaire de philologie, en tant que spécialiste des poèmes Anglo-Saxons.

Tolkien le Philologue

Depuis son séjour à l’hôpital, il imagine un monde pour donner vie aux  langues qu’il invente. Un monde peuplé d’Elfes, de Nains (inspiré des légendes nordiques), et rempli de hauts-faits (inspiré des légendes moyenâgeuses). C’est la première version de ce qui sera décrit dans “le Silmarillion”. Cela raconte la légende de fabuleux joyaux, les Silmarilli, et plus généralement de ce qui deviendra plus tard le premier âge. Le mal est partout et il faut le combattre sans cesse avant que la mort ne vienne, inévitablement. Cette periode est très inspirée par les travaux universitaires de Tolkien sur le poème Moyenâgeux Beowulf.

A la fin des années 30, suite à des discussion avec son ami C.S. Lewis (Le monde de Narnia), ils décident tous deux d’écrire sur le thème des voyages. Voyages dans l’espace pour Lewis, et dans le temps pour Tolkien. L’histoire de ce dernier raconte un père et son fils, dans une cité nommée Numenòr, qui voyagent dans le passé pour découvrir la mythologie du Silmarillion. Revenus dans leur temps, la cité coule, la terre devient ronde, les terres de l’Ouest disparaissent, ainsi que la route pour y aller : The lost road, comme s’intitule le texte. Là encore, Tolkien pose les bases de ce qui deviendra plus tard le second âge, et décrit précisément la fin de cette période.

Tolkien le père

Alors que John, son premier fils, n’arrivait pas à s’endormir, Tolkien lui racontait les histoires d’un garçon aux cheveux rouges nommé “carrot”. Ce fut le début d’une longue tradition, et il ne s’arrêta jamais de raconter des histoires à ses enfants (nés en 1917, 20, 24 et 1929). Pendant les années 20 et 30, il leur inventera par exemple The adventures of Bill Stickers,  Rover the little dog turned into a toy, et la traditionnelle Letter from Father Christmas, qui revenait évidemment chaque année. Peu de ces histoires étaient finallement retranscrites. Une autre histoire racontée par papa-Tolkien était the adventures of Tom Bombadil. Humphrey Carpenter (auteur de LA biographie de Tolkien) en dit :

“Tom Bombadil was a well-known figure in the Tolkien family, for the character was based on a Dutch doll that belonged to Michael. The doll looked very splendid with the feather in its hat, but John did not like it and one day stuffed it down the lavatory. Tom was rescued, and survived to become the hero of a poem by the children’s father, “The Adventures of Tom Bombadil’, which was published in the Oxford Magazine in 1934*. It tells of Tom’s encounters with ‘Gold-berry, the River-woman’s daughter’, with the ‘Old Man Willow’ which shuts him up in a crack of its bole […] with a family of badgers, and with a ‘Barrow-wight’, a ghost from a prehistoric grave of the type found on the Berkshire Downs not far from Oxford. […] Tom Bombadil was intended to represent ‘the spirit of the (vanishing) Oxford and Berkshire countryside’**.”

* – soit avant la parution du SdA ou même du Hobbit !
** – cf. ci-dessus, l’attachement de Tolkien à la campagne de son enfance.

The Hobbit

La légende veut que, alors qu’il corrigeait des copies, Tolkien écrive sans savoir pourquoi : “in a hole in the ground there lived a Hobbit”. Nous sommes en 1925, Tolkien n’a aucune idée de qui sont ces hobbits, mais il se dit que ça doit être intéressant d’y réfléchir. Un peu avant 1935, Tolkien écrit une nouvelle histoire pour ses enfants, celle de Bilbo Baggins, un hobbit sans histoire, à qui il arrive ce que vous savez. Même si, comme souvent, il en manque la fin, un élève de Tolkien s’arrange pour montrer le manuscrit à un éditeur, qui l’accepte. The Hobbit sort en 1937 et c’est un succès immédiat.

Les éditeurs, Allen&Unwin, veulent une suite le plus rapidement possible (il faudra 17 ans pour que le SdA soit publié ). Tolkien leur montre ses autres contes pour enfant, mais le seul publié, Farmer Giles of Ham, ne rencontrera pas le succès du Hobbit. On notera une fois de plus le thème récurrent du héros de la campagne, qui rechigne à l’aventure, mais se révèle bien plus valeureux que ce qu’on attendait de lui. Selon Carpenter, Tolkien dira plus tard des hobbits :

‘The Hobbits are just rustic English people, made small in size because it reflects the generally small reach of their imagination – not the small reach of their courage or latent power.’ To put it another way, the hobbits represent the combination of small imagination with great courage which (as Tolkien had seen in the trenches during the First World War) often led to survival against all chances. ‘I’ve always been impressed,’ he once said, ‘that we are here, surviving, because of the indomitable courage of quite small people against impossible odds.’

Après 1945, interrogé sur la suite de Farmer Giles, il dira “the sequel is plotted but unwritten, and likely to remain so. The heart has gone out of the Little Kingdom, and the woods and plains are aerodromes and bomb-practice targets”, en référence aux terres verdoyantes d’Oxford, détruites par la guerre…

Le Seigneur des Anneaux, le chaînon manquant

Tolkien comprit très vite que les elfes du Hobbit étaient les mêmes que ceux de sa Grande Œuvre. Puisque l’histoire des silmarils était un premier age, celui de Numenòr un second, la période du Hobbit fut baptisée : troisième âge. Tolkien sentait qu’il avait besoin de quelque chose qui lierait le conte de fée “Hobbit” à son chef d’oeuvre (qui deviendrait “le Silmarillion”) et plus généralement à tous ses textes pour adultes.

La genèse du Seigneur des Anneaux est tout à fait intéressante. Dès 1937, l’année de sortie du Hobbit, Tolkien s’attèle à une suite : The return of the shadow. Mais Bilbo est sensé finir sa vie sans aventure ; Tolkien note alors dans ses tous premiers manuscrits : Make return of ring a motive. Le concept de l’anneau qui a plus de pouvoirs qu’il n’y parait est de suite trouvé, pas dangereux lorsqu’on fait le bien, mais qui peut perdre l’utilisateur. En trois ans, le premier chapitre est réécrit sept fois. Le héros est d’abord Bilbo qui va se marier à Hobbiton, puis Bingo, le fils de Bilbo, qui va chercher des champignons.
Comme souvent avec Tolkien, l’histoire semble s’écrire seule et dépasse dans un premier temps l’écrivain. Tolkien écrit à son éditeur pour lui dire que, sans qu’il l’ait voulu, un cavalier noir est apparu dans l’histoire, et semble vouloir rattraper les hobbits à tous prix. Ce serait un porteur de l’anneau rendu invisible de façon permanente pour trop l’avoir porté. Tolkien se demande alors pourquoi tout le monde en veut à cet anneau, et vient l’idée de l’anneau maître, qui les lie tous. Sauron veut le récupérer, les hobbits doivent le détruire ; cet anneau serait : the lord of the rings. Tolkien écrit à son éditeur que l’histoire lui échappe, devient effrayante, et s’éloigne de l’ambiance du Hobbit. Bingo devient Frodo, car le nom est trop enfantin pour cette histoire.

En 1940, les hobbits traversent la vieille forêt, rencontrent à Bree un hobbit étrange nommé Trotter (qui deviendra plus tard le rodeur grand-pas), puis vont à Rivendell (déjà présent dans le Hobbit, je vous invite à comparer la description des elfes dans les deux œuvres), puis à la Moria où ils restent pendant un an.  Ce n’est qu’en 1941 que ce qui deviendra le premier tome existe de façon définitive, même s’il est régulièrement réécrit. Il lui faudra encore huit ans pour finir l’histoire, puis cinq années de corrections avant de publier le premier tome (1954 à 55 pour le troisième).

C’est surtout ce premier tiers – voire le livre un – que je trouve intéressant, et qui montre l’évolution de l’œuvre de Tolkien : du conte Hobbit au sombre Silmarillion. Les héros partent à l’aventure comme dans un conte, et sont petit à petit rattrapés par des évènements bien plus grands. C’est ce qui explique que ce premier livre ait une saveur différente du reste. On notera que Tom Bombadil et les évènements associés (les hauts-galgals) existaient depuis longtemps dans le monde de Tolkien, et qu’il relie petit à petit ses histoires dans un même univers. Il fera de même dans tout le seigneur des anneaux, se référant aux deux premiers âges par le biais des chants et légendes, et finallement dans les annexes.
On peut aussi noter la manière dont les idées venaient à Tolkien, dont il se lissait guider par elles, concept très important pour lui.

La vie après le SdA

Tolkien passera le reste de sa vie a compléter son univers et à le corriger, particulièrement le premier âge. Son livre Leaf by Niggle, raconte un peintre dont le perfectionisme l’empêche de finir sa peinture à force de corrections, et c’est ce qui lui arrivera. En 1973, Tolkien meurt, sans que le Silmarillion ne soit publié. Son fils Christopher reprendra les notes de son père et les publiera dans différents ouvrages, principalement Le Silmarillion et Unfinished Tales, mais il faut bien comprendre qu’il s’agit parfois de notes compilées, ce qui en fait des oeuvres parfois difficiles à suivre, sans parler de l’extrême complexité du monde décrit.

Finalement, Tolkien était un passionné de langues, marqué par les légendes moyenâgeuses et nordiques, et également un raconteur d’histoires aimant amuser les enfants. Le Seigneur des Anneaux est à la croisée de ces deux tendances, récit évoluant parfois par lui-même, quête initiatique, et c’est ça qui en fait un chef d’œuvre, le meilleur de Tolkien et sans doute une qualité inégalée dans l’Heroïc Fantasy – si ça ça ne soulève pas une montagne de commentaires ^^.

I am in fact a hobbit, in all but size. I like gardens, trees, and unmechanized farmlands; I smoke a pipe, and like good plain food (unrefrigerated), but detest French cooking; I like, and even dare to wear in these dull days, ornamental waistcoats. I am fond of mushrooms (out of a field); have a very simple sense of humour (which even my appreciative critics find tiresome); I go to bed late and get up late (when possible). I do not travel much.
- J.R.R. Tolkien

Merci à Derek Mainwaring.

Yesterday was the anniversary of the death of someone whom I feel truly embodies the spirit of the Dominicans.  On November 22^nd, the very same day on which Aldous Huxley and John F. Kennedy died, Clive Staples Lewis shuffled off this mortal coil and was born into eternal life.  Lewis, who was known as Jack to his friends, suffered the grievous loss of his mother while a child, partially as a result of that trauma, and partially as a result of his intellectual prep school education, he rejected God altogether and became a devout, if such a word may be used in context, atheist.

Having become a professor at Oxford University, Lewis came into contact with some of the greatest minds of his day and age.  He became close friends with the likes of J. R. R. Tolkien, Charles Williams, Dorothy Sayers, and many others.  He began to note their religion and faith.  He noted their morality and piety.  Frankly, this confused him.  He underwent a process of thinking which he later gave to the older Pevensie children in The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe. C. S. Lewis looked at Tolkien, Sayers, and Williams and said of their Christian faith, either they are crazy, they are liars, or they are correct.  He knew from their moral character that they were not liars.  Anyone could tell from being around the group for any length of time that they were not crazy.  In Lewis’ mind, that left only one option.  They were right!

This brought Lewis into a process of conversion that ultimately allowed him to become, as some have called him, “The Apostle to the Skeptics.”  His writings can be found in every book store in the English speaking world and have been translated into countless other languages.  He has inspired authors, television shows, songs, movies, and even video games.  His influence can be felt in virtually every Christian denomination in North America and Europe.  His writings are spiritual classics on par with the great writers of the Middle Ages.

When C. S. Lewis converted to Christianity, his gifts converted with him.  His wit, his intellect and his ability to write clearly and persuasively all were used by the God for the service of Jesus Christ.  His influence is so profound that one could easily say that his writing and influence have set the world on fire.  May we all be so effective in our writings and teachings that we, too, light the world on fire!

This week is going to be a busy week for everyone.  It is my intention to write some reflections on C. S. Lewis this week.  I’ll probably write something about Thanksgiving this week too, although I’m feeling rather grinchy right now, so I’ll have to readjust my mindset before then…

Clive Staple Lewis in a great big chair with a great big book!

Costumo dizer que se a partir de hoje nenhum novo livro fosse publicado, o tempo que me resta de vida não seria suficiente para ler todos os grandes clássicos da literatura mundial. Tendo em minha relação de não lidos alguns dos livros de Dostoiévski, Kafka, Shakespeare, Faulkner, Flaubert, Garcia Márquez, Homero, Thomas Mann e Virginia Woolf, só pra citar alguns, não dá pra perder tempo lendo Stephanie Meyer ou Dan Brown.

Meu primeiro contato com os clássicos aconteceu no começo dos anos 90, quando eu tinha uns 14 anos, através de uma coleção de histórias em quadrinhos chamada Clássicos Ilustrados. Eram edições semanais com adaptações de obras clássicas como Moby Dick, Hamlet, O Conde de Monte Cristo, Grandes Esperanças, A Ilha do Dr. Moreau, A Queda da Casa dos Usher, O Morro dos Ventos Uivantes, A Letra Escarlate, A Ilha do Tesouro e Cyrano de Bergerac (links para a versão .pdf dos quadrinhos de 1990).

Não consigo pensar numa forma melhor de despertar em crianças e adolescentes a paixão pelos grandes clássicos da literatura mundial.

Se você concorda e curte quadrinhos — principalmente adaptações de clássicos — vai gostar de saber que começou a pré-venda de “O Hobbit”, de J.R.R. Tolkien, ilustrado por David Wenzel.

Abaixo, 3 páginas de “O Hobbit” ilustrado (imagens de divulgação – clique para ampliar).

_______________

AVISO AOS LEITORES

O link da pré-venda de “O Hobbit” que aparece nesse texto é meu primeiro como integrante do Programa de Afiliados do Submarino. No entanto, a adesão a esse programa não tem como função gerar algum tipo de renda para o este blogueiro que vos fala: todo o valor arrecadado com as vendas — incluindo os valores gerados pelas compras que eu mesmo fizer — será convertido em doação de livros.

Achei que seria legal comentar.

Left 4 Dead: The Battle for Helm’s Deep (New Custom Map)

Mike sent me this clip and, boy, does it reek of epic. Yes, I am aware that the second coming that is Left 4 Dead 2 is upon us. But this new custom survival map is just so over-the-top that it needs to be played. Recreating the LotR jizzfest that is the Battle of Helm’s Deep (see: The Two Towers), it brings the Survivors to Middle Earth in a glorious combination of awesome.

L4D owners (PC-only, duh): download the map here.

Well, I’ve still heard nothing from anyone about Pecan Hill from any of the agents which I queried, so I guess that I’ll have to take it as a hell no from them.  It feels as though I have to revise my query letter again to try and hook them.  Sometimes it feels stupid to try and explain what happens in the story.  Is it possible that my logical mind is screaming that what I’m writing about is stupid and that the agents and anyone who reads the query letter will think it’s pathetic.  I suppose I’m still trying to grow that thick skin which all authors need to have.

But it’s when I get to trying to write Spoil the Child that I’m finding myself hitting the wall.  I know where I want to go but it’s getting over that wall or smashing through the wall which is proving to be a problem.  I’m starting to wonder if I should start from the beginning again – like J.R.R. Tolkien with the Lord of the Rings and the slow progress of waves crashing up the beach, a little further each time.  I guess you could say that I’m a little insecure with the whole setting.  New York was the right location for Pecan Hill I knew it as soon as I started.

But I’m starting to wonder if Florida is the right location for Spoil the Child.  I’ve only spent a week in Florida compared to living for four months in New York.  I thought it would be fine in I created a small town which I could then terrorize, a little like Stephen King.

I’m starting to think if I should go back to Where Angels Fall which is a fantasy story for which I have finalised the first draft.  I know at least in that world I will be in charge and have created the entire world already

My friend Ian is a brilliant writer and story-teller. I asked him once how he did it. He said that he has to wait on characters who find their way to him from a dark wood in his mind. The characters are often shy, unsure of how to respond to the disembodied voice who will become their narrator. Eventually, these timid fictives step forward and begin to tell their story. For Ian, this is the place from which stories come, and these stories can be used to communicate any message, to stir up any emotion, and to prove any point. If you want to do theology or philosophy, says Ian, tell a story.

At times, I find myself nodding along, hearing the shuffle of hidden characters in the dark woods of my mind. I can see the beauty in the ambiguity of stories and parable — their fluidity and malleability to address the complex issues of human existence. I resonate with a desire to give my theoretical ponderings flesh and bones; to see and hear and touch what I say that I think that I might believe.

And at other times, I find such stories wanting, communicating the complex ethos of the wide range of experience, but unable to express the things that I simply need to say. I guess at times narrative seems evasive and elusive, creating opportunities for beautiful, glorious, disastrous re-interpretation (which is going to happen regardless of the genre). It seems to me that a straight-forward discourse — an “essay,” as one friend called it — is less likely to be misread. It is oftentimes simpler, more clear, and more precisely what I want or need to say. In these ways, it seems like a valid and sometimes necessary way of expressing philo-theological or theosophical ideas.

But I wonder if my need for such clear and concise discourse is the remnant of a post-Enlightenment rhetorical logocentrism. Maybe I’m afraid of the open-ended absence of a purely narrative approach to philosophy or theology and would prefer the “nearness” of a clearly presented and well-argued case. The question I’m left with is this: Is it bad to sometimes prefer discourse, and therefore, to uphold and perpetuate a logocentric belief that discourse will be more understood (or less misunderstood)?

This whole conversation reminded me of the debates amongst the Inklings of Oxford in the 1930s and 40s. C.S. Lewis and J.R.R. Tolkien asked very similar questions. Lewis was very proud of his first Narnia novel, The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe. Tolkien, however, thought that the religious allusions were too blatant. Instead, Tolkien suggested, any religious implications ought to be buried deep within the story, so as not to detract from the story itself. Aslan was too obviously the Christ-figure and as such distracted the reader from the stories of Narnia.[1] More than that, Tolkien was appalled at Lewis’s theological ventures, believing firmly that such discourse was better left for the professional theologians, not the writers and scholars of fiction and literature.[2] And so their two great works, The Chronicles of Narnia and The Lord of the Rings, reflect their differences. Lewis chose a combination of allegorical narrative and straightforward discourse; Tolkien chose to hide his wisdom deeply in his stories of hobbits and wizards.

In my own life, I would say that Lewis’s approach has affected me more personally. In other words, I prefer The Chronicles of Narnia to Tolkien’s work. Tolkien’s insistence on hiding his message makes his stories epic — though at times overly descriptive and long-winded. Lewis’s fiction is witty, to-the-point, and, for me, nearly existential to read. As a theologian, Lewis’s work is sometimes lacking. He was, after all (and as Tolkien rightly pointed out), primarily a writer of fiction and a lover of literature. But despite that, Lewis made points in his theological works that he could not make so easily in Narnia. His simultaneous use of narrative and discourse offered Lewis a variety of paths to conversation, both with his friends and with his readers then and now.

A few weeks ago, I read an interview from Slavoj Žižek. In the interview, Žižek gives his take on the current political struggle over healthcare. Standing up for theoretical discourse, Žižek says:

My friend told me [that Norm] Chomsky said something very sad. He said that today we don’t need theory. All we need to do is tell people, empirically, what is going on. Here, I violently disagree: facts are facts, and they are precious, but they can work in this way or that. Facts alone are not enough. You have to change the ideological background.[3]

Of course, Žižek is describing politics, particularly as it relates to healthcare, but his point remains: Telling the story isn’t always enough. There are times that one must use theory to change ideology. If we can’t engage the theory, then our stories will be open-ended ammunition for whoever wants to use it (which, I agree, is the beautiful thing about using narrative). But occasionally, ideologies must be challenged, and to do that, theory must be engaged in discourse.

I like narrative philosophy. I like when philosophy is done through fleshed-out, evocative, subtle, and open-ended stories. But I also like the use of discourse and essays. They both have a place and a time. So, I prefer a “philosophy of narrative,” one that sees the world in both stories and theories; a communicative methodology that embraces the narratives of real people in communities striving to embody the ideals of their theosophical dialogue; a worldview in which people are recognized as simultaneously transcendent and immanent, summed up by thought and stories. After all, Christians are a people endlessly dialoguing about the incarnational event that can’t be captured in words.

::The Question::
What do you think? Tolkien or Lewis? Chomsky or Žižek? Purely narrative philosophy or a philosophy of narrative? Both? Neither?

———
[1]About.com, “C.S. Lewis and J.R.R. Tolkien: Friendship and Disagreements over Christian Theology,” http://atheism.about.com/od/cslewisnarnia/a/jrrtolkein.htm [accessed on November 14, 2009]. I know, I know. I shouldn’t use such questionable sources.
[2]Ibid.; Literary Traveler,  ”J.R.R. Tolkien and C.S. Lewis: A Literary Friendship and Rivalry Made in Oxford,” http://www.literarytraveler.com/literary_articles/tolkien_lewis_oxford.aspx [accessed on November 14, 2009]. Tolkien seemed upset with Lewis’s preference for Anglicanism over his own Catholicism, probably in large part because Tolkien was crucial in Lewis’s conversion to Christianity.
[3]Jonathan Derbyshire, “I am a Leninist. Lenin wasn’t afraid to get his hands dirty. If you can get power, grab it,” The New Statesman http://www.newstatesman.com/ideas/2009/11/381-382-interview-obama-theory [accessed on November 14, 2009].

William Paul Young initially wrote the story of “The Shack” for his children. It was just going to be his gift to them.  That is why he only made 15 copies the first time he printed it.  However, somehow other friends got a hold of it, read it, and passed it on to others.  By their encouragement, he self-published 10,000 copies.  The story of “The Shack” gained moment and now has over 4 million copies in publication.  His story of redemption has turned out to be a gift to millions.

I will admit up front that the genre of “The Shack” is not my particular style. There has not been a lot of “Christian Fiction” that has captured my attention outside of C.S. Lewis (or J.R.R. Tolkien, if you include him in that category).  I never got caught up into Frank E. Peretti’s series surrounding “This Present Darkness”.  However, I was amused by how many people, Christians and non-Christians, took Peretti’s fictional writing and attempted to build a theology of demons and angels out of it.  I kept wanting to scream, “It’s just a story, folks!  Hello?!  Fiction!”

That being said, I did find the story of “The Shack” interesting. For a self-published work, I thought it was done very well.  There were a few places in the story line that could have been edited a bit more tightly to make for better flow or believability.  However, over all, I found it to be well written.  I enjoyed Young’s personal style that draws the reader into the story and characters.  I found the occasional humor well placed and made the book more captivating and readable.

A search on the internet will reveal a number of people – particularly Christians – who have problems with the story theologically. They have taken the time to pull apart the story and reveal its “heretical” tendencies.  Once again, I would like to inform these people that it was not written as a theological treatise, but as a fictional story.  As such, nothing in the story should be taken as prescriptive but descriptive.  In other words, it was written to describe things that are difficult for the human heart and mind to understand.  It was not written to prescribe for us what we are to believe.  It is not a systematic theology or biblical theology for seminarians.  Nor was it written to become a new theology of some sort for New Agers.

Such fruitless endeavors by well-meaning individuals does nothing to build up faith in others let alone “protect” them from error. I think that such individuals would probably find something wrong in C.S. Lewis’ “The Chronicles of Narnia” or John Bunyan’s “The Pilgrim’s Progress”.  These, too, were written as fiction.  They were meant to be parables or portrayals of the human spiritual struggle.  Every sermon illustration, story attempt, or parable breaks down at some point.  It does not give us the whole truth, only a fuzzy picture at best of part of it.  This is the case for “The Shack”.  Taken as such, I believe there are some great illustrations or pictures for us of what God wants in a relationship with his creation, particularly humankind.

One of the major complaints against “The Shack” is its portrayal of the trinity or triune godhead. This belief is a cornerstone of orthodox Christian theology.  However, one must remember that even the best theologians have had trouble for the past 2000 years to come up with a credible and simple definition or illustration of the trinity.  All efforts at illustrating it – the egg, the apple, the three states of water, etc – all break down and fail at some point.

Wm. Paul Young’s attempt at portraying this relationship between Father, Son, and Holy Spirit is just as difficult. Some critics have trouble with the picture given to us by the author of “Papa” being a large African-American woman at the beginning of the story.  (“Papa” does later in the story, however, reveals himself as a man to Mack.)  I for one was really disappointed that God the Father did not turn out to be Morgan Freeman again…okay, I’m kidding.

Rather than getting caught up in what gender or ethno-cultural identity God would really have if he really appeared to us in human form, one should enjoy the story for what it is…God attempting to relate to a man with a broken heart and past.  In a fictional story, I suppose God can reveal himself in about any way he likes…such as Aslan the Lion…a talking lion none the less.  The real point of what the author is trying to get to is lost in such a myopic attempt to critique the story.  Why not just enjoy the story for what it is?

Personally, I really appreciated how Young attempts to portray the close relationship between the trinity. I thought he did an admirable job attempting to portray the unique characteristics of “three persons in one being”.  This would be difficult at any level!  The church has suffered some nasty self-inflicted bloody noses trying to answer this question – how do you describe the triune nature of God?  A casual reading of church history will reveal some colorful and bloody fights in the early church councils trying to answer this very question.  Therefore, I think we should cut the author some slack in attempting to portray this to the 21st century person.

American Falls 2, July 2003 ©Weatherstone/Ron Almberg, Jr. (2009)

I really like the author’s picture of Jesus. Personally, I have always appreciated a picture of Jesus that was more joyful than one that was ascetic and morose.  The picture I get of Jesus in the gospels is of an individual who really enjoyed being around people, liked celebrations and parties, and had a great sense of humor at the expense of the religious stiff-shirts.  Paul Young, to me anyway, portrays a believable Jesus in the story.

There were a couple of places in the story that I found to be a little unbelievable – a little too science fiction for me. However, it is the prerogative of the author in fiction to take his readers on a journey.  And if one will just enjoy the journey then the story can be enjoyed for what it is rather than critiqued for what it is not.  Nevertheless, the interaction of Mack with Sophia was a little “out there” for me as was the vision Mack was given of God’s view of the world and his meeting his father.  But, that is just me.  You may like those parts of the story.  Remember, it is just a story.

Some critiqued the book for attempting to tell us that sin does not need to be punished. However, I looked carefully for any place the author seemed to say such a thing.  I did not find it.  Instead, he points out that sin has its own consequences.  He reasserts what Jesus said, the world is already condemned and he, Jesus, did not come to condemn the world but through his sacrifice save the world.  Sin, in fact, was judged and the punishment for it paid on the cross.  This the author makes very clear.  The story of the cross and the redemption of humankind through Jesus’ sacrifice is clearly communicated.

The story does not include a portrayal of hell or eternal judgment for those who reject the offer of relationship with God through Jesus. However, as a story, that does not seem to be the direction the author wanted to go or dwell upon.  As the author, that is his prerogative!  He is not writing a theology but a story.  In telling the story, a certain amount of theology or thoughts about God, humankind’s relationship to God and vice versa, and ultimate meaning in human tragedy and suffering is offered for us to think upon.  We are free to draw our own opinions.

If you are looking for deeper and more complete theology, I suggest reading the Bible. The help of a few good theologians may come in handy.  But do not attempt to make too much of out of another person’s fictional story.  Instead, enjoy the story for what it is and embrace those parts that give joy and meaning to you.  I think Jesus would read “The Shack” and say, “Well done!  Good story!  Got another one?”

©Weatherstone/Ron Almberg, Jr. (2009)

I wonder if it's the beards that gives them the power of awesome, maybe I should grow mine back....

Total Film has a great interview with one of my favorite directors and personal heroes, Guillermo Del Toro about the movie I am probably more hype on than any I have been in… well maybe forever.  I used to read The Hobbit every year like clockwork when I was a kid.  In fact, it’s the book I remember reading first in life, coming from a family of huge Tolkien nerds it was thrust into my tiny hands at the young age of 6.

It’s a dream of mine to work on ‘The Hobbit’, I dunno if I’m going to beat the clock on this one but you can bet that who ever is handling post-production for this film is going to start hearing from me weekly come Spring.  And even if I don’t make it, I couldn’t be happier with what the man is saying already.  Here are a couple excerpts:

You mentioned the structure. Will the book make up the first movie, with the second movie plucked from the appendices and maybe even your imagination? Or will parts of the book be saved for the second movie?

We are respecting the structure established by Professor Tolkien because the order of the adventures in The Hobbit is well known to generations and generations of kids. You don’t want to be moving stuff like that.

But we will be integrating Gandalf’s comings and goings because he does disappear in the book quite often.

So, as opposed to the book, we see where he goes and what happens to him

Presumably working with Peter (Jackson) is not that much different to working with Mike Mignola on the Hellboy movies?

You nailed it. I’d say Mike is as opinionated as if he was another director because essentially he directs on the page. And Mignola, like Pedro and Peter, knows the process – they all know that at some point you’re going to be alone with the beast [laughs].

You’re going to be the guy and you can only trust your own instincts.

You’re not going to be making a phone call from a remote location to ask a question; you’re going to have to make a decision yourself.

We had such good discussion on the Vampires and Angels Tuesday post, I decided to blog on it again rather than responding in the comment section.

Where to start?

First, I think I’ve made my point about real beings and historical events, but what about those elements that are purely make-believe? Such as vampires.

While vampires are imaginary, they do have one thing that defines them—they ingest blood in order to survive. The myth, of course, is that they need human blood—hence their status as evil because they killed others to survive.

Of late, however, the “good” vampires found ways to satisfy their need for blood without taking human life. So the question moves to a theological one. The Bible says in Old and New Testament that Jews, then Christians, were to refrain from eating meat with the blood. So what can we assume about creatures that survive by ingesting the blood of another? I’d say, if they existed in this world, they stand in opposition to God’s law.

But what if these creatures exist in a fantasy world without God’s law? Must we, as readers, interpret such creatures in the light of Biblical reality? I don’t think so, not any more than we need to interpret physical events in a fantasy world by earthly reality. In other words, if it’s OK to include a portal between worlds or a flat earth or a sword only the rightful king can remove from its stone setting or any number of things and beings and events that do not adhere to earthly physical laws, then can’t fantasy also reinvent elements in a way that does not adhere to Biblical laws?

Understand, I’m not saying Biblical laws are to be ignored, just that they don’t apply in the same way to a fantasy world or a fantasized rendering of beings. Consequently, in a fantasy, people don’t need to become Christians. Salvation can be depicted through symbol or allegory or through what C. S. Lewis called “supposal.” (For more on this, check out my article at Spec Faith). The idea is, the author imagines a fantasy world and then asks, how would God make Himself known in this place, to these people?

So I might imagine a world where all people drank each other’s blood. They didn’t think it wrong because they all did it. How would God show Himself to those people? I can see Him coming as the only person ever born who did not drink blood. I can see a story about a group of blood-drinkers determined to take His blood by force.

What about beings with power over others and even over nature? How would God show Himself to them? Any number of story ideas suggest themselves.

Now what if I called those beings with power, witches and wizards?

Have I violated Scripture if some of those mythical creatures side with the good that must come if God, as He would show Himself in that fantasy, shows up? Perhaps of equal importance, must I show that their power comes from God?

I suggest it isn’t necessary any more than it is necessary to show that a character in a realistic novel can speak or think because God gave him that ability. In a fantasy world, if “special” powers are the norm, or the norm for a certain class of people, then I don’t think their power has to be shown as either from Good or from evil. Certainly a story can show this if the author chooses, but I don’t think it’s necessary.

Which brings me to Lord of the Rings. The wizards in Tolkien’s work are a special class of people; their power isn’t derivative. It is power that they use for good or for ill, depending on the intent of their heart. And nothing about his imagined beings is like real humans who practice divination or witchcraft. Tolkien has invented a different being but used a familiar name.

Frodo’s buddy Sam has a familiar name, but that doesn’t mean he is human. The point is, names must be understood in context. Because Aragon is called a Man doesn’t mean he’s restricted to act like men of reality act. In fact, he doesn’t.

In the same way, the White Witch, though Lewis depicted her as evil, did not act in any way like witches described in the Bible. She was as much a fictitious construct as Tolkien’s wizards.

Well, I have more to say, but this post is too long as it is. If you’re still reading, abundant kudos to you!

So now that it’s up, I can tell you that one of the reasons blogging has been so light for the last week is that I have been hip deep in reviewing Dragon Age for G4. It’s brilliant and amazing and I spent close to 50 hours over the course of five days playing through it and I’ll probably do it again with a different character. If you’d like to read the rest of my take, check out the full article on the G4 Web site. This particular post isn’t about the quality of the game, which is beyond question for me. It’s about the problem that I had with the Darkspawn, the main threat to the world the player faces.

Here’s the problem. Like the Orcs or goblins in Tolkien’s world, the Darkspawn are an embodiment of absolute evil. They are like locusts, driven to destroy, unable to be negotiated with and seemingly incapable of any higher desire than to burn, crush and destroy and make more of their kind. In short, they’re a typical rampaging fantasy horde that exists merely to provide sword fodder for the player to hack through millions of them without the annoyance of feeling guilty. That bothers me. I don’t like unredeemable fantasy monsters. It was one of the awful influences of Tolkien that turned me off of fantasy for many years.

Now, I’m not a pacifist. I’ve supported wars in the real world knowing that real people on both sides would suffer horrible deaths and injuries because of it. Even as I did it though, I never bought into the simplistic propaganda that those on the other side were irredeemably evil or anything less than human. War is a serious matter, requiring serious deliberation with full appreciation of the consequences of legally sanctioning the killing of other sentient beings. Even when the cause is just, the process is tragic. Like my recent bout of guilt fighting the Morroval in Moria, I’m wondering how to feel about the Darkspawn I’ve killed. (Yes, I know they’re not real and that “it’s just a game.” That’s hardly the point, is it Captain Metaphor?)

What makes the moral simplicity of the Darkspawn especially glaring in Dragon Age is the incredible level of characterization the other races and societies are given. Every character and race in the game has realistic, multi-layered set of motivations. They’re not purely good, nor are they purely evil. Even the “villain” the player faces throughout much of the game is given a believable, though twisted, sense of moral purpose for the actions he takes in defense of his homeland. In fact, at one point one of the character’s henchmen, when asked about the actions she takes, scoffs at the player. “It’s really easy to be an adventurer,” she says. “No one weeps for the death of an ogre. It’s much harder when you’re facing enemies who look just like you.”

She’s right and it’s to the game’s credit that despite the threat they pose, the Darkspawn are actually in the minority of the foes you’ll face. One of the toughest choices you’ll face in the game is deciding which side of a Dwarven royal succession struggle you’ll support — knowing that whichever way you choose, you’re going to have to kill a lot of dwarves whose only real crime is choosing to support the side the player didn’t pick.

No such grace is granted to the Darkspawn, though. They are sword fodder, there to be killed in order to rack up the experience points. Yet the darkspawn wear armor. They carry swords and medical supplies. Clearly they have a culture — someone must be forging this stuff — and value life, their own if no one else’s. Who are they? Are they sentient at all? If they’re nothing but locusts, then they’re not truly evil, are they? This was the reason why in Sufficiently Advanced Magic I chose to avoid having an “evil race” and made sure to explain the motivations for why two nations are at war. I have my sympathies and they come out in the book, but as far as I’m concerned, I’m ready to retire Tolkien’s orcs once and for all.

A television show actually expressing disillusionment with hope and change?  Did some racists get a hold of ABC’s programming department or something?

What I’m talking about is ABC’s new sci-fi drama V, a remake of the 1980s series of the same name:

Imagine this. At a time of political turmoil, a charismatic, telegenic new leader arrives virtually out of nowhere. He offers a message of hope and reconciliation based on compromise and promises to marshal technology for a better future that will include universal health care.

The news media swoons in admiration — one simpering anchorman even shouts at a reporter who asks a tough question: “Why don’t you show some respect?!!” The public is likewise smitten, except for a few nut cases who circulate batty rumors on the Internet about the leader’s origins and intentions. The leader, undismayed, offers assurances that are soothing, if also just a tiny bit condescending: “Embracing change is never easy.”

So, does that sound like anyone you know? Oh, wait — did I mention the leader is secretly a totalitarian space lizard who’s come here to eat us?

Now, I absolutely love good science fiction, and V seems intriguing and looks to be well done.  But truth be told, when I began seeing commercials for it, the political implications went completely over my head.  Instead, I thought, “Wow!  This looks interesting!”  That, in and of itself, speaks to the power of a good story.

However, good stories also offer other layers of meaning behind the creative storytelling.  Instead of merely providing an entertaining tale, good science fiction and fantasy–from The Lord of the Rings to Star Trek to Harry Potter to The Wheel of Time–offer glimpses of ourselves and our societies, often times couched in metaphor and allegory.  V seems to be shaping up to be more than just an entertaining mystery, and may very well turn out to be an apropos critique of our current political climate:

And at the very least, Morena Baccarin is much easier on the eyes than anyone currently in power.

-Mister Person

OLÁ Pessoas !!

vamos falar sobre agora sobre um tema essencial para a cultura Nerd:

O universo criado por J.R.R. Tolkien, o Mestre de fantasia.

Tolkien começou a escrever sobre seu universo durante a 1ª guerra, quando pegou a febre das trincheiras.

No campo de batalha começou a descrever o mundo de Arda , palco de suas fantasias.

[AVISO DE SPOILER]

O primeiro livro de Tolkien foi  o ”O HOBBIT- lá e de volta outra vez” que conta a historia de Bilbo Bolseiro. Curiosamente , a história desse livro , difere de Senhor dos Anéis, pois o Um Anel não é o foco do livro embora ele seja uma parte importante da trama.

A historia do livro é de Bilbo , um hobbit de respeito e que possuía uma vida tranquila , mas um dia Gandalf, o Cinzento bate em sua porta , e o coloca em uma aventura junto com 12 anões ( Dwalin,Balin, Kili , Fili,Dori, Nori ,Ori,Oin,Gloin,Bifur,Bofur,Bombur e Thorin Escudo de Carvalho) em busca de um enorme tesouro , guardado pelo Dragão Smaug.No longo caminho eles enfrentam vários perigos sendo um deles os orcs das montanhas , acabam matando o Grão-Orc e encontram personagens secundários muito interessantes como Beorn, um troca-peles(um ser que muda de aparência, no caso Beorn alterna entre um enorme urso negro e um humano)

Ao chegar à montanha solitária , a morada de Smaug ,Bilbo adentra no covil e rouba uma taça de ouro e vê que o dragão dorme onde outrora foi um grande salão dos anões . Smaug fica muito irritado com o roubo e procura os invasores de sua morada para se vingar , e não os encontra pois eles se esconderam em uma passagem.

Após o roubo , Bilbo volta ao covil do dragão e lá tem uma conversa com ele, e acaba revelando que teve ajuda do povo da Cidade do Lago,  e Smaug  vai para lá para se vingar do povo.

Na Cidade do Lago ,Smaug é morto por Bard que vai para a a montanha com um exercito tentar pegar o tesouro que lhe é de direito, Thorin faz uma muralha e através dos corvos , pede reforços para Dain . Nesse meio tempo Bilbo acha a Pedra Arken que é a peça mais valiosa e importante do tesouro de Smaug, ela é de Thorin por direito pois ela pertencia ao seus antepassados, e Bilbo a entrega à Bard para ele ter o poder de barganha .

Nesse meio tempo os Orcs e os Wargs (raça de lobos gigantes) aparecem para se vingar da morte do Grão-Orc,os anões também chegam nesse meio tempo. e lá é travada a batalha dos  5 exércitos como é de se esperar os orcs perdem. Porem, durante a batalha Thorin é gravamnte ferido e Fili e Kili morrem . no seu leito de morte Thorin recebe a pedra Arken de volta de Bard e é enterrado com ela.

Após o final da batalha Bilbo volta ao condado e la vive tranquilamente ate seus 111 anos mais isso é papo para o proximo post  sobre Senhor dos Anéis  ……

Até a Proxima , e que a força esteja sempre com vocês !!!