site banner
naraburns  nihil supernum  2yr ago (text post)   35888 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of October 3, 2022

This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.

Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.

We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:

  • Shaming.

  • Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.

  • Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.

  • Recruiting for a cause.

  • Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.

In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:

  • Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.

  • Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.

  • Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.

  • Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.

On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.

24
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

How much of this is tied to the fact that Amazon got a fairly scattershot group of rights to Tolkien's work?

We have the rights solely to The Fellowship of the Ring, The Two Towers, The Return of the King, the appendices, and The Hobbit. And that is it. We do not have the rights to The Silmarillion, Unfinished Tales, The History of Middle-Earth, or any of those other books…We worked in conjunction with world-renowned Tolkien scholars and the Tolkien estate to make sure that the ways we connected the dots were Tolkien-ian and gelled with the experts’ and the estate’s understanding of the material.

To me, at least, that feels like trying to bake a cake with flour and chocolate, but no sugar and eggs.

Definitely part of the problem. They needed to make parts of the show noticeably different from Tolkien's work to show that they weren't using material the didn't have the rights to.

I imagine that they had to run major creative decisions by lawyers. That doesn't help the writing.

Thing is, they dropped fleeting hints in that only viewers who knew the lore would get and which would go right over the casual viewers' heads, but since they hadn't the rights to expand on that material, they never explained it.

So that made the starting episodes confusing and boring (nothing happens) for the casual audience while annoying the fans who do know what is going on (anyone else chuckle darkly at the opening episode CGI Elven fleet sailing off to Middle-earth in pursuit of Morgoth?)

Pick what you are gonna do, and stick to it. If you can't legally write about Morgoth or Valinor, don't introduce them. And stop copying the movies.

That would be a decent excuse if they were doing anything right, like getting themes right, character personalities right, or anything of the sort. That they have butchered the timeline is only sin #587 in the show.

Compressing the timeline is a venial sin. I do get why they're doing it, of course you want to have Galadriel and Elrond and Gil-galad and the Forging of the Rings and Tar-Míriel and Pharazon and the Drowning of Númenor all happening at the one time because that is big and exciting.

It's not the worst thing they've done by a long shot. The mismatch between the CGI (big impressive city) and the physical sets (main square that fits in about sixty people at maximum, side streets for recruit training and not a barracks, dockside set that can squeeze in three ships to be a mighty fleet) is the glaring kind of contrast that sticks out. The Southlands is something like four villages (including the destroyed ones) and they all hole up in one watch tower and then they acclaim their new 'king' and uh, this is it? A rabble of raggedy farmers is the entirety of the realm? It's too small for the story they want to tell.

I'd say compressing the timeline adds to the "smallness," though. In canon, many of the relationships among the immortal characters evolved over actual centuries or millennia; there wasn't a "we're on a clock here, get with the program" issue. Sauron does the whole captain of evil armies more than once, but a number of his big accomplishments put him in the insidious corruptor role, instead--Annatar in Eregion, "captive" Sauron in Numenor. Corruptor villains done right take time to develop, otherwise you get Palpatine's "Dew it" and Anakin's "guess I'm slaughtering children now, oh well."

I only realized reading this how better it would have been to cut a bunch of useless stuff from attack of the clones, and use it to build up the Anakin/Palpatine thing earlier. It's like they wasted #2 and tried to cram too much into #3.

Deviations from the source material are about problem #500 with this show. It's really shoddily made.

The writing is the big problem. When they try for the profound, or the aphorism, they end up like a lead balloon (which probably sinks because it looks down at the darkness, not because it's made of lead, right?) They try for 'Tolkien high style' and end up like - sorry any Mormons reading this - sounding like Joseph Smith's Bible fanfiction. They would do better to stick to plain and simple language, because they cannot do elevated speech for love nor money.

Give me the meat, and give it to me raw is the least of it.

I am really impressed by Joseph Mawle, even under the prosthetics and with this level of script to say, he can act in a convincing and affecting manner. I like Adar much more than the 'heroic' characters I am supposed to be cheering for.

Better writing (and better acting by some characters, naming no names) would make up a lot for cheap costumes, small scale, and 'everyone teleports over vast distances'. Maybe no deciding to swim home in a short trip of three thousand miles would help, too.

Ahh interesting point. We should just neuter copyright law at this point, the man has been dead for decades.

Making all the works free of copyright would do no good, I don't think this show could manage to write a decent story even if they had free access to all the material. They'd stick with the parts they've showed us in the prologue: Morgoth was the baddie who attacked Valinor, the Elves all sailed off to fight him - and leave out the awkward parts like "Soooo... how we got these ships we showed you? that involves the First Kinslaying. And then Galadriel and her kindred and their section of the Noldor were betrayed and abandoned by Feanor and had to cross the Helcaraxe. Oh, yeah; speaking of Feanor and his sons..."

They want a simpler "good guy Elves fighting Sauron" story. They're not interested in "death and the desire for deathlessness" or anything 'philosophical'. Diverse skin colours and genders all come together to overcome mutual distrust and beat the bad guy through the power of friendship.

Agreed on that. Still, theoretically others could try their hand and the best would rise to the top.

I kinda want to see the same crazy mashups you get for Cthulhu or Sherlock Holmes.

In fact that's my main argument against the very concept of copyright. We're missing out on so many possible works for essentially no reason.

To hell with canon and rigid control and back to when you could compile random tales into your own new ones and have some cultural evolution.

Hell, LOTR itself was made in this spirit.

I kinda want to see the same crazy mashups you get for Cthulhu or Sherlock Holmes.

Frogwares Games got you covered! Their first version of the game is good, they're remaking it now to fit in with their new version of Sherlock and eh, I'm waiting to see if they can pull it off.

Actually Sherlock Holmes' early adventures are in the public domain now. His later ones are not.

So you can publish your mashup, but it will have a similar mishmash of restrictions on material.

In a different era, I would've agreed. Now though, anything that throttles attempts to trot out atrocious works drafting off the brand name is a shield I'd rather not part with.

Tortured sequels are not unique to this era.

I choose to believe that the reason works are atrocious now isn't that no talent exists, but that no talent makes it to the places where they get access to the IPs, because you have to optimize for politicking to get there.

If anyone could make a Star Wars, you bet your ass we would get higher grade interstellar swashbuckling adventures.

How does one look at the current entertainment landscape and conclude we need even more remakes?

Sufficiently broadly inspired remakes are indistinguishable from novelty. In fact there is no such thing as novelty that isn't that, it always comes from somewhere.

The problem with copyright law is (right now) that it benefits corporations even more than the writer who hits it big like Tolkien. And I think it's major corporations that often get the criticism for being bland and formulaic.

Theoretically, if it was equitably removed, you would end up with a situation like we have for zombies : yes, a ton of corporate products since film is so capital intensive.

But there's a chance for original work with the concept cause anyone can use it. Zombie media are all variations on the same concept but aren't all soulless corporate remakes; they run the gamut in terms of budget and even geographic spread (one of the big shows of this recent Korean explosion in pop culture was zombie-based)

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats