Previous Entry Share Next Entry
Sent to me in email
Patrick Rothfuss' oddly specific analogies about the upcoming Hobbit movie.

Also posted at Dreamwidth, where there are comment count unavailable comment(s); comment here or there.

  • 1
Authors over-disclosing in the second person: always a good sign.

Seriously, dude, keep that one in the first person where it belongs.

Edited at 2012-02-21 05:27 am (UTC)

Well that nearly gave me whiplash.

He seems to have specific issues. And he visits too many porn sites.

Reading that was like you were cruising along a freeway in kind of bad weather at 45mph and you suddenly hit some black ice and did a 360-plus-180 turn and you ended up facing oncoming traffic, without your car leaving the lane or your mind understanding how you had come to be there at all.

What, did that happen directly to you, recently? Or just "your friend"... 8/

Ahh... So our blogger has compared potatoes and automobiles, found them to be NOT identical, and has, therefore, declared one or the other to be useless. I overstate, but to make a point. Please: Books are not movies. Believing that books and movies can be reasonably expected to be interchangeable is a fools errand. But go ahead. I will watch.

Those are remarkably specific analogies - especially considering that they're about a movie he has not seen.

Well, they were really about the Lord of the Rings movies, and his post was about how he feared The Hobbit would be the same.

Also, all worth it for that cartoon.

His points about LotR were reasonably well taken. Especially about the Dwarf. Although (and this had me surprised), after making that (excellent) point about the Dwarf in LotR (does he have a name? or just an accent?), he fails to make the obvious tie forward and point out that this movie has, what, TEN DWARVES in it? Will they all have no character to speak of and oddly selected accents?

One (proto) adaptation of a much-loved book was crap. [1] Therefore all other adaptations of the book will be crap.

Also, only the Original Edition is worthy of your consideration, and not anything from later on where the auteur added new bits and tried to retcon it. [2] If anyone even expresses an opinion to the contrary, I shall thcream and thcream and thcream "George Lucas JRR Tolkein raped my childhood!!1!1eleventy-one!1".

[1] Though given Gene (I don't understand 'Tom and Jerry' and I don't care) Deitch was involved, it could hardly have been otherwise.

[2] I'll wager a small amount that he's never read the very first edition of the Hobbit. It's got policemen in it.

Edited at 2012-02-21 07:07 am (UTC)

Deitch's story of the genesis of the Hobbit short is actually really entertaining, if not particularly morally uplifting; it was made in one month, with only a token public release, to fulfill a contractual obligation as part of a scheme to squeeze some money out of the Tolkien estate.

I have a much bigger problem with the slut-shaming than I have with the preconceptions about a book I never much cared about being made into a movie I'm not that looking forward to.

Ah, now I know why I was mildly skeeved every time a woman appeared on the page in Name of the Wind.

Thanks for clearing that up, Patrick Rothfuss!

Hear, freaking, hear.

For fun, I'd rather like to see the "sweet girl" from his past post a similar essay about that socially awkward dude in highschool she kind of liked until she walked in on him once while she was visiting his younger sister and discovered he was a bit of a skeevy, bearded porn-chaser.

(Which might be every bit an unfair and rather distasteful characterization as the one Mr Rothfuss flung on the floor.)

Oh, me too. Especially "You probably knew someone like her. The smart girl. The shy girl. The one who wore glasses and was a little socially awkward. The one who screwed up the curve in chemistry so you got an A- instead of an A."

Quite apart from the implication of the final sentence ("And I really resented her for making me look less brilliant than I should have looked") it's the tacit assumption that the interlocutory "You" must have "known" rather than "been" someone "like her" because of course for Rothfuss the implied "you" must be a heterosexual male.

Edited at 2012-02-21 03:41 pm (UTC)

(no subject) (Anonymous) Expand
Cool, so now we officially hate Patrick Rothfuss now? Nice to know.

It could be that he chose a startling analogy because it was startling. Or, maybe, if you're the sort of person who reads too much into stuff, it's because deep down he's a world-champion misogynist. Which do you think is more likely?

If you're thinking, "Yay! This gives me an excuse to flex my hate muscles!"--then perhaps Rothfuss isn't the most twisted one in this discussion.

If you're thinking, "Yay! This gives me an excuse to flex my hate muscles!" then gosh, that would be bad. If you're thinking, "that simplistic metaphor doesn't really hold water, and makes Rothfuss' attitudes towards both books and women seem childish and self-involved," then maybe you're just a normally constituted adult.

Really, the big excluded middle in your second paragraph leaves room for a whole world of responses.

(Deleted comment)
(no subject) (Anonymous) Expand
I bailed out half way through the extended metaphor, because resentful tales of that cute girl in high school rarely go good places. Especially from male writers.

I'm kind of reminded of Toby Keith's execrable "How Do You Like Me Now?!" I'm not the most well-adjusted of people (not by a long shot), but even I have the good sense to know that holding on to the resentment of a young lady you had a crush on (resentment for not being exactly what you fantasized about) when Newt Gingrich was Speaker is... a bit unhealthy.

Edited at 2012-02-21 05:02 pm (UTC)

(Deleted comment)
There is a long and honorable tradition of artists hating the people that pay them to create art. I've never understood it.

Dude. Pat. I like you, Pat, I've met you, and you're a landsman too.

But as someone who probably has been around a few different blocks than you, let me tell you right up front: it's the same woman.

a) Therefore it's a bad analogy. Adaptations are always different things.

b) IT'S THE SAME WOMAN. She has a day job you didn't expect. So what?

c) Christ Pat. Show a bit more maturity than the J. Geils Band.

"Show a bit more maturity than the J. Geils Band."

Applause. That song got up my nose.

(Deleted comment)
Jesus fuck, can nobody criticize a particular jerky thing someone has said as part of their professional public discourse without being accused of being a mob of witchhunters looking for their next candidate for 15 minutes of hate?

I mean, why is it that when someone says "Hey, Person X said an icky thing as part of a professional public-facing interview or event" someone always has to show up with "OH NOW IT'S TIME TO HATE PERSON X?"

  • 1

Log in