George RR Martin on Tolkien's Biggest Mistake
Vložit
- čas přidán 22. 08. 2024
- Previous Video - George RR Martin on Asshai: • George RR Martin on As...
Full Interview: • JUEGOS DE TRONOS de Ge...
A Song of Ice and Fire/Game of Thrones Author George R. R. Martin Interview
* Tolkien laughs in complete books
*and then coughs in silmarillion*
@@sernoddicusthegallant6986 He completed LotR, his magnum opus, whereas Martin has yet to complete ASoIaF. The Silmarillion is a separate history of Middle Earth; how many histories of Westeros will Martin complete before his death?
Haha, right! It's too bad that something else George couldn't learn from his elders like Tolkien and Lewis was how to rein in and edit characters and subplots to tell cohesive, and complete, stories.
SerNoddicusTheGallant ironic, considering you have a damn Puck pfp
@Green Gobby So?
What's George's biggest mistake? Trusting D&D.
Haha yes
2nd biggest mistake:
Taking too damn long!
dont refer to them as D&D, you besmirch Dungeons and Dragons.
Agreed. The series can never be compared to the books,
GRRM is the hack here, D&D realized that there was no compelling ending. GRRM scammed them as well. The final books will never see the light of day because that will once and for all show that GRRM is a fraud.
At this point there's a better chance of Tolkien finishing The Winds Of Winter...
Lol 😂
Lol same with elden ring
I don't think Tolkien was ever up to a Sharknado cameo.
@@____REDACTED____ what? This doesn't even make sense...
GRRM wrote the story and created the world YEARS ago... why would the game not be finished on account of George?
@@____REDACTED____ it's out!
Note to self after reading comments: never criticize Tolkien
Ikr grrm loves the shit out of Tolkien, honestly I think it’s the uploaded fault for the title of the vid making grrm sound bad
@@ravendeafening192 Yeah,the channel is reuploading scenes from these interviews and slapping these clickbaity titles.
I think it’s more about how low class it is to criticize someone who can’t respond. GRRM should also consider that his own series will never be completed so it will never truly be a success like LotR.
I would much prefer to see GRRM finish this series, any criticism he receives afterwards at least everyone will understand the accomplishment of writing such a series.
@@FreakyLynx How “low class it is” what are you even talking about,you’re acting like he’s crapping on tolkien because he knows he can’t reply even though that’s not really what he’s doing, he’s just giving his small opinion on what tiny mistake he made that’s it, don’t know why this is so controversial lol
Especially an inferior writer who owes Tolkien blind loyalty at the penalty of the sword =]
If GRRM wrote LOTR he probably would have run out of characters before Helms Deep.
Lmao
He would just keep adding more B and C list characters we have to use a spreadsheet to keep up with.
If GRRM wrote LOTR, it would have been long forgotten about by everyone but a few literature historians who knew about these two books that were never concluded by the author writing the third one.
Actually he would have spent five books getting there
If GRRM wrote LOTR we never would have gotten Return of The King
He never brought him back for Frodo tho. Guy had to complete the quest without ever knowing Gandalf came back.
Oh good point
Plus, Gandalf coming back was him getting a promotion since the white wizard betrayed the council, so Gandalf became the new white wizard.
@@JosephSmith-lm4ri Oh you mean Saruman, right?
@@ThaMobstarr yes. I was just afraid of typing it wrong (not bad at english, as it's my first language, I just don't always type stuff right).
Holly shit. Never thought of that actually.
"His body was broken, and his soul fled back to Valinor, were the Vala were commanded to send him back to fulfill his mission."
Never said he died.
It’s basically saying he died
@@ravendeafening192 The Vala are Immortal. The body is just a vehicle for them. It may take a long time, but they can get new bodies.
@@canundrumsixnine6830 yeah but that’s still to mortals considered dying somewhat no?
@@ravendeafening192 I really don't think that any inhabitant of Middle Earth really sees death and dying in the same way us outside onlookers do.
That's essentially what happens to Elves when they die as well, but Tolkien is very explicit about this being death to them. Gandalf died just like Elves die and just like Men die, the difference is what happens to them afterwards.
Whether that's true for normal Maiar is another question, but Gandalf and the other Istari were bound to their bodies in a way no other Maiar or Valar were - they couldn't just cast their bodies off like old clothes and put on new ones the way other Maiar could.
GRRM imagines a story, then build a world to contain it
Tolkien imagines a world, then told one of the stories within it
1000% correct
I personally prefer the first one.
Tolkien imagined a family of languages and then build a world to contain it and then told stories about it.
Ftfy
That's absolutely NOT how GRR Martin writes, he's a worldbuilder as well. You are describing Terry Goodkind's writing process.
Absolutely spot on comment.
My Silmarillion skills are rusty, but from what I recall: Gandalf was a Maia, an angel of sorts, and therefore could not truly die. Right??
Absolutely right.
Maryam Dadar Yes, not to mention in the books there's not even a moment where he's dead. He falls, walks back all those steps to the top, collapses at the top and is taken by a great eagle to Rivendell, where he is given his new white robes. He's not even considered dead at any point.
@@stuv1996 It's really not that clear in the book when Gandalf explains what happened to Aragorn, Legolas and Gimli; but I think what he meant was that his physical body, the "vessel" of his appearence did die, since it was mortal flesh, after all.
(Gandalf was taken to Lothlorien, not Rivendell, btw).
Luis Acosta Casanova from what I remember from the Silmarillion, that isn’t uncommon. Since the Maia are essentially angelic energies, even if their “human” host bodies were to be destroyed, the Maia itself cannot be.
Just like Sauron wasn't really destroyed, but just banished from Middle Earth.
Martin forgot that Eru Ilúvatar resurrected Gandalf so his “task could be completed”
Boromir most definitely stayed dead.
Just like the king and heir of Rohan, Theoden and Theodred.
Martin doesn't know the lure that well apparently.. he's quite short sighted and I don't think we have D&D to fully blame for a crap ending anymore.
And those were the only people of any importance that died in the whole series. He has a point. :p
Johnnythefirst only “Gandalf” was revived who is more like an immortal angel than a human being, plus Gandalf the White is not the same person as Gandalf the Grey. Gandalf the White is Saruman The White “how he should have been”.
Johnnythefirst plus in the books way more people of import died like multiple lords of Rohan and Gondor.
Tolkien was writing a myth and his characters were there to fill roles in that myth. Both he and Lewis were men of faith and their relationship was strained when Lewis began dating a divorced woman (Tolkien was a devout Catholic). He also felt Lewis should “leave theology to the theologians” (e.g. Mere Christianity) and didn’t like Lewis’ choice to make direct Christian allegories (Aslan is unquestionably Jesus). Even so, his faith unquestionably influences LOTR.
GRRM is writing salacious, political novels with twists, turns, and difficult decisions that all exist in a fantasy world.
Technically, they’re both fantasy writers, but their purpose for writing couldn’t be more different.
This. Tolkien wrote a mythology which followed certain archetypes and common mythological symbolism. GRRM was writing a fictional history that reflects real history.
What's interesting is that while Tolkien was devout Catholic, GRRM is a lapsed Catholic and an agnostic/atheist. So in terms of religion they are kinda the opposite. In think it is heavily shown in both of their writings.
@@TheGeneralGrievous19 I didn't know that about GRRM, but it does fit.
This is a great way to put it. In addition, I think it's naive and simplistic to say Gandalf should have stayed dead, considering he was a Maiar.
“Gandalf should have stayed dead.” Says the man who will be resurrecting his MAIN CHARACTER!
Jon snow?
@@holeinthehat shh don’t tel him Jon Snow wasn’t resurrected in the books
@@ravendeafening192 you mean to tell uss jon motherfucking snow won't be brought back
@@sufnskanne469 we can only find out
@@ravendeafening192 we wont find our shit martins done with the books
Killing his own characters clearly isnt enough anymore lol
Hmm
You don't get the point why he kills his characters
@@IperialAndroid you don't get the joke
@@sairamts just saying in case it's not a joke. A lot of people thinks George kills his characters only for fun and shock value
JK Rowling makes everybody’s characters gay, and then George RR Martin kills them
At least Tolkien can finish a story in less than 20 years.
utubrGaming no he can’t, The Silmarillion being a prime example
dick
hes right though lets be honest George is a very slow writer
Amateresu When you have so many POV characters and their places in the world, including the time at which they’d realistically be able to travel from one place to the next for the timelines to remain consistent, all while keeping the story from slowing down to a halt, you’d be a slow writer too.
@@theatheistbear3117 yah but that's not the point, Tolkien wouldn't.
Tolkien's mistake was finishing ROTK instead of going on talk shows, editing second-rate sci fi anthologies, and acting like a bratty child whenever people complained about it not being released.
🤣🤣
And being actually profesional.and disciplined to his work unlike this fatass know it all
Tolkien told stories about specific quests within his world; quests with real end points. I like ASOIAF but it’s about a quest with no real ending. Someone assumes the iron throne, they die. Someone else assumes the throne, they die. A quest for a functionally everlasting prize with no main character doesn’t end until the author chooses to stop writing and by no other litmus.
That’s not true the others and wight walkers and the azora high prophecy all give it a very clear ending that can be reached
Gandalf’s death in terms of the story is impactful regardless of its temporary nature because of one major thing: his death removed him from being able to play any active role in Frodo’s quest. WE know that Gandalf returned, but Frodo never finds out until after the Ring is already destroyed.
@Than Empire thank god, couldn't agree more.
It also allowed the group to splinter, as Boromir would never have pulled the shit he did, with Gandalf still in control and leading the group properly.
Thanks, I knew this was true, just never processed it in that light.
Still kills any stakes the story had, the plot in LOTR is really not it's strong point.
@@anon_148 I disagree on both counts. The Fellowship has literally one angelic being. If any of the other 8 die, they would stay dead. Just ask Boromir.
The Scouring of the Shire was Tolkien's way of appealing to tradition, conservation and a deep-seated desire that the English be free of the drudgery and ugliness of modern cities, industry and 'growth at all costs'. Tolkien was an English romantic, and a devout Catholic, so for him Gandalf's resurrection as powerful as his descent into the depths of Moria.
He can say, "That's not how I would've done it", but that's because George isn't a romantic like Tolkien is.
Martin aslo isn't as good a writer. I started reading his books and they were so BORING.
spot on. his position is actually anti-capitalist, or at least, anti-industrialization.
@@uberdru True, this article goes into Tolkien's beliefs in greater detail. Suffice to say, he was someone with a great love for his people who would be dismayed, but not surprised at the state of his country today.
nationalvanguard.org/2020/01/christopher-tolkien-obituary/
@@RantTheRetort that can also being said of Tolkien. I'm sure there are people who find lord of the rings boring. But does that make lotr a bad book or Tolkien a bad author? No. The same goes for George R R Martin. Just because *you* don't like asoiaf, that doesn't make the book series automatically bad.
@@cerostymc That's fair. I guess we shouldn't judge it too harshly until it's done 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
This comment section is saltier than the Dead Sea, damn.
I just kan't disagree with you on that one
Bruh fr can't we just celebrate the differences in literature?
For real. grrm has complimented tolkien a thousand times and also said that Tolkien IMPOSTERS made the good guy vs bad guy overused, he also said that he loves Tolkien and looks up to him
@@anonymousnate678 George was probably a bigger fan than you dude, he LOVED Tolkien’s books but instead you guys moan and cry thinking that he insulted Tolkien. If you can’t stand your favorite author taking criticism than you shouldn’t be on the internet
but i guess we can call grrm out on making a mistake too because he is human too and definetly did not understand the meaning of gandalfs resurrections
When last I looked, Tolkien not Martin, was the author of Lord Of The Rings.
Tolkien was consistent though. In Middle Earth, if you kill a Balrog, the Valar bring you back. Glorfindel was also brought back from the dead this way.
the silmarillion tales, the tales of the first age were the FIRST thing Tolkien wrote concerning middle-earth, with The Fall Of Gondolin being the very first, and he wrote it while he was still a young man in the middle of war. So by the time the hobbit and lotr were created the tales and myths of M.E already existed for years and years. He couldnt have wrote an entire mythology after the hobbit right on the spot like that, it takes so much time to do so. He offered his tales which already existed but the Publisher didnt accepted it, so Tolkien wrote tlotr as the final moments of the third age inside his old tales and got his shit together concerning the lore, the one ring and fixing everything (in the first version of the hobbit the ring was just a magic ring).
This is true, but it doesn't really change the point. He decided for Gandalf to meet a balrog in that cave so that he could die and come back. He could have had him meet some beast that would kill him and he'd stay dead.
@creepy truck driver Tolkien had been creating the mythology of Middle Earth before he even conceived The Hobbit. I repeat: Tolkien wrote the (original) Silmarillion before Lord of the Rings.
Glorfindel is such a cool character
Different Glorfindel. Not the same person.
He acts like he’s not gonna bring Jon back in the books
Ikr
Probably not as D&D did. It was implied that Jon wargs into Ghost which would be a far better way than the show version.
@@xxlCortez you really do believe that one of his main POV characters will remain the rest of the saga as a glorified dog? I mean... It could be interesting, don't get me wrong... But is almost certain that Jon will be back in his own body by R'hllor like in the show. I just hope that Martin puts more consequences in to this, like Jon losing a part of himself in the process (like Berric and Catelyn).
@@adrianoalves5829 I doubt it. Where's Melisandre at this point? The book didn't make the stupid Shireen sacrifice just so Melisandre can go back. We'll see if Martin ever finishes that book.
@@xxlCortez I think she is in Castle Black (or in the North at least )and spent a lot of time with Jon in the books. She even told him about his assassination. It's more plausible that she will see something in the flames that tells her that Jon must be revived (even if not necessarily because he is the Azor Ahai) than one of the main characters spending the climax of the story as a wolf.
I honestly think that the fact that Eru Ilúvatar decided that everything is fucked without Gandalf so chose to intervene directly to bring him back more powerful than ever, when directly intervening is something he so rarely did, is more impactful than leaving him dead and clearly shows how important Gandalf is. I love Game of Thrones but I’m glad it was Tolkien who wrote LOTR and not Martin.
Cause Martin never finished Tolkien works and probably focused only on LOTR trilogy. Eru set a path for his creation so in the end Sauron was always gonna fail, one way or another. Gandalf was important character but he was just a single piece of the puzzle. Its like when we were kids and we used to drop couple of puzzle pieces on the floor by accident. Later we found them and completed the picture. That's how I felt about Gandalf. He just returned where he belongs until the picture is completed. Cause Eru said to Melkor that even his own music is part of Erus plan and nothing he or anyone else can do to disturb the final outcome of his will. So the final result is always gonna be the same but the journey there is not set in stone. Also Tolkien understood human nature better then Martin when he decided to write about the story that's gonna end like many fables before and after. He knew that we love mystery, drama, killings, intense feelings but in the end we all desire for a happy end and he gave it to us. He wrote a trilogy that sends us a message far more powerful and impactful then Martin even could. Everyone would love to live in Shire. No one would want to live anywhere in GoT world. Enough said.
"Gandalf should have stayed dead"- revives Catelyn Stark, a side character, and makes her even more irrelevant. Proably going to revive Jhon Snow like in the series..
Gandalf´s ressurection had a deeper meaning. He should know it.
It really didn't.
Passione Nera then you haven’t read the books
@@harleyokeefe5193 Gandalf is basically Jesus, we got it.
And what exactly is this "deeper meaning"?
Primetime if you don’t know the early history of middle earth and it’s gods, it would take hours to explain
I knew what this would be before clicking. George HATES Gandalf's comeback. He mentions it so often lol.
I dont think George got the idea of Middle Earth having Gods and Gandalf basically being a divine creation like an Angel.
@@Themadhorse George is an LOTR fanboy, he knows all of it. He just didnt agree with the choice, thats all....
And now George R.R. Martin has trouble committing to keeping characters dead in the Song of Ice and Fire books. He’s come full circle.
sparrowcfc9 Lady Stoneheart anybody?
@@Akaya7777 Like Jon stays dead in his universe, right? #not
Gandalf coming back just reinforces the fact he's a Maiar. He's essentially an angel. Of course he can come back to life.
“You have no power here”
Tolkien's greatest mistake was finishing Lord of the Rings before dying obviously.
@Spellcaster86 he did finish lord of the rings. All the rest us the legendarium but lotr is done
Shots fired...but they didn't miss
Hobbit and the Lord of the Rings were the only works he finished. He spent years fiddling with the Silmarillion and died before he could finish. His son published it years after his death
Wow, I never saw that comment before. Please keep doing it for every small criticism he makes. Martin is one of the biggest fans of The Lord of the Rings? "aT LeAsT x FiNiShED X".
Shut up. I don't care if this is legitimate or a joke. Both are overused and stupid.
Your comment makes no sense
I just love how the lady keeps trying to bring up the next question like "okay" but he keeps talking, killing characters is his sweet spot lol
That's because she doesn't listens to the answers. If he said instead "One time Tolkien and me rode a tandem bike naked as a baboon in Japan. And he had this weird Pikachu tattoo above his ass crack. My question to Tolkien would be why would you murder Kennedy? "
The interviewers response probably would be "okay, so the next question is from...."
@@has489 Well I don't blame her, english is probably not her first language and it's hard to concentrate on translating in your mind as someone keeps talking
@@TheEtherny "translating in her mind" lol, this is not how it works. Not trying to translate things is the first step to advance through the basics of a language, at intermediate level anyone is able to think in their second language.
The practical knowledge that translation is not the same as meaning is one of the biggest reasons learning a third language turns much easier.
(My first language is Portuguese, English is the second, and Japanese will be the third)
@@TheEtherny the dificulty of conversating on a second language comes from the lack of vocabulary and the alien fonnetics, not from some need to translate things.
@@erikadasilva507 Do you know her? No. So shush.
*Tolkien laughs in finished story from afterlife*
*coughs a speck of mythopoetic universe on the carpet in the process*
this kinda rings hollow to me, tolkein wrote somewhere in the ball park of 705,356 words across the lord of the rings, silmarillion, and hobbit. GRRM has written 1.7 million words in the 5 books published so far not counting all the sample WOW chapter we've gotten so far. He's just telling a bigger story and has to actively work with HBO for all these fuckin spin-offs they've greenlit. If Tolkien was actively worrying about how his world would be depicted on screen while writing I bet it would have expanded the 12 years it took to write LOTR by a decent amount.
Ah so this why George loves to kill.
He's getting back at Tolkien
The fact that Gandalf came back makes perfect sense in the lore
Kaneda Gandalf is like a god in lotr lore, so shut up next time
@@kaneda7368 I knew this would be the reply i would get but i actually mean, it makes sense in a sense that its still good story telling. Think about it, the wizard story arc needed to have a purpose and for their god to bring one of them back seems likely within the original story. And he only got to stay until after his quest was done. So it almost felt like what we where seeing was Gandalfs ghost.
It still was a huge shock seeing him die the first time and him coming back wont erase what you felt the first time.
His death in the first one was the beginning of his "real" death.
@@kaneda7368 i Agree with you, but i dont think lotr would have handle deaths the same way to be good if its still interesting and cool. They are good in their own right.
I FUCKING LOVE CHARACTER DEATHS IN GOT haha they are so badass and as you say usually change the story in a new direction.
ive just never particulary missed that in lord of the rings. Boramir didnt come back and so didnt theoden among others.
Butwith this said i do truly get where you are coming from. Atleast we had a fun little discussion!
@@kaneda7368 Multiple characters come back from the dead in GoT. Waaay more than LoTR.
Gandalf was just too great a character to kill off
I definitely disagree about raising Gandalf. Martin talks about it as if it's random, like he is Tolkien's darling character he didn't want to give up. But really It has a huge role in the story itself and brings meaning. One of Tolkien's favourite themes is the disparity between hope and despair. the resurrection of Gandalf helps set up that disparity as a lot of despair comes later on. It also enforces Tolkien's theme of providence which is always in the background of his stories. Martin's universe is much more chaotic than Tolkien's on a basic level. Martin shouldn't fault Tolkien for being consistent with his world just because that world is different than Martin's.
Watch the full video, he doesn’t hate tolkien at all the title just makes it sound that way
The lore dictates that Gandalf had to live as he killed a balrog
@@lordbonney9779
It wasn't just that he killed a Balrog, but that outside of that he had done his job to a T in the forming of the Fellowship, denying the corruption at the hands of Saruman, actively working against the forces of Sauron, and aiding Eru's creations to the best of his abilities.
He slew the Balrog at the cost of his earthly body, which shows how devoted even the meekest of the Maiar was to carrying out his lord's wishes.
@@ravendeafening192 he still wrote a series of books to subvert Tolkien's work. And now he can't even finish it.
@@maisuchan6209 he didn’t write it to subvert tolkien he loves tolkien lol
Can anyone imagine Homer starting his work like this?: Oh, muse, help me to remember the structure of the sewers of the divine Ilium, that of high walls... allow me, oh Muses, to describe the taxation system, be it on individuals or corporations, during Priam's rule...
He's probably going to say that Tolkien's biggest mistake was finishing The Lord of the Rings.
“His biggest mistake was finishing the books.” -George RR Martin.
Not sure what Peter's excuse for the Hobbit is though
@@vespasiancloscan7077 Peter Jackson didn’t write the Hobbit.
@@theopinson3851 you think I'm talking about the book?
@@vespasiancloscan7077
What do Peter Jackson’s films have to do with this? They aren’t canon.
@@sam5tue577 just poking fun at PJ
I'm just glad George also loved the lord of the rings. Him stating his small gripe doesn't mean he hates Tolkien's work
No. But he is wrong. Tolkien and Rothfuss are both lazy fat tubs of lard and are mediocre authors. Tolkien was a genius! Anyone that writes fantasy, myself included (unpublished) live in the long shadow of Tolkien.
@@crusader0074 It's an opinion, you can't really be wrong.
@@JumSalsa
Opinions can be wrong, not always, but they can be.
@@crusader0074 no they can't...... that's why it's called an opinion. If I were to say I hate lord of the rings, it would be right to me but maybe not you. An opinion isn't a fact, it's a preference.
(Note: I love lord of the rings, just using it as an example)
@@Meh2752
Alright, let’s test your theory (for arguments sake): In my opinion the sky is orange during the day, the Earth is flat, the moon is a hologram, and the USA is on the African continent. Are my opinions wrong?
I cried so much as a kid when Gandalf died in the movies! I relate with his sentiment
"Why did you bring Gandalf back from the dead? You should have left him dead."
Promptly revives Jon Snow.
Don't forget Beric Dondarrion (six times) and Catelyn Stark/Lady Stoneheart
Can people please stop crediting GRRM for D&D's writing.
@@sernoddicusthegallant6986 The revival of Beric Dondarrion and Lady Stoneheart are most definitely NOT D&D's work.
@@anthonyfarshaw8619 I wasnt replying to you I was replying to OP.
And while I cant speak for Martin I think hes okay with reviving Beric and Cat because nobody cared about Beric before his revival, and Cat's revival literally costed the life of Beric and then it looks like shes turned pretty evil and her revival may well be for the worse in the long term. Martin's complaint about Tolkein's decision to bring back Gandalf wasnt just "you cant revive characters" it was that this specific character revived in that way. So my guess is he found it too lenient a ressurection for a character that important, it either should have costed a great deal more like with Cat or it should have been someone not as important.
And?
Just because he thinks a specific character should have stayed dead doesn't mean he thinks you can't ever resurrect a character under any circumstances
He just thinks in that particular instance it would have been better not to lol
Now I know why I prefer Tolkien. Martin is the nihilist and Tolkien is the optimist.
@Lucimyr You're not entitled to whoch project he finishes first. Don't act like you can make rules regarding his own self-employment.
Searching For Knowledge true but Martins the one that said see you next year after AFFC then release the next book six years later
Martin's not a nihilist. He clearly believes in bad and good, but he's not naive. He doesn't hold to a religious worldview that convinces him that all will be good in the end. Things very well may end horribly, and until they end there's still tons of horrible shit irl.
Tolkien was a believer and 'The Grey Havens' were a kind of heaven, but I don't think of him as an 'optimmist' or TLOTR as a happy ending or cheery work...this life damages everyone, and everyone is all fucked in the head at the end. I guess our boy Frodo was gonna overcome his PTSD and physical pain in the Havens? I forget. But besides more memorable prose, Tolkien has that Havens ending. Only huge difference. Martin critiques religion harshly [yet has magic???] while Tolkien allegorizes religious ideas positively. Tolkien is a realist with moral themes...the whole theme of Rings is actually summed up in a BUDDHIST expression, believe it or not:
'Evil cannot be overcome in the world, only resisted within oneself'.
Another theme, stated almost outright,is, 'evil people destroy themselves'. Saruman and Grima end up petty beggars after Sauron blows it by not even CONSIDERING someone might try to resist evil and kill the ring, the projecting formless fuckup
After reading both[at least whatever Martin completed 3 years ago or so]. Martin is like a comedian you chuckle over or say, 'hey, that's funny' over, and Tolkien is a belly laugh. Martin's world-building and detail and interwoven plotlines are a wonder, but his work just doesn't have the visceral impact and memorable lines and power and humanity of Tolkien.
The best thing about Martin since I do not dig his prose style[and to be fair, at times Tolkien goes over-the-top with his 'stateliness' bordering on pretentiousness[and I don't like 'back-writing', the clear add-ins...for god's sake, life is messy, not a Swiss watch-a few seeming 'loose ends' is natural. Overwriting and going back gives a weird unreal vibe to things at times]...what the fuck was this peon saying while critiquing things I couldn't do if my balls were threatened with a wood-shredder?
Oh yeah, the best thing about Martin is the mental challenge of trying to keep it all straight[no pun, but boy is there some gay subtext gong on there]. I mean, it's amazing to be able to create something that intricate and overwhelmingly complex.I felt like I needed to take notes. Like 'who is this and what has this to do with this and what the fuck is going on here? what is this person's relation to this person'? It's not good for audiobook listening for me, but that's all can do now because of eye trouble
But yeah, Martin lost me a few times...and I don't blame him, I blame me. But a nihilist? I dunno. Killing off characters in such a dangerous 'win or die' world doesn't necessarily mean the lives and life aren't seen as valuable
====
hey if you read all that, thanks. Not intending on going Russian novel, but shit happens
WE DON’T BELIEVE IN NOTHING LEBOWSKI
Gandalf was immortal, he can't really die, he just manifests in different forms. Gandalf the white was a very different being.
Yeah, he only vaguely remembered Aragorn and the others, even his own name need them to jog his memory.
All of the Wizards were technically immortal. Even Saruman. GRRM clearly hasn't read Silmarilion.
@@stockbridgeworks and yet sauruman didnt return to middle earth and you're missing his point completely.
@@unrelatedpopcornfire9823 who's point? The fuck u talking about? Have you read it? Cause I have. George Martin is a fat dickhead with a talent for writing sadistic fantasy stories with no moral point. Yet he feels he can criticise a legendary author who's leagues ahead of him. Lol
@@unrelatedpopcornfire9823 he never came back to middle earth because he wasn't allowed to.
He spent more time rereading the entire LOTR series than writing his next book 🤣
Martin: *Questions Gandalf's return*
Also Martin: *Beric Dondarrion*
George not really 'getting' Tolkien's themes actually explains a lot about the way he writes his stories.
Yeah, but it's nice that we have two series of fantasy books that show both perspectives.
What does it explain? I'm curious
Its not that he doesnt get the themes. Martin is a very different style author than Tolkien. Tolkien is a plot driven writer. Martin is character drive. When Tolkien killed off Gandalf he was already(probably) aware he was going to bring him back at some point. Martin likes let his characters develop the story based on their personality traits, conflicts and desires. So Martins really wondering "how would the fellowship of solve the problems that resurrected Gandalf fixes"
And honestly that would be a great read too
Caleb Silvergleid I know right? Why do you have to choose which one is better. They’re both amazing authors
Emily Savage I don’t know if this is what you are asking about but Gandalf was brought back because of the parallel of the life of Christ. Jesus has 3 roles of priest prophet and king. Each one of those characteristics is personified by Frodo as priest, Gandalf as prophet and Aragorn as king. Each one has a moment of death like Christ. Gandalf, duh, Aragon, when he falls off the cliff while dragged by the wolf and Frodo when he is on the mountain and flown off by the eagles.
I love RR's take. But I totally disagree. Having Gandalf arise not as he was but born anew, that was my introduction to what has come to be known as 'soft magic' systems, where there is some mystical truth that can't ever really be understood perfectly; some hint of the beyond which cannot be fathomed. Gandalf's return but not return was a triumph.
Which RR's take?
One could say Gandalf regained more of his original being as Maiar. Istari and Valar are somewhat like angels.
Tolkein probably needed Gandalf for his skills and exposition value. The story would have been hard to wind up without Gandalf's return.
Nah, it was pointless.
That seems like hard magic to me not soft magic. Gandalf can just never die. That’s OP as hell
I love GRRM. But I have to say, I’m glad Gandalf returned after his fight with the balrog. I don’t think it lessens his death at all. Gandalf is one of the few characters in Middle-earth who is resurrected, so this was a very special circumstance. And the fact that the balrog actually damaged his body to death shows how tough balrogs actually were, seeing as it killed the most powerful member of the Fellowship. The stakes were high, in other words.
Besides, the Fellowship did actually continue without him under a lot of strain-so we were able to actually see them struggle without his guidance. Frodo decided to go to Mordor on his own-a decision he wrestled with. And Strider was already making his way toward Theoden in a roundabout way when he ran into Gandalf the White. Either way, I disagree.
Tolkien’s Catholic background seems to play a role in things like Gandalf dying and coming back, and the Maiar in general. Whatever the case, I enjoy it thoroughly, as I’ve enjoyed ASOIAF. Big fan of both series.
And think about the circumstances.
He destroyed one of the last Balrogs. A heroic thing to do. Berric Dondarion was resurected because of "Why Not?" And that over and over again.
As a writer myself hoping to get published both Tolken and Martin are huge inspirations for me in both how to build a world for the reader to enjoy and the complexity of the characters that are needed to keep the reader enticed upon the words on each page
You should watch Apollonian Germ's video about George RR Martin.
Everyone now knows that Gandalf is resurrected because the story is popularised. But if you'd never read the books, and you didn't know, Gandalf's return is as emotional a moment for the reader as it is for the characters.
Because it is a metaphor for Wisdom. To gain wisdom, you must first die. Gaining wisdom is to struggle and overcome darkness. Galdalf returned levelled up.
Can it go any cheaper?
True! Knowing how Tolkien's books are inspired by Norse mythology, you could further connect this event to Odin sacrificing one eye in order to gain higher wisdom.
Nah that's just mental gymnastics to justify poor writing.
@@brenobonfim5749 exactly
@@brenobonfim5749 killing a balrog resurects you, as per LotR lore, so no bad writing there, actually its consistent writing
Gandalf was never gonna die, he is an angelic being...
If he blames Tolkien for Gandalf's comeback, he definitely misses the whole meaning of Tolkien's work
He’s probably a bigger fan than you grrm is a huge fan of tolkien
@@ravendeafening192 well he midunderstood Gandalf coming back (he wasn't resurrected, he is basically an angel he changed his appereance and role), which plays a huge role in the story.
@@ocean7849 Boss hes talking about the first time he read it when he was a teenager and the Silmarillion would not have even been released yet...
Even though I disagree that Gandalf should have “stayed dead” I can see where he’s coming from, I read the books before the films were made and, I’d read The Hobbit and then started Fellowship of the Ring and was absolutely blown away when Gandalf fell in Moria, it was an incredibly powerful moment, I couldn’t comprehend how Gandalf could be gone, this was the character with the plan and all of the answers, the most powerful member of the fellowship and then he’s taken so suddenly, it definitely heightened the suspense for the rest of the book.
No book before or since has ever shocked me the way Tolkien did when he “killed” Gandalf.
I agree with you, I definitely understand George's point of view, though I disagree with him since Galdalf's role is important throughout the rest of the story, Tolkien did bring him back just 'cause, there was a purpose in his return, and also Frodo didn't have his help. But yeah, the impact of the moment is lost when he comes back
Yea. I agree. Better if gandalf stayed dead
Then he brings Jon Snow back from the dead.
At least Gandalf was a Maiar.
He didnt bring back Jon from the dead. The show did.
@@paultokjian7915 True, but I think it's extremely likely he'll bring him back in the books.
He did bring back Catelyn and Beric about 15 times.
@@temetnosce2099 cat and beric both lost a part of themselves (cat is a different person really)
@@temetnosce2099 Beric is dead bro
@@RedpillRetreat Yeah after he was brought back a dozen times. And he's only dead because Lady Stoneheart took his place...when she was brought back.
"I don't really like the cliched ending where everything is resolved, the good guy wins and bad guy loses"
Guess he really hated the TV ending then.
John is 'banished' to the only place he truly felt himself, with people that respected him for who he was not what he was; Tyrion finally had the respective he deserves; Westeros was once again ruled by a Stark, who's first act was to grant the north got their independence; all the baddies are defeated; the Dothraki and Unsullied conveniently piss off back home...
No he didn’t like the TV ending
You do know that season 8 was written by D&D right?
@@ravendeafening192 Yes, of course.
Which changes nothing with my assertion that GRRM probably hated their hack job.
@@CynicalOldDwarf it was still written by D&D so you’re comment makes no sense, also stop liking ya own comment
@@ravendeafening192
1. I didn't like my own comment, I'll like it now to prove that.
2. You were an idiot two months ago and you are an idiot today.
It doesn't matter who wrote the TV ending, GRRM can still hate it for the same reasons he hated LotR's ending. which is what my original comment was about you pillock.
Tolkein was a philosophical (and philological) genius who wove a genius modern mythology (that critiqued modernism). Martin not so much.
I wouldn't go that far. He wrote some good fantasy books. Not sure where you get "philosophical genius" from.
Typical fanboy comeback.
Idk I really really like the world building in ASOIAF a lot more than LOTR
They both are.
But regarding Endings, Tolkien sets us up for „bittersweet“ in a way that George really can‘t, George doesn‘t have some perfect place of innocence in his books like the Shire were nothing bad ever happens. George exposes the entire world as corrupt from the getgo, whereas in Tolkien corruption is a kind of outside force that they vanquish at the cost of their own purity.
It George did that same thing, it would be either meaningless or way too depressing.
I think creating any sort of closure at all in a world that you‘ve already shown to be corrupt is a whole other challenge than ending LotR, and probably much harder, which may arguably George‘s main underlying problem with finishing these books. How the hell do you give a satisfying resolution to a story like that without subverting your own themes?
@Morgan Freeman that's exactly his point, dude. They had to sacrifice Shire's innocence in order to get rid of greater corruptons.
The shire is comparable to Winterfell if u look at it and it's surprising how many similarities these two settings share both are refuges where the readers feel at peace, in Winterfell it's only once outside forces enter that aren't Starks where shit happens same as the sacking of the shire both places are torched and our protagonists always reminisce about times there whilst out in the cruel world, it's a place of respite and a haven stolen away, an innocence gone until eventually the protagonist come and reclaim it but once that's done... It's not the same, not really cox they've now come back with the filth of the world within and not even that place can cleanse them of it... So they must move on
Sometimes the best resolution for a story isn't satisfying.
"Ice falls everyone dies"
The idea geroge is a nihilist is so backwards thinking and miss the point of the series. If geroge was truly a nihilist then the Northern would've forgotten about Robb stark and red wedding yet they haven't they still fight for starks because they loved how brave,honorable and good were the starks it inspires them. And the villains have forever destroyed their reputation due to their violation of sacred law such as guest right the lannisters,boltons and frays are have ruined their names but the stark name will live on and be worshipped for their bravery.
Lot of people in the comments here talking about how Gandalf's resurrection makes logical sense so it's fine. Yes, it does make sense in setting, and yes it is fine, but what Martin is suggesting here is that there is more narrative weight if Gandalf remains dead, or that if he comes back there should be some sort of cost. The idea is that by bringing him back to life in Two Towers the weight of Gandalf's death in Fellowship is dramatically lessened. It's not about it being a plot hole, it's about it having more emotion if done differently. I still think Gandalf's resurrection is fine, but I can see where Martin is coming from.
EDIT: I am not arguing Martin is right. I think he is wrong. I am just trying to make clear what the point in the video actually is since people to be ignoring/misunderstanding it.
I'm mean he would have to re-write gandalfs origins or the whole deity system and history of the entire universe to keep him dead...
It would only be a problem if Tolkien did this willy-nilly with other characters; instead, he does it one time with a character that holds logic in a narrative sense that was clearly thought out and adds to the story at large. Hearing this man criticize Tolkien in any fashion triggers me a little.
@@FishbowlPhenom for real tho. Tolkein was a genius. He built his works from the ground up, created the languages races and their historys in great detail on a level that Martin could only aspire to. Starting before the creation of the world all the way up to the events of the movies with so much stuff leading up to it it's unbelievable.
St1cKnGoJuGgAlO - Again, it’s about the thematic weight. Yes it would require a rewrite, or to have been written different entirely. But that’s the critique.
Beric Dandarion, Lady Stoneheart, and John Snow.
Martin resurrected more characters in 5 years then Tolkien in 3 ages(what, like 5,000 years or so).
GRRM should finish his books instead of wasting time on these shows.
Tolkien’s biggest mistake was obviously finishing his series as opposed to GRRM’s plan.
Dude Gandalf's a Maia. He's immortal
Ismail Hafeez Not to mention he didn't die right there at all. He fell and then walked back up the stairs, collapses, and is taken by a great eagle to Rivendell.
No he absolutely did die. Tolkien even states so in his letters.
@@stuv1996 His mortal form--his physical body--died. He was sent back, whether by the Valar (Manwe or Varda) or by Illuvatar, doesn't matter. And he went to Lothlorien and was given new robes by Galadriel--he didn't go to Rivendell.
When Tolkien said that Gandalf 'fell', it wasn't the literal definition of the word, like falling down the stairs. Multiple times in the book it is mentioned when someone fell, that it was a euphemism for dying.
Lmao morons in this comment section actually think that Martin has no clue about lore reasons for Gandalf's revival. He was talking about completely other thing.
It's really sad that fans of such complex writers as Tolkien and Martin can't grasp a simple critique of storytelling
Sauron was a maia and very much died
This man needs to go home and write 2 books
Underrated
Yea a dream of spring is never coming out. Funny thing is even if it did there’s no way he’s gonna be able to wrap it up in 2 books unless he pulls a D&D and just starts going stupid
That Gandalf rant is absurd.
For one, Gandalf is not just a character, he's a fucking godly being. One of the spirits that created the world that the other characters live in. It's not like he can die just like that.
Second, he never actually comes back. The fellowship loses that "father figure" and needs to fare without him. What comes back is not Gandalf as we know him. What comes back is what Saruman was supposed to be. He turns from Gustaw to Konrad (just like the main protagonist from Adam Mickiewicz's "Dziady" or "Forefathers' Eve' - I don't know how you English people call that play), or just like Lady Catelyn returns as Lady Stoneheart in GRRM's own writing.
It's the same body, and the same soul, but with a completely different mission and evolved character traits.
Just like Stoneheart is not really Catelyn, Gandalf the White is not Gandalf the Grey.
Gandalf came back because the story needed him to come back, and because Gandalf needed to play an important role in the war. The role of guide, beacon of hope and courage. It's really not that hard to figure out, you don't even need to read the books. A better question is to your showrunners why they killed off Littlefinger and many others for no reason.
Characters should be killed off because the story demands it, not because he/she is not important anymore or because you want to make the readers feel uneasy or shocked.
I agree with your statement for the most part. Obviously it would change from genre to genre.
Personally, I like stories with small and detailed casts. So when someone gets killed off it has maximum impact.
It's just that Martin does not like hope.
Why even compare LOTR with GOT? Like the reason Gandalf was brought back ties a lot into the whole mythology of Middle Earth, this is such a poser thing to do.
Indeed
Hello Ulmo, I'm a big fan lol
@@fullcircle2340 cheers mortal :D
Lmao morons in this comment section actually think that Martin has no clue about lore reasons for Gandalf's revival. He was talking about completely other thing.
It's really sad that fans of such complex writers as Tolkien and Martin can't grasp a simple critique of storytelling
@@satanamogila9251 yeah he thinks that because he kills his characters he is doing something revolutionary never seen before. So who is moron now?
Tolkien wrote classic fantasy. ASOIAF is a realistic world with fantasy elements. They are both fantasy but in different classes.
@Carnivorus Except that Daenerys achieves 99% of things through her dragons, which wouldn't exist in a non-fantasy world...
Carnivorus by the end of the series, Dany will have a big effect on westeros
@Carnivorus Dany's dragons literally affect every aspect of Westeros from the north to the Asshai, the hatching of her dragons restored some of the magic that had weakened, that's why the white walkers, The Deep Ones, shadowbinders and potentially Kraken are being awakened, plus that her arrival in westeros with both dragons and the khalasar and unsullied will force Kings Landing and the rest of the northern part to fight war on several fronts with magic beings aswell as for power.
ASOIAF is NOT a realistic world lmao the difference is that Tolkien uses symbolic patterns that actually exist in reality whereas G does not, giving it one less dimension
@Carnivorus The fantasy elements let him publish his historical novel as a fantasy, although they get more important as the story grows.
I hope Jon Snow stays dead or doesn’t die then, because from that point onward I didn’t enjoy the show as much.
Says the man who brought Catelyn Stark back from the dead as a zombie. 😇
wait what? i only watch the show but damn
@@derpynerdy6294 I guess we'll never know what he had planned for her. Doesn't look like he'll ever finish the books. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
@@Alex-nk8bw
at this point
theres a bigger chance pf half life 3 than winds of winter releasing 😂😂
In his defense, he has stated that ressurection is okay, but it should come at a cost. In this case, Dondarrion basically sacrifices his life for hers, and she comes back as a shade of her former self.
Gandalfs Death was demoralising and forced the characters to go on by themselves for quite a time. It caused the Fellowship to break up, especially Frodo and Sam heading for Mordor alone, and resulted in the capturing of Merry and Pippin.
As a matter of fact, Aragorn&Co would have had to defeat Saruman the White on their own - a godlike being,that was corrupted by his strive for power. While at the same time, in order to replace Saruman, Gandalfs fall and death made perfect sense as a necessary ordeal. Also, it's a great message: Even as a wizard you have to transcend your limits, you need to imagine a greater self of yours in order to grow.
Finally, from a story-telling point of view, Gandalfs return did not "undo" the consequences of his absense. He healed Theoden, he gathered the Rohirrim to save Helm's Deep, but Merry and Pippin got the Ents moving and Aragorn&Co did most of the hard work, despite losing not only Boromir, Gandalf, Frodo and Sam, but (supposedly) Merry and Pippin. Aragorn's time without Gamdalf truly challenged him as a leader.
Nope, nothing wrong with Gandalf coming back.
Edit: One could say that Gandalfs return lowers the suspense because it makes the reader think that every character can come back. 1) Gandalf delivers a very specific explanation for what happened, 2) Boromir and Theoden stay dead.
You don't need to butcher your characters in order to create suspense.
Totally agree dude..
Most of this is bullshit. His death and the continued belief in his death gave Frodo the drive to realise Gandalf's words. He believed Gandalf was dead until he saw him.
He didn't even die in the books. It says he makes his way back to the top from his fall with the Balrog and collapses at the top(which you can interpret as a death but isn't factually called a death) and is taken by a great eagle to Rivendell. No death, just defeat and a comeback.
@@stuv1996 You're right, I was just talking about his "death" as assumed by the reader and the Fellowship! Because the story went on as if he was dead - until he returned to explain what happened.
@@saeedvazirian Most of what is bullshit? What Joseph Schneider said was that Gandalf's (assumed) death was a serious set-back for the group and challenged all of them to make their own, hard decisions. It's not even about whether Gandalf is a Maiar or whatever, because for the average reader as well as the Fellowship Gandalf appeared as a mortal being with magic skills and tricks - not a demigod that could fight and defeat a fiery demon.
At least Tolkien finished his story, and both his books and his adaptations had absolutely brilliant endings.
MrJedabak you liked the Hobbit movies?
Ismael San Antonio I did.
MrJedabak ok, I guess I won’t judge.
Tolkien's trilogy was ~1200 pages long, with a cast of what, 10? Martin's trilogy is on pace to be 6000 words and has a cast of thousands.
Michael Warren so you only count the main cast of lotr but you include every character in ASOIAF? Ok
George seems to forget that he brings important characters back from the dead too.
Well, the Gandalf resurrection felt epic. I think the real dramatic weight in Fellowship was Boromir's sacrifice (c'mon he had optimistic intentions at first, then corrupted and then when he was redeeming himself....)
JRR Tolkien was a master and did not allow a bunch of idiots to rush his story and milk it for the most amount of money before he got to tell it himself.
Big diff is Tolkien has a lot of real life experiences, He was at the first world war as well.. GRR Martin is a smart nerd..
Carnivorus does Tolkien glorify war though? He does tend to shy away from the gritty dirty part of war but he doesn’t necessarily present it as some amazing thing. No one who fought in WWI would present war in a positive light.
Lol at rush his story. He has zero desire to ever complete the damn story. People can’t wait forever for you to get a single book done
What a retarded comment that makes no sense whatsoever
Have you watch the Hobbit movies?
Berric Dondarrion.
Catelyn Stark.
Jon Snow.
Khal Drogo.
Benjen Stark? Are you thinking he's Coldhands? George's editor asked him if he is and George confirmed that he's not.
asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php?/topic/123057-confirmed-coldhands-is-not-benjen/
B Gill oh shit, I never knew that, thanks for stopping misinformation.
Khal Drogo?
A: Jon and Drogo have never been resurected
B: Berric and Cat both came back at a price of them being broken shells for their former selves, whereas gandalf became even stronger
Yes all of those people did come back from the dead but they did it at a cost. Three of those four people that did come back we’re only shells of their former selves when they came back to life.By this proxy you can probably assume the same thing will happen to Jon Snow. When Gandolf comes back he just becomes more powerful making his death have a little consequence and seem almost like a good thing.
And yet, what I presume was after this interview book-wise (unless it's one of those interviews spawned by the show alone), when Jon Snow died, not a single person I know of believed he'd actually *stay* dead. The irony is there.
I see lots of comments about how GRRM doesn't get Tolkien, about the lore, Gandalf's true nature, Eru Ilúvatar, etc...
To me it seems that's actually not the case. Martin is criticizing Tolkien's choice of bringing Gandalf back simply because, to him, it undercuts one of his favorite moments from the series. He never said it was a 'plot hole', inconsistent, or even thematically inappropriate. He just thinks the story would be better overall if Gandalf stayed dead, regardless of the deeper, and perhaps even allegorical, meaning behind his resurrection.
I have to disagree, Gandalf’s resurrection is an example of the powers and intentions behind the higher powers that sent him and the other wizards there in the first place.
I think it’s how he reads a story and what he wants from it. For me it’s the same, imagine now reading the books (watching the movie) that you don’t know Gandalf comes back. It’s pretty rash for the story but traumatic for the reader, Boromir and Gandalf are both dead and they’re already failing. It’s really up to the reader isn’t it.
Like me personally, with A Song Of Ice And Fire, I don’t know why mance climbs the wall to see King Robert. Felt too convenient for the conversation he was having with Jon
@@TheArsenalgunner28 Boromir is a human. Gandalf is an immortal demigod.
Garrett I know but I’m saying, it’s still traumatic for the reader (plus we didn’t really know he was a Demi god till later)
I think George being young when he read it, expected Gandalf to be dead and enjoyed the trauma the story influenced and the unpredictability it created from that moment. I think he feels it was better for the story that he stayed dead, and not that it doesn’t make sense that he comes back.
It’s more down to the writers choice I think that George has a problem with.
Even then that concept/theme could be seen as a weak one. How much are the motives of the Valar further discussed? And even after that, it really just boils down to "yeah good 'gods' exist and they don't want Sauron to win". Not exactly groundbreaking literary work.
Throw Away The funny thing from all this is you and even GRRM are all wrong here. Gandalf DOES NOT DIE in the books. Only the movie. In the books he chases the balrog back up the stairs and defeats it, continues up the stairs and eventually collapses at the top(not dead) and is taken by a great eagle to Rivendell. Where he is given new cloaks and stuff. Never having actually died at all.
Tolkien believed in ressurection. And Gandalf was a kind of angel, anyway. George is just cynical.
Lmao morons in this comment section actually think that Martin has no clue about lore reasons for Gandalf's revival. He was talking about completely other thing.
It's really sad that fans of such complex writers as Tolkien and Martin can't grasp a simple critique of storytelling
@@satanamogila9251 intellect is not a common trait the reason. Why it attracts simpletons is because they look at a story for its surface overview without looking into the ideologies or in world comparisons or other ramifications of the story.
Tolkien was a catholic and be believed that the main forces in the world are good and evil his mythology reflects that grr Martin is very much unlike that he write his character not necessarily be good or evil. He writes them to have motivations that are common for most people. They don’t do things out of nobility or pure malice for all that is good but out of selfishness, fear and grief. I think that is ultimately why the lord of the rings can have a satisfactory ending that makes you feel fulfilled and a song of ice and fire can’t. Because Lotr was based of classic myths where there good people and bad people that you root for and want to see finally be happy at the end. There is a beginning there is a conflict against evil and a end where ultimately good unmistakably triumphs. Got is based on real life where there are no noble hero’s that defeat dark lords where one second people are hailed as hero the next vilified and there is no clear cut good and evil everything is muddled and confused. The characters can have no happy ending because even after the main conflict of there character arc is resolved they are still irreparably miserable people living miserable lives. Just like most people in real life. Why the hell did I write all this. If you read through this unadulterated rambling your a true madman and I hope to never meet you in a dark alleyway. Get a hobby or something geez
"He should've stayed dead"
"YoU hAvE nO pOWeR heEeRe"
Isn't this the guy that is going to bring back Jon Snow
Tolkien was Catholic. Gandalf's return from death symbolises the Resurrection of Christ.
Same thing with the lion Azlan, in C.S. Lewis' Narnia.
while yes, the tale of christ's resurrection probably influenced tolkien, and despite many other paralels to the bible, he did not set out to specifically make a religious allegory, and rather disliked people making those comparisons. While Gandalf's return is certainly very reminiscent of Jesus's, it's not a symbolism of it, and they are not at all similar past the surface level.
It can't be a symbolism as tolkien had it placed, since Gandalf is an angel therefore imortal by his own nature.
*Aslan
That’s cool lol
Tolkien hated allegory, but even he wouldn't be able to deny influences from his experience in the war. All his friends dying on him, and him holding mantle of his brothers' wishes to write fantasy fiction.
To the people comparing Jon and Gandalf. I don't think it makes any sense, because Gandalf was the light for the whole quest, which made losing him felt like losing all hope.
The way I see it you’re correct they don’t really have similar personalities they are both their own people but at the same time Jon snow was like Gandalf in the sense that he always did what he felt was right and was for the greater good, he was the one to round up a great enough army to defeat the undead and bring everyone together and when he died before all of that it did feel the same as Gandalf because he was also the light for the majority of the quest to defeat the undead
So yeah they’re pretty likeminded individuals with different personalities and one is wiser than the other who started out knowing nothing 😂😭
If by light you mean he was the guy who knew more about the quest, than you are right.
But in their journey after Gandalf was gone they all had Aragorn, he was the one who acted as the "light"/main character who would guide them and it fits because of his lineage and character.
Jon being the guy who is trying to bend tradition and fight with the wildlings instead of fighting against them, seeing that there is a greater threat than them that is superhuman and will be more difficult to defeat, he comes to the conclusion that only together they might stand a chance.
With Jon gone the only character left on the Wall is Melisandre and she doesnt seem like the character to lead the fight against the dead simply because she hasnt really had much time of development, sure she would help, but in all the hints George has been dropping about Azor Ahai Jon Snow fits the character best.
Daenerys is also someone who could be Azor Ahai for sure, but she is at the other side of the world and knows nothing about the dead, so she cant take over either.
Conclusion: This is all my opinion and I personally felt more shocked when Jon died than Gandalf.
P.S: Not to say that I wasnt shocked or anything but in the end i knew Gandalf was going to pull some sick wizard shit and come back.
Jon Snow is the same thing. He's the hero that is destined to save everybody
Real comparison is Gandalf and Eddard Stark.
Both were the father/mentor, both was the light in the darkness...
But only one of them returned...
Cant mess up the ending if you don't make one
-GRRM
So glad to see everyone come out to Tolkien’s defense ❤️
Well at least he finished his books. By the time asoiaf is finished, apes will have retaken the earth.
I´m just joking though, I wish George the best and I´m excited to see that videogame he´s going to make with From Software.
It would be quite disappointing if Martin ends the book series on the same note as the show. I know the show deviated from the source material but I wonder just how different the paper ending will be.
Alex Lion I thought he said that the ending of the show will be similar to that of the books
@@torakka2ow640 but not rushed and Will make sense
Elden Ring might be the best of the decade. From software always makes amazing games, one thing they lack is story(sekiro had an ACTUAL story) and characters. Now imagine GRRM as one of the best writers living today. But then again both Elden Ring and Cyberpunk 2077 coming out in the same year. Both have GREAT potential.
@KesselRunHero definately at the rate he's going. I'm not convinced book 6 will ever come out let alone book 7. He said he was going to be totally focused on finishing it and wouldn't do anything else - then writes and releases Fire and Blood instead. Then to add insult to injury he's doing the software thing!
George: Gandalf should have stayed dead!
Also George: *brings back Jon Snow*
Craig Gahan did he? From what I know that part was not mentioned in the books
Hi Daßer so you think Jon isn’t coming back? Haha I highly doubt the show took that many liberties that they would tell George RR Martin that regardless of his future plans that Jon is coming back. Come on you know as well as I do that the majority of what happened in the show will happen in the book. The big difference is I think George will execute better than the show did which rushed through everything. I think George will take his time and build to it properly.
Also Catelyn......
Also The Mountain.......
Season 6 is said to roughly be what The Winds of Winter is going to be. Seasons 7 and 8... at this point, I wouldn’t be quick to say they’re what A Dream of Spring will roughly be. More of a gray area at this point.
A few things that happened in Season 6, if I remember correctly, are definitely going to be in The Winds of Winter. Though truthfully, the only one I can remember is:
Hold the door.
I remember that from Inside The Episode: The Door.
Martin has developed a nasty habit in his books of saying a character has died only for it to later be revealed otherwise. The most notable examples are Davos and Mance.
at first i was like "how dare he besmirch the name of Tolkien!?" then I watched the rest of the interview. lol he poses a pretty big question that I wish Tolkien could have answered him in his own write. Theres definitely a reason he brought Gandalf back. My guess is that Gandalf could be brought back just as well as Sauron was. They were both the same of kin. To Tolkiens credit, he was one of the first fantasy writers with very little to look to for inspiration. Whereas GRRM grew up with a wellspring of various series. Tolkein created multiple languages, taught at a university, had a family, fought in WW1, and still managed to finish his series. I love the world GRRM built but it has gone out of control, not to mention he became complacent once HBO began its rendition of GOT. They literally finished the series before he could. Tolkien never had the luxury of franchising before he finished his stories.
It is not just that. Tolkien belived that all myths and subsequently fantasy reflect the Truth. That supernatural things in fantasy point to supernatural things in our world. He belived that at the end Good will triumph over Evil in an eucatastrophe. As Tolkien was a devout Catholic Gandalf's story is also a reflection on Christ's death (catastrophe) and resurrection (eucatastrophe). If one's cries and is shocked when Gandalf dies one should also be shocked and weep for joy when he comes back. This is the essence of fairy-stories for Tolkien. Frodo, Aragorn and Gandalf reflect Christ in certain, non-allegorical ways. It all makes sense within lore but also outside it.
On the other hand Martin does not belive in the myths/fairy-stories. For him fantasy is just world virtually empty of gods and Providence with just some magic and dragons thrown in to make it more interesting. It's all random, that is why he is know for just killing of characters. He is lapsed Catholic and an agnostic/atheist. So he does not belive Good will Triumph over Evil, or that those things can be even said to be real, same with cosmogony and God. His works are steeped in postmodernism.
Beacuse of thet his works are considered nowadays to be more "realistic". Personally I disagree since I share large part of Tolkien's worldview. I think Eucatastrophe is more realistic than no happy ending. And Middle Earth with Eru Illuvatar is more realistic than Westeros when we don't even know if there are any gods.
@@TheGeneralGrievous19Westeros does actually have god's in the form of the old gods and the lord of light, although they don't tend to be as humanised as the gods in lotr, who are known to clearly have thoughts, motivations and take actions. The gods of westeros are more like forces of nature, completely unpredictable and out of human reach. Well written comment though
@eralGrievous19 I am not sure Gandalf was supposed to be a Jesus allegory given Tolkien's criticism of C.S. Lewis. Also, spirituality is kept intentionally vague in Martin's story. There are hints of spirituality being a real thing in ASOIAF.
In fairness to Tolkien, Gandalf the Grey stayed dead. Gandalf the White is a new character. He was less brought back or resurrected as he was reincarnated. that's why he doesn't even know he was Gandalf until Aragorn mentions the name too him. From a Lore perspective Gandalf died and returned to his Celestial form as a Maia and then was sent back to earth as a final bid to defeat Sauron. It's also why Gandalf leaves Middle Earth after Sauron is defeated
At least he got the damn book finished george
That may be true but ASOIAF is a much longer and much more ambitious book series that LOTR is. Now they both are incredibly difficult books to write but ASOIAF is going to take longer than LOTR did.
Finn Conroy more like his son finished them.
@@generalawesome7279 asoiaf is much wider, but much less deep imo
@@legogandalf5453 how tf is it less deep?
@@legogandalf5453 Depends on what you mean by depth, for example LotR has a far deeper lore that goes back to the beginning of its world thanks to the silmarillion, but Martin writes much deeper characters and explores the politics of the world in much more depth.
I think Gandalf’s death and rebirth is an important part of the story, and not a mistake at all.
I expected more from GRRM, this was a pretty crappy response. Yeah um Gandalf CAN'T die, he's a Maia. His whole purpose of coming to middle earth was to sort out the whole sauron situation, so when his earthly form perished he was sent back in a different more powerful form, hence the white robes. He cannot return until his task is complete. He didn't "come" back, he was SENT back by Eru. Get reading GRRM
Right, it's literally "Deus Ex Machina". That's partly what Martin is objecting to. Same problem with Star Wars: you want something to happen in the story, just invent a new Force power, or a new "technology". Want to destroy the New Republic in one fell swoop so you can start over? Just make them completely incompetent and introduce a new superweapon that can destroy entire star systems from light years away.
Its only deus ex machina if you havent read the silmarillion and are unfamiliar with the lore. I dont know anything about star wars so I wont comment. So same advice goes to you, get reading :)
Tolkien was not writing about England and the wars. He hated direct allegory. George RR cherry picked what he loved from Tolkien, but George does not seem to really understand him all that much. Tolkien's stories are mythological in nature and will live on for a very long time. The same can not easily be said for George's books
The bittersweet ending is that he will never ever finish a song of ice and fire.
Jennifer Hewitt That would be hilarious. He dies and before that he is like by the way I never actually finished it. Then a long silence sets in the room.
I dont get the "sweet" part of that bittersweet
asoiaf fans: REALLY GEORGE?
You're good, George... But you're not Tolkien good.
@Terror hahahaha I like your humour
As a fan and reader of both, I gotta finally admit to myself, Martin's work is better, at least to me
@@fredcarmichael5544 me too cause his work is not typical good vs evil and good guys never dies
@@Aaarqhev tolkien’s work is much much deeper than that. if you are a christian or religious in any way and start to learn the deeper meanings tolkien creates in his books you will be blown away by the depth. a lot more to his stories than “good vs evil and good guys never die”
Nah hes much, much better than Tolkein
Wow, what he said about Frodo not being able to enjoy the world he built for others resonates a lot with Jon’s ending at the series. I did have serious doubts, as many do, but this makes it even clearer to me that what we saw was essentially his ending, which he probably is (at least subconsciously) trying change now that he saw the backlash. Drastically delaying the Winds of Winter and obviously A Dream of Spring
"Kings, Queens, dragons, dwarves,
Horses, fortresses, magic, and swords!
You Hob-bit my whole shit, you uninspired hack!
You want a war, George? Welcome to Shire-raq!
In book sales, you've got nothing to say!
I'm number one and two! You're under Fifty Shades of Grey!
I got the prose of a pro! Your shit's sub-par!
You're a pirate! You even stole my R. R."!
Tolkien
Gandalf the Grey did die, ancient and vulnerable to the evil in certain ways. Gandalf the White was born, filling the maiar spirit the Saruman the White sacrificed in his pursuit of power, and he was born with the blessing of Illuvitar himself because he was the only wizard to remain true to the mission of staving off evil and Sauron. There’s so much more to Gandalf’s revival than just bringing back a beloved character. Better than Snow’s revival at least.
Yeeup
In Tolkien's world, Aragorn's genealogy mattered. He was the rightful king. Apparently, Jon Snow's lineage didn't matter to anyone anyway (including Jon Snow).
Game of Thrones is not GRRM's world, A Song of Ice and Fire is.
@@liamfoote7164 - Of course, the LOTR films were Peter Jackson's world; however, they were quite faithful to the spirit of JRR Tolkien -- and they were better for it.
@@ccchhhrrriiisss100 i don't think many people are arguing that Game would not be better if it were more faithful.
@@liamfoote7164 GoT is canon now, because this fat fuck won't finish the story himself.
Tolkien made no mistakes. He wrote exactly what he wanted to.
I'll always prefer Tolkien over Martin. Tolkien values bravery and selflessness. Martin values deviousness and manipulation. Tolkien's heroes are celebrated and rewarded. Martin's heroes are shamed and discarded.