3 ms·

> ...once they have diverged from the original creator’s vision and mythology, it’s simply exploitation for financial gain. Must things always stay the same? C

> ...once they have diverged from the original creator’s vision and mythology, it’s simply exploitation for financial gain. Must things always stay the same? Can't some popular stories grow and evolve beyond one, albeit original, author's imagination? As stories cross generations I think it's kind of awesome when each can add some flavor to the retelling or expansion of the tale. I have a special adoration for Star Wars yet am happy to see it getting more production, even if it must be at the hand of Disney.

astrange 4y ago
The problem is, what typically happens is an author writes an original story and then it's "extended" by filming a completely unrelated off the shelf plot with some of the names changed and lore added. If something isn't a Hollywood hero's journey it's going to be one now. Scouring of the Shire would've been a lot more original than any new material we're getting here. Though American TV has improved a lot since the time they had directors of making sure none of the protagonists were women.
eternalban 4y ago
I sense the displeasure is due to a perception, which may well be correct, that certain cultural artifacts are recycled as a platform for propagating socio-political agendas. Emasculation and milk toast male characters, for example, seem to be de rigueur these days. > Can't some popular stories grow and evolve .. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolfram_von_Eschenbach#Parzival https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolfram_von_Eschenbach#Parziva... One of my all time favorite European works is Wolfram von Eschenbach's Parzival. He wasn't the original author of the legend of Percival, and there were other versions after him. It evolved, but that process took centuries and imo was an organic development. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Percival#Perceval https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Percival#Perceval So I think the generally unspoken issue is who is doing the 'growing and evolving' (here: Corporations) and how are they evolving dearly beloved cultural works. Wolfram for example changed some bits and even inserted a short (rather amusing) interlude to vent his frustrations with women, but we can be certain there wasn't a committee with a social agenda sponsoring him to write that. So, genuine development is definitely OK. At least in my book. [pdf] https://ia800908.us.archive.org/24/items/Parzival/Parzival.pdf https://ia800908.us.archive.org/24/items/Parzival/Parzival.p... "If there is anyone who praises women better than I, I will surely not be the one to hold it against him..." (See page 117 of the pdf to hear out this knight's complaints.)
wrp 4y ago
> ...Can't some popular stories grow and evolve beyond one, albeit original, author's imagination? Of course they can, but it's also the case that Tolkien was extremely defensive against divergent interpretations of his work, and he has a large fan-base with the same attitude.
- mpeg 4y ago
  If he wanted to be so defensive of his work, he shouldn't have sold it (or left it to his descendants to sell). You can't have it both ways, if I sell my startup to Google I can't then berate them for deviating from my vision and making it too corporate.
  - MichaelCollins 4y ago
    > if I sell my startup to Google I can't then berate them for deviating from my vision and making it too corporate. I'm pretty sure can. Maybe they could gag you with a contract during the sale, but I am certain that fans of your original business are well within their rights to criticize what Google later does with it. Your decision to sell something doesn't oblige others to respect what the new owner does with it.
  - wrp 4y ago
    I'm not arguing for any particular position, just trying to explain the motivation of some Tolkien fans.
mixmastamyk 4y ago
Unfortunately, with most new productions it’s clear that the new folks don’t understand the story or characters they’re supposed to be extending. Or rather, they don’t care to and want to tell their own. That would be fine if they just chose a new name.
alpaca128 4y ago
> Can't some popular stories grow and evolve beyond one, albeit original, author's imagination? Sure, it's simple. Name it differently when you already plan to stray from the author's vision and as a bonus people will rate it more independently from the original (though that also means no free marketing by riding on a known brand).
Valakas_ 4y ago
They can, but then change the name and any implication that it is somehow more of what we got before (Lord of the Rings). Or clearly state it is only based on it, but has actually nothing to do with the original work, only draws inspiration from it. This is not the case. Here the directors / whoever just think they can do better than Tolkien (and that's fine) but then they appropriate themselves with everything he did, including claiming it's his work, but that they "improved" or "modernized".

astrange 4y ago

The problem is, what typically happens is an author writes an original story and then it's "extended" by filming a completely unrelated off the shelf plot with some of the names changed and lore added. If something isn't a Hollywood hero's journey it's going to be one now. Scouring of the Shire would've been a lot more original than any new material we're getting here. Though American TV has improved a lot since the time they had directors of making sure none of the protagonists were women.

eternalban 4y ago

I sense the displeasure is due to a perception, which may well be correct, that certain cultural artifacts are recycled as a platform for propagating socio-political agendas. Emasculation and milk toast male characters, for example, seem to be de rigueur these days. > Can't some popular stories grow and evolve .. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolfram_von_Eschenbach#Parzival https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolfram_von_Eschenbach#Parziva... One of my all time favorite European works is Wolfram von Eschenbach's Parzival. He wasn't the original author of the legend of Percival, and there were other versions after him. It evolved, but that process took centuries and imo was an organic development. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Percival#Perceval https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Percival#Perceval So I think the generally unspoken issue is who is doing the 'growing and evolving' (here: Corporations) and how are they evolving dearly beloved cultural works. Wolfram for example changed some bits and even inserted a short (rather amusing) interlude to vent his frustrations with women, but we can be certain there wasn't a committee with a social agenda sponsoring him to write that. So, genuine development is definitely OK. At least in my book. [pdf] https://ia800908.us.archive.org/24/items/Parzival/Parzival.pdf https://ia800908.us.archive.org/24/items/Parzival/Parzival.p... "If there is anyone who praises women better than I, I will surely not be the one to hold it against him..." (See page 117 of the pdf to hear out this knight's complaints.)

wrp 4y ago

> ...Can't some popular stories grow and evolve beyond one, albeit original, author's imagination? Of course they can, but it's also the case that Tolkien was extremely defensive against divergent interpretations of his work, and he has a large fan-base with the same attitude.

mpeg 4y ago
If he wanted to be so defensive of his work, he shouldn't have sold it (or left it to his descendants to sell). You can't have it both ways, if I sell my startup to Google I can't then berate them for deviating from my vision and making it too corporate.
- MichaelCollins 4y ago
  > if I sell my startup to Google I can't then berate them for deviating from my vision and making it too corporate. I'm pretty sure can. Maybe they could gag you with a contract during the sale, but I am certain that fans of your original business are well within their rights to criticize what Google later does with it. Your decision to sell something doesn't oblige others to respect what the new owner does with it.
- wrp 4y ago
  I'm not arguing for any particular position, just trying to explain the motivation of some Tolkien fans.

mixmastamyk 4y ago

Unfortunately, with most new productions it’s clear that the new folks don’t understand the story or characters they’re supposed to be extending. Or rather, they don’t care to and want to tell their own. That would be fine if they just chose a new name.

alpaca128 4y ago

> Can't some popular stories grow and evolve beyond one, albeit original, author's imagination? Sure, it's simple. Name it differently when you already plan to stray from the author's vision and as a bonus people will rate it more independently from the original (though that also means no free marketing by riding on a known brand).

Valakas_ 4y ago

They can, but then change the name and any implication that it is somehow more of what we got before (Lord of the Rings). Or clearly state it is only based on it, but has actually nothing to do with the original work, only draws inspiration from it. This is not the case. Here the directors / whoever just think they can do better than Tolkien (and that's fine) but then they appropriate themselves with everything he did, including claiming it's his work, but that they "improved" or "modernized".