Jump to content




  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About reyler

  • Rank
    Wallflower Princess
  • Birthday 05/06/1985

Recent Profile Visitors

7511 profile views
  1. As nice as it is when there's trans representation (or, really, any lgbt representation), I don't believe for a second that Balthamel/Aran'gar counts. We don't get any sense of Balthamel as a person before he is unceremoniously disposed of, and he is SUPER ticked when he wakes up in a woman's body - Osan'gar outright thinks it's the Dark One playing a nasty prank based on who Balthamel was in the past. Like Taltos said, Aran'gar is more Jordan indulging in his fetishes (in this case, m2f, or, "damned if a woman's body isn't a pleasure car, must be nice to be behind the wheel instead of in the passenger seat") rather than any legit attempt at having a trans character.
  2. You guys act like goats aren't recyclable
  3. David Eddings died a few years ago, and his wife went a few years before that. Also, why won't this thread go away?
  4. So, I logged on for a minute and saw that you had stalked me last week. <3

  5. My default description of the Belgariad and subsequent works is that it's the fantasy novel version of a summer popcorn movie. To that end, the characters have traits that occasionally delineate them, at least in the Belgariad (they very much run together into a personality omelette in the Malloreon), but not what I would consider actual depth. The characters are really more like sketches of people.
  6. Worldbuilding-wise, Eddings is an unapologetic devotee of the Planet of Hats trope. Character-wise, well, that depends on if you equate character traits with character depth.
  7. I'm not sure whether being compared to Tom Hanks is better or worse than being compared to the dog.
  8. I don't feel like repeating points I've made probably a hundred times before, so here is the last one I made them in. That's Fish's thread; I don't see Krak in there anywhere, so I guess that was an earlier thread that I can't recall. I have so many admirers. I brush them out of my hair.
  9. hey there miss reyler :) I miss you and your insults XD

  10. First, Frodo being unable to recall the experience of the Shire is in the book, and it's due to the Ring at that time having nearly devoured his mind. Sam is attempting to rouse him out of the delirium he's in as a result of being in possession of the Ring so close to Orodruin. Anyway, I meant he never does anything to justify the responsibility he is given. In the book, he strikes at the Witchking at Weathertop, and defies him again at the Ford despite the shard of the Morgul blade making him significantly weaker to them and the Ring urging him to give in to them. He displays the ability to resist their influence. Second, Gimli doesn't just fall down, he is blown back by the force of the Ring most definitely not being destroyed when he hits it with his axe. Did you miss where the blade of his axe had completely shattered from the impact? The whole incident was meant to display the veritable indestructability of the Ring. It's one of the things PJ did to try and show that the Ring is an immediate threat in its own right, and not just an inanimate object. Probably not something Tolkien would have had the Ring doing, but it gets the point across better than a lot of talk. Anyway, it's easier to pick at the things they got wrong than talk about the things they got right.
  11. Istari is more of a job title. They're still Maiar. You can call it coming off as weak-willed; I call it coming off as visibly conflicted, which, due to highly external style Tolkien favored, he doesn't really appear to be until the trip down Anduin. He had a very good reason to look to whatever source of strength was available. In fact, I probably should have pointed out, when I stated that he believed the strength of Men could equal the strength of Sauron, that his job sort of requires him to think this way. If you want to talk about who got wussified in the films, look at Frodo, who never once really justifies why he should be the Ringbearer.
  12. It's not that Boromir was specifically weak-willed, his fatal flaw was actually his pride. His belief that the Ring could be used, by Men in general, or by him specifically, that he had a great enough spirit to control it and not be dominated, that's how it got inside his head. Boromir believed that the strength of Men was equal to the strength of Sauron. Gandalf and Aragorn both understood that the Ring was more powerful than they were. It's kind of like, Boromir really only lost to the Ring because he entered the fight (and didn't know what he was up against), while Aragorn and Gandalf and most everyone else at the Council of Elrond knew their limits, knew the Ring would kick their ass, and didn't step through the ropes. Frodo sort of knew what he was getting into, and he just kind of huddled in the corner until the Ring beat him down. It took actually succumbing to the Ring for Boromir to realize he wasn't up to the challenge; nobody was. And for the record, Gandalf wasn't actually a Man, he was a Maia, the same class of spirits as Sauron, though probably much lower in power.
  13. Just to be a pedantic asshole, you guys are actually talking about Ctuchik, not Zedar. And they were actually more or less evenly matched. Being terrified beyond all reason by the notion of the Orb in Garion's hands (and half-nuts to boot) is a semi-acceptable explanation for trying to unmake it, but the actual written execution of it, as most everything else, is really clunky. Anyway, how did the revelation that UL was the father of the gods do whatever it did to theological thought in their world? How did it get out? Who that was present at Cthol Mishrak went and told the Associated Press? According to the prequels, Belgarath at least already knew. And anyway the notion of "theological thought" in a world where 100% of the people agree on the creation myths is kind of ludicrous.
  • Create New...