Previous Matches
Still More Quote Porn
Lord of The Rings: Return of The King
"It must often be so, Sam, when things are in danger: some one has to give them up, lose them, so that others may keep them."
"Go in peace! I will not say: do not weep; for not all tears are an evil."
"Do not spoil the wonder with haste!"
Survivor
"Reality means you live until you die... the real truth is nobody wants reality."
"Don’t quote me on any of this. It’s been a long time since I’ve been tested."
"Not that I’m crazy or anything, I just want some proof that death isn’t the end."
"Go in peace! I will not say: do not weep; for not all tears are an evil."
"Do not spoil the wonder with haste!"
Survivor
"Reality means you live until you die... the real truth is nobody wants reality."
"Don’t quote me on any of this. It’s been a long time since I’ve been tested."
"Not that I’m crazy or anything, I just want some proof that death isn’t the end."
Head-to-Head
Characters: This tussle boils down to the entirely different roots of the characters: that is, Frodo and Sam (and the rest of the broken fellowship) are medieval, unquestionably good and noble, and their foils are literal monsters who do bad things to good people and just want to watch the world burn. Meanwhile, Tender Branson has this aura that makes me want to root for him one moment because of his insane upbringing, while remembering moments later that the man is literally a domestic terrorist. He's kind of his own foil, really.
There's no media in Middle Earth. Survivor wouldn't be a book without the media.
In the end, Tolkien's characters helped to create (if not completely created) the basis for the entire fantasy genre, while Palahniuk's characters carry the burden of acting like actual, breathing, shitty people. One set are great because they're so imaginary, the other set are great because they're so real.
Copout time!
Advantage: Push.
Setting: The setting for Survivor, while impressive, may well have been pulled from a series of 5:00 news segments on a week that Palahniuk sat down to write it. While it's a real setting that adds gravity to his plot... if Tolkien had source material for Mordor, I don't wanna see it. The grand feat of imagination beats the spectacular adaptation of reality.
Advantage: Return of The King.
Plot: I've been forgiving Return of the King's latter sections so far in the tournament, specifically the couple hundred pages with the return to the Shire and the antics of a poor man's Saruman—don't get me wrong, the conclusion of everything Tolkien worked on in the first two books pays off magnificently and the last-minute tension of a triple threat match with the ring in the volcano; it's enthralling! Against plots that don't quite flirt with perfection, everything after is a forgettable foible.
But, Survivor is just such a tight book, plotwise. Everything is necessary; if anything, it's almost too brief. It's tense, it's relatable, it's relevant, it's interesting. I docked Palahniuk in setting because he only captured the world around him.. but he does it so well, harnessing it to tell a hell of a story.
Advantage: Survivor.
Ending: See above rambles. If the moment the ring meets its ultimate fate could be considered the ending, there'd be more of a conversation. No doubt, RotK is a book that feels good to finish, but Tolkien's strategy of gradually dwindling the plot has always been a sour note for me.
Survivor's ending isn't perfect either: it's almost too symbolic, and obfuscation to the extent of requiring the author's out-of-book explanation isn't ideal to me. Still, starting on page 289 and ending on page one? A+ bit.
Advantage: Survivor.
Language/Writing: Tolkien's vast descriptions and songs are charming, and are one of the principle reasons that his work caught on like it did. Still, Palahniuk's way with words and ability to put common experiences into words is more of a draw for me.
Phrased another way: trying to come up with RoTK quotes for the quote porn sections was taxing; out of context, Tolkien's words don't shine on their own. His context is everything. Conversely, pulling passages from Survivor is easy because, like any given Red Hot Chili Peppers lyric, so many lines make neat statements that they can be stripped of context and still have appeal.
(Though unlike any given Red Hot Chili Peppers lyric, Survivor actually made sense when taken as a cohesive whole. But I digress. As always.)
Advantage: Survivor.
Philosophy: The good guys win in the end vs just look at yourselves, you silly fucking people.
Advantage: Survivor.
But, Survivor is just such a tight book, plotwise. Everything is necessary; if anything, it's almost too brief. It's tense, it's relatable, it's relevant, it's interesting. I docked Palahniuk in setting because he only captured the world around him.. but he does it so well, harnessing it to tell a hell of a story.
Advantage: Survivor.
Ending: See above rambles. If the moment the ring meets its ultimate fate could be considered the ending, there'd be more of a conversation. No doubt, RotK is a book that feels good to finish, but Tolkien's strategy of gradually dwindling the plot has always been a sour note for me.
Survivor's ending isn't perfect either: it's almost too symbolic, and obfuscation to the extent of requiring the author's out-of-book explanation isn't ideal to me. Still, starting on page 289 and ending on page one? A+ bit.
Advantage: Survivor.
Language/Writing: Tolkien's vast descriptions and songs are charming, and are one of the principle reasons that his work caught on like it did. Still, Palahniuk's way with words and ability to put common experiences into words is more of a draw for me.
Phrased another way: trying to come up with RoTK quotes for the quote porn sections was taxing; out of context, Tolkien's words don't shine on their own. His context is everything. Conversely, pulling passages from Survivor is easy because, like any given Red Hot Chili Peppers lyric, so many lines make neat statements that they can be stripped of context and still have appeal.
(Though unlike any given Red Hot Chili Peppers lyric, Survivor actually made sense when taken as a cohesive whole. But I digress. As always.)
Advantage: Survivor.
Philosophy: The good guys win in the end vs just look at yourselves, you silly fucking people.
Advantage: Survivor.
Winner Winner Turkey Supper
Take Lord of the Rings as a whole, and we might have a different conversation—but Survivor is one of the most complete pieces of fiction I've ever read, and it's sort of hard for a third of a trilogy to stand against that.
Survivor survives to see the semifinals.
No comments:
Post a Comment