Comments on: What Should I do #8: Penny Arcade

By: Dynishra Shin

Dynishra Shin — Tue, 03 Jun 2008 01:22:11 +0000

Ah yes ...PA ... my ancient dark vice... I love it when others recommend things I already adore! It makes joy bubble in my heart.And I'm glad to see in your more recent post that your feeling better. It's amazing how much better one can feel after that alien baby has been ripped from your greater intestine. I shall drink honey mead to your health this Mid-winter. (Of course I would drink honey mead to anything, that stuff tastes like the blood of the Gods, in other words, it rocks my socks off).

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sat, 31 May 2008 00:55:33 +0000

There’s a video game called Penny Arcade Adventures: On the Rain-Slick Precipice of Darkness, Episode OneIt’s pretty good toohttp://www.giantbomb.com/2008/05/22/of-robots-rakes-mimes-and-men/

By: Captain Joe

Captain Joe — Fri, 30 May 2008 23:49:52 +0000

All good points, Kip, yet I wouldn't go as far to say that there are <>better<> authors in the fantasy genre than Tolkien. More simply put, there are now <>modern<> authors since Tolkien.Tolkien gave the genre the most elves and dwarves it will ever need, and he'll stand the test of time. <>The Lord of the Rings<> is one of those novels that you can re-read forever and always find something new. They're alive in the way that most fiction strives for, but falls short.I'm firmly of the believe that this up-and-coming rookie, name'a Rothfuss, will not only stand the test of time, but wrap it around his little finger. The 20th century had Tolkien, the 21st will have Pat - I don't really like that analogy, as Tolkien and Pat are in classes of their own - but it makes sense. Pat's book can't be put down, it draws you in, you have to finish it.As for Hendrix, I could kick his ass on my guitar...hero.I'm off to the pub,~Joe

By: Kip Speaks Again.

Kip Speaks Again. — Fri, 30 May 2008 17:46:46 +0000

Fortunately Though I have been in this type of discussion before, Involving the aforementioned Hendrix. This type of discussion portrays what is greatest in this world: The difference of opinions, and the freedom to express them. So varied are the opinions of the peoples of this world that they lead us to sayings like “One man’s trash is another man’s treasure”. I love it, without these diferences I think the world would be a sham of an existance.Pat, Sorry for typing so much. I tend to like to talk (type).

By: Kip, The verbose

Kip, The verbose — Fri, 30 May 2008 17:39:07 +0000

Again I must disagree. To say that something is the pinnacle of it’s feild, wether it be writing, music, movies or art. Is to say that the feild is now dead. Once such a greatness has been experienced, will anything else ever do? Will once great foods turn to ash in your mouth? will once great words fail to catch your imaginination? will once great works of art fail to inspire you? I think Tolken is far surpassed but the likes of Martin, Rothfuss, Erikson, Salvadore, Eddings, and Asprin. While I in no way slight his staggering contributions to the fantasy genre on a whole, I believe that his works, held side by side with any of the aforementioned authors, would pale in comparison. Sure every now and then an autor or artist rises above the masses, but thankfully soon someone will come and rise yet above them. this keeps things interesting, and keeps our intellectual progression from slowing and mouldering. Pat is one of these recent demigods of the literary world. After his book I was staggered. Where I went into Half Priced Books looking for something to pass the hours at my weekend job, I came out with a book that Holds a revered spot high on the large-book book shelf in my collection. Tolken is retired to the highest shelf in the furthest corner, I will probably only dust him off when I get too bored with my current selection. This cyclic nature keeps my faith in the evolution of nature and everything.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 30 May 2008 16:52:11 +0000

Kip, you are no doubt correct–contempt never bought anyone anything. I apologize for that.Instead, I will respectfully disagree with your assessment. Your argument seems to assume that there will almost always be something new that surpasses the old. Personally, I think there are some (even many) works of art/music/writing that are justifiably “classic” and “timeless”, and whose brilliance is rarely (or never) equalled by subsequent efforts. I happen to feel that Tolkien and Hendrix are two such classics. Just as I’ve yet to come across a composer who surpasses Bach, a rock band that I enjoy more than Led Zeppelin or the Rolling Stones, or an artist who uses color and light more effectively than Monet or Sargent. You might argue that George Martin or our very own Mr. Rothfuss’ work surpasses Tolkien’s art and vision. And while I’m very (even fanatically) fond of both, I find that Tolkien stands the test of time brilliantly–I think it’s as brilliant upon my twelfth reading as upon my first. I’m not holding onto the past so much as I’m valuing what I consider to be elite works of imagination and skill–and frankly The Name of the Wind is one of those. So’s LOTR.And as for movies vs. books…yeah I know…they’re totally separate mediums and a movie version of a book can be different and good in its own right, but when you’ve read the book first, and you’ve developed a real love for the book’s voice, then someone comes along and creates a movie that is at odds with that voice, it’s jarring. It’s like someone’s gone and made a bad cover of a classic song. I think Peter Jackson did a lot of things right with the LOTR movies, but he also did a lot of things wrong. I try to ignore them, but it’s difficult. Having said that, I will certainly see the Hobbit and “sequel” (probably multiple times).-Jigman

By: Kip, The Taxed

Kip, The Taxed — Fri, 30 May 2008 15:51:16 +0000

Don't feel contempt. Toklen was good, now their are better authors. Hendrix was good, now there are people who make his guitar work seem childish.You can't hold onto the past and ignore new advancements in anything, to do so is counter productive and pathetic. I'm not saying they weren't good, but that there are better things out there. I usually find the people that grasp to old things, refusing to admit that new things ane better are usually smallminded and afraid of change. Again this is counterproductive, where in some cases the older ways are better, these are few and far between.Now I am off to kill My boss and mount his haed on a pole next to my desk to ward off others who seek to give me tons of work....

By: Mary J.

Mary J. — Fri, 30 May 2008 14:40:52 +0000

Wow, Corby- that was a very... sensual description of a book.I think I need a cool shower.Enjoying Penny Arcade, thanks Pat!

By: paranoyd

paranoyd — Fri, 30 May 2008 07:32:55 +0000

Bah. Movies and books are, dare I say it, different - and you do not ruin a book by making it into a bad movie. The book still sits there, on the shelf, waiting for you to lovingly caress its hard outer shell, run your fingers down the pulpy gilt-edged pages, and read its sweet nothings into your fevered imagination.Complaining about a film that has not even been made is like breaking up with the girlfriend you haven't met yet. Lord of the Rings was fantastic, regardless of the Tolkien fanboys complaining about the lack of a jolly guy in galoshes. The Hobbit can be well done in film - Rankin and Bass proved that. The "sequel" is no such thing, it is, as someone said, based on bridging material Tolkien wrote. I for one would love to see some of the background stuff that has nothing to do with Frodo or Bilbo.Anyway, Hi, Pat. Good to meet you at WisCon. (David Durham introducing me to you was a high point.) Thanks for the Spirograph! Sorry you got sick - me, my wife, and our 6 month old were hit hard, and carried it home to some other family - so they were happy. -Corby

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 29 May 2008 22:50:02 +0000

I'm with the camp that is mostly ok with the notion of splitting the story of the hobbit into two parts in an effort to do the story justice. I would like to think that Jackson would make an effort to be as absolutely faithful to the book as possible, but after the liberties he took with The Lord of the Rings, my faith is nil. And a sequel to The Hobbit? A bridge between it and The Lord of the Rings? The thought makes me queasy...although...at least they wouldn't be butchering an existing work. Movies made from books almost never work in my option (The Princess Bride being the only possible exception I can think of--but then Goldman wrote both novel and screenplay).And as to the ludicrous fellow who finds both Tolkein and Hendrix to be outdated relics...I simply have no words to adequately express my pity (and I'm sorry but I can't help feeling a touch of contempt).--littlejigman