Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
If you have an email ending in @hotmail.com, @live.com or @outlook.com (or any other Microsoft-related domain), please consider changing it to another email provider; Microsoft decided to instantly block the server's IP, so emails can't be sent to these addresses.
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE
Friends who won't stop bitching about Game of Thrones
Goddamnit it's not like it killed your insipid Dragonlance fantasy forever godammnit fuck. There's still lighthearted fantasy out the wazoo out there.
Comments
This could be interesting.
Oh, well if that's why they're hung up on it, screw 'em.
But there's so much more problematic stuff in there if you dig deep enough.
Let's play the Monty Python's Holy Grail Peasant Sketch game:
1)Take a popular work
2)Search for "work name" and any -ism you can think of
3)Double points for every link that's not Livejournal, Tumblr or Wordpress, unless it is penned by a fictive, otherkin or gray
Only for hardcore enthusiasts->4)(If the person hirself is not of the category discriminated against)Add one point for every person in the comments section who is of said category but didn't feel offended
A quick google of Game of Thrones nets me 6 points:
http://cratesandribbons.com/2012/08/29/george-r-r-martin-and-the-misogyny-in-game-of-thrones/
http://www.bengodby.com/2012/05/game-of-thrones-is-super-racist.html
http://ivanolix.tumblr.com/post/21259181677
http://angryfuckingliberal.tumblr.com/post/15473465966/renly-the-homophobia-divining-rod
Dragonlance is insipid because it's actually trying hard at times to be mature and falls awfully flat there.
In any case, I have no issue with dark fantasy, but ASOIAF isn't as "dark" as it is "grimderp". Martin also appears to know a lot of individual facts about the Middle Ages but can't seem to collate them effectively, and his ideas of how people functioned socially at the time say more about his views on human nature than any actual history whatsoever. I would be happy for a popular series of books or whatnot to provide a balanced and reasonable depiction of the Middle Ages, but Martin's work isn't it, and it seems a lot of people assume it's more accurate because it does away with some common fantasy tropes. For all that, though, it keeps many cliches.
Basically, I'm annoyed at Game of Thrones less because of what it is, and more concerning the way Martin talks about it and how it's advertised by word of mouth. No matter how much Martin or anyone else tells you you're reading something that authentically depicts life, politics and warfare in the Middle Ages, that is definitely not the case.
Also, no-one knows how to sword fight in the books or in the TV show. That kinda makes some parts difficult to take seriously.
You mean the middle ages didn't have zombies and dragons, I am amazed.
By that do you mean, "no character ever uses a sword to achieve something" or "the author knows jack about fencing, and the TV show didn't hire a fencing instructor"? /isunfamiliarwiththisstuff
The author doesn't know jack about fencing, and the TV show hired pretentious fencing instructors or excellent con men.
Alex, you should know by now that good real fencing and good TV fencing are not the same thing.
Honestly, though, there's so little actual swordfighting in the show, it's hard to care about it
@CU: I suspect his point is that they shouldn't be different, though.
It's Alex. Is anyone even sort of surprised by this turn of events?
Okay, that does look pretty awesome.
But TV fencing was also developed in large part to prevent accidental injury.
That fencing was slowed down in part to prevent injury as well. Also so everyone can tell what's going on.
Mostly a little bored. Both with the turn of events and my homework. Thus, my posting.
Someone should get Alex to watch Garo just to get some commentary about the sword technique there. It looks good, but I'm not sure how it would work in real life. ('course, the characters use it to battle embodiments of human Yin, mostly)
Here, have a clip:
Sword against handgun isn't a matter of technique or accuracy but ridiculousness or, alternatively, tactical virtuosity. Sword against rifle is a bit different because rifles, when they're not being guns, are essentially short polearms, so it could give a better indication of technique.
In any case, there are no sword vs. gun techniques for the same reason there aren't sword vs. bow techniques. Whoever has tactical advantage has the "hard counter", or the complete advantage. So it's not a matter of being more skilled, but more clever.
Anyway, the swordsmanship in Garo is very "broad" -- strikes don't end around the centreline or in a guard, so the guy is way open to counterattack. And obviously, parrying bullets is close enough to impossible that that kind of thing doesn't merit analysis.
Well here's a single sword vs. dual swords clip, for something less ridiculous (in theory). There's some problem with the video quality, though.
Nothing in that is really swordsmanship. Which is fine to me, in this case, because it's obviously embracing its own excesses and sense of hyperbole.
Actual swordsmanship looks like, well, the video posted above, or the end of this. Note how there isn't even a meeting of blades, but an evasion that contains an attack. Swordsmanship thrives on single-time actions like that, where evasions, parries and strikes are contained within the same movement. Separating your attacks, parries and evasions is generally a good way to get killed unless you're using a smallsword.
#1 rule is of course always looking cool.