• Amnesigenic@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 days ago

    Jesus fucking Christ this is some high level cope, if you’ve convinced yourself that Gandalf carried a sword through this many battles on the front lines without ever killing anybody then too far up your own ass to see daylight, you are a waste of time

    • Seleni@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 days ago

      I’m going by what the book said, dude. It’s called reading. It’s not as if Tolkien was afraid to talk about his heroes killing, either; for heaven’s sake, Gimli and Legolas even have a contest counting kills at one point!

      And again, Gandalf was only in two battles (Helm’s Deep and Morannon) and in Helm’s deep it’s not said that he killed anyone.

      Why are you so desperate to believe Gandalf is out there whacking everyone with a sword, never mind what the book says?

      On an unrelated note, earlier you said that you ‘moved on’ from fantasy to nonfiction, as though that somehow makes you more mature? Or something? Why? What makes you see fantasy as lesser than biographies and history books?

      • Amnesigenic@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        6 days ago

        You’re ignoring a whole lot of what the book said and pretending that the few parts you’re quoting do anything to support your inane assertion, if you had any self awareness or dignity you’d be dying of embarrassment. I don’t base my politics on fiction, it’s extremely simple and makes a shitload of sense if you’re being honest.

        • Seleni@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          6 days ago

          We were talking about the fights Gandalf was in and how many he killed. I was referencing the fights in the book, you know, the source material, and how may he killed. How is quoting sources ‘embarrassing’? If you disagree, then perhaps post references from the book proving your assertions, instead of doing an ad hominem?

          And I dunno, the Vimes Boots Economic Theory works just as well in the real world as on the Disc as far as I’ve seen.

          Just because someone dresses up political commentary with wizards and witches and the Night Watch doesn’t mean the policies they’re expounding on are any less valid. Sometimes is all escapism, yes. But sometimes it’s actual political points looked at from a different perspective, like how Star Trek took on issues of the day by disguising it as ‘visiting those crazy aliens’.

            • Seleni@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              6 days ago

              I would just like to point out that ignoring evidence and stating ‘I’m right’, without showing any supporting evidence, is no better than ‘basing politics on fiction’. Just because the ‘I’m right’ vibes are in your head doesn’t make them any less of a fantasy.