Zuri

I wouldn't go as far as considering his writing "crap", but I have to admit that I don't find his writing itself outstanding. I'm writing a blog series about writing and in that context, I noticed that Tolkien delivered one example of a shortcoming, I also found in a story I was editing for someone: Not introducing things that solve problems until you need them, sometimes can feel a little cheap. It's similar to the concept of deus ex machina. Additionally, at the point of introducing that plot device, it wasn't really needed anymore. On the other hand, his worldbuilding work as well as crafting iconic conlangs is justifiably praised. Actually, the adaption very literal and true to the originals plot since Jackson is a fan of Tolkien's works. However, he made the smart choice to leave out some of the first chapters in the Old Forest and the Barrow-downs, that don't add much to the story and the movie's runtime would suffer as it is already not that short. The only thing, fans miss in the movie adaption is Tom Bombadil, and even though, he's a fascinating legendary figure, in Fellowship, he doesn't do much despite being overpowered and having a wife whose primary traits are described as being pretty and a formidable host for the Hobbits (could come off as a little sexist if you ask me). --- I'm currently reading "Thrawn" by Timothy Zahn after finishing "The Picture of Dorian Gray": 'Thrawn' is very much the re-introduction of the character Mitth'raw'nuruodo into the Star Wars franchise after being declared non-canon (or 'legends' in Star Wars jargon) after the acquisition by Disney. The novel is written by Thrawn's inventor, who also wrote the famous legends novels about Thrawn. Instead of following Thrawn along on the zenith of his power after the Empire collapsed, and the New Republic couldn't get a hold of the galaxy yet, like in Zahn's legends novel, in the new novel, we witness Thrawn's rise to power shortly after the birth of the Empire before the Rebellion. He is found on a remote planet and brought before the Emperor, who's fascinated with Thrawn, and therefore supports him in climbing the military ranks in records times. Not everyone likes that, especially because he's non-human, but his success proves him right despite his non-conventional methods. Like in the legends trilogy, Thrawn is incredibly smart, but has far more political opponents.

For those, who don't know, this song is dedicated to Matthew Shepard who was murdered for being gay: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matthew_Shepard

Damn, this song is so catchy and it gave me such an earworm! Thanks for sharing!

The relationship between author and reader is in a state of torture. But torture can only lead to pleasure if it is consensual and built on trust. Not unlike in BDSM. I gonna put the two scenes (Hitchcock's explanation of suspense and the opening scene of Inglorious Basterds) – does that clarify the emotional relevance for the reader?

What would you say if I told you that writing is a lot like BDSM? You might tell me that you are not into that—but aren’t you? No, no, that wasn’t an invitation for sex. I wasn’t talking literally but literarily. Okay, let’s clear that up: It’s what we can do emotionally with writing. Usually described as an “emotional roller coaster”. You might say that kind of cruelty only exists in splatter and gore. But it might just be that you’re getting BDSM wrong. When practicing BDSM, you wouldn’t go around slapping random people on the street. This would most likely not result in arousal but in arrest because you are a psycho. BDSM, on the other hand is built on trust and a common goal—even though it’s reached through suffering. But it’s not suffering for the sake of suffering but for pleasure. And that’s what writing is about, too. Without the emotional bonding (not bondage), it would be needless suffering. We, as readers, surrender ourselves to the dominant author—let them play with us as they please. And if they are doing a good job, they keep us in a constant (or recurring) state of excitement, wanting for more. We don’t want them to stop. It’s not a surprise, books also have climaxes. And after a good climax, there’s the equivalent of post-coital tristesse. Just admit it: You like it, too! Yeah, one last thing: Just like kinks, it’s not for everyone but you’d be surprised for how many it is. Even Hitchcock already knew about the value of suspense. His theory is perfectly illustrated in the opening scene of Quentin Tarantino’s “Inglourious basterds” where SS-Standartenführer Hans Landa (known as “the Jew hunter”) interrogates French dairy farmer Perrier LaPadite who hides Jews under his floor—something we are made aware of. If we weren’t, the end of the scene, where Landa fires his gun through the cracks of the floor and kills all the people down there, wouldn’t have remotely the devastating effect it has on us. Even though, Landa’s whole bearing is intimidating, we hope, that the farmer might find a way to convince him that he doesn't have what the Nazi is looking for. As children, what we like and don’t like is quite simple (I know, parents would tell me, it’s not, given the fact that it doesn’t make sense, their child suddenly doesn’t like broccoli anymore), as long as it’s sweets we can eat. When we grow up, our taste buds get more sophisticated: We like coffee, different alcoholic beverages, black tea, dark chocolate. A bitter taste is something, most children cannot appreciate—yet. For a reason, in German we say, literally translated, “sour makes funny”.

Why have I never thought of that? ^^

Interesting thing about this: "He" is the stage name of Bruno Balscheit, a German climate activist