The Fantasy Problem

pussy

wtf I love George RR Martin now! I hope my children grow up to be like him.

The little girls in fantasy settings are a lot more hot and sexier. And sometimes they have magic powers that could be used to improve sexual pleasure.

People with zero fondness for fantasy (art in general) are the boring ones as far as we're concerned. They are usually practical minded, which is a good thing to be, but people who are too practical have no creative imagination. Being practical minded is also not the only good thing to be, there's also being an intellectual. Intellectuals are the ones who usually have the penchant for fantasy since fantasy dives into the subconscious, pulls out abstract symbols and manifests them in wildly imaginative adventure, which is what the intellectual gets off to.

OP fantasizes about fags on a daily basis

>Is there anything gayer than fantasy?

The Greeks definitely have fantasy authors beat in terms of pure gayness for one.

>.gif from a show in which they play D&D

And yet those who are more steeped in fantasy than reality are usually so disconnected from the mechanics of the real world since they are instead steeped in signifiers that have long since had any real-world meaning. For example, one who loves Star Wars, Lord of the Rings, etc. and plays all of their respective video games and reads the books etc. obsessively -- these people don't see the ring for what it might be parallel to in the real world, they see it as the ring of power. They are kept forever unintelligent and unable to create anything of lasting value.

Fantasy works of lasting value almost always have some strong tie to our understanding of the real world -- even if it doesn't take place in the real world.

How can she support her organs? Fake.

At least now we know you're projecting.

Practice delayed gratification, it'll fix you.

Neck yourself.

Start with the Greeks, pleb!

Alberto?

Most of what the Greeks wrote is fantasy

I love C.S Lewis and his quotes about being an adult, but I still think that most fantasy is garbage, and that the people who primarily consume it end up as manchildren.

And let me guess, those intellectuals who praise the classics for their quality and wit and despise fantasy for its lacking these are actually "not really intellectuals?"

I agree. But I think most of pretty much everything is garbage so it's not a very meaningful statement.

I think you're projecting when you say I'm projecting, because you have a habit of it yourself and can't imagine that other people might be able to use experiences other than their own to describe common phenomena. Pretty pathetic desu

how many levels of projection are you on, my man?

Cuck

succ

Most people who participate in anything are fairly clueless. Same goes for the practical minded who don't like fantasy. What do those people do all day? They sit around and watch sports games, go bowling, shit like that. No better for it.

>dude what if dragons and stuff
>imagination
Read some Cervantes.

>440. The job of an artist is obviously to make us feel, that of the philosopher to think, and yet subhumans believe it is the other way around. And that is why they are forever drowning in bad art and bad philosophy, since they can't even figure out the purpose of any of these things.

Because those people view it as entertainment, not as some work of art to be interpreted. The two types are coming at it from different angles.

It's just more things you use in art. Stop being a pathetic regressive cunt.

>Fantasy works of lasting value almost always have some strong tie to our understanding of the real world -- even if it doesn't take place in the real world.
That's not why they have lasting value though. This is where you are mistaken. Correlation vs. causation.

What about the Epic of Gilgamesh or the Iliad?

Worthless tripe. Anything that isn't the middle-class people in the present day is just childish dribble that belongs in reddit. If you have to resort to using cliches and imagination to get your point across you're a shit writer.

I am one hundred percent serious by the way.

Its more like works like LOTR actually had something to say. Most fantasy dosent and only exists to be escapism, so the reader walks away with all the sugar but no meat to chew on.

Fantasy has only recently been overtaken by con-visiting autistic man-children. This is due to a degenerative cultural shift not the genre.

this

The "fantasy" you're talking about is usually derived not from original interpretations of archetypes and cultural materials (like Tolkien) but from other fantasy works that people enjoy because it's escapist (like a video game.) This results in people writing from an amalgamation of different sources in different mediums, then resulting in something that isn't aware of the fact that it doesn't precisely know what it wants to be.

What I mean is that they have some didactic lesson about our lives in the more middlebrow works; or perhaps help us endure some self-reflection, by casting a mirror across the face of our souls, in the higher-brow works. This is what literature does. This is engaging with the real world, with the real people that inhabit it, including the reader, especially the reader, always the reader. That is what I mean, and I think you'd probably more readily agree with that definition.

I really doubt you are serious or else you would have picked a better OP image. Especially after the "reddit" comment.

All media involves some sort of self-reflection. Fantasy can make that self-reflection a little less painful, but at the same time it can enable other people to disregard that self-reflection all together and pump out escapism that glorifies the aesthetic and the form more than any message similar works were trying to show.

Why do you create a thread if you're not interested in discussion? And by the way, why do you put on airs of pretentiousness when you talk like a twelve year old?

You're one of those people who wants to discredit an entire field in a transparent attempt to justify not having to learn anything about it. The worst kind of pseudointellectual: a lazy one. You can't even be bothered to learn about what you criticize, you just want to pretend to be "enlightened" about the world by dismissing anything that could possibly challenge your narrow worldview, complete with the typical buzzwords of your ilk.

why not both?

>Is there anything gayer than fantasy?
>Why are they so childish?
That's some serious Cognitive dissonance going on there.

Where's that from? The best google can offer is "Punk rock"

Orgy of the Will

You are projecting user

I'm not the poster you're replying to, just FYI

>why is it the fantasy community has more fun than the classics
>why aren't people reading books I read
>why don't people want to discuss obscure post modern books with me
Cry more

I think your argument is flawed because that interpretation of that work of art is also entertainment; the problem with art now-a-days is precisely that people forgot the purpose of entertainment, and the purpose of art to entertain.

This, to be honest. Every story is imaginary, and fantastic to some extent, else it'd be history. It is shallow to regard a story as "non-fantastic", and I think the whole genre of "fantasy" is a pretty silly redundancy; though I get what it popularly entails, it doesn't cease to be a frustrating term, since most times, when a book is labeled as a "fantasy book", I have no clue what I'm getting into.

If your gripes are about dragons and fairies, well, consider this then: how is the man who creates a fictional system in the form of the life of a character any less than one who creates a fictional system in the form of the physiology of a creature? Both can appeal to our emotions.

That's incredibly vain.

I don't know but that's pretty hot, OP

And yet, it is a reasonable assertion.