[ SECRET POST #2889 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2889 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.



__________________________________________________



09.











Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 051 secrets from Secret Submission Post #413.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

I've known people who weren't aware of it. Either they hadn't read Tolkien, or they weren't very good at analysis so they didn't pick up on the similarities. Just like how there are people who've read Twilight but not Bram Stoker. Sad, but it happens. *shrug*

[likeadeuce]

I venture there is very little connection between Twilight and Stoker. But I imagine most Brooks fans are familiar with Tolkien and just want more in the same vein!

[(Anonymous)]

Except for vampires (sort of) and the theme of sexual repression, chastity, denial, etc. But I wouldn't be surprised if most Twilight fans were unaware of vampire mythology and literature in general. Nor would I be surprised if they didn't realize that Twilight was a vastly different take on a very old trope.

[likeadeuce]

Vampires have been thoroughly absorbed into pop culture to the point that whether or not you've read Dracula is sort of irrelevant to appreciating Twilight.

I mean I loooove 'Dracula,' and I find 'Twilight' fairly amusing, but I don't think the connection is that vital (whereas I understand Brooks's series is pretty much a fullscale ripoff of Tolkien...) There's a difference between working with long-established genre tropes and. . . that. (I'd be kinda surprised if Stephenie Meyer has read Stoker so I think requiring her fans to is a bit silly.)

[(Anonymous)]

I think you misunderstand my argument. I'm not "requiring" anyone to read anything. I'm just pointing out that saying of COURSE people who've read Sword of Shannara know it's a rip off of Tolkien because they've read it isn't necessarily true. Lots of Brooks fans probably don't realize it, just like lots of Twilight fans don't know anything about Bram Stoker.

likeadeuce is arguing that the difference between Shannara and Tolkien is much smaller, which increases the likelihood of a large reader overlap while Bram Stoker and Twilight are very far apart, which makes it likely the reader overlap is smaller. That's a very sensible and logical argument, but I still think there's plenty of room for the audience of the Shannara books to have missed the fact that it's a blatant rip off of Tolkien.

[likeadeuce]

Fair!

[(Anonymous)]

why are you replying to likeadeuce and saying "likeadeuce is arguing" instead of "you are arguing"

[caecilia]

anon if you have a link to an in-depth literary comparison of Dracula and Twilight I would honestly love to read that

[(Anonymous)]

Some "vampire mythology" is fairly recent. One in particular one that comes to mind is "vampires dissolve in the sun". That trope came later than Dracula.

[(Anonymous)]

DA

Yeah, but I can read Tolkien 3 times and not get bored with it, whereas Sword of Shannara I read once and barely got through it that time. It might be in the 'same vein' but it's DULL. (And it was so long ago, I can't tell you why it was dull anymore.)

[likeadeuce]

Oh sure ..I just meant the secret implies fans don't know any better. They might know & just have different taste.

[(Anonymous)]

*rereads secret* It says "I'm disappointed more Brooks fans don't know", etc. etc. Emphasis mine. That suggests to me that actually yes, OP is aware that some fans know Brooks is ripping off Tolkien, but wishes more of them knew it.

[(Anonymous)]

But how does the OP know who does and who doesn't know. Did OP take a survey.

"According to my findings, 72% of Brooks fans he ripped off Tolkien, 21% are aware he ripped off Toklien, 7% are undecided."

[(Anonymous)]

You're overthinking it. OP doesn't have to know exact numbers of percentages, they just have to have encountered some Shannara fans who know and some who don't and wish that the ones who didn't know, knew.

[(Anonymous)]

Not necessarily. There's a not-insignificant number of modern fantasy fans who've never read LotR, or have never read all the way through.

Or who have, and think it derivative because they read a lot in the genre before getting around to it, which is always an amusing conversation to have.