Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ruin Explorer" data-source="post: 9610095" data-attributes="member: 18">This is 100% the vibe, yeah. Like it's the sort of thing I might have done when I was like 22 and extremely pleased with myself for having read a lot of the Western Canon.There's also a lot of 'airlifting' going on - i.e. stuff that's clearly from genre works being called "literary" for the sake of inclusion. There's no way Steven King's It is literary first, genre-second, even if you could maybe argue that for LotR. Let alone President Snow.Also there's some absolute ridiculous shenanigans going on when Humbert Humbert - a simple self-deluding pervert/sex offender (basically a criminal and loser and not much else) is a "[better] villain" (their words not mine) than Moriarty from Sherlock Holmes, who is one of the premier villains of detective fiction! I feel like people voted for Humbert because they were afraid to fail to condemn pedos in the eyes of their peers, not because they were actually looking at who was a well-rendered and truly villainous character.And why is Caliban even in there? He's not even a villain and there are like fourteen actual villains from Shakespeare that could have had the slot! Don't even get me started on Frankenstein's Monster - including him is just trolling lol. (Yeah, I see that they're in anti-villains, but there are several straight-up evil characters in there, which makes it a weird category to even include.)As for the current bracket, Napoleon should win it, but someone trite like Sauron probably will. Despite 90% of the people voting don't even understand the nature of Sauron's villainy.</blockquote>

Verification