Which of these games would you rather play (and why)?

Which Option would you rather play?

  • Option One

    Votes: 16 12.5%
  • Option Two

    Votes: 100 78.1%
  • Neither

    Votes: 12 9.4%

Lord of the Rings without the Shire and Rivendell isn't Middle Earth. Having something worth fighting for a key concept that Option 1 has, and Option 2 doesn't seem to.
Hence "isolated pockets of civilization". The hobbits had to cross a perilous wilderness to reach Rivendell, with only Bree as a sign of civilization between them.

In a large region such as Middle-Earth, we had the Shire, Rivendell, Bree, Mirkwood Hall, Lake Town, Lothlorien, Minas Tirith and Edoras as the main Points of Light.
 

log in or register to remove this ad



Put it in its historical context. Tolkien wasn't writing his English mythology to be anti-black, anti-Irish, or anti-anybody else. He was writing it because, as scholar of Anglo-Saxon literature, he saw that something had been lost to history, and wanted to create something to fill in the blank. He was creating an English language equivalent to the Icelandic sagas or the Finnish Kalevala, to fill out the lost English world you can glimpse in Beowulf or Sir Gawain and Green Knight.

It's very much in the context of late 19th century romantic nationalism. You hear "race" or "nationalism" and think of oppression and jackboots, that it means hating the other. I think of the revolutions of 1848, when European romantic nationalist and liberals were overthrowing the multiethnic empires of old, to set up self-ruling nation states. To me, Hungary for the Hungarians, Finland for the Finns, etc. wasn't evilly fascist, but progressive -- and it was both a political and artistic movement, with rediscovery of folk art, folk music, and pre-Christian mythology that had been considered backward and were endangered at the time. It's closer to the "locavore" movement than fascism . . .

I just wanted to say that I respectfully disagree (although I do agree with some points you've made), but I won't say more as I don't want to have this thread derailed again.
 


I choose 1, because of the seemingly greater possibilities for diplomacy and encountering different peoples on an equal level. In #2, your job is basically to subjugate - with all the attendant evils of such a policy. In #1, the task is to unify trough alliance, which has a great appeal to me.
 

Remove ads

Top