this post was submitted on
2,190 points (63% like it)
5,256 up votes 3,066 down votes
shortlink:

reactiongifs

unsubscribe94,745 readers

141 users here now

ANNOUNCEMENT: /r/ReactionGIFS has entered into an official partnership with SRS! Don't like it? Fuck off! Click here for more details.

Individual reaction gifs, and nothing else.

Albums or "packs" of related gifs may only be submitted by a moderator. If you would like to become a mod to (among other things) help create & maintain official packs, message us.

A reaction gif is a physical or emotional response that is captured in a gif which you can link in response to someone or something on the Internet. Read this for more information. The title of the submission has no bearing on whether it is or isn't a reaction gif.

Link directly to the GIF and please use a reliable host such as:

Your gif must actually contain some sort of reaction.

If you resubmit anything in the top 100 of all time it will be removed.

Official Packs:

How to make a gif in 5 easy steps

Y2Gif Creator

Check out Gifsplode, a chrome extension for bookmarking and managing reaction gifs, created by joshu

Check out gifsearch, a search engine for reaction gifs created by /u/free_agent99.

Check the very new EmotionReply.com a super cool reactiongif search tool! It was built by the esteemed ricoking

Check of ReactionClips; a new site for searching for ReactionGifs by name.

Check out GIFBase; a very easy-to-navigate GIF database which makes it quick for you to quickly find your exact face when.

Exquisite ReplyGif.net

Create some [OC] (Original Content) that gained over 500 karma points in this subreddit? Message the mods and we'll design some custom flair tailored specifically for you.

MORE INFORMATION

Note: If you did not create the gif yourself, you are not eligible for OC flair! Please remember to use the [OC] tag on your original creations if you want to receive custom flair.

Other subreddits you may enjoy:

created by syncretica community for
to anything interesting: news article, blog entry, video, picture...
message the moderators

MODERATORS

reddit is a source for what's new and popular online. vote on links that you like or dislike and help decide what's popular, or submit your own! learn more ›

2189
2190

JK Rowling's reaction to negative reviews of her new (non-Harry Potter) book (i.imgur.com)

submitted ago by nemoran

top 200 commentsshow all 295
sorted by:
best
best
top
new
hot
controversial
old

[–]exatorp 170 points171 points ago

It was a review by MICHIKO KAKUTANI. The woman hates almost everything she reads, and essentially gets paid for being a cunt.

[–]nemoran[S] 51 points52 points ago

Don't forget: she loves the word "limn"

[–]PancakeMonkeypants 47 points48 points ago

I hate pseudo-intellectuals who pick one word and act like geniuses for using it a lot since not everyone has heard of it.

[–]babysealsareyummy 62 points63 points ago

That is very hebetudinous of you sir or madam. Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to go pick up my black turtleneck from the haberdasher while scoffing at the capricious intellects of the simple knaves I pass along the way.

[–]Man_with_the_Fedora 21 points22 points ago

But is it a tactical turtleneck?

[–]babysealsareyummy 26 points27 points ago

Indeed. There is a special pocket where I can keep my Friedrich Nietzsche books to aid in impromptu masturbation.

[–]truncatedChronologis 11 points12 points ago

Masturbation! To Nietzsche perish the thought! Real intellectuals use Descartes.

[–]Ghost141 2 points3 points ago

Welcome to /r/nocontext

[–]PancakeMonkeypants 5 points6 points ago

I desperately want to play along but big words only ever come to me in context. My brain can't recall them at random. I was going to try and sarcastically call you out for misusing capricious but after some consideration I'd say it fits. I was then going to draw attention to your use of naive but I have no idea whether it can be used that way or not so I give up. You're a prestigious gent and I'm a big pile of dog shit.

[–]babysealsareyummy 11 points12 points ago

HOW DARE YOU QUESTION ME, I AM A RHODES SCHOLAR!!! (However, you have led me to realize the gut wrenching irony of spelling knaves as "naive".)

[–]PancakeMonkeypants 2 points3 points ago

Does it really constitute irony, though? What makes it ironic? I'm going to have to keep calling your bluffs lol.

[–]babysealsareyummy 12 points13 points ago

This will explain everything.

[–]PancakeMonkeypants 8 points9 points ago

Oh okay. Gotcha.

[–]namesrhardtothinkof 2 points3 points ago

It is an example of irony sharp enough to slay English knights.
Naive, to be simply innocent and/or ignorant of things. Believing his writing of "knaves" was "naive" was pretty naive of you.

[–]werferofflammen 0 points1 point ago

Why was your turtleneck at the hat maker's shop?

[–]babysealsareyummy 1 point2 points ago

Because I am so smart that my hat requires a turtleneck as well.

[–]Thelazychild 0 points1 point ago

BUT, BUT a haberdashery is a hat store.

[–]Finkster 0 points1 point ago

Oh, well in that case sir, I hope you will not object if I offer you my most enthusiastic contrafibularities.

load more comments (1 reply)

    [–]duxup 7 points8 points ago

    That is a cool word.

    [–]Kingslayer_ 7 points8 points ago

    But easily abused.

    [–]secretvictory 5 points6 points ago

    Jack limn

    [–]Kingslayer_ 4 points5 points ago

    Limn on the edge.

    [–]ahwoo32 2 points3 points ago

    Way to go out on a limn there

    [–]endchan300 0 points1 point ago

    Hmm. Sounds funny too. Limm. Limmmm.

    [–]duxup 0 points1 point ago

    Every word is easily abused. At least it is a cool word to abuse.

    [–]traviskwright 0 points1 point ago

    lemon?

    [–]AlexandertheHokage 18 points19 points ago

    So an in real life Rita Skeeter?

    [–]Kash87 5 points6 points ago

    I haven't read the article and I know nothing about this Michiko person you speak of but I already don't like her

    [–]jcasb 20 points21 points ago

    way to be brainwashed

    [–]itsasillyplace 3 points4 points ago

    "gets paid for being a cunt"

    Just an ordinary day at Fox News

    [–]exatorp 0 points1 point ago

    Aye.

    [–]Poontang_Saint 0 points1 point ago

    You can't spell MICHIKO KAKUTANI without C-U-N-T.

    [–]Babyrape_McMethlab 27 points28 points ago

    more than 500 pages of relentless socialist manifesto masquerading as literature.

              -the Daily Mail

    Man, I might just read it now.

    [–]TwistTurtle 4 points5 points ago

    If I were Rowling, that quote would take up half the front cover.

    [–]overdosebabyblue 4 points5 points ago

    As someone who grew up in the sort of home she's describing in this book, it's so friggin' powerful to read. It's like I'm reading about myself as a kid. Kudos to her for shining a spotlight on disadvantaged youth.

    [–]my_kingdom_for_a_nap 69 points70 points ago

    I am floored that they want 17.99 for an e-book. Crikey.

    [–]ImKindOfBlind 15 points16 points ago

    Really? I thought digital sales are suppose to be cheaper.

    [–]QueryingKiwi 3 points4 points ago

    Since the list price is round about $35, the digital copy is indeed cheaper.

    [–]ImKindOfBlind 4 points5 points ago

    Why is it so expensive? I like to have a hard copy in my hands but that is way too expensive for a book that is not a text book.

    [–]QueryingKiwi 6 points7 points ago

    Profit. Lots of it.

    [–]tim915 2 points3 points ago

    Most hardcover books are that much.

    [–]ImKindOfBlind 1 point2 points ago

    I must be used to buying books around 20 dollars.

    [–]tim915 0 points1 point ago

    I'm also in Canada though so that might make a difference. I often hve to debate when a new book comes out whether it's worth paying 35 now or waiting a year and paying like 9-12 dollars.

    [–]Lewke 25 points26 points ago

    Not cheap enough, not yet. Publishers and distributors are still greedy for profits.

    [–]ZuFFuLuZ 3 points4 points ago

    Depends on what you are reading. If you buy a book that was just released or is on the bestseller list, then it's going to be pricy.
    But if you read stuff that is not that popular or wait a little while, then the e-books are definitely cheaper. The prices drop faster, too.

    [–]Lewke 6 points7 points ago

    Distribution costs are now almost negligible compared to printed books. They're still marked up with horrendous profits when they've decreased in price substantially.

    load more comments (2 replies)

      [–]my_kingdom_for_a_nap 1 point2 points ago

      They definitely started out that way. The average book was $6-7. Now the average is $13-14. They advertise tons of books for less than $5, but only romance crap. I use Barnesandnoble.com and amazon.com.

      [–]ellveekay 3 points4 points ago

      £9 at Tesco, my friends.

      [–]my_kingdom_for_a_nap 3 points4 points ago

      ok...9 pounds at Tesco, plus round trip airfare to Europe (or where ever there's a Tesco..)...Maybe the 17.99 isn't that bad..lol!

      [–]Itchy_Back 1 point2 points ago

      This! When I can get a trade paperback for like 10 bucks plus tax, that is made from trees that had to be cut down and processed into paper, then printed on and bound, then shipped to retailers and still sold for a profit, I'm not really sure why I'm paying more for a string of numbers that costs them next to nothing to distribute.

      I guess it's cheaper than a hardcover, but I always figured hardcovers were more expensive because of the materials/printing process as well as the increased size during shipping, which wouldn't apply to ebooks.

      [–]boredlike 60 points61 points ago

      There's also been lots of positive reviews.

      [–]DrDebG 36 points37 points ago

      I was looking at the Amazon reviews, and the large number of 1-star (worst) reviews boil down to: (1) It's not Harry Potter, so screw her, and (2) It's too expensive as an ebook, so screw her.

      Not a single one of the bad reviews had actually, you know, read the book.

      [–]RedManDancing 24 points25 points ago

      What is the book's title? And what is it about? Haven't heard about it.

      [–]nemoran[S] 29 points30 points ago

      Here's the review that inspired the GIF: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/27/books/book-review-the-casual-vacancy-by-j-k-rowling.html?_r=0

      [–]PancakeMonkeypants 5 points6 points ago

      "Rowling wanted to try something totally different after spending a decade and a half inventing and complicating the fantasy world that Harry and company inhabited,"

      This woman is stupid. How is "complicating" appropriate there? It isn't. Not in that context. Complicating something is making it worse. Dumb bitch needs a thesaurus or something. She can't just decide what words mean because she thinks it sounds fancy.

      "This is definitely not a book for children: suicide, rape, heroin addiction, beatings and thoughts of patricide percolate through its pages;"

      Oh my fucking god that is not what percolate means. I fucking hate this woman so much.

      " The novel contains moments of genuine drama and flashes here and there of humor, but it ends on such a disheartening note with two more abrupt, crudely stage-managed deaths..."

      She then manages to partially spoil the ending as well. This woman is a piece of work. God damn.

      [–]KangarooLemonade 5 points6 points ago

      Instead of an appreciation for the courage, perseverance, loyalty and sense of duty that people are capable of, we are left with a dismaying sense of human weakness, selfishness and gossipy stupidity. Instead of an exhilarating sense of the mythic possibilities of storytelling, we are left with a numbing understanding of the difficulty of turning a dozen or so people’s tales into a story with genuine emotional resonance.

      I want to see her do Rules of Attraction next. "NO BUT WHY? EVERYTHING SHOULD BE HAPPY BECAUSE BOOKS."

      [–]Hominem -1 points0 points ago

      Complicating means making it complex.

      [–]PancakeMonkeypants 2 points3 points ago

      It has negative connotations attached too though. It's making something more complex but while also making it more confusing and convoluted.

      [–]Hominem 1 point2 points ago

      I guess it isn't a typical usage, but it is well established. Watch features, such as a stopwatch or moon dial, are called "complications". They make the watch batter yet more complex.

      [–]tribalether -1 points0 points ago

      Sure she's an unpleasant woman, but you're wrong on pretty much all counts. The use of complicate and percolate here are perfectly appropriate. I'm sure this must be really embarrassing for you, so I won't ask you to apologize for acting like a jackass.

      [–]PancakeMonkeypants 0 points1 point ago

      I'm not embarrassed because you simply stating that I'm wrong doesn't do shit for proving me wrong. You need to say why or you look like a jackass.

      [–]tribalether 0 points1 point ago

      "Complicate - Make (something) more difficult or confusing by causing it to be more complex."

      "Percolate (of information or an idea or feeling) - Spread gradually through an area or group of people."

      There are the definitions, you have to take it from here buddy. Apply yourself.

      Keep in mind that just because you don't "like" how she used the words doesn't mean that it isn't a proper way to use them, and it certainly doesn't mean that you should go one some childish tirade about how she's a "dumb bitch".

      [–]PancakeMonkeypants 0 points1 point ago

      Stop being a shithead. You know you are. Stahp. In that context she was looking on Harry Potter favorably, so saying Rowling was complicating the fantasy world isn't correct. That isn't what complicating means, you don't need to post definitions like a prick as if I'm an idiot. Stop acting like you're superior for your opinion, which happens to to wrong. As for percolate, it's not a word that can be applied like that. It's an active thing. An action verb I think it's called. It's not right. Trying to present yourself as some kind of scholarly, distinguished individual by using words improperly makes you look like a dumb bitch. That's why I said she's a dumb bitch, because she is.

      [–]tribalether -1 points0 points ago

      Who says something being more difficult or complex isn't positive in this context?

      If you are going to convince me that percolate is not appropriate you're going to have to do better than "I dunno man it's an action verb or something."

      It's funny how I'm the shithead when you're the one who's throwing around expletives like a 13 year old.

      [–]RedManDancing 4 points5 points ago

      Thanks a lot.

      [–]MrMagnetar 96 points97 points ago

      TL:DR version of the review: JK Rowling wrote Harry Potter. This isn't Harry Potter. I don't like it because it's not Harry Potter, which the author also wrote.

      [–]nemoran[S] 16 points17 points ago

      Too true.

      [–]KookyGuy 61 points62 points ago

      The Casual Vacancy. It's an adult novel.

      [–]AverageHero 12 points13 points ago

      So porn for ladies?

      [–]Wubbledaddy 68 points69 points ago

      No, it's a comedy, but it's an adult reading level.

      [–]AverageHero 40 points41 points ago

      Ah I see, as opposed to the potter books. Makes sense though, since the audience that probably started reading Harry Potter when it first came out are adults now.

      [–]reiverbell 16 points17 points ago

      i too read reddit

      [–]AverageHero 8 points9 points ago

      I don't get it.

      [–]jumpstartation 5 points6 points ago

      There was a post a few days ago about how the children that grew up reading Harry Potter have since aged enough to begin reading adult novels, hence the reason that J.K. Rowling wrote one of her own.

      [–]b3mus3d 6 points7 points ago

      And therefore the ONLY WAY SOMEBODY COULD THINK THAT NOW is if they read that post.

      [–]vfxDan 9 points10 points ago

      I know she's known for writing Harry Potter, but they need to stop calling it an adult novel because it's incredibly confusing and I'm sure a lot of people who are going to buy it to indulge in canonical Potter-porn are going to feel misled.

      [–]BigDaddy_Delta 2 points3 points ago

      well, it does includes some heavy stuff

      "This is set in a tiny English town and deals with politics,class struggle,poverty,drug use,child abuse,rape,self-mutilation, suicide, pedophilia,mental illness and other ugly realities."

      [–]headstory 0 points1 point ago

      That quote got me since I am writing a novel which actually does cover all those issues too, over the course of the whole series. But I wouldn't even read my own book if it was presented as bluntly as that, let alone someone else's. Goddammit.

      [–]curlygirl86 0 points1 point ago

      Actually, her editor forbade her from reading 50 Shades of Gray. Good man....

      [–]Imissyourgirlfriend2 -1 points0 points ago

      Harry Potter And The Search For More Money

      [–]GarenBushTerrorist 9 points10 points ago

      Because it is impossible to write and publish a book without being concerned about money.

      [–]Sasum 1 point2 points ago

      It will be released alongside with Spaceballs and the next History of the World.

      [–]Felipe_O 1 point2 points ago

      Featuring Hitler on Ice.

      [–]genzahg 610 points611 points ago

      Whereas the Harry Potter universe was as richly imagined and intricately detailed as Tolkien’s Middle Earth or L. Frank Baum’s Oz

      Hahaha. Yeah, no.

      EDIT: Before you downvote, read this. Rowling wrote a good story, but she can't touch Tolkien on intricacy.

      [–]PattyMcWagon 113 points114 points ago

      You're getting downvoted but I'm inclined to agree with you. The worlds Tolkien and Baum created were massive with huge books dedicated simply to lore and history with major books ending with appendixes and such. Harry Potter, while decently fleshed out, was nowhere near the size, scope and intricacy that Middle earth or the lands of Oz were.

      [–]splunge4me2 37 points38 points ago

      Absolutely. Tolkien fabricated a nearly complete English mythology by himself using Icelandic sagas and various other mythologies as source while inventing several coherent languages in the process. It's an amazingly complex and complete universe unto itself. Quite an amazing feat.

      [–]CaptLudwig 20 points21 points ago

      Not to mention that HP really isn't well thought out as that type of novel.

      While I think that the HP universe is definitely complex and imaginative, it doesn't provide the farther reaching explanations. I always thought it was odd that the rest of the wizarding world was mentioned but the ministry only seemed to have control over the UK, and Voldemort rose to power without any type of pressure from the rest of the wizarding world. Or how Hogwarts seemed to have an extremely small amount of students for a very large community.

      One could say I'm being too critical of a children's novel, but once you make the comparison to Tolkien's universe you see that HP is centralized around an event in a world whereas Tolkien's is about the world itself.

      [–]sentimentalpirate 6 points7 points ago

      Yeah, a lot of Harry Potter makes less sense the more you think about it, whereas LotR gains more and more meaning the deeper you get.

      [–]genzahg 0 points1 point ago

      That's how I think of it as well. Middle-Earth is completely thought out. Tolkien wrote the history for people and parts of the world that are never even mentioned in the books.

      To me, it seems Rowling pretty much wrote the background information for what she wrote in the books, and didn't go beyond that. Not much exists beyond what you see mentioned in the stories or side-books.

      [–]zhgtrees 0 points1 point ago

      So I'm a big HP fan and can clear up some things.

      1. The Ministry does only have control over the UK. The series is based in the UK, so it makes sense. They don't mention the rest of the wizarding world because it isn't relevant.

      2. There aren't that many powerful wizards. Yes, all wizards are capable of extraordinary power, but they are strictly regulated so that the muggles don't find out about them. Therefore, when a wizard like Voldemort comes around, they're able to gain lots of power quickly.

      3. There aren't that many wizards. I'm not sure where you get the idea that the wizarding community is very large. There are also probably other wizarding schools in the UK. Hogwarts is just the best. But once again, none of these need to be mentioned since they're not relavant.

      Not saying it touches Tolkien's universe at all, but it is very well planned with few holes.

      [–]khoury 2 points3 points ago

      There aren't that many powerful wizards. Yes, all wizards are capable of extraordinary power, but they are strictly regulated so that the muggles don't find out about them. Therefore, when a wizard like Voldemort comes around, they're able to gain lots of power quickly.

      This one sounds like a bit of a stretch. I probably would have made a comparison to Hitler and Isolationism, personally. It's not a problem until he's invading your territory.

      [–]Turbineblade666 51 points52 points ago

      I love Harry Potter with all my muggle heart. But yea, LotR pioneered fantasy adventure as we know it today. In fact, it's safe to assume Harry Potter would never have happened (or at least been as popular) if it wasn't for Tolkien's work.

      [–]Castellan_ofthe_rock 13 points14 points ago

      While I agree that the HP universe isn't quite up to the level of LotR, I really don't think that one can say that HP never would have happened without LotR. Tolkien didn't invent the fantasy genre.

      [–]Yazzeh 30 points31 points ago

      Not only did he not invent the fantasy genre, comparing their works is always a silly idea. The HP universe is still based on our world. It's just like an expansion pack to what we already know and understand. Building a whole secret world based on real life and making it good is very difficult.

      However, Tolkien invented a whole world, history, and various cultures from scratch.

      I find that HP is much more fun to read, while Tolkien is much more interesting to live in.

      [–]lonesoldier4789 7 points8 points ago

      Many of the staples of the fantasy genre were either invented or refined by Tolkien.

      load more comments (1 reply)

        [–]matsky 1 point2 points ago

        I think Harry Potter's success is more comparable to works by C. S. Lewis, or even writers like Enid Blyton (look up "boarding school stories"), than Tolkien. HP wasn't an original concept at all, but somehow all the right elements came together at the right time.

        [–]EasilyRemember 10 points11 points ago

        I've been a diehard Harry Potter fan (of the books, that is) since the first book came out, and I have no problem agreeing with you on this. Rowling's strength is in her descriptive writing, that allows the reader to really vividly imagine the settings and events, as well as to really connect with the main characters. She's no world builder though. Not that she didn't have some good ideas here and there, it's just that her wizarding world lacked the real subtle complexity that someone like Tolkein had. It's not really a criticism though; Tolkein approached his writing from a linguistic/historian perspective, and Rowling approaches her writing from a more descriptive narrative style.

        [–]piezeppelin 188 points189 points ago

        Wow, there are a lot of butthurt Harry Potter fans here.

        [–]rocketsurgery 212 points213 points ago

        For millions of people, trashing Harry Potter is like spitting on their childhood friends.

        [–]ChestyHammertime 68 points69 points ago

        Yeah, they taught me how to read, so I get pretty defensive, too.

        [–]RaichuALoveS0ng 120 points121 points ago

        So did books like the Bernstein Bears, doesn't make them on par with LotR.

        [–]ChestyHammertime 26 points27 points ago

        In terms of detail, no. But I never said it was. I just meant that those books mean something to a lot of people, and are responsible for one of the most reading-conscious generations in a long time.

        [–]robot_steve 64 points65 points ago

        Also, the LoTR books were written for adults, who can generally cope with pages droning on about the intricate detail of the landscape, the houses, the design of the clothing and armor, etc (which was a good thing to have for the movie). Most adults sadly can't handle it, because it's beyond their reading level. Tolkien was a professor of literature in the 50's-60's at Oxford, and as such, expected you had a college level (adult) reading acumen if you were reading those books, and colleges back then had large amounts of reading required and higher standards of literacy, which generally means you can absorb large amounts of detail. Reading Tolkien's books if you're not used to reading stuff like that, makes you a better reader and more literate, its like lifting weights for your brain. The story also pays off as well. It was freaking hard for me, but by the third book, I was practically cruising.

        Harry Potter books were written for children, especially at first, so they are more comparable to the Hobbit which is no easy read for a child either, both are meant to be challenging for a child's reading level.

        So yes, the Harry Potter books can't hold a candle to LoTR in detail, but it shouldn't, the first books were written for elementary to middle school aged children and reading levels, for which they are pretty advanced. Your average adult who has a 4th grade reading level (what newspapers are written in), so Harry Potter seems detailed perhaps to your average person.

        [–]namesrhardtothinkof 3 points4 points ago

        It was the weirdest feeling ever when I picked up a C.S. Lewis book and it turned out to be a discourse on literary discourse. A lot of children's writers were full-fledged professors and crotchety old men. It's surreal.

        [–]Yazzeh 10 points11 points ago

        I don't care how literate you are, fuck the Council of Elrond.

        [–]TehNumbaT 8 points9 points ago

        I love the books, but Tom fucking Bombadil can go shove all of middle-earth up his goddamn ass

        [–]khoury 18 points19 points ago

        Tom Bombadil is easily one of the coolest things about the books. In the context of the universe, he's set apart somehow and a total mystery. There's a background and understanding for almost everything else. If there's not explicit details, there's hints. Worst case scenario you can look at the Silmarillion. Tom Bombadil? Doesn't give a fuck about the ring. He can wear it. He can see you even when you wear it. It's nothing to him. Besides (or perhaps including?) Eru he may be the most powerful being in the LOTR universe. I love mysteries more than I could ever love the answers to them and Tom is the biggest mystery that the LOTR universe has to offer.

        [–]rainator 2 points3 points ago

        I remember reading the whole trilogy when i was twelve or thirteen in about a week..... so i think that comment may be slightly exaggerated, though that book isn't exactly the hungry caterpillar.

        [–]ChestyHammertime 11 points12 points ago

        I don't know that it's about reading level, but just ability to read through that much dry detail. I read them around that age as well, but some parts were just painful (Aragorn, Gimli, and Legolas traversing a field in the Two Towers, for instance, was ridiculous)

        [–]gggjennings 0 points1 point ago

        Dude that was my favorite part in the books haha the three of them hunting Orcs and fucking shit up in Rohan? Totally sick.

        [–]namesrhardtothinkof 3 points4 points ago

        When I was around thirteen I also speed-read through a lot of shit, but I've revisited a lot of it later and I realize that I missed like, almost everything. And I won't stop rereading the Hobbit until I get a good five layers of story.

        [–]robot_steve 2 points3 points ago

        It took me a month to read the Hobbit when I was that age. My guess would be though if it was that easy, you're probably British.

        The biggest issue for me though was reading British style English, the wording was strange and took me a while to make sense of it. Now reading the Queen's english is nothing, but it almost felt like I had to translate it into a manner of speaking I could understand when I first read it.

        [–]rainator 0 points1 point ago

        i am British, and it actually took me a lot longer than that to read the hobbit just a year or so earlier, is British English that different to American English? I've not noticed it from this side of the pond, but then again more books are probably written by americans.

        [–]khoury 0 points1 point ago

        I remember reading the whole trilogy when i was twelve or thirteen in about a week.

        Does anyone else remember that kid in elementary school that had to prove they were hot shit by speed reading everything, including out loud? Most people with a halfway decent reading level can speed read pretty fast while maintaining retention but who wants to read fiction that way? Take the time to enjoy the books you read, really soak them in and allow your mind to reflect on them as you go along. I read LOTR when I was thirteen or fourteen as well and I had grown so close to the characters that I shed tears when I finished the book.

        [–]td17pics 0 points1 point ago

        He was Professor of Anglo-Saxon, otherwise good post

        [–]robot_steve 0 points1 point ago

        I thought it was Anglo-Saxon literature? Like ancient stuff like Beowulf, etc.

        [–][deleted] ago

        [deleted]

        [–]Level_75_Zapdos 11 points12 points ago

        I read them when I was 12, about a year before the Fellowship was released in theaters. I didn't even know they would be making it into a movie; I just read them after my mom suggested it.

        To be fair, I've read books all my life. Not actually that many books, but I read pretty consistently. The Redwall books were my precursor to the Hobbit and LOTR :) After that, I read the Harry Potter books as they were released, Ender's Game, and just about every book in the Dune series (including the books by Herbert's son). Then His Dark Materials, the Coldfire trilogy, randomly read Siddhartha, Hitchhiker's Guide, and Small Gods, Wheel of Time, and Game of Thrones (about a year before the show was announced).

        I've been reading Malazan Book of the Fallen (just finished book 8!) for the past year and a half. Definitely the best series so far, even better than LOTR and Game of Thrones. Although it would probably cost a ludicrous amount of money to make it into a TV show, at least a couple hundred million dollars per season if they wanted to do it right. Like any series, Malazan BotF does have some minor weaknesses. Author Steven Erikson's writing can get a bit preachy at times, and the first book is a real challenge to get through, since he delves right into the story, leaving the reader slightly lost and overwhelmed for a little while. To be fair, each book gets better as the reader acquires more knowledge of the world and its inhabitants. The first book also doesn't take place at the beginning of the story, and there are many "flashbacks" scattered throughout the series. Despite the absolutely massive number of events and characters, I couldn't help but get invested in nearly all of them. Not only that, but Malazan has one of, if not the deepest and richest histories, with the conflicts and events intertwining beautifully. It really is the ultimate fantasy series (at least so far!).

        [–]swimshoe 3 points4 points ago

        Dude, I love Ender's Game, and Small Gods, although I have to admit I have yet read most of those books which you mentioned...

        [–]JamesBar 0 points1 point ago

        Why do you keep mentioning that you read something before the movie/tv show was announced? Is it really that bad when you read something because it became popular in another medium? What the actual fuck...

        [–]varietygamer 2 points3 points ago

        Try reading the wheel of time series.

        load more comments (2 replies)

          [–]TheSquidFromSpace -4 points-3 points ago

          You should probably read the history of The Hobbit and the LotR books if you think they were written entirely for adults.

          [–]sickboyy 4 points5 points ago

          Your comment in context with the original comment made it sound like you were arguing for the downvoters.

          edit: I'm sorry if this makes no sense... getting tired.

          [–]secretvictory 0 points1 point ago

          That big red dog and bunnicula fans have begun tearing at their hair and smearing feces with the affront.

          [–]TheFirstInternetUser 13 points14 points ago

          Some of us read more than one book growing up. Then we don't get so attached to one author.

          [–]SlumpBuster 4 points5 points ago

          my parents and my teachers taught me how to read

          load more comments (5 replies)

            [–]jgzman 5 points6 points ago

            Yea, but 'Not as intricate as Tolkien' isn't exactly a downvote, is it? There are entire campaign settings that aren't that intricate.

            [–]rocketsurgery 3 points4 points ago

            Yeah I was just speaking generally.

            load more comments (34 replies)

              [–]lukas8u 41 points42 points ago

              richly imagined? yes. Intricately detailed? no.

              [–]lordkabab 35 points36 points ago

              Intricacy != interest though. Goddam I get bored with Tolkien.

              [–]compto35 12 points13 points ago

              I've tried, and failed in three separate occasions to read the Silmarillion. That book—goddamn.

              [–]albinomike 9 points10 points ago

              I think the LotR trilogy is hard to get through during some parts, but the Silmarillion is horribly boring to me

              [–]compto35 14 points15 points ago

              It's like he wanted to establish canon back to the creation of Middle Earth, but instead of writing out all of the lore, he outlined it for anyone wanting to write fanfiction

              [–]gjallerhorn 4 points5 points ago

              My copy is sitting on my shelf somewhere, bookmark still stuck in the about 1/3 of the way through. Man, that is dense. I have trouble enough coming up with names for the few RPG characters I play in games, Tolkein makes up 50 names for the lineage of some elf-spirit dude that dies a paragraph after he is introduced. It like the Illiad.

              [–]compto35 0 points1 point ago

              I feel like it's the driest parts of the Bible's Old Testament and the works of Homer put together. I sometimes have a hard time remembering that it was eventually intended for commercial purposes as literature.

              [–]ReverendVerse 10 points11 points ago

              The Silmarillion is the height of Tolkien's work. I've read that book more times than I can count. There are many sections I can repeat, from memory.

              This is coming from a guy who is transcribing the book in Sindarin...

              [–]compto35 9 points10 points ago

              More power to you…I can't get into it. And that's with concerted effort to do so

              [–]FistOfFacepalm 5 points6 points ago

              Start further in, with the wars and shit. Then read the creation myth.

              [–]PriestmanX 2 points3 points ago

              Wars and shit ALWAYS get my attention.

              [–]ReverendVerse 0 points1 point ago

              People have done dissertations on the Nirnaeth Arnoediad alone.

              [–]ReverendVerse 0 points1 point ago

              I'll admit, the first two sections; Ainulindule and the Valaquenta are hard to get through the first time. Once you get past that and into the Elves killing one another, the wars, the love story of Beren and Luthien, and the sheer brilliance of the tragic Children of Hurin (my favorite story), the rise and fall (Akalabeth) of Numenor; it's a magical experience.

              [–]TehNumbaT 0 points1 point ago

              dude. that. is. awesome. do an AMA

              [–]ReverendVerse 0 points1 point ago

              I don't think there is enough to be said about that project, at least not enough for an AMA. Maybe when I'm done, which is going to be a while, because its being done, by hand, in tengwar calligraphy.

              [–]TehNumbaT 1 point2 points ago

              maybe not, but that is incredible

              [–]babada 1 point2 points ago

              Yeah, that book is hard to read. But the stories are amazing. It was the first book I read that was difficult to enjoy but totally worth the trouble.

              [–]TheReginator 1 point2 points ago

              Just listen to Blind Guardian's album "Nightfall in Middle Earth". The whole album tells the story in a non-boring, epic way. If you're lazy, here's one of the best songs.

              load more comments (2 replies)

                [–]genzahg 0 points1 point ago

                Oh, to be sure. Tolkien's work is nowhere near as accessible as Harry Potter.

                [–]blueasclepius 20 points21 points ago

                Richly imagined and intricately detailed, sure. However, I just couldn't get through Tolkien's works. The level of detail was far too much for me in the same way non-skippable, on-rails scenes in games make me feel. Personally? I don't look for detail in stories. I look for quality characters, quality dialogue, good story, and internal logic above all. In that order.

                [–]Achra 36 points37 points ago

                internal logic.

                The time turner. Oh you.

                [–]sentimentalpirate 2 points3 points ago

                Not to mention the wand lore in the last book that completely ignores a slew of duels in all the previous books, especially the constant expelliarmus-ing in Prisoner of Azkaban.

                [–]genzahg -1 points0 points ago

                The three Curses in Harry Potter really just ruined the magic system for me. Duels come down to who can cast Avadakedavra or Expelliarmus first.

                Dumbledore is really the only guy who uses actual, cool magic.

                [–]Bluelegs 5 points6 points ago

                Internal logic in harry potter. A series in which almost any plot-point can be explained as "a wizard did it"

                [–]OldAccWasCharlievil 6 points7 points ago

                "But what ab-"

                "A FUCKING WIZARD DID IT!"

                load more comments (1 reply)

                  [–]SillionL 2 points3 points ago

                  The LoTR novels are a bit like really, really great history textbooks that just so happen to have characters. I can respect the hell out of the LoTR universe, but the books are incredibly dull to me, as I can't exactly relate with a landscape.

                  But, some people enjoy that, and to each their own.

                  [–]fmsrttm 1 point2 points ago

                  And the Harry Potter books don't have seriously dull moments?

                  [–]fakyou 1 point2 points ago

                  Quality characters in Harry Potter:

                  Definitely not Harry

                  [–]kochipoik 6 points7 points ago

                  Personally, I dislike it when they put long winded songs/poems in books, especially in another language. Am I suppsed to read that?

                  [–]brtd90 10 points11 points ago

                  Then skip it...ya you lose some of the culture but it doesnt take away from the story

                  [–]kochipoik 4 points5 points ago

                  Oh I most definitely do skip it

                  [–]genzahg 0 points1 point ago

                  I'll admit, I do the same. I recognize that the poem is probably awesome and well-written, but if it's clear that it doesn't have any plot significance, I generally don't bother.

                  [–]YouKnowThatGuyWeKnow -3 points-2 points ago

                  So.Freaking.Annoying.

                  [–]hubbawubba 4 points5 points ago

                  I'll give her imagined, but detailed? No. I'm pretty sure Rowling hasn't written what amounts to a history textbook about her world (don't get me wrong here, I do love me some Silmarillion).

                  [–]genzahg 0 points1 point ago

                  Exactly. The wizarding world was an imaginative invention, as were many of the magic gadgets wizards used (though we encountered the majority of them in the Weasely household), and Quidditch of course.

                  I think that, because Harry Potter is likely their first exposure to the fantasy genre, a lot of people give Rowling credit for things she borrowed (not that that's a bad thing) from other stories. For example, almost all of the fantastical creature in her books are not of her creation.

                  [–]Amoral_Batman 5 points6 points ago

                  Have you read The Wheel of Time series?

                  [–]albinomike 1 point2 points ago

                  It's my favorite fantasy series, but the books don't spend a lot of time developing the locations, they spend more time on the character details. Not to say that the world isn't very large and detailed, just that Jordan seemed to be more interested in character development.

                  [–]genzahg 0 points1 point ago

                  YES. I'm re-reading it right now, actually, in preparation for the last book. I'm about to finish The Dragon Reborn.

                  I don't think any series will ever top WoT for me. The couple friends I have who also read the books can talk about them for hours.

                  [–]Amoral_Batman 0 points1 point ago

                  Im glad to hear that. I feel as though WoT doesnt get as much recognition as it deserves only because it came such a long time after Lord of the Rings.

                  You're very lucky to have a few friends with which you can discuss it. Most of my friends have read A song of Ice and Fire, and once you've read (ror are still reading) a long fantasy epic it's very hard to commit the time to yet another enormous world.

                  [–]Nevelos 0 points1 point ago

                  Well, hmmm. My problem with JK Rwoling writing has always been that she was too detailed. Detailed to the point where I wasn't able to create a fantasy on my own anymore while reading her books,

                  The Tolkien world had way more detail in the fact that the world was a lot larger than the HP world and not totally mapped out. That was Tolkiens strength and what make his books to the best books ever written, imo.

                  load more comments (18 replies)

                    [–]RICH_LITTLE 187 points188 points ago

                    romney when he doesn't get elected.

                    [–]Deagle_Shitter 92 points93 points ago

                    Bill Gates when Windows 8 flops

                    [–]om3n 129 points130 points ago

                    And right after he's done wiping his tears he'll donate the money to cure cancer.

                    [–]Deagle_Shitter 22 points23 points ago

                    Well he is worth hundreds, if not thousands, of times more than Mitt Romney.

                    [–]pfkninenines 5 points6 points ago

                    Probably less, actually. Hundreds, if you count his net worth as what his campaign says. Maybe ~40 times more if you include any assets such as trust funds or similar financial assets that don't get counted.

                    [–]Tenstone 0 points1 point ago

                    donate the tears*

                    [–]clarusdogcow 1 point2 points ago

                    Only the tear stained notes of Bill Gates can cure the cancers!

                    load more comments (1 reply)

                      [–]Turbineblade666 13 points14 points ago

                      Oprah when she gains weight.

                      [–]asshatnowhere 11 points12 points ago

                      when she gains more weight

                      [–]eak125 4 points5 points ago

                      You do realize that Bill Gates

                      1. Doesn't work at Microsoft anymore
                      2. Has nothing to do with windows since 2008 - his last official day At M$
                      3. Would rather that you place blame on Balmer - as it's his company now.

                      [–]choc_is_back 0 points1 point ago

                      Not even an advisory role on the board or something?

                      [–]eak125 1 point2 points ago

                      Upon further research, he no longer is day to day at M$ but has the title "Non-Executive Chairman". So I guess if he walked in and said, shit needs to change, people would have to at least take it under advisement...

                      [–]DaveDrevello 20 points21 points ago

                      I like this much better than reposting this gif in 5 days under that title. Let's run with this whole posting alternate titles in the comments thing!

                      [–]vfxDan 10 points11 points ago

                      It was already posted with that title a week or two ago.

                      [–]TheFirstInternetUser 11 points12 points ago

                      Well, that just let all the air out of that marching band, didn't it?

                      [–]OfThriceAndTen 1 point2 points ago

                      perfect.

                      [–]drunk_polish_girl 0 points1 point ago

                      Me when I get rich and don't give a shit...

                      load more comments (9 replies)

                        [–]FuckingTornadoes 14 points15 points ago

                        Checking all the poor customer reviews on amazon it's just a lot of retards that are pissed that it's not a Harry Potter novel or were upset with the price.

                        [–]OpenSecret 12 points13 points ago

                        <insert rich person here> reaction to <insert negative criticism here>

                        [–]secretvictory 5 points6 points ago

                        rampart

                        [–]Shnifty 11 points12 points ago

                        Oh gawd I guess the rampart ship has sailed. Thanks for taking the hit man.

                        [–]secretvictory 6 points7 points ago

                        Ouch. Reddit is a fickle mistress, I guess.

                        [–]ij00mini 1 point2 points ago

                        Well his comment wasn't really clever. If he had done something with the meme even remotely requiring thought, he may have gotten some upvotes.

                        [–]secretvictory 0 points1 point ago

                        I guess you do not look at usernames. My point was to beat someone to the punch. Just say it directly and thusly step on the toes of those that would make a joke based on that.

                        [–]ij00mini 0 points1 point ago

                        Ok.

                        [–]Freeroot 1 point2 points ago

                        That reminds me, did anyone actually see rampart? If so, how was it?

                        [–]ahaltingmachine 2 points3 points ago

                        I really enjoyed it, regardless of the AMA "scandal".

                        [–]scandinavian_ 0 points1 point ago

                        Yep, liked it a whole lot.

                        load more comments (3 replies)

                          Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy. © 2012 reddit inc. All rights reserved.

                          REDDIT and the ALIEN Logo are registered trademarks of reddit inc.

                          π Rendered by PID 16154 on app-127 running c5030b6.