43 KiB
Worm Reread and Discussion Group
-
Author: u/None *
-
URL:
-
Score: 23
-
Created: 2017-11-13T14:27:45
Post:
[deleted]
Comments:
u/Shovah32 [+21] (8 minutes later)
Checking out the relevant We've Got Worm episode after each arc might do close enough to what you're asking. Great podcast, and could be finished by the time you make your way through the story again (they're on Arc 26 right now, one episode per week).
u/HeckDang [+3] (an hour later)
Yep, I've been thinking of doing the same. What kind of pace are you thinking of setting?
u/None [+1] (2 hours later)
[deleted]
u/HeckDang [+5] (2 hours later)
Hmm. I was thinking you were going to be posting like, a weekly/daily discussion post on reddit somewhere covering consistent chunks of the story, here or /r/Parahumans or somewhere else. That's how I've seen community rereads of things go before.
u/mightykushthe1st [+1] (2 hours later)
I would be totally ok with this. There's large parts of work I can't remember at all, so having people to read and discuss major plot developments with would be really helpful.
u/absolute-black [+3] (4 hours later)
I'm about halfway through a reread right now for not-Ward reasons, and it's already making Ward interludes and such more interesting to me
u/Iconochasm [+1] (6 hours later)
I'm in.
u/ben_oni [-10] (6 hours later)
I've actually just started reading Worm for the first time. I tried reading it a while back and couldn't get into it. Doing better this time. Some basic thoughts:
Why is it called Worm instead of Parahumans?
It sure looks derivative. I've seen these tropes somewhere before. This is just another take on The Incredibles, isn't it?
I really hate Taylor. I'm taking Emma's side on this one. I mean, how can the girl make such consistently bad decisions all the time? She's just a waste of human flesh.
Tattletale, on the other hand, is awesome! We're getting married. As soon as I figure out how.
Why Arcs? Each Arc would be a Chapter in any other book! Why it have to be all hipster?
u/xaxidk [+20] (7 hours later)
Why is it called Worm instead of Parahumans?
The author, Wildbow, likes 4 letter titles. Worm, Twig, Pact, Ward. The title also makes more sense towards the end but it's mostly a stylistic choice.
It sure looks derivative. I've seen these tropes somewhere before. This is just another take on The Incredibles, isn't it?
I'm guessing you haven't read much of the story yet. It starts as a standard teenager-cum-superhero story in the first couple arcs but eventually goes off the rails in a very big way.
I really hate Taylor. I'm taking Emma's side on this one. I mean, how can the girl make such consistently bad decisions all the time? She's just a waste of human flesh.
Eh, I think a bunch of readers here somewhat empathize (hence the debates about whether Worm is 'rational' or not), but it gets better.
Why Arcs? Each Arc would be a Chapter in any other book! Why it have to be all hipster?
Worm is 1.7 million words long. That's 8.5x longer than Moby Dick. Arcs are not chapters; breaking the entire story into arcs makes sense.
u/ben_oni [+0] (4 days later)
The author, Wildbow, likes 4 letter titles. Worm, Twig, Pact, Ward. The title also makes more sense towards the end but it's mostly a stylistic choice.
That's a really bad reason. But okay.
I'm guessing you haven't read much of the story yet. It starts as a standard teenager-cum-superhero story in the first couple arcs but eventually goes off the rails in a very big way.
I'm in Arc 10, and it hasn't really gone off the rails in any significant manner; at least, not as far as the Hero's Journey goes. (I feel like I've been using that term a lot in this thread when talking about Worm. Is that even the right paradigm in which to be thinking about Taylor?)
Eh, I think a bunch of readers here somewhat empathize (hence the debates about whether Worm is 'rational' or not), but it gets better.
I dislike it when the protagonist carries the idiot-ball. And that's been Taylor since Chapter 1. I gather this sub has similar feelings about hero's who make bad choices simply because the plot demands it.
Worm is 1.7 million words long. That's 8.5x longer than Moby Dick. Arcs are not chapters; breaking the entire story into arcs makes sense.
I... am coming around on this. The length of each chapter has been getting longer, and they are starting to include scene-breaks. They're feeling more like real chapters. The early Arcs really did seem like little more than elongated chapters.
u/foxtail-lavender [+2] (7 days later)
(I feel like I've been using that term a lot in this thread when talking about Worm. Is that even the right paradigm in which to be thinking about Taylor?)
Nope, but it explains why you’re critically misreading the story.
I dislike it when the protagonist carries the idiot-ball. And that's been Taylor since Chapter 1. I gather this sub has similar feelings about hero's who make bad choices simply because the plot demands it.
So you dislike characters with complex motivations and mentalities who don’t always pick le rational option every time? That’s all well-written book characters. Reading must be a chore.
I... am coming around on this.
And that ellipsis tells me everything. You don’t want to give this story a chance. You can’t even admit that you were wrong about how the author formatted his own work. That’s not rationality, that’s just pettiness.
u/ben_oni [+1] (7 days later)
You wouldn't happen to be a fanboy, would you? Because I'm sensing hostility from you. In one post you managed to impugn my reading comprehension skills, my taste, and my character. You sure seem to have discovered a lot about me just from a few of my observations.
u/foxtail-lavender [+2] (7 days later)
No, I am definitely not a fanboy.
I can recognize bad-faith reading and inaccurate application of tropes/narrative tools, though. And yes, when you have made comments regarding your own comprehension of a written text, your personal taste, and your own opinions, it is very easy to make judgments of all three.
u/foxtail-lavender [+2] (7 days later)
No, I am definitely not a fanboy.
I can recognize bad-faith reading and inaccurate application of tropes/narrative tools, though. And yes, when you have made comments regarding your own comprehension of a written text, your personal taste, and your own opinions, it is very easy to make judgments of all three.
u/Nuero3187 [+13] (7 hours later)
How is it another take on The Incredibles? The only thing they have in common is superheroes, and maybe both being subversions, but even that's stretching it.
Worm predates MHA if I remember correctly... Yeah 2011-2013, as opposed to MHA starting in 2014. Also, it isn't centered around a superhero high school, which differentiates it from both MHA and Sky High. That's not even getting into the tonal differences between them all. I haven't heard of Steelheart Reckoners, so I can't really comment on any similarities.
As for why its called Worm... there are a variety of reasons for that that are spoilers, but if you're at Tattletale I can at least tell you this much. A Worm is a contemptible person, a weakling. To "worm" is to maneuver yourself into a position of power. Also, worms are something she can control.
No idea why its arcs though.
u/liquidmetalcobra [+12] (8 hours later)
To be fair, The Incredibles does attempt to explore superheroes in the context of society instead of ignoring it. When Mr. Incredible causes massive amounts of property damage in the first scene, he (rightfully) gets prosecuted for that. When other super heroes get caught abusing their powers, the public backlash is enough to eventually force the government to ban usage of powers. It even goes so far as to invent some jobs as a result of the powers, such as Edna's super costume profession.
Now, the Incredibles isn't comprehensive or even rational, but it's pretty interesting for a kid's movie.
u/alexanderwales [+17] Time flies like an arrow (11 hours later)
They're coming at it in opposite directions. The Incredibles is asking "what would be the consequences of superheroes actually existing in the world?" while Worm is asking "given that there are superheroes in the world, what needs to be true to justify their existence?".
u/liquidmetalcobra [+4] (13 hours later)
That's... a bit unfair. While there are some things that do feel like bullshit handwaves to justify the superhero conceit (passengers, contessa, simurgh) there is also a lot of world building that examined some of the consequences of superheroes. Things such as the existence of rogues using powers for entertainment (Canary), scientists examining powers and their implications (arc 9ish) and the massive efforts the PRT puts towards pr (merchandising, limiting collateral damage, etc).
u/alexanderwales [+7] Time flies like an arrow (13 hours later)
That's not meant to be unfair, or a ding on Worm, that just seems like the way the world and its concepts were created to me. I don't think there's anything wrong with saying "I want a space opera, how can I have that make sense" and then searching for the least number of changes I'd have to make to explain the setting.
u/liquidmetalcobra [+7] (15 hours later)
Sure, I was probably reading too much into your statement. Nevertheless, there is plenty of world building that explores the consequences of the existence of capes rather than justifying it.
u/ben_oni [+0] (14 hours later)
I haven't heard of Steelheart Reckoners
It's another superpower deconstruction story. In this particular subversion, supervillains begin appearing, but no superheroes. An entirely different take on the genre, but still feels similar enough to be worth mentioning. I'm sure there are many other (better) examples that I'm not familiar with. And yes, I'm aware that it (also) post-dates Worm.
u/Zephyr1011 [+4] Potentially Unfriendly Aspiring Divinity (a day later)
In what ways do you think it's derivative/overly similar? I've read and enjoyed both, but consider them incredibly different works, beyond having the same base of "there are people with superpowers".
u/ben_oni [-1] (a day later)
I was thinking about the modern trend of superhero/superpower deconstruction stories. While superhero stories go back a long ways, I'm not looking at anything by Marvel or DC that plays the tropes straight (actually, I probably should mention Watchmen, though it's not really part of this trend). I should add Megamind as a supervillain deconstruction to the list as well. I included Steelheart because it does deconstruct (and subvert) the superpower tropes.
u/None [+9] (a day later)
[deleted]
u/ben_oni [+2] (a day later)
To be fair, Worm is starting to grow on me. As of this writing, I'm on Interlude 7. It still hasn't gone anywhere, but... well, I'm still reading.
like calling Harry Potter derivative
Matilda and Jane Eyre are obvious inspirations. Granted, Harry Potter is a watershed in its own right, but arguing that it's not derivative is like saying Star Wars wasn't derivative. Of course it was, but, like Harry Potter, it was so flawlessly executed that it also became a new source of inspiration for future generations. I hesitate to say the same of Worm.
u/None [+4] (a day later)
Well let's talk after you finish it. I feel like your points are valid, and you're just looking at it from a different perspective.
This is a subreddit that mostly likes Worm for various reasons, so I feel like your points come off as bashing to some. While I'm sure that isn't the case, you are operating from a limited perspective, insofar that you don't have all the info about the setting etc.
Sidenote, what you are reading is really a draft, and Wildbows first work. His writing, pacing etc all improved from then, which might or might not be relevant to you.
u/Noumero [+4] Self-Appointed Court Statistician (2 days later)
Wildeboobs
I don't think using this meme outside of r/parahumans^1 is a good idea, especially when discussing Worm with someone whose opinion on it is undecided-leaning-negative.
^(1. And r/wormfanfic, the pedant in me wants to note.)
u/None [+1] (3 days later)
I thought he has an alert system set up for pings
u/Noumero [+3] Self-Appointed Court Statistician (3 days later)
Only Reddit's default one, as far as I'm aware. It would only work if you write "/u/Wildbow", as opposed to simply "Wildbow".
u/None [+2] (3 days later)
Ah, I see. My bad, didn't wanna ping him for no reason
u/Noumero [+3] Self-Appointed Court Statistician (3 days later)
If I recall correctly, it did work the way you feared in r/parahumans' IRC: a user's name without any tags would ping the user there. That's where this meme came from, so there's that.
Also, if you want to live dangerously and scare r/parahumans' frequenters, you could write his username this way:
\/u/Wildbow. It would look so: /u/Wildbow — and make it seem like you should have pinged him, but didn't.Alternatively, for maximum evil, do it this way:
[u/Wildbow](https://www.reddit.com/user/wildbow/)Looks so: u/Wildbow. Is an actual hyperlink to Wildbow's page. Doesn't ping him.
Mwahaha.
u/None [+2] (4 days later)
You are the best kind of evil.
u/Zephyr1011 [+2] Potentially Unfriendly Aspiring Divinity (a day later)
I think if you're bothered by having read other works which try to deal with the superhero genre in new ways, then fair enough that's just your preferences. Since Worm is definitely about dealing with the superhero genre in new ways.
But personally I don't consider that at all to be a negative point for Worm, because I think it deals with the superhero genre in a really interesting and new way I haven't seen elsewhere. And I think I'd describe it as more of a reconstruction of the superhero genre than a deconstruction, taking many hallmarks of the genre and trying to create a world where those make sense and follow from the world's own internal logic.
u/ben_oni [+0] (a day later)
I'm not bothered by the familiarity of Worm's tropes. I read fanfiction explicitly because I want that familiarity. What baffles me is all the love it gets around here when it isn't really bringing anything new to the table. The tropes may be new to you, but I've seen then again, and again, and again. I know it's not fair to Worm when some of those sources post-date it, but maybe that should be a warning to wildbow to hurry up and find a publisher before Worm becomes unpublishable.
u/Zephyr1011 [+7] Potentially Unfriendly Aspiring Divinity (a day later)
How far are you into Worm? I completely disagree that it brings nothing new to the table, though from what I recall it doesn't differentiate itself that much in the first few arcs.
u/ben_oni [-2] (a day later)
As I've said elsewhere, I'm at Interlude 7, at the moment. That might not change for a bit. If it's just going to do the hero's journey thing, I'll probably get bored. I'm hoping it gets all twisty and loops around on itself -- goes off the rails, so to speak. The fact that the sequel is called Ward... isn't exactly a positive sign.
u/SharksPwn [+8] (a day later)
As I've said elsewhere, I'm at Interlude 7, at the moment.
Friend. Brother. Person I have no idea and am rather annoyed at the moment for dismissing Worm off-hand for rather insignificant reasons. Read the literal next chapter. Just skim it, if you have to.
u/Zephyr1011 [+6] Potentially Unfriendly Aspiring Divinity (a day later)
Prioritising Oathbringer is, of course, entirely reasonable because it's (hopefully) amazing. I think there's decent odds that you'll like Worm when you return to it though, or at least not dislike it for the reason of following the hero's journey in a dull standard way.
Oh, and Taylor is not the main character of the sequel. It's called Ward for utterly unrelated reasons.
u/ben_oni [+0] (a day later)
It's called Ward for utterly unrelated reasons.
Oh? I assumed it was because it was a four-letter-word.
u/tmthesaurus [+4] (a day later)
If it's just going to do the hero's journey thing, I'll probably get bored.
Could you explain how what you've seen thus far matches the Hero's Journey? I'm just not seeing it, but it could be because I'm using future knowledge.
u/ben_oni [+1] (2 days later)
It matches pretty well, so far. Understand of course, that the Hero's Journey is broad enough to encompass most stories, and I fully expect Worm to follow the pattern: I just hope for more than that.
A character is in a zone of comfort,
But they want something.
They enter an unfamiliar situation,
Adapt to it,
Get what they wanted,
Pay a heavy price for it,
Then return to their familiar situation,
Having changed.
Since I'm only at Arc 8, I can't say where exactly to line up the pieces. They may very well line up multiple times. For Taylor, her school situation was a familiar routine, from which she admitted she was finding excuses to deviate from. Living with the Undersiders may also qualify as a zone of comfort, from which she doesn't want to deviate. Chapter 6.09, she resists leaving, then in 7.12, she finally makes that decision. And... since that's where I'm at, I can't really say more on that.
u/RavensDagger [+2] (2 days later)
A character is in a zone of comfort,
-Okay, more or less. I wouldn't call her school life comfort, but it was familiar.
But they want something.
-Definitely.
They enter an unfamiliar situation,
-She does.
Adapt to it,
-More or less. Not so much adapts as escalates faster than any one else.
Get what they wanted,
-Hahahaha! Someone in Worm getting what they want? No, that... that just will not happen.
I can see how you might interpret Worm as following the tropes of the Hero's Journey, but this isn't a story about a hero-like protagonist, this is the story of a girl doing the wrong things for the right reasons. It goes off the rails hard and fast and often.
u/THEHYPERBOLOID [+1] (2 days later)
So... Interlude 7? The next arc is what hooked me.
u/muns4colleg [+5] (2 days later)
It sure looks derivative. I've seen these tropes somewhere before. This is just another take on The Incredibles, isn't it?
All but one of those works are predated by Worm by years. And Sky High is a flipping comedy.
Besides, it's weird to call something just another take on the Incredibles, when by this logic you can call the Incredibles another take on literally any other superhero property because superheroes are the most derivative genre in existence to the point that criticizing superhero works for being derivative is completely pointless. You might as well complain that all the crackers in a box of Ritz all look the same.
I really hate Taylor. I'm taking Emma's side on this one. I mean, how can the girl make such consistently bad decisions all the time? She's just a waste of human flesh.
Wait, so you side with Emma. Meaning that because Taylor doesn't make optimal decisions she deserves to be bullied and socially ostracized by her peers? Da fuq?
u/ben_oni [+0] (2 days later)
You might as well complain that all the crackers in a box of Ritz all look the same.
They do all look the same! It's such a rip off. I mean, look, you wouldn't get two socks that were exactly the same, would you? At least animal crackers try to mix it up a bit.
All but one of those works are predated by Worm by years. And Sky High is a flipping comedy.
Besides, it's weird to call something just another take on the Incredibles, when by this logic you can call the Incredibles another take on literally any other superhero property because superheroes are the most derivative genre in existence to the point that criticizing superhero works for being derivative is completely pointless.
So, I'm not really criticizing Worm here, which a lot of people seem to have taken my remarks as. But I have seen these tropes a lot. Stories in which superpowers spontaneously appear? Check. Stories in which superheroes are regulated? Yes. Stories of kids just getting powers? Uh huh. In particular, all the works I listed are other deconstructions of the superpower tropes. The earliest such work I'm familiar with is The Incredibles. If there is an earlier one, I'd be interested in hearing about it. And I know some of them post-date Worm, which isn't fair to Worm, but I was aware of them first. The real question in all of this is what does Worm bring to the table that is unique?
Wait, so you side with Emma. Meaning that because Taylor doesn't make optimal decisions she deserves to be bullied and socially ostracized by her peers?
Does she deserve the bullying? No, of course not. But she's not doing anything to stop it, either. If you've ever dealt with bullying, you'll know she's doing exactly the wrong things to make it stop. And from Emma's perspective, she might not even realize that what she's doing is wrong. It's just something that's built up over time, each step feeling like the right thing to do. Taylor on the other hand? She was presented with a straight-up choice, and she decided to become a supervillain.
u/Noumero [+1] Self-Appointed Court Statistician (2 days later)
The real question in all of this is what does Worm bring to the table that is unique?
That would be telling. As multiple people have pointed out, next Arc is going to show you one notable feature, but in regards to worldbuilding... Well, it's not going to come into play for quite some time yet, so read the following if you don't get hooked upon finishing Arc 8: Worm | very vague worldbuilding/plot spoiler
If that's not enough: Worm | much less vague worldbuilding/plot spoiler
u/ben_oni [+1] (2 days later)
Okay, so you haven't read Sanderson's Reckoners. I am aware that it post-dates Worm, but it has at least been published.
u/Noumero [+1] Self-Appointed Court Statistician (3 days later)
I indeed didn't, but going from the summary... Hm. Finish Worm's Arc 8, then give me your overall opinion on the story and where it is heading; if you still don't like it by then, I'll tell you more spoilers.
u/ben_oni [-1] (3 days later)
I finished Arc 8. Combined with the fact the next "Arc" is an extended interlude, this feels like the end of the first volume. I can almost see a flashing neon sign saying "End of Part 1".
The Endbringer looks like a Diabolus ex Machina, (followed by a Deus ex Machina when Scion arrives). As for Taylor's decision at the end (whatever it is), it looks like she's just planning to do the Hero Thing of taking a crappy world and trying to make it better. I don't expect that to go particularly well, but I do expect that she'll learn a great deal about how the world works in the process of trying.
The most interesting part, as far as worldbuilding goes, was Miss Militia's interlude, and her recollection of her trigger event. I get that powers come from somewhere, and while not all of these stories explore that, this isn't exactly new ground. In fact, most superhero stories (when played straight) include an origin story. I would be surprised if Worm deviates from the established pattern and didn't explore where powers come from.
So, Scion, the Endbringers, and the Source of Powers. Those are the three big questions, right? I stand by my initial assessment: this is all very familiar territory.
u/Noumero [+2] Self-Appointed Court Statistician (3 days later)
The Endbringer looks like a Diabolus ex Machina, (followed by a Deus ex Machina when Scion arrives
Well, you did want the story to go off the rails. Doesn't dropping a rock on the city counts?
Regarding Scion, I don't think his appearance could be called a Deus ex Machina, since waiting for him was explicitly mentioned as a frequent Endbringer fight strategy. It wasn't unexpected, for the characters or for the readers.
Scion, the Endbringers, and the Source of Powers. Those are the three big questions, right? I stand by my initial assessment: this is all very familiar territory.
Granted, I suppose it would all be, ah, "derivative", if you're using such a broad and acausal definition of this term. But if you liked the content about the Source in Miss Militia's interlude despite this, or if you liked, say, related sections of The Reckoners, you'll most likely like Worm's take on the topic very much.
That said, the concepts wouldn't be completely unfamiliar, and your opinion on Taylor probably isn't going to change, if it hasn't already. That given, decide for yourself.
... Or you could list what you like/dislike about the story and I could say whether there's more/less of it further ahead.
u/tak08810 [+1] (3 days later)
I'm not familiar with all the stories you linked, but I'll tell you that what makes Worm unique to me is it actually explains and gives reasoning how a scenario that's found in superhero works of fiction could actually occur. It answers questions like: Why can't people with powers just chill? Why do they have to fight all the time? Why don't the super powerful heroes (Eidolon, Panacea etc) just take over the world? Why are there even Endbringers that exist? Why don't they destroy the world? Why doesn't Scion just kill them? It actually answers those questions (I think some of them have already been answered or hinted at for you) in creative ways. For example, the Endbringers are at this point Diabolus ex Machinas but I am so sure you have no idea as to their actual origins or purpose.
Also, I personally find the powers in Worm extremely creative and how they use it. Night (the cloak, flashbang, smoke grenade) and Oni Lee are the best examples of this early on. Are there other examples of works that utilize creative powers effectively like that?
u/ben_oni [+1] (3 days later)
Are there other examples of works that utilize creative powers effectively like that?
Anything by Sanderson, really. He is in fact doing all of these things you talk about, constantly deconstructing (and reconstructing) fantasy settings. I imagine that's one of the reasons he's linked on this sub's wiki.
For example, the Endbringers are at this point Diabolus ex Machinas but I am so sure you have no idea as to their actual origins or purpose.
Well, more like they're an invocation of Chandler's Law; the plot wasn't going anywhere useful, so wham. Coil's interlude suggests this may not exactly be the case, but I don't have enough information yet.
u/tak08810 [+1] (3 days later)
Fair enough, I haven't read Reckoners (which came out after Worm right?). I have read Mistborn (and Wheel of Time if that counts at all, and I will say that I think Wildbow is a better writer and far superior at character development based on my limited experience with Sanderson thus far. Mistborn is fairly simple bad vs evil, whereas pretty much all the characters are, to an almost frustrating degree, shades of gray in Worm. For example, I think it's funny you love Tattletale so much when a lot of people passionately hate her and find her a smug, unnecessarily manipulative bitch (but maybe it's because you're still so early on in the story).
Also, overall I find Steven Erikson and especially George RR Martin (who actually arguably overdoes it) far better and more focused on deconstructing fantasy tropes.
I will say I do feel that Sanderson and Wilbow give me a sort of similar feel with their writing. One of the main things, and this is a personal one, is that both of them seem to have zero issues with writing extremely graphic, gut wrenching violence but they completely refuse to even get PG-13 with sexual content. Off the top of my head I can't think of any other authors who do that. Sanderson obviously does it because of his religious leanings, and I have my own, private theories towards why Wildbow does it, but it's really just a personal issue I've come to accept since I'm a very sexual person myself and I consider sex extremely important and wish people were more comfortable about it, especially in America.
But again, I would be really interested in your thoughts when you finally find out what the Endbringers actually are and their motivation.
u/ben_oni [+1] (4 days later)
Reckoners (which came out after Worm right?)
It was actually published first. Because Worm hasn't been published. I'm getting really annoyed that people feel the need to point out that Worm was "written" first. If I said that Worm was derivative, there'd be a point there (I said it a derivative of The Incredibles, which I stand by).
and Wheel of Time if that counts at all
It does not, that was Robert Jordan. Sanderson took his job to mean he needed to mimic the existing style, so it's not really fair to attribute it to him as an example of how he writes.
Mistborn is fairly simple bad vs evil, whereas pretty much all the characters are, to an almost frustrating degree, shades of gray in Worm.
You realize you're coming off as a fanboy now, right? Before you were defending Worm as an example of characters using their abilities in creative ways, but now it's that the characters are complex shades of gray. If you'd like, I can counter with authors that do that better...? Regardless, a work does not need to be defended against other works. In this context, they're just different examples. It's not like we're handing out writing awards.
I think it's funny you love Tattletale so much when a lot of people passionately hate her and find her a smug, unnecessarily manipulative bitch
Maybe because I'm a smug, manipulative, condescending jerk myself. I can relate.
overall I find Steven Erikson and especially George RR Martin (who actually arguably overdoes it) far better
I tried reading Steven Erikson... I'll probably try again in a few years. I thought Martin's writing was trash. That was maybe... 10 years ago? Read A Game of Thrones, and thought it was vile. Was surprised when HBO thought it was worth making a show of. More on that later.
zero issues with writing extremely graphic, gut wrenching violence but they completely refuse to even get PG-13 with sexual content
So... violence and sex are different things. The fact that both will earn a movie a PG-13 (or R) rating is irrelevant. When writing a romance story, sex is kinda relevant. Neither of these writers is doing that. When writing action stories, violence is rather relevant. Both of these authors are doing that. Asking for sex in an action story... just why?
I consider sex extremely important and wish people were more comfortable about it, especially in America.
... you've lived a very sheltered life, yes? The 70's are thattaway --->
I'll tackle this from the perspective of movies, having seen quite a few. Sex is kinda central to The Graduate, but showing it would add nothing to the show. The fact that it happened and how it changes the characters is what's important. Turning the movie into a skin-flick would do nothing. Or how about Psycho, with its famous shower scene? No nudity, because it wasn't needed; the scene couldn't be more famous if it did show more skin (it would probably be less well known, in my opinion).
Let me arbitrarily divide an audience into two: those intimately familiar with sex, and those who are not. For those who are, writing about and showing depictions of sex is unnecessary. They can fill in the blanks on their own. "Sex goes here" is sufficient. For the other audience, depictions of sex is actively harmful. It skews their expectations, warps their sense of what is normal, and may even make them feel inadequate.
So when HBO picked up Game of Thrones and decided to focus on sex and nudity, I just have to shake my head. It's shameless pandering to the basest desires of their fans. It's little more than porn. It's porn.
u/tak08810 [+1] (4 days later)
I'm getting really annoyed that people feel the need to point out that Worm was "written" first.
Cause it's honestly bizarre to me you're using new works as an example of how Worm is unoriginal, it'd be like saying Kurosawa's Hidden Fortress is unoriginal because Star Wars exists. Yes Worm isn't published but I'm confused about your fixation on that especially considering you stated you have a strong interest in fanfiction.
If I said that Worm was derivative, there'd be a point there (I said it a derivative of The Incredibles, which I stand by
I don't really see that other than in the broadest stroke, but perhaps that's because you're so early on in the story. For example, you think the government regulates the superheroes in Worm? With the arguable exception of a few other countries, it's absolutely the other way around. There's so many differences in The Incredibles - The kids didn't just get their powers and aren't the focus of the story, there's no focus on how or why characters have super powers, the super powers are relatively cliche and not used that creatively, and most importantly superheroes actually are able to just live peacefully, which if you'll keep reading, will find out is literally impossible in Worm.
You realize you're coming off as a fanboy now, right? Before you were defending Worm as an example of characters using their abilities in creative ways, but now it's that the characters are complex shades of gray
First off, I won't deny that I probably count as a Worm fanboy. I'm not a fanatic and I think people do overhype it up, and honestly it's not as super original as some people paint it as, but I think you also have some bias against the work considering and that you're actively looking for cliches and tropes rather than trying to enjoy the work. I made those comments on Mistborn just to explain why I find Worm a superior work in general, but also because I was surprised you cite Sanderson as an example of someone who's deconstructing fantasy tropes on a level above Wildbow. You actually never addressed my point, as I'm not sure if you would disagree with me on Mistborn being extremely derivative (Downtrodden orphan secretly posses incredible power and is destined to save the world - and discovers said power with the help of an older mentor who is also very powerful; said mentor sacrifices himself in the fight against a great and ancient evil but ultimately the protagonist succeeds with the help of a seemingly minor item/character that was only hinted at in the past - am I talking about Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter, Star Wars, or Mistborn? Now do that for Worm and The Incredibles - even up to this point) or if you think it's not representative of his other works which are more deconstructing.
Maybe because I'm a smug, manipulative, condescending jerk myself. I can relate.
Sorry to hear that, but that wasn't really my point - rather I was trying to show that Wildbow's characters often have wildly subjective interpretations from readers. Who actually roots for the Lord Ruler or Ruin in Mistborn (actually maybe you do). Who doesn't like Vin, Sazed, and Elend?
I thought Martin's writing was trash. That was maybe... 10 years ago? Read A Game of Thrones, and thought it was vile.
I mean his writing might be trash (although you imply it's because he has such focus on sex and nudity which I personally find a bit bizarre but to each their own) but that really didn't have anything to do with my point that Martin deconstructs the fantasy cliches far more than Sanderson did in Mistborn.
u/ben_oni [+1] (4 days later)
I won't deny that I probably count as a Worm fanboy.
Being a fan is fine. Liking something, telling other people about it... all well and good. The negative connotation of the term is the confrontational aspect: defending the work from any perceived slights or competition. While I am actively analyzing Worm as I read it, looking at the tropes, cliches, and subversions, I am also trying to enjoy it as I go. I'll probably write another top-level response to Worm in one of the weekly threads sometime soonish; I'm further in, and people seem to want to talk about it.
I'm not sure if you would disagree with me on Mistborn being extremely derivative
So, you were talking about Mistborn's characterization; I didn't address the point, because there isn't really anything to argue. Mistborn is actually rather typical for Sanderson. Complex characters are not his strong suit (which isn't to say they are either good or evil), and he usually plays the Hero's Journey straight. Mistborn demonstrates his strength in worldbuilding; you can see that while the Hero's Journey is typical, the premise has been knocked upside-down. The Hero of Ages came to save the world... and the Lord Ruler won. The setting is the central idea: a land rimmed with active volcanoes, ash falling from the sky, crops that barely grow. An apocalyptic landscape. This particular subversion isn't exactly original (for instance, any dystopia ever) -- take a crappy world, and heroes who want to make it better.
I thought Martin's writing was trash. That was maybe... 10 years ago? Read A Game of Thrones, and thought it was vile.
I mean his writing might be trash (although you imply it's because he has such focus on sex and nudity...)
I did not mean to imply Martin's writing was bad because of the sex. I mean that as a criticism for the television adaptation. Martin is best known for subverting heroic tropes: just when you start thinking a character is the real hero, he dies. That certainly puts a damper on the Hero's Journey. Now, it's been a while since I read it, and my memory is rather fuzzy, so bear with me. It seemed like he spent too much time building a world that was larger than life, without actually creating anything new. He made promises with the audience that he then broke. He introduced too many characters too fast. The writing was all grimdark without reason. The thematic elements didn't have a point. To be fair, it's quite possible that what really bothered me was the lack of a heroic journey; I was less mature and my tastes unrefined in those days. Regardless, I do know much of the writing itself was weak, and the book left me with a sour feeling.
u/Revlar [+1] (4 days later)
Pretty sure this is just copy-pasted bait.
u/ben_oni [+1] (4 days later)
Copy-pasted from where? (How strong is the google-fu with you?)