No, GRRM, We Don't Care About Aragorn's Tax Policy

George R. R. Martin thinks Tolkien should have told us about Aragorn's tax policy, for some reason, but would that really make any sense?
Check out In Deep Geek's videos on Aragorn's tax policy ( • Video ) and what he might have done about the orcs ( • Video ) for some actual answers to Martin's critique.
For my video on Tolkien's essay On Fairy Stories, click here: • On Fairy Stories
For the video on happy endings, go here: • Tolkien Trolls His Rea...
If you're interested in what good leadership looks like in Tolkien, you might like this video: • Tolkien's Lessons on L...
And if you want to get some insight into Tolkien's politics, check this video: • Tolkien on Politics
Check out Marquette's oral history project, where you can volunteer to give a brief interview about what Tolkien means to you, here: www.marquette....
My own interview is now online: cdm16280.conten...
You can support my channel by visiting my Patreon page: www.patreon.com/tolkiengeek.

[@dragonhelmofdor-lomin4017]

George R.R: Martin asking what was Aragorn's tax policy is like asking what was the tax policy of Gilgamesh, Beowulf and King Arthur, how did the economy work when they ruled. Tolkien's world was meant to be a fictional mythology for England that was set in our prehistoric past, and not a political drama series set in a fictional planet with dragons and witches like Martin does.

[@marcusantoninus1838]

Nevertheless, debating someone's tax policy while their city is under siege by orcs, trolls and the like (aka something is obviously wrong) is a total leftist thing to do.

[@enzorossi9853]

Yeah it shows you didnt read the books

[@DanJuega]

Exactly! You got it. It wasn’t meant as a criticism but simply to differentiate it from fantasy that’s more mythological

[@paulportman3754]

I totally agree. It always really irks me when some hack journalist refers to Martin as the "American Tolkien," because outside of both stories being massive and having a fantastical setting, they are really not very similar at all. Martin seems to be writing a human drama set within a fantasy world, but one that is still grounded in medieval realism. Tolkien, on the other hand, wrote a fairy tale history and mythology in the vein of classic legends and myths which inspired him. The two are not the same, but we can still appreciate them both.

[@srinjoyroychoudhury7034]

What brother's me is Martin's own comments on Tolkien's lore. The issues he raised are already answered by Tolkien. That only shows that Martin never PROPERLY READ Tolkien. Which as an author he should have especially when he himself says that Tolkien inspired him. If you do not read EVERYTHING about the works of the person who inspired you, then you are a bad author.

[@paulportman3754]

@@srinjoyroychoudhury7034 I wouldn't go as far as saying that makes him a bad author, but it does make his supposed love for Tolkien's works feel a little less genuine when he is leveling unreasonable and invalid criticisms against them. It feels as if Tolkien was a huge inspiration for him, but it seems like he is still to this day bothered by how Tolkien wrote the books and his overall mythology in a way that wasn't concerned with most of the same details that he is. Martin often seems like he is projecting his own sensibilities onto a completely different author writing a different type of story, and not fully grasping that those kinds of details that he concerns himself with were irrelevant to the story Tolkien was telling.

[@srinjoyroychoudhury7034]

@@paulportman3754 I will have to say that regardless of the author's intentions, he or she will has to be well read and have vast amounts of knowledge about various different things. If Martin isn't well read on Tolkien then he is not holding true to the ethos of being an author.

[@paulportman3754]

@@srinjoyroychoudhury7034 Fair enough. I still don't think that just missing the mark on a certain aspect of another author's work makes one a bad author necessarily. I love George Martin's work and despite his shortcomings, reading his books makes it clear that he has a lot of talent as a writer.

[@arte0021]

You can say that ASOIAF is set in Medieval England, but LOTR is set in mythical King Arthur version of England

[@reptomicus]

"I did begin a story placed about 100 years after the Downfall, but it proved both sinister and depressing. Since we are dealing with Men, it is inevitable that we should be concerned with the most regrettable feature of their nature: their quick satiety with good. So that the people of Gondor in times of peace, justice and prosperity, would become discontented and restless - while the dynasts descended from Aragorn would become just kings and governors - like Denethor or worse. I found that even so early there was an outcrop of revolutionary plots, about a centre of secret Satanistic religion; while Gondorian boys were playing at being Orcs and going around doing damage. I could have written a 'thriller' about the plot and its discovery and overthrow - but it would have been just that. Not worth doing." -J.R.R. Tolkien, on why he didn't write A Song of Ice and Fire

[@niklasweber2548]

I knew that quote already, but the source add-on made me laugh real hard.

[@generaljeanmoreau6853]

Lmaaooo when you added martins book crack me up

[@thehussarsjacobitess85]

Our satiety with good is indeed the worst part of humanity. Tolkien had already tackled it in his tales of Numenor anyhow.

[@SerbAtheist]

In essence, Tolkien had an inkling for something resembling GOT.

[@oxtheunlikelycontemplator2682]

I wonder what's like to see a rivalry that doesn't exist in Martin vs. Tolkien. And have it so blind me that I can ignore a world and story constructed by thousands and thousands of pages and declare it not worth doing. And no the story spoken of is nothing like A Song of Ice and Fire.

[@cioplasmmajic8327]

For a college class, we had to read a story that was basically the everyday life of a random teacher. It spent 300 pages of painfully vapid mundanity, then he died from a diabolus ex machina, then 10 pages of how everything was affected. It was one of the most painful things I was ever forced to read.

[@JonPITBZN]

God, I hate postmodernists!

[@randomcenturion7264]

@@JonPITBZN It's killing people's love of literature. It praises monotony and dismisses the epics.

[@thehavoccompany-a3]

Thank god I went to high school at a time when The Illiad and Greek Mythology was still taught in English Literature class (although I certainly didn't come to appreciate it until later). And every day, I learn something that further vindicates my choice to have never gone to College, and instead invest my time and energy in the Navy and Trade School. Western Universities are a f**king joke now. They are nothing more than schools of indoctrination, rather than homes for knowledge and learning.

[@mirceazaharia2094]

Wow. That sounds awful. I am profoundly grateful that I had to study some decent stuff for my English finals. Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf, A Passage to India, The God of Small Things, Wilfred Owen, stuff like that. Some more things, and boy, were they hard to find sometimes. Worth it, though.

[@KororaPenguin]

A big part of what _Star Wars: A New Hope_ was so popular was because in a time when sci-fi was chock full of gloom and doom, ANH did NOT end with the Death Star moving away from Yavin's new ring-to-be.

[@patty4349]

I am perfectly happy with the ending of "After Sauron was destroyed and the orcs stopped murdering travelers, life drastically improved in Middle Earth."

[@Jeowyn321]

Tolkien is the master. His songs are stronger songs and his feet are faster.

[@theophilus5777]

Based

[@Sehestedtify]

"What was Aragorn's tax policy?" is like asking, "How come Captain Kirk never goes to the bathroom?" He does, but no one cares. Story isn't meant to bury us in detail. Story is as much (or more) about what you leave out. "Does Han Solo floss or use a water pick?" NO ONE CARES!

[@corruptangel6793]

Martin is asking if Aragorn, the heroic warrior archetype who claims the throne after a thrilling adventure/campaign, would actually make a good king. The entire point of Robert Baratheon the character is that he is George's answer to the question. Robert was a charismatic and heroic warrior who lead the people to defeat a mad king and save the kingdom! Then, for his great deeds, he won the throne. The end result however was that he became fat and lazy, whoring and drinking his days away while thinking of past glories and let others rule for him. He let the seven kingdoms fall to ruin and set the groundwork for the entire story. Not including the Whitewalker's return obviously, but the massive debt, civil wars and just overal chaos ravaging the seven kingdoms. People take his comment too literally and miss the point. Most of the people who will likely end up on the throne are shown having entire arcs where we see exactly what kind of ruler they are and will be should they win the throne. Especially Jon and Dany.

[@vicc19]

@@corruptangel6793 martins questions are irrelevant when Tolkien spent entire books explaining to us that in his story, Aragorn is basically perfect (with his imperfections). We don’t need to know about his "tax policies" because we have already been told clearly, that, regardless of what aragorn does, he’s good and righteous. No random CHEAP plottwist with a personality change. He wont just become a fat greedy pos, and thats well stabilished

[@corruptangel6793]

@@vicc19 as i said, the "heroic warrior architype who claims the throne after a thrilling adventure/campaign". To my understanding, Martin is a big fan of LOTR and was just using Aragorn as an example for his question. He's aware that LOTR is a "and they lived happily ever after" type story. Martin just wanted to take that classic story trope and apply it realistically.

[@mytandasouder4485]

@@corruptangel6793 i get what your saying, and I guess it could be considered tongue in cheek, but Martin would never have the balls to say this with the rhetoric he used while saying this in the interview, to Tolkien face to face if he could meet him face to face. But what evs

[@jerseymikes3403]

@@mytandasouder4485 Jesus, he isn't even criticizing Tolkien. You people sperg out every time someone doesn't agree that Tolkien is perfect and everything else is shit.

[@diegonatan6301]

Well, the only thing that I could add is that I have more faith in Tolkien finishing the unfinished tales than GRRM finishing his main series...

[@1Drakorn]

The sad part is that it's probably true. As we've seen with The Silmarillion and other more recent publications, Tolkien's descendants clearly have the right to continue his work if they wished, whereas Martin clearly stated he doesn't want anyone else touching Westeros if he dies prematurely.

[@mitchelanhalt5261]

@@1Drakorn Just goes to show how much Martin really cares. If he wanted to finish his series properly, he would actually give it to the hands of someone he trusts in case that day does come, and not to some idiot who just has no grasp on the world or even the genre itself...again.

[@kod8933]

Basically Tolkein is writing Arthurian Legend. GRRM is writing a POV on inner machinations of War of the Roses. They're not comparable except for the fantasy elements of Dragons and Undead.

[@AlexJones-ue1ll]

Yo, GRRM, you know why Tolkien will always be the master over you? Because he finished the bloody story.

[@susanli7149]

Never thought I'd agree with Alex Jones, but here we are! (Haha, just kidding.)

[@incanusolorin2607]

Except he didn’t. Don’t get me wrong, Tolkien is my favorite author and TLotR is far superior to ASoIaF, in my opinion, but Tolkien left A LOT of stuff unfinished. He could probably have published Beren and Luthien, The Children of Húrin and even maybe The Fall of Gondolin, but he couldn’t finish those stories, Cristopher being the one to thank for finishing up the texts left by his father.

[@JonPITBZN]

@@incanusolorin2607, but none of those things are the main work that made Tolkien famous. Not finishing those is like GRRM not finishing the Dunk and Egg series (which, by the way, is also a possibility.) If GRRM does manage to finish the main ASOIAF series, but fails to finish Dunk and Egg, his legacy won't be that of "guy who didn't finish the story."

[@incanusolorin2607]

@@JonPITBZN Good point! They weren’t even “commercial” books like Martin’s. Tolkien worked on the stories about the First Age just for fun. So I guess you’re right, I shouldn’t compare the two of them. I only meant that Tolkien was not as good at getting things done as was suggested by OP.

[@generaljeanmoreau6853]

@@incanusolorin2607 He finished the main story while martin is either gonna revive Jon snow or let him rot

[@RomanHistoryFan476AD]

I'm sure Martian does not cover the taxes or such in his own books that much at all, it is kind of glossed over.

[@magister343]

He certain discusses King Jaehaerys's tax policy in Fire and Blood. He does not go into the most minute detail, but does explain that the king overruled advisers suggesting a flat rate revenue tariff and instead levied very high luxury taxes on spices, silks, etc, while not raising taxes on grain imports. He also added a new tax on the construction of any new castles or the addition of any new crenelations to existing structures, as a way of discouraging them from building forts that might be able to withstand the royal army if they were to revolt over other taxes. He also says that the Mad King was captured and held captive by Lord Denys Darklyn of Duskendale after the lord refused to pay any taxes until the king would agree to issue a new charter giving the citizens of Duskendale new privileges and to charge lower port fees in his city than elsewhere in Westeros.

[@RomanHistoryFan476AD]

@@magister343 That is nice to hear, wish he would put as much effort on finishing the main novels.

[@greylithwolf]

@@RomanHistoryFan476AD you gotta write what you're passionate about. I bet GoT left a pretty bad taste in Martin's mouth.

[@fantasywind3923]

One detail is that over the course of A Song of Ice and Fire Tyrion acting as Hand of the king introduced new taxes but that's about it, we don't know much about king Robert Baratheon's tax policy, though apparently under Aerys the mad king, the treasury was 'overflowing with gold' ;). Well we can be certain of one thing, though that when it comes to Lotr and Aragorn, his taxation would be far more lenient towards the people than that of his very distant ancestors: "In the second stage, the days of Pride and Glory and grudging of the Ban, they begin to seek wealth rather than bliss. The desire to escape death produced a cult of the dead, and they lavished wealth and an on tombs and memorials. They now made settlements on the west-shores, but these became rather strongholds and ‘factories’ of lords seeking wealth, and the Númenóreans became tax-gatherers carrying off over the sea evermore and more goods in their great ships. The Númenóreans began the forging of arms and engines." -J.R.R. Tolkien, Letter No. 131 Those Numenoreans of old, really greedy tax collectors ;). More seriously though sometimes such details are unimportant, especially when the story is effectively ending and that is when Aragorn assumes power, basically the story is nearing the end when he becomes king, what would be the point of explaining his policies (though some details on the early years of reign of Aragorn as king Elessar are available quite a bit of them actually). In The Hobbit it’s mentioned how Wood Elves and Lake-men of Esgaroth had some squabbles over economical matters because it was in part of the story naturally involving ancient trade and wealth gathering: “The talk was all of the trade that came and went on the waterways and the growth of the traffic on the river, as the roads out of the East towards Mirkwood vanished or fell into disuse; and of the bickerings of the Lake-men and the Wood-elves about the upkeep of the Forest River and the care of the banks." ... "Except for occasional squabbles about river-tolls they were friends with the Wood-elves." ... "They still throve on the trade that came up the great river from the South and was carted past the falls to their town; but in the great days of old, when Dale in the North was rich and prosperous, they had been wealthy and powerful, and there had been fleets of boats on the waters, and some were filled with gold and some with warriors in armour, and there had been wars and deeds which were now only a legend." ... "Then the Master hesitated and looked from one to the other. The Elvenking was very powerful in those parts and the Master wished for no enmity with him, nor did he think much of old songs, giving his mind to trade and tolls, to cargoes and gold, to which habit he owed his position." In The Hobbit the 'practical stuff' is highlighted and even a dragon points it out :). "What about cartage? What about armed guards and tolls?” And Smaug laughed aloud. He had a wicked and a wily heart, and he knew his guesses were not far ..." Naturally the kings in Middle-earth had possessions of their own from which they could additionally receive income: “The land was rich and kindly, and though it had long been deserted when they entered it, it had before been well tilled, and there the king had once had many farms, cornlands, vineyards, and woods.” Gondor in the past have been incredibly wealthy kingdom and I guess even in decline it would be rich :). "Atanatar Alcarin son of Hyarmendacil lived in great splendour, so that men said precious stones are pebbles in Gondor for children to play with." And even during reign of Stewards things were not that bad off hehe: " Rohan had received great help from Gondor in the evil days. When, therefore, he heard that the Haradrim were assailing Gondor with great strength, he sent many men to the help of the Steward. He wished to lead them himself, but was dissuaded, and his twin sons Folcred and Fastred (born 2858) went in his stead. They fell side by side in battle in Ithilien (2885). Túrin II of Gondor sent to Folcwine a rich weregild of gold."

[@RomanHistoryFan476AD]

@@fantasywind3923 First off nice to see someone using paragraphs and spacing out their comment, a rare sight indeed. Secondly loads of lovely information there, Tolkien your right did go into the economics to a degree of the middle earth enough to understand the basics. My point was that GRRM was basing Tolkien for the lack of Aragorn's tax policy when in at least his main series he also just hand waves over such matters as well, or goes into them lightly. While in maybe his other works GRRM does go deeper into the tax and economy of his world, the problem is well that is not in the main series (a main series he has seemed to forget to also finish it seems).

[@Delta040301]

GRRM is basically comparing a book about the war of the roses to the story of Beowulf.

[@chrisi1466]

In fairness the quotes from GRRM, I think was him actually pointing out how they are different. Not criticizing Tolkien in any way. And he wasn’t saying that Tolkien did it wrong, just that those were the thoughts that he personally had when he read them, which spurred his type of storytelling. I don’t think he was trying to say that Tolkien should have added this stuff, just explaining how his thought process is.

[@skolkor]

Exactly, people are absurdly upset about that quote. It doesn't deserve an 18 minute video.

[@Alfonso88279]

@@skolkor It totally does precisely because people is taking it that way.

[@MrEnviousMonster]

yes exactly, he's said he re reads the story often,i think he understands what Tolkien was going for.

[@squashedeyeball]

"In what order does our protagonist brushes his teeth? Is there a different pattern in each day? How much food got stuck between them, after last night's camp fire? How does his breath smells like!".

[@mrillis9259]

How do fantasy characters fight epic battles after going down the Oregon trail on acid?

[@squashedeyeball]

@@mrillis9259 Now that's a question to ask... The answer could be difficult to come up with thought.

[@jerseymikes3403]

How many wars were started over toothbrushes?

[@poitre_]

Aristotle has been real quiet after this

[@andrewbesso4257]

King Elessar continues Denethor's tax policy. Moving on...

[@zach415]

What was Denethor’s tax policy?

[@CsnvLsRnst]

@@zach415 The same as Ecthelion's tax policy.

[@du6167]

"Great stories, love em, but you know what they're missing? Politics and incest" - GRRM, probably

[@husky0098]

Feanor and Túrin have entered the chat

[@TheMan05555]

Aragorn and Arwen: Hello?

[@joejoelesh1197]

If I understand GRRM's comment and it's context, I think he was emphasizing how his story is a fundamentaly different story than LotR.

[@greylithwolf]

I think it's strange that's even a conversation. Even from watching the shows and movies you can see how vastly different LOTR is from ASOIAF.

[@andtalath]

​@@greylithwolf It's a talking point to make people understand that there is a huge difference between different fantasy works. Loads of people don't distinguish between soft fantasy, hard fantasy, high magic, low magic, fairy tales and a bunch of other forms. George creates a very different type of fantasy than almost all other fantasy writers do, doesn't mean it's better, but it's different. It's also been shown to be one of the few fantays stories capable of truly being interesting to other people than us fantasy nerds, which is somewhat interesting.

[@thedarkmasterthedarkmaster]

@@andtalath I mean I think it's hard to say if any story is truely more interesting to other people. Like more people have read GRRM's work than alot of smaller fantasy names so just statistically speaking of course more people are going to read it

[@waynepurcell6058]

I'll worry about Aragorn's "tax policy" when I see fellbeasts flying through the air around my actual neighborhood. I don't recall R. E. Howard's "Conan" talking about taxation wherever he happened to be in his stories much either. GRRM is a good writer, but really, you fall into worlds like Middle Earth or Hyboria to ESCAPE realistic crap like "taxation". Seriously? Does he think we all want hyper realistic fantasy novels about taxes? Idiot. I think he's mistaking most fantasy readers desire for "relative authenticity" for "world realism".

[@thschnick]

GRRM can critique Tolkien when he actually finishes his book series.

[@someinteresting]

I don't think he's really that good. The story and its execution is very all over the place. His writing style isn't great either. In comparison to Talkien he seems rather meager. Middle-Earth after all is created by a true scholar. Martin is but an amateur who relies on his fan-sites even to follow his own plot (and those are his own words).

[@chrisi1466]

@@thschnick I don’t think GRRM is “critiquing” Tolkien, by all accounts he loves Tolkien. He wasn’t saying Tolkien should have talked about the taxation and stuff, he said that those are the things he personally thought about in his mind which is what spurred his storytelling style. So he is heavily influenced by Tolkien but it was him explaining how his storytelling, is different than Tolkien’s not saying Tolkien did it wrong.

[@jerseymikes3403]

Game of Thrones is incredibly popular, so you're clearly the idiot, here.

[@SpaceMonke99]

Martin isn’t directly criticisng The Lord of Rings but using Aragorn’s tax policy as an example for the kinds of questions he asks and the kind of stories he wants to write. He was just making a point, no one care about Aragorn’s tax policy just as tax is only ever mentioned in passing in ASOIF. His only real criticism of Tolkien is his moral simplicity.

[@davidwilson6577]

Even then, no, he criticized poor Tolkien imitators of creating morally simple stories. He wasn't very clear that he didn't include Tolkien in his 'dark lord trope' criticism though, I'll grant you.

[@grahamsimpson9086]

Come on, GRRM didn't like the idea of resurrection, esp in Gandalf's case? So Clearly he never read any of Tolkien's work or understood "Demi god's can't die" pmsl.. but it's ok to resurrect John Snow and another 7 characters in his story...or was is it just Plot Armour? because his story would have ended there & then, And not to mention he wrote I&F back in 1991... After pinching ideas from other authors. And the new HBO HoD stuff, that's Not Actually his work either 🤣 This guy can even finish his own story, JrrT made at least a dozen languages then wrote the books... GRRM is a joke period

[@internetenjoyer1044]

tolkien is more morally complex than grrm

[@UlmoLOTR]

What people don't understand is that Martin didn't criticized Tolkien. He only pointed out that he has a different writing style and different interests. There are different ways to do world building. I am sure that many Tolkien readers ask questions about those kind of details Martin is talking about. And Tolkien answered some of them, or said he didn't know, or he didn't want to know. Some of those questions were asked after his passing, so we have no answers.

[@duolingoowl920]

I'm glad someone here understands that.

[@Alfonso88279]

Well, I didn't take his words as "this is good, that is bad". I thought he was just talking about how his story was different of Lord of the Rings. Anyway, I have conflicts with Song of ice and fire. I enjoyed the books, I read them in a few days. But they broke me. I felt like trash constantly. They are very well written (in my humble opinion) and they are really addictive, they have unexpected twists all the time. But I felt SOOOO MISERABLE. They got a puppy? No matter, the puppy will be MURDERED in a few pages. That guy is nice? Don't worry, he will die horribly in a few pages. That kid looks kind? Don't worry, they will break his back in no time. I mean... I felt so manipulated in the end, so used by the author. So sad, so... how can people read that shit and end up happy? How? How much of a psychopath you need to be? And in the end the guy ended up in a hole that he created. Reminded me of Eragon (just MUCH better, you know, the quality is a different world). Paolini got in a hole and he was unable to get out. With each book instead of closing threads, he kept opening new mysteries. More unsolvable each time. His books ended very bad, unable to close almost anything. And I suspect that George RR Martin may be in a very similar situation. If he does what he was preparing, he will dislike it because it will be too obvious and the guy likes crazy twists. If he repeats the crazy "subversion of expectations" I think it's called in english, he could make people angry because they could not like it, it may be an objectively worse ending. So. He speaks about Tolkien. A guy who knew what he was doing from the start to the end, eagles not included. He probably feels better that way.

[@the98themperoroftheholybri33]

I genuinely believe Tolkien's stories will be similar to how we still have the Greek iliad today, Tolkien will be remembered in history, GRRM won't be

[@blingabiaino197]

Oh look, someone who claims to know the future. Give me a break. You have no idea who will be remembered or not.

[@TolkienLorePodcast]

You apparently can’t read; he said he believes, not that he knows.

[@lunakoala5053]

One problem I have with such assumptions, is that it basically assumes a collapse and restart of society. Tolkien will always be the father of modern fantasy, this alone makes him unique compared to the likes of GRRM or JK Rowling. But we will still have ASOIAF, Harry Potter and even stuff like Twilight in the future. We'll probably still have these here exact comments. The iliad is only special today, because it's a rare example of ancient storytelling. No work of fiction since the invention of the printing press will ever get a similar status. The culturual impact has yet to be seen. But with the TV Shows eventual fall from grace and GRRMs seeming inability to finish the story, paired with the renewed interest in tolkien thanks to Amazon... Tolkien's impact will probably work out to be much greater. ASOIAF had huge potential tho. If he managed to finish the story during the show, thus both saving the last two seasons and interest in the franchise at it's height during the release of the final books, it could have become much more influential and possibly define a future genre of more gritty fantasy. But alas, it didn't happen, so meh.

[@alrabbi6194]

@@TolkienLorePodcast Why can't you people just respect both writers instead of comparing them in videos like this ? Martin himself has said that his admiration for Tolkien is second to none yet you Tolkien fanboys always castrate him for the slightest criticism he makes on Tolkien's work. And while Tolkien's stuff is obviously great, modern writers need to get out of that trend and start implementing different genres of fantasy, not just of one type. And I believe Martin has paved a path to that for which I always respect him. But one thing which really pisses me off is the way Tolkien fanboys always react to the slightest criticisms made about his works. While it's certainly one of the greatest works of fantasy ever, nothing is completely flawless.

[@Dougy359]

@@alrabbi6194 where did he disrespect anybody? He responded to criticism. Are people not allowed to respond to things? Why is Martin allowed to make criticisms but others are not allowed to respond?

[@daniloa.ferreira8918]

I got your point, buf I don't think that Martin was really criticizing Tolkien's approach on politics. He was simply saying what political questions cocerning Tolkien's world made him come up with his own story. I know it may seems like he was trynna put in his story what he felt that "laked" on Tolkien's, but I don't that was so; Martin himself already told that his story is set on a completly different world than that of Tolkien's. He even said that he feels honored for being called the "American Tolkien", but he makes it really clear that it is not true att all.

[@keegan112099]

Exactly. Hes a huge Tolkien fan. And Tolkien inspired him to write in his more gritty style. I hate people who take this as him sitting on Tolkien

[@Enzaio]

That's exactly right. I recently bought Marlon James's Black Leopard, Red Wolf, which is a fantasy novel based on several African mythologies and languages. James has said (in a Tolkien lecture by the way!) that what he misses in Tolkien's work is the representation of a culture that he identifies with (cultures from or influenced by Africa). That's not a criticism of Tolkien, James understands perfectly well what Tolkien was doing and that fantasy based on European mythology is entirely legitimate. James just wanted to do something different. Same with Martin.

[@thegorgon7063]

It does strike me as if there's a lot of defensiveness or whataboutery in GRRMs comments.

[@reidsimpson4213]

I mean, he only started writing novels after his career in television writing went nowhere, and with A Song of Ice and Fire, he essentially just ripped off Tolkien's legendarium and a LOT of the major plot points of Frank Herbert's Dune, but in a medieval context.

[@gregfam6250]

Who uses the toilet how much on the trip...." Hmmmm now that you mentioned it... I'd likes ta know! 😂

[@incanusolorin2607]

I suppose the Hobbits shat the most, since they are small and have reduced intestines, but eat a lot.

[@nox6948]

It was Pippin

[@someinteresting]

"Jelousy is an ugly thing, Dorothy, as are you in anything backless." Sofia from The Golden Girls is pure gold.

[@stevenhale2935]

The way I think about it is just to reverse the concept: Would you include a biography or family history when you send off your annual tax report?

[@Ne-ne7qo]

Yes

[@jerseymikes3403]

That's because you're a complete moron. Tax policies have done much to shape human history. Wars have been fought over that's since ancient times.

[@davidwilson6577]

GRRM didn't criticise Tolkien for not going into Aragorn's tax policy. He made a humorous comparison between his own style of writing and the style upon which the majority of epic fantasy is based, Tolkien, as a way of explaining why he thought a take on a fantasy world that was more grounded in mundane historical politics could be interesting. It was a jab at his own blandness in comparison with Tolkien. The only criticisms he's made when Tolkien is brought up is of those authors who copied his style badly, and he does not miss the opportunity to praise Tolkien and those good books Tolkien has inspired while doing so. "The point of (Tolkien's) story was not to talk about Aragorn's politics" was the point GRRM was making. He wanted to do something different. He did not misinterpret what Tolkien is. "Here we get the idea that Martin thinks we want to know all these details", well no. Here we get the idea that Martin thinks an engaging story _could_ be told where many of the conflicts are centred around these details. And so far he has done that. Taking his sweet time, though. "It's like asking who uses the toilet how much on a trip, no-one wants to know that. It's not relevant, it's not important." Unless it's a subtle way of hinting to the reader that a character is quite sick, or is sneaking away from the group often. It _can_ be relevant, depending on the story. "How many ways can you make tax policy relevant to (the story)? It just doesn't work" jesus, lad. Take a look at history and see how often that kind of thing starts wars, or changes the outcome. If you're talking specifically about Middle-Earth, then yeah, it can still work, but it probably wouldn't fit. GRRM never said it would. It's just an interesting premise. If you mean generally then you're just wrong and ignorant here. Ah, you end up saying "especially this story" so I guess you're just wrong and ignorant. Huh. "It's either Martin being unfairly critical or it's showing that what Martin is doing is fundamentally a different thing" the reason it was brought up was to explain why Martin wanted to do something different than standard fantasy stories, which are often heavily inspired by Tolkien who he clarifies as having done it first and right. It is definitively not Martin being unfairly critical. "He's thinking that Tolkien is somehow lacking by telling us nothing about these details" no he isn't. You have no clue what you're talking about. Almost all of this video I have to take from the viewpoint that you think GRRM misinterprets what kind of story Tolkien was making, because otherwise you are proscribing what kind of story any author can write. Well, he didn't, and he praises Tolkien highly. GRRM's novels are not just chapters of everyday life in only slightly fantastical medieval Europe. If you read ASOIAF and found it boring because nothing interesting happened, then you weren't paying attention. And I don't just mean the obvious hugely important moments that happen every now and then in those books, but pretty much every chapter has a lot going on. From very grounded and mundane-seeming interactions that turn out to be pivotal, to prophetic lines, to crazy, fantastical events, to symbolic representations of characters' intentions or connections or what have you.

[@bridgeofsighs5081]

What I'm curious about is how Aragorn would react to the concept of "tax policy".

[@JonPITBZN]

What, like when Aragorn's tutor taught him about it as a kid? Feudal societies had taxes (commonly paid in grain rather than gold), and Aragorn grew up as a the ward of an elf-king who saw Aragorn as the future King of Gondor. He would not only be familiar with the concept of tax policies, but have some degree of knowledge about them.

[@Dan-lm3xn]

Great video response! I’m blown away by how often GOT is compared to LOTR. They cannot be compared, only contrasted. It’s like comparing a Wendell Berry novel to Atlas Shrugged. The story style and message is so different as to make any comparison pointless.

[@ElZhaidelagente]

G. R. R. Martin: "What was Aragorn's tax policy?" J. R. R. Tolkien: "What language do your trees speak?"

[@FreekinEkin2]

GRRM writes novels. Tolkien writes Epics. The idea of covering tax policy depends on a move completely alien to the genre.

[@horseradishpower9947]

About 7:09 into your video, and just wanted to pause, and make a comment. Aragorn following ancient laws, and not really changing them, sounds rather like a Saxon affair. In the Kingdom of Kent, you had King Ethelbert, and he made sure that the core of his laws were written down, so future generations could follow them. It was about an administrative justice, meaning set punishments for set crimes. It meant everyone who transgressed the king was punished the same way, no favouritism. This is the sort of thinking and text that fed into Magna Carta, which still has about three clauses still in Statute to this day. I wanted to add this, because I think I see something interesting, and might potentially be giving something useful to the discussion.

[@shawnn7502]

When I heard the quote, years ago, I remember thinking the exact same thing. No, we are not interested in what Aragorn's tax policy is. We can easily imagine from the character in the books what he would be like as a king- a good one. The kind of man that you want as King. Enough said. Of course, Martin doesn't get too into the details of rule either. He is big into political maneuvering and manipulation, but that isn't the same thing as ruling. 99% of Martin's story is about getting the throne or staying on the throne and NOT about what a ruler does on the throne any more than Tolkien's work is. Anyway, the difference between Tolkien and Martin is so striking that it is nearly two different genre's. Tolkien wrote true fantasy. Martin writes what I call adult fantasy or fantasy porn. Frankly, I think Tolkien would be appalled to be associated with it.

[@DavidMacDowellBlue]

Martin's comments were not a criticism of Tolkien, but rather an acknowledgement that the two writers are approaching a general genre in two totally different ways--and from two different places. Quite simply they are asking different questions, and exploring different aspects of the human condition. This is not a criticism of either Tolkien or Martin.

[@helenaconstantine]

Really? You think Martin and Tolkien were writing in the same genre? Remarkable.

[@davidwilson6577]

@@helenaconstantine Broadly, fantasy. Which is, in fact, a genre, with many sub-genres. Do you not think fantasy is a genre?

[@somethingwitty309]

@@helenaconstantine Huh? They are both fantasy authors? Obviously, there are divisions and differences between the two, but to imply that Tolkien and GRRM’s works aren't in the same genre... Well, that's remarkable. Obviously, Asoiaf is far more grounded and dark when compared to lotr (largely reflecting the broad shift in modern fantasy towards realism) but they both have magic, dragons kings, queens, large scale wars etc. That's pretty similar. That being said, I would love to hear what you think the two should be categorised as! If they aren't in the same genre

[@TolkienLorePodcast]

LOTR is a fairy tale romance. ASOIAF is more a drama that happens to be set in a fantastical world.

[@somethingwitty309]

@@TolkienLorePodcast Hey! I kinda disagree but that's okay. They are very different from each other so I understand your assessment. Also, your videos are great! I love the channel!

[@Lethgar_Smith]

Lord of the Rings is highly descriptive in its narrative details. Which is why people have longed to see it as a movie ever since it was first published. The author goes into great detail describing almost every aspect of our hero's daily lives. With two notable exceptions: The act of relieving oneself of bodily waste and anything of an erotic nature. Do Hobbits jerk off and does Gandalf shit in the woods? The answer to some questions we may never know.

[@donaldhysa4836]

Did Aragorn and Arwen actually have sex before they were married? I mean they were not catholic and being chaste is not something anyone in LOTR mentions as being a virtue one should aspire too so the fact that we are not answered this question is a huge plot hole. Yes Sir I am a big fan of Fantasy can't you tell?

[@internetenjoyer1044]

i think theres something to Harold Bloom's theory of the anxiety of influence tbh. he says that artists (well he only applies this to great poets, but i think it applies to all artists, but not universally to any group, i think hes just identified one pattern) creatuively misread their influences so as to make space for themselves to continue or to rebel against their influence's work according to their own concerns. and thats what Martin is doing; he has to see this as a hole in Tolkien because he cares so much about it himself, so he misreads tolkien's use of genre and form as psycological and political naivity, so thereby he can "correct" him

[@mirceazaharia2094]

*slaps forehead* Something that should have been obvious to me, given that I myself have experienced such rebellions in the past. I look at various stories which I enjoy, and I often say to myself "This is good, but I think that this part could have been done much better like this". And then I set my brain to work, and I think on such things in the background, until I come up with a new idea for one of my many works in progress. One of them is basically fit to write already (all ideas and important details are feature - complete, including the plot, structure and characters), I just need to actually get started.

[@redshirt5126]

The virgin George vs the Chad Tolkien.

[@chrisvickers7928]

I run an frpg campaign based on the writings of M. A. R. Barker. He did an amazing job of creating a setting with five working languages (he was a linguist), social and political system, military system, and religions and magic. I am a science guy so I have worked out the geology to his geography, the agriculture management system, to support his huge population, and yes, how the taxes work. My players don't want to here this, obviously, but sometimes it interacts with them as part of the story and the reason something happens. Then it's plot.

[@mirceazaharia2094]

Many thanks for recommending this author to me. I hope that your own projects are progressing well.

[@wackyswacky1374]

George's comments were not really a critique of Tolkien as much as they are a thesis for his own story.

[@juancholo7502]

Aragorn's tax policy is in Appendix 1040A ;P

[@fantasywind3923]

Well at the very least the currency of Gondor is explained ;). ". The Shire seems to me very adequately to translate the Hobbit Suza-t, since this word was now only used by them with reference to their country, though originally it had meant 'a sphere of occupation (as of the land claimed by a family or clan), of office, or business'. In Gondor the word suza was still applied to the divisions of the realm, such as Anorien, Ithilien, Lebennin, for which in Noldorin the word lhann was used. Similarly farthing has been used for the four divisions of the Shire, because the Hobbit word tharni was an old word for 'quarter' seldom used in ordinary language, where the word for 'quarter' was tharantin 'fourth part'. In Gondor tharni was used for a silver coin, the fourth part of the castar (in Noldorin the canath or fourth part of the mirian)." HoME XII, hehe this part of writing in the tomes of History of Middle-earth is of course a draft which never found it's way to appendices :).

[@Bee-zr5pb]

We learn enough about Aragorn and who he is as a person that we can infer what sort of king he'd be without getting bogged down by details. By the time the man is king, we've seen him lead armies, influence kingdoms, and change the world forever. We've seen him make hard choices, sacrifice, lose brothers in arms, and I'm sure that whatever his tax policy is, it's fair. Don't need the details. I think thats effective for story telling and pacing.

[@jerseymikes3403]

Not really. Being an effective general is not the same as being an effective ruler.

[@jagpro91]

@@jerseymikes3403 Aragorn wasn't just a general though, he was already 88 years old by the time of Lord of the Rings and had accumulated a significant amount of wisdom and life experience beyond just fighting. There's no reason in the text to suppose that he was in any way a bad king.

[@MrAurelioCantu]

ARAGORN COULD FIND ALL THE WEALTH HE NEEDS BY RAIDING ALL THE ABANDONED ELF SETTLEMENTS

[@tereza1959]

You know what makes this funnier? Martin never wrote anything about tax policy in Westeros 😂 we literally never see scenes where tax collectors are a thing or conflict because of taxes, he simply writes things like "and then things became expensive and everybody was mad" or "and then the king helped everyone and people stopped rioting"

[@AlexB-dg9vv]

Martin doesn't actually know a lot about the societies he claims to be realistically portraying (see the "a collection of unmitigated pedantry" blog by an actual historian if you haven't already). Hence why he doesn't realise how stupid his point is. Tolkien is surprisingly realistic about a lot of things, probably through his influence from epic poems etc.

[@thehussarsjacobitess85]

I'll check that out! As a neurotic history buff myself, I get so sick of Martin being called historically realistic by vapid, lazy nihilists.

[@joejoelesh1197]

Great idea for some fan-fic: Tax policy of Gondor in the early 4th age. It will be a big hit in the Tolkien / CPA croud.

[@louisbrown4620]

The American Tolkien is a guy by the name of Lucas. George RR can pound sand.

[@brucealanwilson4121]

Exactly. JRRT himself makes much the same point in ON FAIRY STORIES in his critcism of Spencer's "The Fairie Queene".

[@EdwardBast]

The answer to Martin is much simpler: The narrator of the Lord of the Rings isn't an omniscient Tolkien, it's Frodo (and Sam, presumably, for the final chapter), a character embedded in the tale. So the question for Martin is: Why would a hobbit be interested in the tax policy of Gondor and why on (Middle) Earth would one expect Frodo to know, care, or write about this subject? Literature 101: Identify the narrator and his relation to the tale before criticizing the author's focus. Rookie mistake on Martin's part. About Frodo's style: Frodo isn't writing a fairy tale. He's essentially writing an historical chronicle steeped in the oral narrative traditions of his world, hence the formulaic imagery - "beautiful as the stars," for example, is formulaic in the same sense as Homer's "wine dark sea" or "rosy fingers of dawn."

[@isopropyltoxicity]

Brilliant point I can't believe no one has brought this up

[@No_Relation_666]

yea george is very open about the fact that he’s not writing anything like what tolkien wrote

[@elainehill6504]

haha! I actually have wondered about the company "going to the toilet" while guarded and blindfolded on the way to Caras Galadhon. I mean, were they allowed some private unblindfolded time?

[@lordnoiado]

Well GRRM mentioned his writing is different and although I disagree with some of his positions and how he writes, he's always concerned with the conundrums of every single part of his world and the politics of such. His books' narratives are amazing but they emphasize different elements of the story

[@MarkArandjus]

LOTR and ASOIAF are fundamentally different in that one is a construction of a legend, it's romantic, while the other is deconstructionist and cynical. LOTR is a John Wayne western - it's very black and white in its morality, while ASIOF is a Clint Eastwood western - even the good guys are flawed people and the world is wretched. ASOIAF is much closer to Dune, where it's very shades of grey and introspective. LOTR is more like Star Wars (except for The Last Jedi because somebody had the bright idea of making Star Wars deconstructionist in that movie).

[@alexstewart9747]

What’s the matter George Martin ?? Struggling to answer all the mystery boxes you’ve been opening for years ?? If you’d left the politics alone, you might have had a chance. I’ve prepared for disappointment and now study Tolkien’s work instead. Its pure escapism and allows your imagination to run wild.

[@waltonsmith7210]

His books without the politics wouldnt be the same or as good.

[@Toshiro_Mifune]

martin is still alive?

[@superherbs369]

I thought the same thing!!!! For some reason, I had believed he died. Strange!

[@oxtheunlikelycontemplator2682]

The tax policy comment seems to always be taken at or damn near face value. It's almost window dressing to the bigger question that gets asked almost immediately following it, "What does that mean to rule wisely and well?" Ruling comes with a host of decisions including ones that may seem banal and even trivial (hence the tax policy line) but that have a real impact on people's lives. That's one of the major themes of ASOIAF and it's a much more important thing than how many times someone went to the toilet. It's a huge and complex question with some degree no one right answer. I also see people take it as a criticism of a Tolkien which seems crazy if you know anything about George Martin. Look up George R.R. Martin on fantasy and there's a line where he says, "They can keep their heaven. When I die I would rather go to Middle Earth."

[@richirare]

You are absolutely right that about the reaction people have about George's comment. I understand Tolkien fans react defensively because they perceive it as someone point out a flaw in something they love, but George is simple saying that to him it is not enough to say so and so ruled wisely and everything went peachy because he was a good and that is what makes a good ruler. George wants to challenge those ideas and that's what he likes to write about but people seem to get super defensive about the things they love.

[@sststr]

On the matter of the mundane details of traveling, in Babylon 5 they gave a brief scene on exactly that: Garibaldi: This is the part I hate most. The waiting. Sinclair: Hmm. [There's a moment of silence.] Garibaldi: Mind if I ask you a question? Sinclair: Sure. Garibaldi: Okay, it's morning, you're getting ready for work, you pull on your pants-do you fasten and zip, or zip and then fasten? Sinclair: What kind of question is that? Garibaldi: Well, look, we've got two hours to kill- Sinclair: Forget it. Garibaldi: Just a question. Sinclair: Why do you want to know? Garibaldi: Why do I want to know? Because I think about these things sometimes. I was getting dressed this morning, I couldn't remember how I did it, and I started thinking about it. Does everyone do it the same way? Is it a left-handed/right-handed thing-? Sinclair: [incredulous] You think about this stuff a lot? Garibaldi: Yeah. Look, okay, I'm sorry I asked. You're always so serious all the time. Not every conversation has to be the end of the world as we know it. Sinclair: I didn't mean to- Garibaldi: Never mind. It's okay. I'll just…watch my console. Don't worry about it. (After a long pause, Sinclair sighs.) Sinclair: Fasten, then zip. You? Garibaldi: Fasten zip. Sinclair: How much longer? Garibaldi: One hour, fifty seven minutes. [pause] Want to talk socks? Sinclair: No. Garibaldi: Just a question. Sinclair: I'm not having this conversation.

[@sststr]

Come to think of it, they did another much briefer one like that between Franklin and Marcus: Marcus Cole: I spy with my little eye…something beginning with "B." Stephen Franklin: [annoyed] Boxes. Marcus: Fine! I spy with my little eye something beginning with "M." Franklin: More boxes. Marcus: Two in a row. Franklin: [deadpan] "And that's when I shot him, Your Honor." Marcus: I spy with my little eye something beginning with "E." Franklin: I-I give up. Marcus: Oh come on. Franklin: This better not be what I- Marcus and Franklin: [in unison] Even MORE boxes! It's hilarious that JMS gave thought to such details and bothered to write them into the script here and there ;-)

[@JXEditor]

He wants to know what Aragorn’s tax policy was and you think you need to make a video on why his fantasy is different from Tolkien’s. It just seems self explanatory

[@anardistformerlynigel5250]

The volunteer relief mail service of the farthest provinces wasn't enough detail or that sort for him.

[@shadowseer07]

I’ve never felt more intellectually and emotionally offended by a comment than “what was Aragorn’s tax policy?” I mean the utter smothering of the imagination that conveys. I was always critical of Martin because of his stance of subverting the readers expectations, which always smacked of needing to be edgy for the sake of being edgy, and simply came off as banal. The problem with his work in comparison to Tolkien’s is that Martin’s work decimates and leaves nothing in its wake, it feels hollow, while Tolkien’s legacy prevails because his work utilizes what is universally and fundamentally and eternally true.

[@cccc7388]

One of the most insightful comments I've read!

[@damonmoney4474]

There is a fairytale about tax policy: Robin Hood! But the tax policy was included because it was inherently important in the story. Not because it was an expansive tale with all the minor details delivered.

[@MrEnviousMonster]

I think this was a great argument, but i don't think GRRM is downplaying Tolkien because remember he has said he re reads the book a lot, i Think he understood what type of tale Tolkien was trying to tell when he first read it. But you can imagine continuing to re read your favorite story as you get older and become a writer with your own style, I think his comments are of his own thoughts and what influences his style of writing. I love both of these authors very much and both are masters at telling the type of stories that want to tell.

[@animezinglife]

I'd argue it's much simpler: Martin's trying to sound smarter than he is and "edgy." That's something Tolkien never had to do with his talent for storytelling.

[@DavidEllis94]

You know what's funny? I never saw George detail taxation in Westeros any more than Tolkien did.

[@stupot3765]

I agree but I do care about his tax policy and his subsidization of Orcs and how that all effects the smaller men and everything

[@redjirachi1]

The fact taxes aren't an important issue in Tolkien's world is why it's considered fantasy

[@Cyricist001]

Martin is all about postmodernist deconstruction. Everything's ugly, selfish and materialistic. It's like he doesn't believe a king can be truly smart and altruistic for his people, or that a person is really pious and truly follows his faith. Not to mention, his cultures are all over the place. Somehow Starks have enough authority to burn all their ships? Hah, like the other lords would just let that happen, and even if they did, it's insane to think that the lords with coastal regions wouldn't make new ones for centuries. Logically, the wildlings should have been the Ironborn, a lot of fjords from the glaciers for natural harbors, a lot of wood, fishing and trade being their easiest source of food and income. Dorn should have never stayed independent, too reliant of scarce water sources to resist occupation. The dothraki are a joke equipment wise. The Iron islands shouldn't have been independent, resource and population too limited. And among all this mishmash of medieval and ancient tech are Renaissance mercantile city states, who for some reason can tango militarily with nations who dwarf them in resources and manpower so much it's not even funny. It's basically Genoa if they picked a fight with France, Holy Roman Empire and Spain at the same time.

[@jerseymikes3403]

Name one perfect altruistic king.

[@DanIel-fl1vc]

They're living in a medieval world, it's safe to assume farmers paid tribute to the king in exchange for protection. Anyone living inside the walls were of a higher class, possibly a warrior class since there was a constant war with orcs. The dwarves exported ore, men furs and wheat, elves...they probably had a slow metabolism or had gardens were they grew food. I think the main issue with Tolkien are the elves, I can't see them using money to buy wheat or ore. I suppose if you're immortal and have already built a perfect society in the woods you could live off of nature and not worry much about money. They probably used money in the past but not much in the 2nd and 3rd ages. Probably lived as civilized hunter gatherers and had a very slow metabolism so could survive long without food. So 10 000 elves could live off of 10 deers.

[@grimreaper492]

Very important questions for GRRM: What is the white walkers' tax policy? Do white walkers piss and shit? Do white walkers need to eat food? Are white walkers carnivores or vegetarians?

[@blitz8425]

What's funny is its not like GRRM is laying out complex tax policies in the seven kingdoms, let alone in other parts of planetos. Sure he might say "the crown holds this much debt" or "the lannisters gave a gold mine. No, a big gold mine" by that isn't exactly a thorough breakdown or explanation of how that economy functions. I would even argue that the vaguery of say Gondors tax policy makes it less problematic than when George drops snippets of economic breakdowns in westeros. It actually raises MORE questions. To my knowledge he doesn't talk much about collecting rents, and what percentage is reserved for the king. Christopher Paolini actually has a really fun poke at economics in his inheritance cycle when Galbatorix talks about how he spends an inordinate amount of his time protecting total coinage against counterfeit, which I think is far more interesting than any economic discussion in ASOIAF. But sure. The Lannisters have a Gold Mine. And somehow the Iron Islands exclusively support themselves of raiding. Just bizarre.

[@mfcabrini]

I just stumbled on this in Michael Martinez's "Middle Earth Blog: " In the second stage, the days of Pride and Glory and grudging of the Ban, they begin to seek wealth rather than bliss. The desire to escape death produced a cult of the dead, and they lavished wealth on tombs and memorials. They now made settlements on the west-shores, but these became rather strongholds and ‘factories’ of lords seeking wealth, and the Númenóreans became tax-gatherers carrying off over the sea evermore and more goods in their great ships. The Númenóreans began the forging of arms and engines." -- Letter 131

[@danguillou713]

I don’t disagree with what you’re saying, exactly. I think. But I don’t agree with the way you put it. I don’t think Lord of the Rings is a great story because it is an epic fairy tale. I think it’s a great story that happens to be an epic fairy tale. I don’t think RR Martin is wrong to ask these questions about tax policy, farming technology and potential genocidal warfare against remnant orc tribes. I myself find those kind of questions fascinating and worthy subjects for storytelling. But nor do i find Tolkien at fault for being completely uninterested in the minutiae of rulership. I’ve read a bit of history, and some of the most fascinating parts have been about exactly how farming and taxation worked in a medieval village. Or about court intrigue, murder and civil war in proto-France. And then some author who’s into the same stuff goes and writes a fantasy novel: I’m there for it. But I also dig Prince Valiant, Morte d’Arthur and TH White, so if someone is telling stories about a young squire having adventures and working his way up toward knighthood in a really idealized chivalry setting, I’d be happy to read that too. My actual actual favorite fantasy involves heists in a magical fantasy bronze age metropolis called Lankhmar. Another absolute favorite is realistic psychology (although with a jungian bent) and progressive lefty ideas baked into a really epic fairy tale with dragons and sailing. What I’m saying is that Tolkien did something really unique and different. He was a linguist inventing con-langs and fake mythology as a hobby for his entire life, he was a world-builder first, who wrote four novels set in that world, almost as a biproduct. That gives his books some unique qualities, no two ways about it. I am a fan of Tolkien! I just don’t think that ”doing what Tolkien did” is any kind of measurement for what is good storytelling.

[@kidsyx]

Ive said this to people about GRRM before. He has said that his true passion is writing people and love, that might be true but thats not where he shines. He is really good at writing politics. His legendarium itself isn't overly that creative. It has a few really exceptionally orginal characters. Theres no doubt about that but his world building is nothing compared to Tolkiens world building.

[@UnclePhil73]

I agree at some point you have to say it's a story. Do I care about the colors of every horse? No. Do I need to hear every story of every soldier at every battle? No. I want to hear things that move the story along and give me the idea of how the characters and plot are progressing. Unless Aragorn's tax policy somehow bring Sauron back, then it's not relevant for me to hear.

[@kieferclaes4067]

The real question is, what was Ned Stark's tax policy. He's basically the archetypal "Good King" figure, though not a King in his own right, the shoe fits. Yet we know nothing about his tax policies. So GRRM's own criticism could be applied to himself.

[@sageofcaledor8188]

Wonderful video and great insight!

[@camillosteuss]

Tolkien`s books are like elven love, pure and as far from the carnal as possible, and there you have GRM asking, but what about anal? what about fetishes and incest? what about using chopped off orc limbs as sex toys? NO! NONE OF THAT! If you want that, go read a G.R.R.M book, oh, wait, you cant, as he wont publish it, but if you are here for the Tolkien`s works, you enjoy what they offer and dont ask what about something that if is a part of that world is so unimportant to the matter regarding which the books are written... Its like asking after reading a biology encyclopedia - but where`s the cars and vehicles part? There is none there, the book deals with other subjects of the world and not technology, not physics, not math, its a biology only - specialized book... Its not a general encyclopedia to contain a bit of everything with expanded focus on some fields...

[@Thegreywanderer42]

You* don’t care about his tax policy. Nice click bait though.

[@juckoosaurus]

Wonder if Mordor's restaurant charges unfair service tax

[@TheSorrel]

I think you shouldn't take Martins comments on TLotR at face value. Of course he knows that the Lord of the Rings isn't supposed to be a realistic drama. But he got the idea of ASoIaF by basically reading TLotR as conservative propagabda and thinking about what the society behind that might look like. The pnly actual criticism Martin points toward Tolkien concerned Gandalfs Death.

[@virginiahansen320]

Every time GRRM tries criticizing Tolkien I just want to say: "Uh-huh, and where IS The Winds of Winter?" Guy can't even finish his own story and wants to bad-mouth the guy who invented the genre.

[@recursiveslacker7730]

This was something he said when an interviewer asked him what he’d change if he HAD to change anything. This was his attempt at not giving a boring answer. I think you’re being too hard on him for trying to give the interviewer something to work with.

[@dgxkeyboards4535]

We Should Get A Sequel to Return of the King About Aragorn's Tax Policy.

[@Sari36YT]

Well said! Really glad I found this channel. You seem to have really well thought out and considered content!

[@striker8961]

I think he meant that as more of an example of not knowing quite how well he ruled and what he did cus if he did we'd be getting a whole lot more taxes from him

[@samhinnant4416]

I think George should focus more on finishing his books than commenting on parts of greater writers books that he doesn't like.

[@jerseymikes3403]

When did he say he didn't like them? You sperg out over the littlest things.

[@thedarkmasterthedarkmaster]

@@jerseymikes3403 Why do you dodge the main point. Can he finish his fucking books?

[@Sarah-ok6xq]

Aaragorn would have seen to it that duties and obligations were fulfilled. Martin is a modernist and Tolkien was a traditionalist.

[@canahmetdarama354]

It depends on the story. If the universe is important for that story, I would like to learn policies of the rulers

[@niclasjohansson5992]

Lotr is also written as a historically revised epic with one revision being in verse and a latter one is written in prose. An epic wouldn't contain minutia like that

[@FlagAnthem]

Is an ecosystem with dragons stable?

[@Huffman_Tree]

Makes me puke how some people ride these Martin quotes to hell and back without any charitability about what he may have actually wanted to express with those thoughts. Not meaning the Tolkien Geek with that.

[@seeker6755]

NO wonder why George RR Can't finish his Books.

[@HS-su3cf]

Been some years since I read GRRM, but can't remember he deals much with Robert Baratheon's tax policies.

[@briankinsey3339]

Martin in many ways is a product of the times we live in. He writes with an express purpose of showing that good guys don't always win, that heroes aren't necessarily nice guys, and that the "real" world is much bloodier and more chaotic than that world that "classic" fantasy portrays. It's a reaction against the classic tropes of fiction - not just fantasy - and it is a valid lesson in the modern world, which is largely sanitized from the kind of chaos you find in ASOIAF. Tolkien wrote from that "classic" style, which arose in a world where readers didn't need to be reminded of the tragedy and failure of life - they lived it in their day to day existence much more than we do. Stories were usually meant to rise above the day to day, and paint a picture of the way things "should" be. Martin, like many other moderns, is reminding us of the way life actually tends to be instead. And I like both authors, though I'm still PO'd at Martin for not finishing the books first!

[@PoyoPoyomfs]

And why is that a bad thing? What i want its a well writen story not escapism.

[@TolkienLorePodcast]

Some might say the purpose of art is to point us to something higher, not merely represent how bad we already are.

[@PoyoPoyomfs]

@@TolkienLorePodcast thats not the purpose of art

[@TolkienLorePodcast]

That’s your opinion.

[@thedarkmasterthedarkmaster]

@@PoyoPoyomfs Escapism does not exclude a well written story. Also art has no purpose except the act of being made by a person for their own enjoyment

[@JamesMC04]

Tolkien gives some attention to what might be called constitutional issues, in Unfinished Tales, some of the Appendices, and the Akallabeth. Tribute is mentioned at various points, but not fiscal arrangements. His myth is about as far as can be from “kitchen sink” drama.

[@incanusolorin2607]

THANK YOU!

[@Pandaemoni]

Tolkien was writing about a world that decays over time. I always found there to be a tension between the crumbling world, the triumph of good over evil, and the notion that goodness tends to be rewarded (or leads to prosperity). And I think the last of those three points is a romantic notion that, given the decaying nature of the Tolkien's world, was eventually bound to fail (at least until the world is remade and the Second Music of the Ainur begins). The great splendors of the past all crumbled and left us the world you see in the Fourth Age. Magic was fading. I think it is fair to question having Elessar as King really should have led to a century of peace and prosperity when we know little of the practicalities of his rule other than knowing that he was himself virtuous. So far as we ever learn, nothing in Aragorn's background trained him for the role of day-to-day adminsitration of his kingdom. He led the relatively small and very self-sufficient Rangers of the North, but not such besides. One can say, oh, but it's a fairy-tale, but it's a fairy tale world that will continue to fall apart until at last it is our own magicless, problem-filled world where we know those skills are needed to hold it together. It's not clear to me that some basic economics wouldn't have helped King Elessar. I understand not everyone cares, but I would love to know the specifics of the laws and policies that were in place under his reign, even though it is a world where whether one is a prince or a pauper depends more on your parentage and blood, rather than merit. And that itself is in some tension with the notion that one's moral virtue will be rewarded. I find myself asking questions like that a lot...like did the hobbits ever pay for their food and drink at the Prancing Pony and, if so, using what currency? Did the Shire have a currency of its own (which seems unlikely, but they were presumably not bartering other goods and livestock for their drinks at the Green Dragon or the Ivy Bush in the Shire) or did they use some other country's currency? Perhaps the currency oif Arthedain in the beginning, but by the time of Frodo that coinage would be far too ancient to still be in circulation, since Arthedain fell a millennium before that. Or, from another franchise, why did Palpatine even want to be Emperor? It wasn't merley to destroy the Jedi as he was Emperor even after that. Real emperors need to worry about things like crime rates and lawlessness in the Outer Rim, about agricultural and economic policies (if only to maximize their own personal wealth), which I can't imagine was the lure for him. So what was his intended endgame?

[@TolkienLorePodcast]

Frodo actually mentions (or thinks to himself) that he has a little money on him at the Prancing Pony. But there aren’t exactly a lot of opportunities to spend money in the story otherwise lol.

[@HeavyMetalMouse]

General agreement, and mild counterpoint - For questions like "What happened with this character?" or "What was this like?", in addition to things like the Appendices, as you do mention, there is also simply the possibility of, if the author decides something is interesting enough, just *writing another story*. That new story may very well care deeply about how exactly Aragorn was a good man and good king, and what challenges he had to overcome in being a good king in a world of Men who had for a long time had only Stewards of varying quality. For a story like that, how he handles the Treasury of Gondor, or how he deals with the remnants of the Orcs, could be *extremely* relevant... to *that* story. JRRT didn't get around to writing that story, if he ever wanted to, so we don't exactly know what he might have written in it, save for bits of content referenced here that might inform such speculation. Someone today, just because they think they have a good story to tell, could entirely independently use Tolkien's world and characters to write a story of their own in which such things play a pivotal roll, and the reading public would have to decide how much they like that story and want to accept it into their understanding of that world and its stories or not. So yes, I fully agree - The Fellowship of the Ring, as a story, does not care about the question of Aragorn's Tax Policy, and complaining that it does not is missing the point to a large degree; but on the other hand, it is not unreasonable to think that a further story, in which such details become important, could be worth telling in its own right.

[@Angenga]

I like ASOIAF and LOTR for veeeery different reasons, Tolkien is pure escapism and myth, Martin is family drama, political intrigue, anti-war and social commentary set in a fantasy world with strong elements of magic and medievalism, to compare the two because they happen to lie largely within the same genre is just pointless, GRRM can come across very insecure at times, dont get me wrong though, I still very much enjoy ASOIAF

[@Kilthan2050]

I like both Tolkien and GRRM for what they are, and what they are are two different things. Tolkien is High Fantasy, Mythology, Legend. GRRM is Low Fantasy, History, Politics. They're only related in so much as they both are 'Fantasy Worlds' but that is merely set dressing for the largely narratives. They're too different genres, at heart. There are very few Fantasy settings designed like GRRM's, because to most people, Fantasy is to escape the realism. I usually make this comparison when talking about Sci Fi themed things. Comparing Star Wars and Star Trek doesn't make sense. Yes, they're both set in space, with FTL travel, space ships, aliens, etc. But that's set dressing. Star Wars is a mythical sort of story, the minutia of how things work doesn't matter, its the greater narrative that does. Star Trek is a hard sci-fi show about politics and interactions between varied groups. In Star Wars, there is a clear Good and Evil, just like in Tolkien. In Star Trek, even the 'good' guys do questionable things, just like in GRRM. You see it in Comic Books as well (classic comics, at least). DC Comics was mythic in scope and scale (Superman, Wonder Woman, Batman, Aquaman, paragons of virtue) where as Marvel was gritty and down to earth, its characters relatable but not mythic in scope. The capes and cowls are just the set dressing for two different types of stories. I love Tolkien's works because of the fact they're so much more than just fantasy stories. I recently read my 6 year old the Hobbit for the first time. It is, as you say, a Fairy Tale. She learned lessons from it. Bravery, sacrifice, the dangers of greed, compassion, confront fear and overcoming it. I explained that Bilbo showed just as much bravery walking into Smaug's lair as Bard did in slaying Smaug. Not everyone can be a great warrior or a dragon slayer, but everyone can be brave. You don't need a mountain full of gold, you need food, a home, and friends to share it with. And I hinted, for when we read LotR, that a small act of compassion, of mercy, can make all the difference. GRRM gave us a world of intrigue and mystery and politics to debate and discuss. Tolkien gave us magic and wonder and adventure and, at the end, a return to home and hearth and growing things