Tintin Forums

Tintin Forums / Works influenced/inspired by Hergé /

“Tintin in the New World: A romance”: A novel by Frederic Tuten

Page  Page 3 of 8:  « Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next » 

sliat_1981
Member
#21 · Posted: 10 Jan 2006 07:39 · Edited by: sliat_1981
I should point out that there's even a point in the book where he graphically talks about an errection he had! Is this how you thought of Tintin? I found it was so offensive to me to think that so many children would want this seeing as it had their hero in it and their parents buying it for them only to discover such filth. I feel sorry for my uncle as he knew I loved Tintin, but obviously didn't read this book before he gave it to me. I'm glad this is still concidered unofficial, but I can not understand why Tuten did this to his friend. How would he like it if I made a book about his other charaters talking about their errections and killing themselves?
Tintinrulz
Member
#22 · Posted: 10 Jan 2006 08:58
Exactly. I picked the book up from the library when I was about 10 and was treated to philosophical erotico drivel! It's horrible. I picked up the book thinking it was going to be a novel about Tintin that respected the character, but nooo! I've read it recently to see if my views change but it is crap, absolute crap. Not to mention it's boring as anything. And totally corrupts our hero's innocent image.
sliat_1981
Member
#23 · Posted: 8 Dec 2006 22:20
I trust this book is NOT taken as canon. I have heard that 'Tintin In Thailand' is an offensive sex romp. I can't possibly imagine it as being as bad as this.
I have finally read Tintin In Thailand. Although I think it's offensive, it's nowhere near as offensive as this. At least they didn't split up Tintin and Haddock or kill him off. The sex in Tintin In Thaliand is off-putting, but is never shown and nowhere near as pornographic as Tuten's book. What discusts me is that they gave permission for this. If I was in charge I'd give permission for neither. But if I had no choice, I'd chose Tintin In Thailand anyday.
Aristotle
Member
#24 · Posted: 11 May 2007 17:41
Congratulations, dalidali. You allow your own prejudices and narrow-minded thinking completely destroy any ability to appreciate a story.

What's most pathetic about this whole post of yours is that what offends you most is the idea that Tintin could possibly be homosexual. Oh, how scary. Save us from the scary gay people. Seriously, dude, get past your prejudices.

May I remind you that Captain Haddock has ALWAYS been a has-been drunkard. That's his character, and for those of us who were actually READING the stories, that's why we loved him. Likewise, Snowy was originally conceived as a character to crack wise and serve as a foil to Tintin's relentless optimism. Snowy became more comic relief-oriented ONLY after Haddock was introduced.

That you can only perceive this to be an attempt at creating an "anti-hero" further betrays your complete lack of ability to understand art. The story is attempting to re-examine Tintin, as well as the adventure-story archetype, in a new, more abstract manner. We all know Tintin isn't real, and that his adventures probably could never take place. They're cartoony. And even if they weren't, a kid doesn't stay the same age for 60 years. So what happened when Tintin finally grew up? Well, here's one possibility. If it helps your tiny brain comprehend the story, look at it as if it were an "Elseworlds" story, a possible future, an interesting musing. Thank God no one got this upset when DC Comics published a trilogy of graphic novels featuring an alternate-universe Batman eventually being defeated and assimilated by vampires. Thank God no one got this upset when Luke Skywalker briefly dabbled in the Dark Side in Dark Horse Comics' "Dark Empire" miniseries.

The public's the best critic, huh? I guess that means that Britney Spears is the pinnacle of pop music perfection, Audioslave is way better than Rage Against the Machine, George Bush is a legitimate leader, and Tintin sucks in the U.S. Just based on public opinion, mind you.

Now I can't speak to your accusations of projected insecurity. However, I take issue with your apparent assumption that those "projections" make a person bad. The reason you're mad is that Tintin is portrayed as having "feelings of angst, anger, resentment, disillusion, depression, and perhaps homosexual tendencies." But what the hell is the problem with those feelings? You name me one person who HASN'T felt angst, anger, resentment, disillusion, and depression, and I'll name you someone who hasn't lived. As for homosexuality, it's not a sin, buddy. It's just another way to be. Personally, I don't think Tintin's gay, and I don't think this story makes him gay, but if Tintin had been gay, it'd have been fine with me. So, in summary, yes, it may be the author projecting those feelings onto Tintin, but the fact that you're so offended by the possibility that the fictional character of Tintin might feel the same seems to be a projection of your own deep-seated repressions of the same feelings.

Stupid? I beg to differ, but you've certainly the right to an opinion. Barbaric? The idea of dismissing a story as "barbaric" simply because it exposes Tintin to Eastern ideas would seem to discount a number of Herge's works, but I'll leave you to that contradiction on your own. Allow me to conclude: Herge gave the author PERMISSION TO WRITE THIS STORY. While he was alive, the author ASKED IF HE COULD DO THIS STORY. And Herge said yes. So figure it out for yourself, dali. Your paranoia of Eastern ideas, of adult themes, of homosexuals, of sadness, of humanity, of everything that appears to separate you from the rest of the human society, is outmoded and uncalled for. And the man you seem to worship, Herge, understood that.

Karaboudjan, don't ever become a Star Wars fan. Some of the best, most beautiful works, with the greatest literary and artistic merit, have been accomplished by creators other than George Lucas.

Sliat_1981, how old are you? You write as a freshman girl in an American high school would you. You talk about "psychological junk," and can't even spell the word. You talk about the book as if you took it 100% literally, which one simply can't do with much of the body of modern art and literature. This book was not written with other characters in mind. It was written for Tintin. It was written to challenge preconceptions. Like yours. With the permission of Herge. How does it feel, to be so set in your ways and ignorant of the modern artistic theory, that it places you in complete opposition to the wishes and views of Herge?

Tintinrulz: Philosophy is drivel? I'll let that statement stand on its own. Doesn't even need a rebuttal, really.
Ranko
Member
#25 · Posted: 20 May 2007 15:30
I've just bought a copy of this book on e-bay for £5. I've never read it before so I'm going to go into it with an open mind. There seems to be varied opinions as to the quality and content of the book. I'll have a read and decide what I think.
If I find it not worth keeping then I may pass it on to fellow tintinologists who have not read it just to see what the fuss is about.

Stay tuned. Due to arrive mid week.
Tintinrulz
Member
#26 · Posted: 21 May 2007 06:12
Aristotle, no, Philosophy in general isn't drivel. But much of fiction that is just a mashing of ideas and angsty feelings is labelled as philosophical (and is really drivel). Fredric Tuten's novel fits this mold perfectly.
jock123
Moderator
#27 · Posted: 21 May 2007 13:20 · Edited by: jock123
Aristotle
Congratulations, dalidali. You allow your own prejudices and narrow-minded thinking completely destroy any ability to appreciate a story.
You appear to have taken a very high-handed tone, Aristotle, which doesn’t serve your argument well, I’m afraid - it might be that you are allowing your own prejudices and narrowmindedness to cloud what you say; however I don’t know you, just like you don’t know dalidali, so I wouldn’t presume to condescend to you in such a manner.

What's most pathetic about this whole post of yours is that what offends you most is the idea that Tintin could possibly be homosexual. Oh, how scary. Save us from the scary gay people. Seriously, dude, get past your prejudices.
No that isn’t necessarily the point at all; the sexualization for sensation of a childrens’ character is possibly unacceptable, regardless of sexual orientation. Those who seek to sensationalize sexuality - even in real life, with real people – often seek to make greater issue of the matter by presenting a person as homosexual. Tintin has been subjected to both hetrosexual and homosexual interpretations, and in both cases it has been seen by some as an unnecessary and inappropriate advance.

May I remind you that Captain Haddock has ALWAYS been a has-been drunkard. That's his character, and for those of us who were actually READING the stories, that's why we loved him.
Well again, there is in fact more readings of this than just your opinion.
I think that the character has always been a sort of redemption figure, and that his humanity has been invested with greater resonance by being someone who, far from being a has-been, comes to realise his worth, and gets away from his problems through making a difference in the world.
Whenever the Captain goes back to the bottle, he gets into trouble.
When he stays away, he is often heroic. In my view, the Captain is loveable not because he is a has-been drunk, but because he picks himself up and gets over it.
The charcter in Tuten is far more like the figure slumped at the table in the cabin in Crab than the rest of the series in which he stops being that figure, and becomes something far better, so in that sense the rendering in New World is a retrograde step, as rather than making some new telling point about the Captain, he just ignores the journey the character has been on, and in a rather lazy fashion just makes the figure a stock drunk, as if he hadn’t actually read the books at all.

Likewise, Snowy was originally conceived as a character to crack wise and serve as a foil to Tintin's relentless optimism. Snowy became more comic relief-oriented ONLY after Haddock was introduced.That you can only perceive this to be an attempt at creating an "anti-hero" further betrays your complete lack of ability to understand art.
Why? Why not just see that as a different position to your own? It also has to be said that the novel han’t really been a critical success either, so for whatever reason, perhaps the fault isn’t in not recognizing the brilliance of the novel, but as seeing art where there is in fact none (“Look at the King! Look at the King”)

The story is attempting to re-examine Tintin, as well as the adventure-story archetype, in a new, more abstract manner. We all know Tintin isn't real, and that his adventures probably could never take place. They're cartoony. And even if they weren't, a kid doesn't stay the same age for 60 years. So what happened when Tintin finally grew up? Well, here's one possibility.
Exactly. And dalidali has looked at it and found it wanting - surely a proper response to a piece of art? Surely the point of art is to provoke a response, and this is what it has done; at least he isn’t ambivelent about it.
Add to that that an attempt to bolt a “real” dynamic onto a “cartoony” character might be doomed to failure anyway, and perhaps Tuten just didn’t have a good idea to build from. That’s just another point of view, by the way, I don’t feel compelled to belittle your own alternate position.

If it helps your tiny brain comprehend the story,
There really isn’t any need to be rude - you have yet to show your own intellectual credentials are greater or better than anyone elses, and stooping to name-calling makes it hard to take you and your philosophical handle seriously as a great thinker of the age. Let’s keep things on a higher level than that, please.

look at it as if it were an "Elseworlds" story, a possible future, an interesting musing.
I agree with you that there is certainly room to make that comparison, but only so far as that what one person finds interesting another will be bored to tears by; you couldn’t pay me enough to sit through a football match. So it is up to the individual to decide whether they find the novel interesting, because you can’t dictate for that, and you certainly can’t make that assumption for dalidli.
Personally I think a far better alternate universe was to be found in the DC Comics tale in which the repercussions of a small non-aligned Balkan state being in possession of an atomic rocket capable of reaching the moon a good decade before the super-powers were in such a position was played out as an apocalyptic drama; it still managed to extrapolate a “real” story with resonance, without having to reconcile a “realistic” environment to the “cartoony” world of the original.
Thank God no one got this upset when DC Comics published a trilogy of graphic novels featuring an alternate-universe Batman eventually being defeated and assimilated by vampires. Thank God no one got this upset when Luke Skywalker briefly dabbled in the Dark Side in Dark Horse Comics' "Dark Empire" miniseries
Again, why? Surely a neutral response is artistic death? You also would have to show that there was any real enthusiasm for the Elseworlds approach over the mainstream one, that they equalled or excelled the success of the main series. A lack of success could be read as tacit disapproval; personally I find the Elseworlds approach to be highly variable in terms of merit, and I don’t know that it is true to say that no-one got upset by these books - how do you know?

The public's the best critic, huh? I guess that means that Britney Spears is the pinnacle of pop music perfection, Audioslave is way better than Rage Against the Machine, George Bush is a legitimate leader, and Tintin sucks in the U.S. Just based on public opinion, mind you.
That’s a very selective approach, isn’t it? “Pop” music is what is popular (“of the people”), so if that’s what they buy, that is the de facto standard. There are many ways to define what is good and successful, and sheer bulk sales/ financial reward is one of them, without a doubt. And although I can’t say I have ever bothered to buy or even really listen to Ms. Spears, I can strongly recommend the re-interpretation of Oops! I Did it Again by folk legend Richard Thompson, which he listed as one of the greatest pop-songs of the last millennium, and he knows a thing or two about music.
You’ve also chosen to pit Rage Against the Machine against Audioslave, but it is a very personal selection isn’t it? Many people, both learned and the great unwashed will never have heard of either of them, or may consider neither of them to be real music, if they think of them even as worthy of consideration in the first place. So what you present as absolute values others might see as no value at all - it’s all relative.
The appraisal of critics and analysts does not automatically confer merit upon something; popular opinion is not automatically wrong. Charles Dickens was a popular success years before he was critically acclaimed, and even then Edmund Wilson was only saying what the masses already knew, his criticism wasn’t needed to make Dickens great.
But what the hell is the problem with those feelings? You name me one person who HASN'T felt angst, anger, resentment, disillusion, and depression, and I'll name you someone who hasn't lived.
Well yes, but Tintin didn’t live, did he? You said so yourself earlier. His make-up is exactly that of someone who literally doesn’t have a care in the world, isn’t it, so to change that is to create something which isn’t, by definition, Tintin? To stick the Tintin name on another character could be seen as both ineffectual and frankly wrong. It’s a bit like owning the thousand year old hammer in the joke, which has over the years had a dozen new heads and two dozen new handles - it ceases to be what it started out to be.

yes, it may be the author projecting those feelings onto Tintin, but the fact that you're so offended by the possibility that the fictional character of Tintin might feel the same seems to be a projection of your own deep-seated repressions of the same feelings.
No again I beg to differ - your inability to allow for the fact that taking a children’s character and applying any sexualization to it could be seen as a step too far (akin to the feelies and sex-play for children depicted in Huxley’s Brave New World) is to deny dalidali a valid and fair opinion.
Also you are actually denying the possibility that dalidali’s response is the one that Tuten wanted - it is a book which to me seems designed to push buttons, and this is what it has done.
I am reminded of Sir Ian McKellen talking very eloquently on why he understands homophobia - because he recognizes it in himself; he knows that there is a part of him which could react irrationally to things which are not within his own world picture. Perhaps that is what Mr. Tuten was looking to outline, and your passivity in response to the book is in fact a lack in yourself in some way, or indicative of your inabilty to see some nuance which dalidali is sensitive to? [Continued below.]
jock123
Moderator
#28 · Posted: 21 May 2007 13:32 · Edited by: jock123
Please excuse the consecutive posts, only it doesn’t seem to be possible to post a message this long in a single go; still, it will be soon over! - Jock123

Stupid? I beg to differ, but you've certainly the right to an opinion.
I’m glad that you have taken time to acknowledge the fact at long last, because you certainly haven’t taken such a stand throughout the course of your lambasting of dalidali’s comments.

Allow me to conclude: Herge gave the author PERMISSION TO WRITE THIS STORY. While he was alive, the author ASKED IF HE COULD DO THIS STORY. And Herge said yes. So figure it out for yourself, dali. Your paranoia of Eastern ideas, of adult themes, of homosexuals, of sadness, of humanity, of everything that appears to separate you from the rest of the human society, is outmoded and uncalled for. And the man you seem to worship, Herge, understood that.
Never mind that your contention that dalidali is “paranoid” doesn’t warrant a place in a civilized discussion, there is a fallacious logic to this; just because Hergé allowed it to happen does not mean that it has any worth to it.
And just because he made that allowance doesn’t mean that he liked it, or even that he ever read it. For all we know, he may have expressed exactly the same sentiments as dalidali has done. There just isn’t any case to be made on the matter without evidence (and there is no need to shout…).
Oh, and it ill-behooves you to lecture so harshly and shrilly on the subject of humanity, as it only underlines which could be seen as a lack of the prime human characteristic - compassion…

Sliat_1981, how old are you? You write as a freshman girl in an American high school would you.
To paraphrase, “As for writing like a girl freshman in an American high school, it's not a sin, buddy. It's just another way to be. Personally, I don't think Silat_1981 writes like a girl freshman in an American high school, and I don't think this story makes him a girl freshman in an American high school, but if Silat_1981 had written like a girl freshman in an American high school, it'd have been fine with me.”
Really, don’t keep just slinging insults around as if they constitute some sort of reasoned analysis. You can’t take the moral high ground over dalidali by accusing him of prejudice, and then just turn around and engage in it yourself.

You talk about "psychological junk," and can't even spell the word.
You managed to end the first sentence of the attack on Silat–1981 on a very mysterious extra “you”, but I just put that down to an error on your part, not the opportunity to take a dig, but seeing as you don’t extend that courtesy to others, I’ll mention it now. Oh, and it’s “Hergé”, not “Herge”.

You talk about the book as if you took it 100% literally, which one simply can't do with much of the body of modern art and literature. This book was not written with other characters in mind. It was written for Tintin. It was written to challenge preconceptions. Like yours.
But you have tried time and agin to demolish people here by using just such pre-conceptions yourself - so and so doesn’t understand art, someone else has a “tiny brain”, someone else hasn’t read things properly - so who is more clearly demonstrating their pre-conceptions?

With the permission of Herge.
Again - so what? That permission does not actually make a case for it being good.

How does it feel, to be so set in your ways and ignorant of the modern artistic theory, that it places you in complete opposition to the wishes and views of Herge?
Err, what? What basis have you for making this sweeping statement? One, the level of knowledge of artistic theory doesn’t equate to appreciation of art; nor does it follow that just because artistic theories exist that they are good.
I had to learn a lot about Marxist film-theory for an exam at University, and got quite good marks, as an indication of my knowledge - however, I doubt that it was in any way correlated to my understanding or appreciation of the artistic merits of films, Marxist or otherwise; I personally have not found it to be an analytic tool which I have the need or desire to use.
Two, we know not what the wishes and views of Hergé were in this matter. True, he does appear to have given Tuten carte blanche, but that doesn’t say much. One could easily be swayed by friendship into lending someone a car - it doesn’t make the friend a careful driver, nor does it mean that they won’t crash your car; nor does it pre-suppose that you will automatically be happy if they crash it. It could be that Tuten, metaphorically, crashed Hergé’s car…
Tintinrulz: Philosophy is drivel? I'll let that statement stand on its own. Doesn't even need a rebuttal, really.
No, you have made that out of Tintinrulz’s post, but that isn’t what‘s said - the post says that the book is full of philosophical drivel; you are twisting things to make it otherwise, and such a tactic could in itself be drivel - it certainly isn’t logically sound. Tintinrulz could be speaking from the point of view of someone who has studied philosophy for many years, and it may be a cogent thing to say if the philosophy found in the book is erronious.

Anyway, at the root of all this is that you are quite entitled to your own opinions, Aristotle, but then again so are other members, even when you disagree with them; however, you could be a little more gracious in how you do this, and a little less tart in your choice of expression, which does appear to be on the verge of trolling. There is no need to take pot-shots at mental capacity, ability, beliefs. By all means conduct a robust debate, but that requires that you build a case of your own, not just to blow their houses down.
You have obviously taken a lot of time to consider the book, but the nett result of your post is that we know more about what you think of other people’s ideas (and even about what you think of Star Wars), than of your own ideas about the book.
It is better to lead, to educate, than to batter at people with a big stick, in my opinion, so why not just give your own thoughts on the book directly, rather than venting spleen on others in quite such a confrontational style? Making such direct attacks on people will tend, I find, to entrench them in whatever position they are in, it won’t lead them out of their error.
I’m sure that the result would be more effective and affecting that way. Now that you have let off steam, why not let us know what you think about the book?
Tintinrulz
Member
#29 · Posted: 21 May 2007 13:51
I really have strong doubts that Herge gave permission to Tuten. Herge was no idiot and Tuten obviously just wanted to make a quick buck (I mean he even used characters and whole situtations from another book - Magic Mountain).
jock123
Moderator
#30 · Posted: 21 May 2007 17:52
Tintinrulz
I really have strong doubts that Herge gave permission to Tuten. Herge was no idiot and Tuten obviously just wanted to make a quick buck
Whatever his motives, financial or not, he certainly did get permission from Hergé, with whom he was friends, apparently.

Page  Page 3 of 8:  « Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next » 

Please be sure to familiarize yourself with the Forum Posting Guidelines.

Disclaimer: Tintinologist.org assumes no responsibility for any content you post to the forums/web site. Staff reserve the right to remove any submitted content which they deem in breach of Tintinologist.org's Terms of Use. If you spot anything on Tintinologist.org that you think is inappropriate, please alert the moderation team. Sometimes things slip through, but we will always act swiftly to remove unauthorised material.

Reply



  Forgot your password?
Please sign in to post. New here? Sign up!