Lord of The Rings

I know it was ground breaking for its time but I re-read it not to long ago and I set them down with a sadness.

I didn’t find the writing nor the story really that “AMAZING” but rather mediocre and blandly told.

I find many SCi-Fi stories now a days with much better writing styles, better stories and plots, and to me above the “LOTR series” and yet LOTR is championed as one of the great of its Genre. I do not see the greatness as much as I just see it being one of the “first”.

The movies were like the book. Medicore with nothing that really stood out.

Maybe I am being cynical but I have to question that if this is truly “One of the Greats” what exactly is it that is so “great”.

PS: Cherry Cola Sucks.

Personal preference vs. collective preference.


The same comparison can be made between a photo-realistic painting and the Mona Lisa. Or Vonnegut and Vic-k. As long as we are talking opinion there is no answer.

At the end of the day I think we need to remember that art (of which literature is a type) is primarily subjective.

I think LOTR reads better if you approach it as an epic history of language, to be honest. The linguistics and etymological diversions are more interesting, and frankly better thought out, than the adventure - which is hardly surprising, given Tolkien’s profession.

Not that I think the adventure side is bad, per se, but it hasn’t dated well (ironic, given that it’s a fantasy). One of the reasons I enjoyed the films so much is that they made a much more compelling adventure out of the source material, and pretty much discarded the linguistics side.

LOTR is in the same boat as NEUROMANCER, for me - taken in context of its time, it’s a stunning and singular achievement, a book that almost single-handedly created (and certainly popularised) a genre. But out of context, it suffers because so many of its then-innovations are now commonplace, even clichéd.

I re-read it after seeing the movies - which I loved. I though they did an excellent job of condensing the story into a manageable chunk.

But when I re-read the book, I was almost ashamed to say that I found it very slow. So much of it takes place in meandering observation and thought processes. The action parts of the book are never done in detail, they win a battle in two paragraphs and go on to talk some more about good tobacco, or tea.

I thought that it was probably a symptom of today’s fast paced world - that I didn’t have the time to sit and wallow in the sensuality of description. That I’d become so desensitised that I couldn’t appreciate the detail. I often have a go at my hubby for wanting to watch movies that are full of flames and blood and speed and nothing else. I was horrified to think that I coud be tarred with the same brush.

But on reflection, I don’t think I should feel that I let him down. I enjoyed reading the books when I was 12, and will always hold them dear. But times and writing styles change.

So wot ysayin then, I`m as good as the Mony Lisa?

in a comparative way considering… viewtopic.php?f=8&t=4371&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&hilit=troll#p35389

Also would help if I was slightly better at spelling than bird brain.

this isn`t you by any chance…is it?

Don’t I wish!!!

If I had that much dance ability I would have 3 kids, not 2.

And how cool would that be?! Travel the world and having FUN!

My life … blows. At least I have a mac.

When I hear about dancing I go back to this video and wonder how this young whipper snapper has the strength to do what it is he does.

I mean upper body strength and balance that would make any olympian green with envy!

And he is british I think…

Um - well. I am finally daring to reply.

I love the Lord of the Rings, and have reread it many times. As an adult, I notice different things in it than I did as a child. And it still strikes me as unique in many ways.

First, of course, the languages. I got really irritated when I read the (admittedly very clever) kid’s book, Ella Enchanted, and had to cope with the way she wrote Ogrish and other languages. It was just annoying. Tolkien’s languages hang together and make sense.

Second, the care and exactness with which he describes nature and the journey within it. You can really feel that you are in this world with the characters.

Third, as Ursula LeGuin pointed out, the “Mrs. Brown” factor. This is a book in which the humble people are the heroes. And that’s one respect in which it was really innovative. Most fantasies before this, I believe, involved knights and heroes and “chosen ones”. In this regard, the Potter books are a long step backward.

Finally, this is an epic quest of renunciation. It’s all about loss and partial victory, and loss as victory. Most of the Tolkien imitators are all about victory and winning - which completely misses the point.

But I have to admit - I love, love, love Scrivener, which is why I’m here. The program’s been a big boost to my writing. But I often feel a bit out of place here otherwise; so many people slam literature that I love and praise stuff I’ve never heard of or can’t stand.

Oh, well. We all get along, anyhow, don’t we?

I love LOTR but I couldn’t bring myself to possibly read everything that goes with it. Most people only read ‘The Hobbit’ and ‘LOTR’. In addition, all of his notes, debates, lectures and unfinished works have been compiled and published into (18?) companion volumes for what amounts to a life-long study of the universe he created.

It’s all more than just a story, that’s fer shizzle…

What happens when someone steals BOTH your bags? Or maybe mine weren’t stolen and I lost them? Does this mean that I am doomed to an eternity of futile attempts at filling a non-existing bag with the content of another non-existing bag?

Thank you so much for this. I must now go and find a bag to carry with me. And this just when snort got me to give up my blankie.

I think you can pick up combo luck/exprience bag replacement kit at Wal-Mart. Costs around $20 bucks.

Apple is coming out with iBag for OSX as well. You’ll have to subscribe to their .Bag service however. :slight_smile:

We do… but perhaps not when I point out that I am in the rare camp that not only dislikes LOTR, but I never liked it, not even as a child.

It’s one of those books where I could never understand what all the fuss was about.

You have to learn Elvish.


You don’t have to learn Elvish per se, but it certainly helps :slight_smile: One of my professors at university is fluent in Sindarin - weird^^
For me, LOTR is in its own league. It is not my favourite book, because that would be unjust to other books - there simply is no comparison. I’m not that old (22), so my first real contact with the books was when the films came out. I did read LOTR and Hobbit before, but only once or twice. After films… oh my god. I now own all books by Tolkien in German and most of the English ones (there are FAR more English books than German) plus a number of secondary literature ranging from maps to envish dictionaries.
I think you mustn’t see LOTR as an adventure book. If you think about it it has a sad ending. Ok, Sauron kicks the bucket, but a which price? The “cool guys” are all gone - I mean hontestly, those Elvish dolks are just incredibly great, and now they are gone.
If you keep in mind that Sauron is just a tiny, tiny servant of Melkor, the real BAD GUY, and consider the difficulty of removing him for the people of the third age, you see pretty clearly that LOTR has no happy ending. Not at all.
Mm, I gotta go to university, maybe I’ll write a bit more later :slight_smile:

I’d type out my response in Entish, but I fear it would explode the data limitations of the forum database.

I had never read The Hobbit or LOTR (this was being published for the very first time when I was starting school). And we never heard about it or read it in school.

So my introduction was the movies. About two years ago I finally read the Hobbit. I had to remind myself not to compare with the movie. I enjoyed it, but it really isn’t my style (I seldom read fantasy).

the story of this book was revolving around the historical event occurred in North-west middle east

Absolutely not … For Tolkien this was recreating a mythology for England as we had lost ours … how many English people these days know anything about Gog and Magog, Queen Mab, etc.? He was an Anglo-Saxon scholar and philologist, whose roots for his languages were Welsh and Finnish as well as Anglo-Saxon.

Though there are those who link his oeuvre to that of Lord Dunsany, Time and the Gods, etc., I can’t see it. As a devout Catholic, it is not in any way surprising that his universe starts from a creation myth involving a single godhead, creating what resemble archangels and angels and then the world. There is a parallel in Morgoth, to the Lucifer story too. But Tolkien explicitly said that his work was not religious literature, even though the Catholic Church likes to claim that the first in a revival of the Catholic novel.

The Middle-East has nothing to do with it at all!