The Lord of the Rings Comments
Lord of the Rings (J.R.R Tolkien)
Tolkien's spent his life writing in the Lord of the Rings world. Tolkien pretty much has four "novel" type stories set in middle earth. I have listed them below in chronological order. Click on the book picture to get an Amazon book description. The Silmarillion is a prequel to the Hobbit and Lord of the Rings. It details the entire history of Middle Earth, how it was formed, describes the history of the First, Second, and Third ages. If you want to really know the history of Middle Earth, and read some of the old tales, read the Silmarillion -- it's sort of the pre-story of the Lord of the Rings, a history of Middle Earth. Children of Hurin is Tolkien's old "new" novel that was recently released by his son, Christopher Tolkien. Christopher edited and completed one of Tolkien's unpublished works. It's a greatly expanded version of Chapter XXI of The Silmarillion, "Of Turin Turambar." and takes place long long before the Hobbit. The Hobbit is the precursor to The Lord of the Rings and pretty much a must read if you like Lord of the Rings. If you have never read Lord of the Rings, I suggest starting with the Hobbit then move on to Lord of the Rings. You can then read the Silmarillion and Children of Hurin
Feel free to rate the Lord of the Rings on the Community Book Review section of the site.
How dare anyone say that Tolkien is a "poor writer" This just shows your incapability to understand his work. Go read Dr. Seuss or something with colorful pictures in it. Tolkien spent more time developing Middle-Earth and the stories surrounding it than any other writer. If his devotion to this series isn't enough to for you to at least give him credit, then you shouldn't have the privillage to read his work.
It sickens me that a fan of this genre would speak so ill of LOTR and its creator.
Tolkien IS a terrible writer. I cant' argue that his plot is nothing short of brilliant or that his attention to detail was incredible. Writing ability has very little to do with plot or detail, but very much to do with style, use of literary mechanisms and general flow. His writing in LOTR exhibits NONE.
I have an English degree, I've read a LOT of boring books that were difficult or slow. Every time I pick up the LOTR series, I want to stomp on the damn books and throw them out the window by the time I get half way through the first book. Great story, terrible writing - but give him credit, his story is one of the few that is able to overcome this this flaw. Everyone has their own tastes though... some people care very little about the way a story is written as long as the plot is good.
I don't he's a bad writer at all. The problem is LOTR was written for children. It's boring for alot of adults me included but i find it hard to fault it on it's own terms. You can be a literary genius who writes a 'devestating existential critque on humanism that reaches into the depths of the human condition' kind of shit. Or, you can be a literary genius who ties together western mythology, imbues with a sense of majesty and realism in doing so entrancing millions and pretty much single handedly forging a genre.
LOTR wasn't meant for children, The Hobbit was.
While creating middle earth was a somwhat great accomplishment at it's time, world building has gone far far far beyond Tolkien these days.
The actual trilogy though, is not by far my #2 of epic fantasy. It lacks so much. And a world devided in pure evil & good... too simple.
Simply couldn't stand this steaming pile of manure. I tried so hard: dedicated reading sessions without music on, rereading paragraphs i daydreamed through but it wasn't enough. About two thirds through i smashed this epic tome off a wall, ripped it into several peices then binned it.
I hate the linear structure following only a single group at once. The christian good and evil feel brings it up to another level of tediousness. I hate the retarded use of exclamation marks: often at the end of long sentances. They sound sort of peevish, at best, lame and at its worse eye gougingly cringeworthy - i'm talking about the elf dialogue.
What about those songs and poems? Simplistic rhymes aught not to be that bad right? No. Quickly these become a concentrated form of torture -i have to read them, if i pick and choose what i read i'd quickly skip the entire book.
Admittely i saw the films first which takes away the plot discovery pleasure of a first read. On the other hand i've read most of the other fantasty cannon: the entire malazan book of the fallen, soiaf, the first law, farseer++ etc etc. I read and enjoyed (even if they were a bit stodgy in places) 'difficult' books like Titus Groan++ and Jonathan Strange&Mr Norrel. Lord of the rings just feels like drivel in comparison.
I can appreciate the historic importance of it, how much influnce it's had on the entire genre but i feel most people read this book as a child, i mean ages eight to ten. Life's too short to read crap like this.
A comparison between Tolkien's books and modern fantasy is somewhat problematic.
The common mistake is that people assume Tolkien wrote some piece about good & evil and threw in a couple of fantastic elements.
One could not be more wrong.
Actually, first of all, Tolkien regarded The Silmarillion as his most important work and LOTR, which he composed as one volume, as some sort of follow-up.
Unfortunately, he died before completion of The Silmarillion, on which he worked for almost 50 years. It fell to his son Christopher to edit and publish the final versions of Silmarillion and later works like the Children of Hurin.
Tolkien was a renowned linguist and expert on nordic/gothic literature and mythology. When he started to write his first stories for Silmarillion he tried to emulate the atmosphere and style of nordic sagas and as a linguist he had great fun in inventing complex languages.
His aim was to publish a mythology which could actually have "existed". Once he said that his Middle Earth is to be regarded not as some kind of fantasy world but nothing else than our own earth - a couple of thousand years ago.
To appreciate Tolkiens writings it is helpful to read nordic sagas like the Edda or old english texts like Beowulf. One immediately discovers dozens of parallels: settings, actions, heroes, the pantheon, motifs...
So, Tolkien did not write what we today regard as fantasy, he wrote a mythology which could actually have evolved from ancient times.
Either you're retarded or you haven't read the Silmarillion or you haven't any stretch of imagination and you're lost in the wordplay. I don't think you like deep immersion, either, because you speak as if you prefer looking at things from the third person.
Fantastic setting and characters. Tolkien is easily #1 when it comes to influence, and probably writing ability, as well.
Anyone who think's Tolkien's writing is"poor" because it is "outdated" is illiterate and needs to go back and read more classic literature.
As for saying "fantasy has moved on since then", I should hope so, because most of the people saying that seem to believe that fantasy as a genre should be one thing, should be strictly of its time and of no interest to future readers, and that each author should be like the last one you read.
As for the assertion that Tolkien was all about poor characterization and simplistic morality, that is simply false. Asserting that good and evil exist is a comment on the human condition, not "unrealistic"; this focus on "grim and gritty" (across genres) is just as escapist as medieval romance.
And it's a poor sort of escapism, a sort of power fantasy wishing the world were a grimmer place than it already is (presumably so we could ignore the problems we are already faced in life.)
Note that I'm not defending a simplistic black and white morality, I'm saying Tolkien was not about that. His books are an eloquent defense of various moral values, showing paragons of good and evil and everyone in between. One could even argue that Gollum is the central character of the book.
One shouldn't go by the militarism of the films with their orcs=dark-skinned easterners simplification of the plot. That's actually a modern misinterpretation of the work. The orcs in the book are evil for a reason and it is reflected in their dialogue and upbringing (yes, they have plenty of dialogue in the books).
And the goodiest of Tolkien's goody-two-shoes believe in mercy even to Sauron's slaves.
Are you serious here? I've read all of your top 5 and they simply are dim bulbs compared to LOTR. Tolkein was a literary master. His inspiration was drawn from Norse mythology where he was a recognized expert. His poetry and prose are very moving and I still get emotional every time I read the final pages of Return of the King, which takes almost religious overtones of the afterlife.
I might put George R R Martin's work second, but while Erickson's work is very entertaining, it is simply light entertainment compared to the depth of the world and the epic characters that Tolkein brings us. What shouldn't even be in the top 10 however is the Name of the Wind. That work is a psychological ploy that glorifies evil IMHO.
We want to escape in our fantasy books. To enter a world that is epic and grand and not grind down into a depressing spiral or into the brutal details of someones sick mind. I'm afraid Rothfuss and even at times George Martin tends to go there. Tolkein, on the other hand always lives one feeling that the world will be a little better tomorrow with a little effort.
There is a reason why Led Zeppelin based half their lyrics on Tolkein's work and why the Tolkein movies are so moving and epic. You will not see the same from these other works and they fall short of this inspiration.
One of the best books I have ever read and the best fantasy book by far. Strange to find comments about Tolkien's writing being poor. Of all the things you could criticize him for, this was the least expected. His writing may be a bit naive compared to Martin and Abercrombie (both great writers) but that's because he wrote his books a long time ago and personaly I think he succeeds in writing a better story with his naive style. Almost everything about his writing is subtle. The humor, the subtext, the historical references and the depth of his characters. There is so much to read between the lines and every time I read it I learn more about the story and about myself. I have always been inspired by the book and it always makes me feel like I want to be better person after reading it. This is why I read, to imagine, to learn and to be inspired. Really can't ask for more from any book.
This will always be my number 1.
Just because a series is considered to be the first in the genre, doesn't make it the best. His writing is fairly poor and characters are poorly written. Fantasy has advanced since then and better material has been written.
Truly, direly bad. Loved it when I was 18. Now I just can't bear it. No ear for dialogue, no characterisation beyond the cardboard cutout, set in the stilted mores of it's time (Frodo is a nice upper-middle class chap, so must be the Ringearer, Samwise Gamgee, the horny-handed son of the soil being cast ass faithful retainer - ugh!)
omg.guys we are talking about a man who write a history for a world ,make language,legends ,myths ,song for the damn world.he even write a bible for it(The Silmarillion).he is like a god in fantasy gener.
"His writing is fairly poor and characters are poorly written" .are u kidding me ?he taught Anglo-Saxon in oxford .i mean no offence ,i have read a a song of ice and fie and malazan book of the fallen and none of them had a richer usage words.
"The Lord of the Rings" isn´t only one of the best books of fantasy, but also one of the best books ever written in the history of mankind. If someone is able to really appreciate the language, the veracity, the idea and the imagination of a story, then Tolkien has to be named together with other inimitable writers like Dostojewski, Faulkner, Carson McCullers, Harper Lee, Gabriel Garcia Marquez, Astrid Lindgren ... It isn´t possible to compare the works of that writers because they are unique. And so Tolkien and Middle Earth is. In the genre of epic fantasy there isn´t one only work that can be compared with "The Lord of the Rings". There are other good fantasy novels of course, which are masterworks as well: "The Neverending Story" by Michael Ende or "Momo" from the same author, but these books deal with completely other aspects. Gandalf, Bilbo and Frodo sit together with Artus and Beowulf, together with old goods and heroes, with dragons and some pipeweed of course and in the stories they tell is a gleam of the ancient dark and the ancient light that Tolkien loved so much.
i have read every book in this top 25... but of all of them i find LOTR to be the best... i dont know how to explain it but i find myself reading and rereading every single book, including the silmarillion and lost tales etc..., over and over again... no other fantasy novel in this list has given me as much enjoyment and as much to think about as LOTR...
I re-read the trilogy about every year to year and a half (I'm a fast reader). I've read a lot of different genres, from history to science fiction, but LotR is one of the few books I keep coming back to time and again. If I had to make a criticism, it would be that some of the poetry/songs in it aren't that great; others are pretty good.
It's the high water mark I don't think any other series in fantasy has reached.
To the poster who said it tops lists by 'default', you couldn't be more wrong. LotR is the birth of modern fantasy but it's more than that. Empathetic characters, sense of scope and purpose, high stakes, (thankfully) not a bunch of silly, sappy sophomoric romance (and I'm female), great lead characters, sufficient, but not overwhelming supporting characters who have their own personalities, new languages and top notch lore. It has it all.
anyone else think that pedro's argument makes no sense at all?
That's the same as saying that citizen kane or the Godfather should not be on a lit of best movies because they are old and technology, direction style, sensibilities etc have changed the course of film-making. Frankly that's just complete BS. You might argue that it shouldn't be no. 1, but the reasons you stated are ridiculous. A better reason would be that it is already popular that no one should reasonably not know its name.
Also, the main point of these rankings is recommending the best fantasy books to people who are looking for some good fantasy to read. I dont see why they shouldn't start with LOTR, in fact it would be best to start there, since that is the beginning of the post modern wave of fantasy.
Like I've said below, at least half of these books would not have existed without LOTR being there first to give the inspiration, influence and the creative direction, and some of these writers (like Patricia Mckillip) have admitted as much themselves.
I disagree with everyone who says it should be ranked 1, and most of all with the rank it's been given! Here we have the same issue with the ranking of the Egypt's pyramids as a wonder. Tolkien was one of the main founders of what the genre lately developed to. As you say, it's a mark. And as such, should not be compared to the others. As the pyramids are not on the new list of wonders, LoTR should not be ranked in a Fantasy book ranking.
Here is my take on this. I think a lot of people look at what the books have done and automatically say that LOTR should be number 1 on all fantasy lists forever. While i agree No set of books will likely ever do more for any genre as LOTR has done for fantasy i dont think when rating the best books it automatically reserves them as number 1.
Personally i am tired of seeing every list have them as number 1 by default. If you use some basic criteria rating for the books themselves and not what they did for fantasy I personally believe it is not out of the question to have Sword of ice and fire and Malazan book of the dead series above LOTR.
While LOTR will always have a place in my heart and is undoubtedly the most influential series of book in the genre when looking at the list of best fantasy based purely on the story, the writing, the characters, and world i agree with the author of the list in this case for Erikson and Martin.
I've always grown up with the Lord of the Rings, it was the most amazing book and movie ever, it is one of the main things I remember when I was younger, definitely the best fantasy there is, good Tolkien.
Evan's review mirrors my feelings exactly. While I enjoy plenty of other fantasy series, I consistently come back to LOTR. A year does not go buy that I don't read these books. It should most definitely be number one in my opinion.