Is The Lord of the Rings still relevant?

[Boba Frag]

Of course LotR is still relevant, even if it's just because of its enormous influence on fantasy. The simplest definition of a High Fantasy setting is "like Lord of the Rings."

You should definitely see The Hobbit too.

Really the only thing that makes LotR irrelevant is when you think how easy it would have been to break the story...namely the whole "Ummmmm...why didn't we just take the Eagles to Mordor?"

There's many counter-arguments to that.

The one I like most is that they couldn't possible hope to destroy the Ring if Sauron saw them coming, which he obviously would have if they just flew to Mount Doom.

There's also the fact that the Eagles are servants of Manwë who exist to observe the mortal realm, not alter its history. This is lost in the films but even rescuing Gandalf from Isengard was an uncomfortable grey area to them. In the book the Eagle complains that he "came to bear tidings, not burdens."

Thank you for exploding that lazy and obnoxious 'plot hole'.

It's one that's always irritated me as a fan of the books first and foremost.

I find it interesting that many people on the thread refer to the movies first, then the games, but seldom the actual source material.
Which is a shame, to be honest, as it's one of the most engaging books I've ever read- I found it very, very difficult to read much other fantasy after it because I was so in love with Tolkien's living, breathing Middle Earth which had its own history and cultures, adventures and the ever present sense that you walked upon the lands of your forefathers at every step.
It's a setting that I find so rich and refreshing to return to again and again I can't ever see myself getting bored with it.

It's been a while since I've watched the movies, which I adore, but ever since I first read the Lord of the Rings when I was 12 going on 13, I've returned to Middle Earth more or less every year to dive in and out of the books.

Perhaps that makes me a Tolkien obsessive, but the fact remains that I can never grow tired or bored of a book that transports me instantly to another world with a word describing the glint of snow on the Misty Mountains, or the thundering clamour of the Falls of Rauros.

I'd definitely recommend people to approach it as a book that starts off as a slightly slow burning tale, that steadily ramps up the fear and danger that Frodo and his companions face.

Which brings me to another point- Frodo of the movies is often portrayed as weak willed and helpless, which is a shame, as this undermines what Tolkien presents Frodo as in the books.

He is someone who is way in over his head, but remains firmly resolute to do the right thing.

A person whose strength of will is much greater than it appears and who continues to seek the destruction of the One Ring, even though it constantly weighs on his mind, because he knows how evil it is, and what will happen to other people if he fails.

This is getting a bit long, so I'll sign off and let you guys to it.

 

[Megalodon]

snip

Fair enough, I'd forgotten just how bizare some of the Beasts fluff went. Personally I found making them less Chaos the more objectionable aspect. It was weird how they seemed to want to strip any servitude/loyalty to the Dark Gods out of what had previouslt been referred to as "The Children of Chaos"

 

[bug_of_war]

I am intrigued to see so many responses in favor of the series, since the people in my direct environment seemed to agree with me. As for Dragon Age and Warhammer they both took Lord of the Rings as a foundation and then build something else on top of it; paladins versus mages and giant-weapon-baddassary respectively.

Here's the thing though, we tend to surround ourselves with like minded people, so of course you're going to find many people in your direct association vicinity to agree with you. For example, all of my friends thought Mass Effect 3 was great and so did I, our opinion isn't the most popular, but we all think similarly to one and other, hence our opinions are similar.

Also, Lord of the Ring was heavily inspired by Norse mythology and in some ways made the old Norse myths relevant to modern times. For example, Elves and Dwarves, two very iconic races found in practically all role playing games stem from Norse mythology. Without The Lord of the Ring I very much believe we would have little knowledge of either of the two fictional races. Also, thanks to TLOTR using Norse Mythology as a template, it has a very deep and intriguing story which seems to click with a lot of people now days (Look at the amount of money the films are making).

Now, I'm not saying your opinion is wrong, it isn't, it's just not for everyone else. You are very much allowed to believe it is as stale as a month old dog shit, but understand that there are a large number of people whom consider TLOTR to be a better version of Norse mythology, just as you find Dragon Age/Warhammer to be a better version of TLOTR.

 

[Rblade]

"Ummmmm...why didn't we just take the Eagles to Mordor?"

flying snakes, witch king of angmar, saurons gaze, 10.000 orcs with bows, Saruman. Without distraction they would have had to scrape the eagle residue of the black gate with a spatula. They aren't immortal. please please please stop making this stupid argument. And that is ignoring the fact that the eagles are described in the book as having an overall stuborn "don't care" attitude about man kind. Gandalf is a very special case.

As to OT. As many have said before, Tolkien invented what is now standard fantasy setting. Stocky stubborn mountain dwelling dwarfs, dainty tree welling arrogant bow shooting elves. On top of that even if the setting has maby moved slightly out of the main stream it's still a timeless classic to fantasy fans

 

[Puzzlenaut]

Well considering the cultural impact is still clearly seen today as the definitive fantasy and the movies was one of the biggest risks any adaptation has ever made and it turned out to be a bunch of quality films, yes it's still relevant. If it wasn't it would have been sent into complete obscurity but many people still enjoy the books and movies and some people enjoy the hobbit. I don't really but yes I think lord of the rings is still quite relevant.

Though you are quite brave claiming of all things, dragon age and warhammer are greater then lord of the rings. Fine in their own merits but they need lord of the rings far more then lord of the rings ever did.

I am intrigued to see so many responses in favor of the series, since the people in my direct environment seemed to agree with me. As for Dragon Age and Warhammer they both took Lord of the Rings as a foundation and then build something else on top of it; paladins versus mages and giant-weapon-baddassary respectively.

Lord of the Rings created a massive world unlike anything anyone has ever seen, with subtleties to it that barely any of the flood of imitators has equalled. There isn't a constant barrage of magical explosions in lord of the rings: magic works by invisible influence and corruption, primarily. Other fantasy works don't understand that more explosion =/= more cool

Warhammer has added literally nothing of note to the genre except a perfected form of a 12 year old's perception of what is "cool". Dragon Age is better than Warhammer but still rather sterile and dull, with the arbitrary and flat moral choices that typify all recent Bioware games.

The slow, creeping evil that seeps through and slowly corrupts society in LotR is far more sinister than the super-muscular Orkz of Warhammer or totally-not-zombies of Dragon Age could ever be. You assert that Lord of the Rings is being 'outdone' and then name literally two of the worst examples of the sterile, shameless LotR rip-offs that pack in literally every tired old fantasy trope that LotR created in the first place.

As a final note: in of itself, LotR is a beautiful piece of literature that holds up magnificently to this day, and in this respect alone will remain relevant for decades to come.

 

[RJ 17]

Snip.

Thank you, you're only about the seventh person to quote me saying the exact same thing. What's really funny is that you all apparently missed the fact that I find that very argument to be a bunch of hogwash. Clearly there's in-story reasons for why it wouldn't work, but also because if they did that there wouldn't be a story at all. The enjoyment comes from the journey, not from accomplishing the end goal.

Please, please, please try reading more comments to make sure that you're not going to be the 7th person in line pestering someone about something when in reality there's no need to be pestering them at all. I, and I'd imagine others, would greatly appreciate it.

 

[Vladimir Stamenov]

I'm not trolling, I'm genuinely asking - is there anyone here, who, after reading and re-reading LotR when he was 12/13/14 but has since read diverse fantasy, sci-fi, classics and contemporary literature ACTUALLY enjoy the books when they've tried reading them recently? Especially the stale characterisation on both sides?

 

[bartholen_v1legacy]

"Ummmmm...why didn't we just take the Eagles to Mordor?"

flying snakes, witch king of angmar, saurons gaze, 10.000 orcs with bows, Saruman. Without distraction they would have had to scrape the eagle residue of the black gate with a spatula. They aren't immortal. please please please stop making this stupid argument.

The best way to stop people from making that argument is to not respond to it at all. Just stop paying attention to it. Plus, complaining about a plot convenience in a book that was released, what, 60 years ago is pretty goddamn petty to begin with. Tolkien wrote it the way he wrote it and that's it. Nothing we can do to change it. Not like there's going to be a rewrite of Lotr with the eagles being replaced with celestial flying meatball octopi or something.

 

[Zykon TheLich_v1legacy]

However, that is not to say it was always like that. Back when Warhammer was like a D&D campaign about the Holy Roman Empire, as played by Monty Python characters, there might have been some merit in the argument. Unfortunately, it's lasting contribution to fantasy seems to have been ""grimdark", in the worst way.

Just so you know, Strike to Stun is still going strong if you want to do some good old fashioned grognardin'

 

[GundamSentinel]

I'm not trolling, I'm genuinely asking - is there anyone here, who, after reading and re-reading LotR when he was 12/13/14 but has since read diverse fantasy, sci-fi, classics and contemporary literature ACTUALLY enjoy the books when they've tried reading them recently? Especially the stale characterisation on both sides?

Yes. I think I've read them a dozen times and I still enjoy them. Sure, they are old books; slow, ponderous and a lot of descriptions. But that's part of my enjoyment of it. I like quick and smart sci-fi and fantasy often enough, but it's good reading a big slow book once in a while. I've been reading Jules Verne recently and that's, if anything, even worse in that regard. And I loved it. I'll never argue that Tolkien is an amazing writer, but he knows how to build his world and make a story of importance and weight within it. That's a rare talent.

 

[Vladimir Stamenov]

I like slow books too, a lot of classics are slow (Pride and Prejudice, Heart of Darkness, Great Expectations), but the last time I tried reading it, it was slow just because nothing happened for large stretches of the book and the language didn't do it enough for me to motivate me. What I realised was, in retrospect, the book's characters and so on didn't really entice me that much the first time around, it's just that for my tiny little brain, this was just the most complex story I'd read. But now that I knew the story and had alreday read it two times before, it just did nothing for me. Lord knows the plot is not simple, but compared to something like The Second Apocalypse, it's not much.
Eh, c'est la vie...

 

[Sean951]

I still regularly read Lord of the Rings. Yes, it is a ponderous tome and I skip most of the songs. And Bombadil. But I thoroughly love the world that Tolkien created and one of the coolest things I own is a first edition printing of The Silmarillien complete with a fold out map that I found for a few bucks at a used book store while on vacation.

 

[TakerFoxx]

I still regularly read Lord of the Rings. Yes, it is a ponderous tome and I skip most of the songs. And Bombadil. But I thoroughly love the world that Tolkien created and one of the coolest things I own is a first edition printing of The Silmarillien complete with a fold out map that I found for a few bucks at a used book store while on vacation.

You found...a first edition copy of the Silmarillion...in a used book store...while on vacation?

Wow. Dude. You shopped, you motherfucking SCORED!

 

[Sean951]

I still regularly read Lord of the Rings. Yes, it is a ponderous tome and I skip most of the songs. And Bombadil. But I thoroughly love the world that Tolkien created and one of the coolest things I own is a first edition printing of The Silmarillien complete with a fold out map that I found for a few bucks at a used book store while on vacation.

You found...a first edition copy of the Silmarillion...in a used book store...while on vacation?

Wow. Dude. You shopped, you motherfucking SCORED!

Yeah I did. I didn't even realize it for a year. I looked at it and realized what it was when I started to read it again and was quite happy with my discovery. I'm a pretty big LotR fan.

 

[KorfZin]

Go ahead and tell me what else from Tolkien is in the already mentioned Dragon Age and Warhammer besides "has elves".

And how would I know I would find "universal disagreement"?

In Dragon Age the Dwarves are cave Vikings who are renowned for their craftsmanship, practice ancestor worship, and generally fear open spaces (specifically the ocean with Tolkien and the surface in general with Dragon Age). The Elves were the "first race" who ruled the world with their powerful magic and impeccable engineering but now they favor dwelling in forests and are in decline because of humans.

The Tevinter Imperium is quite similar to the Númenóreans, they had powerful magic and lorded over "lesser races" of Men, they even both caused apocalyptic cataclysms by defying (the) God(s) and seeking to capture the sacred realm for themselves.

The Lord of the Rings and Dragon Age are both set in worlds similar to Medieval Europe in terms of politics and technology. Both also have a general theme of the world having declined from a more advanced and prosperous state.

I'm not as familiar with Warhammer but such similarities are there as well (in grimdark form of course).

I won't argue that these settings are lesser than Tolkien's just by borrowing many themes from the High Fantasy setting, but I won't deny that the borrowing happened either. The thing about The Lord of the Rings is that it is so deeply embedded in our cultural psyche that many elements of it are simply considered to be a part of fantasy.

And all of these things are surface elements. Most works draing from Tolkien take the races and their trappings, some imagery and the idea of a made up world but little else. I have made no claim that they borrow nothing.

Go ahead and tell me what else from Tolkien is in the already mentioned Dragon Age and Warhammer besides "has elves".

And how would I know I would find "universal disagreement"?

If you don't already understand that if there was no tolkien, there would be no DA or warhammer, then I am afraid I can't help you.

And if you think I said that, I'd like you to show me where I did.

 

[Rblade]

Snip.

Thank you, you're only about the seventh person to quote me saying the exact same thing. What's really funny is that you all apparently missed the fact that I find that very argument to be a bunch of hogwash. Clearly there's in-story reasons for why it wouldn't work, but also because if they did that there wouldn't be a story at all. The enjoyment comes from the journey, not from accomplishing the end goal.

Please, please, please try reading more comments to make sure that you're not going to be the 7th person in line pestering someone about something when in reality there's no need to be pestering them at all. I, and I'd imagine others, would greatly appreciate it.

sorry, it ticks me off. So I did stop reading there. thats my bad. Although I do think a person that says `that thing you like sucks because of reasons´ can get called out on his bullshit. Not that that was particularly the case here, I should keep my cool.

 

[Silvanus]

As to OT. As many have said before, Tolkien invented what is now standard fantasy setting. Stocky stubborn mountain dwelling dwarfs, dainty tree welling arrogant bow shooting elves.

He did not invent either of those things.

Again, I'm not doubting that the man's contribution was massive.

 

[Wolf In A Bear Suit]

Well as it's the basis of much of modern fantasy, yes. The standard it set down is present in nearly every work of fantasy. Tolkien didn't create concepts such as dwarves and elves I'll grant you, but he combined them into a masterpiece. As for the Hobbit and what you may call milking, I found The Hobbit to be an excellent movie in it's own right, even if it isn't LOTR. I wouldn't even call it milking though as The Hobbit was the next logical step, and was heavily expected. Ok three movies for a short book is really pushing it but if it works it works.