Tolkien, Overrated?

[MC K-Mac]

The thing about Tolkien and LotR was that he wasn't so much interested in *writing a novel* as he was interested in *creating a mythology*. He always felt that England lacked a mythology of its own (the Anglo-Saxon mythology of Britain's earlier years was lost after the Norman invasion). So, Tolkien set about creating one, borrowing heavily from Norse and Finnish mythology (which is what Anglo-Saxon mythology was, more or less). This is why there are so many songs and legends and stories in the book that don't really have anything to do with what's currently going on - because Tolkien was trying to create a world with its own myths, songs and legends. Obviously, brevity was not his goal.

For me, this is what makes the books so enjoyable. All the action plays out against this rich, incredibly detailed backdrop that makes everything believable. And the fact that Tokien was a professor of linguistics makes all the names and languages *realistic* - something which most fantasy authors utterly fail at (seriously, pick up a random fantasy book and read some of the place and character names out loud. If you can keep a straight face, I'll buy you a beer).

I don't think Tokien is a Great Novelist, but in terms of creating a fantasy world, he is without peer. Every fantasy author since is a pale shadow in that regard.

 

[ENKC]

To be honest I think that the Lord of the Rings films have contributed to Tolkein's books being approached from a less literary angle than it should be as it is a book and one that was written 70 years ago. It is fine to not enjoy any piece of work but to suggest that Tolkein was overrated because you do not enjoy his writing style is a ludicrous statement. Tolkein does not have "pacing" issues, he simply wrote in a very descriptive style that due to people seemingly having shorter attention span comes in for critisism that it should not.

I have read LotR and found it to be achingly disinteresting. I have read my share of long books in my time, but none which I considered so dull. Perhaps I just found it hard to be impressed by ZOMG HELMS DEEP when I liked to read about the battles of Alexander and Hannibal. They defeated more dudes in single battles than Sauron did in his lifetime.

Yes, I know the battling was only one aspect. I'm just saying that for me I found it hard to consider the scale of the stories as truly 'epic' by comparison to actual history.

Just checking because I am confused, are you saying that a book's "epic-ness" is judged by how many people are killed in it?

Of course not. I had thought I even spelled that out. It's a matter of scale. LotR is supposed to be a breathtaking epic, and yet I found little in it that approached real events from history in that regard.

Despite the fact that the scale of events in LotR surpasses the nearest historical equivalent (medieval era) in almost every way.

Please justify that, as I happen to think that statement is incorrect.

 

[Giest4life]

Drawn out? Perhaps. But that takes a lesser role for me when I consider that some of the most moving moments for me--while reading--occurred when I was reading The Lord of the Rings, the Hobbit, and his lesser known, Similarion.

To each his own.

 

[Nouw]

We all have our dislikes, but you still should acknowledge major figures. Tolkien was practically the father of modern fantasy stories, just like how Shakespeare was for theatre or Freud was for psychology. You may think their works are crap, but you can't deny their influence.

Ooooo /thread.

Without Tolkien, we'd have no elves at all! And maybe even less!

And is that a good thing? trolololo.

But on the Tolkien matter, I think techniclly that he gave us D&D...and I think everyone loves D&D.
Of course D&D has evolved alot but D&D always takes things from LOTR....

If you're asking me if having no elves is a good thing, I should really add that I'm saying without Tolkien, we'd lose a lot of good stuff.

Naaah, I love Tolkien, I just don't like elves. ^^

Then I guess you'll like orks right?

 

[BlindMessiah94]

What other writers do you feel are overrated and why?

Terry. Fucking. Pratchett.
Why?
Because I have read his books and didn't enjoy them. Also every freaking fangirl out there just starts to squeal when you mention him and its getting old.

:O but... he has a space sword.
And I thought I was going to get flamed, you're in for a shitstorm of anger.

Yeah I'm ready for it. I'm always defending why I hate him. People are always recommending me books too and I've just had enough. I don't like him, and I shouldn't have to defend that anymore than you do for not liking Tolkien.

 

[ENKC]

To be honest I think that the Lord of the Rings films have contributed to Tolkein's books being approached from a less literary angle than it should be as it is a book and one that was written 70 years ago. It is fine to not enjoy any piece of work but to suggest that Tolkein was overrated because you do not enjoy his writing style is a ludicrous statement. Tolkein does not have "pacing" issues, he simply wrote in a very descriptive style that due to people seemingly having shorter attention span comes in for critisism that it should not.

I have read LotR and found it to be achingly disinteresting. I have read my share of long books in my time, but none which I considered so dull. Perhaps I just found it hard to be impressed by ZOMG HELMS DEEP when I liked to read about the battles of Alexander and Hannibal. They defeated more dudes in single battles than Sauron did in his lifetime.

Yes, I know the battling was only one aspect. I'm just saying that for me I found it hard to consider the scale of the stories as truly 'epic' by comparison to actual history.

Just checking because I am confused, are you saying that a book's "epic-ness" is judged by how many people are killed in it?

Of course not. I had thought I even spelled that out. It's a matter of scale. LotR is supposed to be a breathtaking epic, and yet I found little in it that approached real events from history in that regard.

Despite the fact that the scale of events in LotR surpasses the nearest historical equivalent (medieval era) in almost every way.

Please justify that, as I happen to think that statement is incorrect.

For example, the Battle of Hastings, 1066.
A suitably epic battle that took place and saw the last time English soil was invaded by an offensive force and conquered.
It was estimated that William of Normandy had 5,000 infantry and 3,000 knights. King Harold's forces had 8,500 men at his disposal. Archers fired volleys, cavalry was countered with lines of pikemen and all in all there were numerous casualties on either side, blood everywhere etc etc.
Source: http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/NORhastings.htm

Compare to say, the defence of Helm's Deep, you've got a tiny minuscule force, albeit with a better strategic foothold, versus an army of '10,000' orcs. They only manage to survive when cavalry arrives 12 hours later.
From any objective stand point, that is by definition 'epic'.
Or the Battle on the fields of Pelennor, wherein Gondor has a mere 2,700 defenders of the city walls, the next day 6,000 cavalry arrive, but even then are outnumbered by an arriving force of oliphants (Giant fucking elephant cavalry). The only way the battle ends is when a force of undead traitors show up to finally rest in peace through slaughter. But all too late the damage is done and the force of the good guys is a tiny little tinyness.

If you don't fidn that scale 'epic' then the only possible explanation I can find for you is that the insane numbers of dead from the modern wars of the 20th century have warped your sense of historical proportion to say that less than a million dead is in no way epic.

If anything, Hastings was my first thought as an argument to the contrary. You have after all just pointed out that it was a numerically larger battle than Helms Deep. Besides which it was the crucial point in a conflict between three western European powers which determined much of the future fate of the world - the effects of which are evident today.

I note that by "From any objective standpoint" you in fact mean "From my personal subjective standpoint".

You appear to be focused on the disparity of numbers between forces as essential to the 'epic' scale. I fail to see why, but one need only look to Thermopylae in such a case. '300' aside, it was a real event which far exceeds your fictional example.

"the only possible explanation" is hyperbole on your part, nothing more. "the modern wars of the 20th century have warped your sense of historical proportion" would be insulting were it not plainly silly. I have not so much as mentioned anything later than the 11th Century.

"to say that less than a million dead is in no way epic" is a pure straw man, considering no-one has said it. No-one at all.

I reiterate, I find nothing in LotR comparable to the grand historical scale of the conquests of Alexander or his ilk.

 

[UltimatheChosen]

Personally, I'm not a fan of Tolkien's books.

I mean, they're not bad, but they're not exactly gripping, either.

I view it the same way I view a lot of older video games that haven't aged well (such as Goldeneye for the N64, which has awful controls compared to modern shooters): I respect the contributions that they made to the genre, but I admire them from a distance.

In my opinion, Tolkien doesn't measure up to a lot of modern writers like Brandon Sanderson or Scott Lynch.

 

[DanielDeFig]

I was going to admitt that i know that Tolkien explicitly stated:"my books are not a work of allegory", and i always try to keep that in mind when i hear ppl explain the racism they see in the Tolkien book (that i didn't see myself).

But instead i will answer you last paragraph. Yes western civilization is more advanced, but that does NOT make it better. I am currently writing this post in Nairobi where my family is currently based, we have been moving around the world since shortly after our parents had us kids. We have spent several years living in African countries, and our parents feel best at home here, so NO they would probably not choose to live in the western world. It is pretty bad here for the locals, but here in Kenya is the best example that things are changing for the better with a growing middle class.

Yes, western civilization is better off, but such things change very quickly. Being better developed does NOT make a culture any better (or worse) than any other.

 

[DanielDeFig]

Also, i did not notice this myself, but several of my older family members have pointed out blatant racism in the books. BLACK Orcs of Mordor, are aided by the evil men of the SOUTH and EAST. They attempt to destroy all that is good and holy, which is Middle-Earth, and the infallibly Good elves (With the exception of Sauron, originally an elf Sorcerer) come from the WEST, and it is there they return, along with those who die.

Sigh...The fact that i didn't notice this myself(mainly i wasn't looking for it) makes me feel relatively good about myself. Still, superiority of western culture and race over all others being apparent in a work of fantasy makes me sad.

The level of ignorance in so much of this just forced me to register and write a reply. The books are not "blatantly" racist at all. In fact I'd go so far to say that they are not even covertly racist. Firstly, Tolkein personally was not racist, he said that "treatment of colour" in South Africa "horrifies", he also hated and resisted attempts by the Nazis to associate his works with their racialist theories of "Nordics" and their superiority and called Nazi race doctrine "unscientific" and their anti-semitism "wholly pernicious".

As for racism in the books you are simply forgetting or choosing not to name countervailing examples. Perhaps you forget that he mentions the Numenoreans (the "highest" of men) as almost entirely falling into evil ways whilst the Wild Men of Druadan forest (who can hardly represent "civilized" European civilisation) were much more resistant and hardy against evil. Or maybe you aren't remembering how the men of Bree and Forlong's men of Gondor are described as "swarthy", a favoured description used by Tolkein of the Southrons and Haradrim. You must also have forgotten all the evils acts done by very pale people such as Denethor, Boromir, Saruman and Grima: or all the evil "white" things, Saruman the White, the white hand of Saruman and the white "corpse light" of Minas Morgul. Oh and point of fact, Sauron isn't and elf sorceror, he was a Maiar that fell (the equivalent of a lesser angel say). You also forget the sympathy Sam has for the Southrons and his remark that they were probably unwilling slaves and not evil at heart.

Tolkein was not racist and neither were his works, as for the "superiority" of western civilisation I will grant you some of that. But frankly cultural relativism is horsecrap. Western civlization is superior! It has produced the highest living standards, comfort, ease and freedom for more people over a shorter time than anything in history. The average life expectancy in some African countries is 30. The average life expectancy historically in all places was roughly thirty, in the west its now 75, 80 or even higher and still rising. Almost all people have food, shelter, opportunities and people are free to live life as they wish to a staggeringly greater extent than any other time or place. You can be gay, transexual, transgender and not worry about being persecuted or executed by law. Western civ. isnt perfect it still can improve but it is an ongoing process and their has never been a better place or time to be alive. Look around the world, at the foot bindings in China, the stonings in Iran, the execution of gays in the Islamic world, the tribalistic strife and genocides and starvation and disease in Africa and tell me you'd rather live there than here. In short your family are ungrateful idiots and half of them wouldn't be alive if it wasn't for the technological and materiel advances of western civilization.

I was going to admitt that i know that Tolkien explicitly stated:"my books are not a work of allegory", and i always try to keep that in mind when i hear ppl explain the racism they see in the Tolkien book (that i didn't see myself).

But instead i will answer you last paragraph. Yes western civilization is more advanced, but that does NOT make it better. I am currently writing this post in Nairobi where my family is currently based, we have been moving around the world since shortly after our parents had us kids. We have spent several years living in African countries, and our parents feel best at home here, so NO they would probably not choose to live in the western world. It is pretty bad here for the locals, but here in Kenya is the best example that things are changing for the better with a growing middle class.

Yes, western civilization is better off, but such things change very quickly. Being better developed does NOT make a culture any better (or worse) than any other.

 

[GrimTuesday]

What other writers do you feel are overrated and why?

Terry. Fucking. Pratchett.
Why?
Because I have read his books and didn't enjoy them. Also every freaking fangirl out there just starts to squeal when you mention him and its getting old.

:O but... he has a space sword.
And I thought I was going to get flamed, you're in for a shitstorm of anger.

Yeah I'm ready for it. I'm always defending why I hate him. People are always recommending me books too and I've just had enough. I don't like him, and I shouldn't have to defend that anymore than you do for not liking Tolkien.

Yeah... I don't know if you've been following the thread but I've basically been defending myself the entire time. Not that either one of us should really have to.

 

[DanielDeFig]

Another criticism i personally have is how Black / White his views of the world are: Orcs = Evil (Because their master is evil and they are orcs), Ents = Good (because they protect nature).

If it's of any worth to you, the whole Orc= Evil thing is a problem Tolkien himself stuggled with his entire life. He never came up with a solution to the problem that he was satisfied with, which is why the Silmarillion was never published in his lifetime. It's only because his son Christopher decided to publish it that we have the whole 'Orcs are corrupted elves' storyline, and the philosophical conundrums that brings up.

Also, i did not notice this myself, but several of my older family members have pointed out blatant racism in the books. BLACK Orcs of Mordor, are aided by the evil men of the SOUTH and EAST. They attempt to destroy all that is good and holy, which is Middle-Earth, and the infallibly Good elves (With the exception of Sauron, originally an elf Sorcerer) come from the WEST, and it is there they return, along with those who die.

Sigh...The fact that i didn't notice this myself(mainly i wasn't looking for it) makes me feel relatively good about myself. Still, superiority of western culture and race over all others being apparent in a work of fantasy makes me sad.

Again, I'd be careful. Tolkien himself was very anti-racism. When prospective German publishers of the Hobbit asked him if he had any Jewish blood, he told them regrettably not, but now that they asked he wished he did, just so he could have the satisfacion of saying so. Indeed, he often professed a respect for the Jewish people, and a great sadness that Germany (a country who's legends obviously inspired him) had gone down such a road as they did.

Regarding racism within the context of LOTR, you need to remember that while the men of the east are portrayed as being evil, they're also next door neighbours to the Big Bad, and therefore have been under his influence for centuries. There are other examples of non-white men, such as the Woses of Rohan, who are actually pivotal to Sauron's downfall (and at one point, one of the supporting characters chides himself for having ever judged the Woses just on their physical appearances). You're reducing to overly simple terms a conflict, and a setting, much more complicated than that. Tolkien never tries to paint the West as the be all and end all: part of the whole point of the story is that the Western lands are actually somewhat less glorious than years previously.

Also remember that the language of 70 years ago was very different today. The term 'black' didn't have the racial connotations it does now. Describing an orc as 'black' is less to do with skin tones, and more to do with the colour of their heart.

Ultimately, the story of LOTR is about a band of heroes from all races and walks of life, banding together and looking past their differences to work together for the purpose of Good. You don't get much more anti-racist than that.

I am not sure if i ever agreed with such connection, which is on of the reasons why i posted what i was told here, to see if anyone with more info on Tolkien (yay for Tolkien geeks!) would refute such claims. Also, i once heard that Tolkien explicitly stated (i think it might have even been in the foreword of the LotR books) that the LotR books were NOT a work of allegory, which i interpret to mean: Mordor is NOT Nazi Germany, the men of the West are NOT the Allies, the Hobbits are NOT...err..Belgians?

Also, i was originally going to add, that the ppl who say his work caontains racism, usually dismiss it as a reflection of the times (similar to TINTIN comics) and not really something people at that time considered wrong.

 

[BlindMessiah94]

What other writers do you feel are overrated and why?

Terry. Fucking. Pratchett.
Why?
Because I have read his books and didn't enjoy them. Also every freaking fangirl out there just starts to squeal when you mention him and its getting old.

:O but... he has a space sword.
And I thought I was going to get flamed, you're in for a shitstorm of anger.

Yeah I'm ready for it. I'm always defending why I hate him. People are always recommending me books too and I've just had enough. I don't like him, and I shouldn't have to defend that anymore than you do for not liking Tolkien.

Yeah... I don't know if you've been following the thread but I've basically been defending myself the entire time. Not that either one of us should really have to.

Yeah I have noticed lol. I am a fan of tolkien, but I completely agree with your original reasons for why you don't like him. I had to force myself through the first half of the first book, but then I loved the rest. I don't blame anyone who doesn't do the same or doesn't enjoy his lengthy descriptions.

In any case, what should it matter, it's your opinion...you don't have to like and just because it's popular doesn't mean you're wrong either.

 

[manaman]

Tolkien's work can admittedly be a bit dry at times

Odd those where the exact words I was going to use.

Sure he can be a bit dry at times but he was a master world creator and great at character creation and development.

]If you like fantasy, READ THE WHEEL OF TIME BY ROBERT JORDAN.

I only read about half the first book in the series. I assume it gets much better from there but I couldn't stand the characters and the world had very little development aside from generic fantasy universe #28. I swear 90% of what I read in that book was shaken out of other series. Still to many people have read and enjoy the series for me to doubt it gets much better. I just haven't gone through the trouble to read on, yet. It could just be preference through.

 

[GrimTuesday]

What other writers do you feel are overrated and why?

Terry. Fucking. Pratchett.
Why?
Because I have read his books and didn't enjoy them. Also every freaking fangirl out there just starts to squeal when you mention him and its getting old.

:O but... he has a space sword.
And I thought I was going to get flamed, you're in for a shitstorm of anger.

Yeah I'm ready for it. I'm always defending why I hate him. People are always recommending me books too and I've just had enough. I don't like him, and I shouldn't have to defend that anymore than you do for not liking Tolkien.

Yeah... I don't know if you've been following the thread but I've basically been defending myself the entire time. Not that either one of us should really have to.

Yeah I have noticed lol. I am a fan of tolkien, but I completely agree with your original reasons for why you don't like him. I had to force myself through the first half of the first book, but then I loved the rest. I don't blame anyone who doesn't do the same or doesn't enjoy his lengthy descriptions.

In any case, what should it matter, it's your opinion...you don't have to like and just because it's popular doesn't mean you're wrong either.

Have you read any of the A Song of Ice and Fire series? Honestly I after I read those books I realized how boring and one dimensional most characters in fantasy are. George RR Martin is the best author when it comes to characterization I've ever read.

 

[Halceon]

It's simple - Tolkien is one hell of a worldbuilder, Middle-earth is one of the most intricate fantasy worlds to date. However, as a storyteller he's OK at best.

 

[DustyDrB]

I just wish game designers could break away from Tolkien tropes. I'm so sick of dwarves and elves. Get creative, make your own races.

 

[BlindMessiah94]

What other writers do you feel are overrated and why?

Terry. Fucking. Pratchett.
Why?
Because I have read his books and didn't enjoy them. Also every freaking fangirl out there just starts to squeal when you mention him and its getting old.

:O but... he has a space sword.
And I thought I was going to get flamed, you're in for a shitstorm of anger.

Yeah I'm ready for it. I'm always defending why I hate him. People are always recommending me books too and I've just had enough. I don't like him, and I shouldn't have to defend that anymore than you do for not liking Tolkien.

Yeah... I don't know if you've been following the thread but I've basically been defending myself the entire time. Not that either one of us should really have to.

Yeah I have noticed lol. I am a fan of tolkien, but I completely agree with your original reasons for why you don't like him. I had to force myself through the first half of the first book, but then I loved the rest. I don't blame anyone who doesn't do the same or doesn't enjoy his lengthy descriptions.

In any case, what should it matter, it's your opinion...you don't have to like and just because it's popular doesn't mean you're wrong either.

Have you read any of the A Song of Ice and Fire series? Honestly I after I read those books I realized how boring and one dimensional most characters in fantasy are. George RR Martin is the best author when it comes to characterization I've ever read.

No I haven't. Where's a good place to start?