Options

Adventure [Chat]

13468956

Posts

  • Options
    ArchArch Neat-o, mosquito! Registered User regular
    edited June 2010
    HerrCron wrote: »
    Arch wrote: »
    HerrCron wrote: »
    Arch wrote: »
    HerrCron wrote: »
    Irond Will wrote: »
    I did not enjoy reading the lord of the rings. It read like something by james fennemore Cooper and also had too many lame parts (Tom bombadil especially o god)

    That said, they are enduring and more or less created an entire genre of literature.

    I like LotR, but yes, the entire section with Tom bombadil is just awful.

    I skip it every goddamn time.

    TAKE THAT THE FUCK BACK RIGHT NOW

    NEVER!

    Hey dol! merry dol! ring a dong dillo! Ring a dong! hop along! fal lal the willow! Tom Bom, jolly Tom, Tom Bombadillo!!!

    Arch, you're going on the list.

    what list?

    Arch on
  • Options
    Robos A Go GoRobos A Go Go Registered User regular
    edited June 2010
    Why is the tv screen at the RMV announcing Jimmy Dean's death? Is my state government in the pocket of sausages wrapped in pancake industry?

    Robos A Go Go on
  • Options
    DrezDrez Registered User regular
    edited June 2010
    Daxon wrote: »
    A good writer writes well and has an interesting story with appropriate pacing and tension.

    Tolkien succeeds at "writing well" and possibly "interesting story" but fails the latter, probably more vital components of writing.

    Well, first off, you said he's "not an author." False. He is an author. You don't have to be a good writer to be an author, you just have to write something. And he was also wildly successful, so... yeah. I don't know how you can say he "was a linguist, not an author" with a straight face. Assuming your face was straight when you said that. I don't know. Maybe you were laughing your ass off when you typed it.

    Second, I don't agree that LOTR doesn't include an interesting story. I think the story is actually the most interesting part. I actually feel that The Lord of the Rings is more interesting in summary than in reading, which is why I think the movies were so popular (at least, I believe that was part of the reason). The way he guides the story is less deft, in my opinion, but not so much that I would call him a poor writer. He did an amazing job building his world with words alone. That is not something many writers can do effectively without it coming off as chintzy. I mean, I couldn't even get through 250 pages of the first Wheel of Time novel. And try reading Krondor: A Betrayal by Raymond E. Feist. I think my brain tried to commit suicide as I read through it to the bitter end.

    Tolkien turned pure fiction into a world that is believable within its own fictional sphere. Same goes for Neuromancer, and George R. R. Martin's books. It's something a lot of hack-ish fantasy and science fiction writers try to do, and few of them actually manage it. But Tolkien took his own imagination and created a fully believable, gigantic world with it despite its complete difference to the real world. That is not something a poor writer could accomplish. And it was not the product of someone who is only a linguist. Of course being a linguist helped, but compare something like Dan Brown, who hits you over the head with his knowledge of Symbology (going so far as to use his protagonist as a vehicle for lecturing the reader on symbology), and what Tolkien does with it. Tolkien uses his linguistic skill to shape his world without being so in-your-face about it. It's just...a part of the prose.

    So while you have every right to find the works boring - as do I, in large part - it's an altogether different matter to say he wasn't a good writer. I won't say that is objectively false, but as far as I'm concerned it is subjectively stupid, and maybe dishonest.

    Drez on
    Switch: SW-7690-2320-9238Steam/PSN/Xbox: Drezdar
  • Options
    nexuscrawlernexuscrawler Registered User regular
    edited June 2010
    Aldo wrote: »
    HI NEXXXUS

    you guys won your game

    silly Danes!

    nexuscrawler on
  • Options
    DrezDrez Registered User regular
    edited June 2010
    Nexus, why don't you love me no more? We never hang out. :(

    Drez on
    Switch: SW-7690-2320-9238Steam/PSN/Xbox: Drezdar
  • Options
    ArchArch Neat-o, mosquito! Registered User regular
    edited June 2010
    also tom bombadil is essentially the embodiment of the entire planet itself

    his wife's name is goldberry

    he refers to himself in the third person and would lose the ring if entrusted to him

    he is the avatar of the hippies

    he is their god

    Arch on
  • Options
    HerrCronHerrCron It that wickedly supports taxation Registered User regular
    edited June 2010
    Arch wrote: »
    HerrCron wrote: »
    Arch wrote: »
    HerrCron wrote: »
    Arch wrote: »
    HerrCron wrote: »
    Irond Will wrote: »
    I did not enjoy reading the lord of the rings. It read like something by james fennemore Cooper and also had too many lame parts (Tom bombadil especially o god)

    That said, they are enduring and more or less created an entire genre of literature.

    I like LotR, but yes, the entire section with Tom bombadil is just awful.

    I skip it every goddamn time.

    TAKE THAT THE FUCK BACK RIGHT NOW

    NEVER!

    Hey dol! merry dol! ring a dong dillo! Ring a dong! hop along! fal lal the willow! Tom Bom, jolly Tom, Tom Bombadillo!!!

    Arch, you're going on the list.

    what list?

    The list of people who have quoted Tom bombadil at me.

    It's a lot longer than you'd imagine.

    HerrCron on
    Now Playing:
    Dragon Ball FighterZ [PC] - Sure is a lot of not killing Goku going on right now.
    Celeste [Switch] - She'll be wrestling with inner demons when she comes...
  • Options
    Irond WillIrond Will WARNING: NO HURTFUL COMMENTS, PLEASE!!!!! Cambridge. MAModerator Mod Emeritus
    edited June 2010
    Dunadan019 wrote: »
    Daxon wrote: »
    HerrCron wrote: »
    Irond Will wrote: »
    I did not enjoy reading the lord of the rings. It read like something by james fennemore Cooper and also had too many lame parts (Tom bombadil especially o god)

    That said, they are enduring and more or less created an entire genre of literature.

    I like LotR, but yes, the entire section with Tom bombadil is just awful.

    I skip it every goddamn time.

    You have to realise that if you're forced to skip an entire section of a book then that book obviously did not go through enough editing and revisions and good authorship to be a good book.

    He is somewhat excused cause he was the first to write fantasy and so mistakes are allowed, I'm just happy authors have refined the art since.

    you are, perhaps, the worst literature critic.

    I can't even retort to something like this. I feel like simultaneously laughing and crying.

    You don't think that there is anything out of lord of the rings that could maybe be pared down in the interests of keeping the action moving or maybe untangling some of the more irrelevant and unnecessary subplots?

    Irond Will on
    Wqdwp8l.png
  • Options
    ArchArch Neat-o, mosquito! Registered User regular
    edited June 2010
    which is why i like tom bombadil

    Arch on
  • Options
    nexuscrawlernexuscrawler Registered User regular
    edited June 2010
    Drez wrote: »
    Nexus, why don't you love me no more? We never hang out. :(

    well would you like to hang out?

    nexuscrawler on
  • Options
    JustinSane07JustinSane07 Really, stupid? Brockton__BANNED USERS regular
    edited June 2010
    Arch wrote: »
    also tom bombadil is essentially the embodiment of the entire planet itself

    his wife's name is goldberry

    he refers to himself in the third person and would lose the ring if entrusted to him

    he is the avatar of the hippies

    he is their god

    Tom Bombadil is terrible, Arch. There's a reason he was ommitted from the movies.

    JustinSane07 on
  • Options
    ArchArch Neat-o, mosquito! Registered User regular
    edited June 2010
    HerrCron wrote: »
    Arch wrote: »
    HerrCron wrote: »
    Arch wrote: »
    HerrCron wrote: »
    Arch wrote: »
    HerrCron wrote: »
    Irond Will wrote: »
    I did not enjoy reading the lord of the rings. It read like something by james fennemore Cooper and also had too many lame parts (Tom bombadil especially o god)

    That said, they are enduring and more or less created an entire genre of literature.

    I like LotR, but yes, the entire section with Tom bombadil is just awful.

    I skip it every goddamn time.

    TAKE THAT THE FUCK BACK RIGHT NOW

    NEVER!

    Hey dol! merry dol! ring a dong dillo! Ring a dong! hop along! fal lal the willow! Tom Bom, jolly Tom, Tom Bombadillo!!!

    Arch, you're going on the list.

    what list?

    The list of people who have quoted Tom bombadil at me.

    It's a lot longer than you'd imagine.

    well maybe it is because tom bombadil is awesome

    Arch on
  • Options
    Irond WillIrond Will WARNING: NO HURTFUL COMMENTS, PLEASE!!!!! Cambridge. MAModerator Mod Emeritus
    edited June 2010
    Why is the tv screen at the RMV announcing Jimmy Dean's death? Is my state government in the pocket of sausages wrapped in pancake industry?

    He was a singer first

    Did famous folk songs like sixteen tons and big bad John and uh well some other famous folk songs maybe John henry

    Irond Will on
    Wqdwp8l.png
  • Options
    ArchArch Neat-o, mosquito! Registered User regular
    edited June 2010
    Arch wrote: »
    also tom bombadil is essentially the embodiment of the entire planet itself

    his wife's name is goldberry

    he refers to himself in the third person and would lose the ring if entrusted to him

    he is the avatar of the hippies

    he is their god

    Tom Bombadil is terrible, Arch. There's a reason he was ommitted from the movies.

    or maybe peter jackson is a hack
    but really he is a minor character at best and would have served only to lengthen the movies artificially

    Arch on
  • Options
    SarksusSarksus ATTACK AND DETHRONE GODRegistered User regular
    edited June 2010
    Tom Bombadil is the fuckin' man.

    His wife is hot too.

    Sarksus on
  • Options
    DrezDrez Registered User regular
    edited June 2010
    Irond Will wrote: »
    Dunadan019 wrote: »
    Daxon wrote: »
    HerrCron wrote: »
    Irond Will wrote: »
    I did not enjoy reading the lord of the rings. It read like something by james fennemore Cooper and also had too many lame parts (Tom bombadil especially o god)

    That said, they are enduring and more or less created an entire genre of literature.

    I like LotR, but yes, the entire section with Tom bombadil is just awful.

    I skip it every goddamn time.

    You have to realise that if you're forced to skip an entire section of a book then that book obviously did not go through enough editing and revisions and good authorship to be a good book.

    He is somewhat excused cause he was the first to write fantasy and so mistakes are allowed, I'm just happy authors have refined the art since.

    you are, perhaps, the worst literature critic.

    I can't even retort to something like this. I feel like simultaneously laughing and crying.

    You don't think that there is anything out of lord of the rings that could maybe be pared down in the interests of keeping the action moving or maybe untangling some of the more irrelevant and unnecessary subplots?

    I know this is not directed at me, but there are differences between recognizing flaws in a book and saying that the book is bad/terrible. Or saying that the author is a poor writer, or not an author.

    Why can't something just be flawed? Most things are. That doesn't make it bad, it just makes it flawed.

    Drez on
    Switch: SW-7690-2320-9238Steam/PSN/Xbox: Drezdar
  • Options
    ElendilElendil Registered User regular
    edited June 2010
    you people should read Daisy Miller

    I felt like I'd aged seven years by the time I reached the end after like 50 pages

    I'm afraid to ever read Henry James again

    Elendil on
  • Options
    Irond WillIrond Will WARNING: NO HURTFUL COMMENTS, PLEASE!!!!! Cambridge. MAModerator Mod Emeritus
    edited June 2010
    Arch wrote: »
    HerrCron wrote: »
    Arch wrote: »
    HerrCron wrote: »
    Arch wrote: »
    HerrCron wrote: »
    Arch wrote: »
    HerrCron wrote: »
    Irond Will wrote: »
    I did not enjoy reading the lord of the rings. It read like something by james fennemore Cooper and also had too many lame parts (Tom bombadil especially o god)

    That said, they are enduring and more or less created an entire genre of literature.

    I like LotR, but yes, the entire section with Tom bombadil is just awful.

    I skip it every goddamn time.

    TAKE THAT THE FUCK BACK RIGHT NOW

    NEVER!

    Hey dol! merry dol! ring a dong dillo! Ring a dong! hop along! fal lal the willow! Tom Bom, jolly Tom, Tom Bombadillo!!!

    Arch, you're going on the list.

    what list?

    The list of people who have quoted Tom bombadil at me.

    It's a lot longer than you'd imagine.

    well maybe it is because tom bombadil is awesome

    This is may e your worst opinion arch.

    Actually it's second place behind your vegetarianism.

    Irond Will on
    Wqdwp8l.png
  • Options
    JustinSane07JustinSane07 Really, stupid? Brockton__BANNED USERS regular
    edited June 2010
    Man the song I'm listening to is from 1989. For some reason, this just...makes me feel weird.

    JustinSane07 on
  • Options
    SarksusSarksus ATTACK AND DETHRONE GODRegistered User regular
    edited June 2010
    Irond Will wrote: »
    Why is the tv screen at the RMV announcing Jimmy Dean's death? Is my state government in the pocket of sausages wrapped in pancake industry?

    He was a singer first

    Did famous folk songs like sixteen tons and big bad John and uh well some other famous folk songs maybe John henry

    And then he killed people with coronary heart disease.

    Sarksus on
  • Options
    ArchArch Neat-o, mosquito! Registered User regular
    edited June 2010
    Irond Will wrote: »
    Arch wrote: »
    HerrCron wrote: »
    Arch wrote: »
    HerrCron wrote: »
    Arch wrote: »
    HerrCron wrote: »
    Arch wrote: »
    HerrCron wrote: »
    Irond Will wrote: »
    I did not enjoy reading the lord of the rings. It read like something by james fennemore Cooper and also had too many lame parts (Tom bombadil especially o god)

    That said, they are enduring and more or less created an entire genre of literature.

    I like LotR, but yes, the entire section with Tom bombadil is just awful.

    I skip it every goddamn time.

    TAKE THAT THE FUCK BACK RIGHT NOW

    NEVER!

    Hey dol! merry dol! ring a dong dillo! Ring a dong! hop along! fal lal the willow! Tom Bom, jolly Tom, Tom Bombadillo!!!

    Arch, you're going on the list.

    what list?

    The list of people who have quoted Tom bombadil at me.

    It's a lot longer than you'd imagine.

    well maybe it is because tom bombadil is awesome

    This is may e your worst opinion arch.

    Actually it's second place behind your vegetarianism.

    whatever The Man

    Arch on
  • Options
    Irond WillIrond Will WARNING: NO HURTFUL COMMENTS, PLEASE!!!!! Cambridge. MAModerator Mod Emeritus
    edited June 2010
    Elendil wrote: »
    you people should read Daisy Miller

    I felt like I'd aged seven years by the time I reached the end after like 50 pages

    I'm afraid to ever read Henry James again

    The turn of the screw was p. good

    Irond Will on
    Wqdwp8l.png
  • Options
    ElendilElendil Registered User regular
    edited June 2010
    Man the song I'm listening to is from 1989. For some reason, this just...makes me feel weird.
    the song I'm listening to is from 1832

    (it's actually from 2010)

    Elendil on
  • Options
    ArchArch Neat-o, mosquito! Registered User regular
    edited June 2010
    Sarksus wrote: »
    Tom Bombadil is the fuckin' man.

    His wife is hot too.

    Hi-5 sarksus

    Hi-5

    Arch on
  • Options
    AldoAldo Hippo Hooray Registered User regular
    edited June 2010
    Aldo wrote: »
    HI NEXXXUS

    you guys won your game

    silly Danes!

    Yes we won with an extremely boring match. It was way too technical and the attempts to get a free kick every time two players came close to each other just annoys me to no end.

    Aldo on
  • Options
    SarksusSarksus ATTACK AND DETHRONE GODRegistered User regular
    edited June 2010
    Arch wrote: »
    Sarksus wrote: »
    Tom Bombadil is the fuckin' man.

    His wife is hot too.

    Hi-5 sarksus

    Hi-5

    Tom Bombadil is who I aspire to be.

    Sarksus on
  • Options
    JustinSane07JustinSane07 Really, stupid? Brockton__BANNED USERS regular
    edited June 2010
    Elendil wrote: »
    Man the song I'm listening to is from 1989. For some reason, this just...makes me feel weird.
    the song I'm listening to is from 1832

    (it's actually from 2010)

    The difference is, these guys are all still alive and still a mega-band today.

    JustinSane07 on
  • Options
    DrezDrez Registered User regular
    edited June 2010
    Arch wrote: »
    also tom bombadil is essentially the embodiment of the entire planet itself

    his wife's name is goldberry

    he refers to himself in the third person and would lose the ring if entrusted to him

    he is the avatar of the hippies

    he is their god

    Tom Bombadil is terrible, Arch. There's a reason he was ommitted from the movies.

    He was omitted from the movies because he's one of the few things in LotR lore that nobody has ever reached a consensus about. It would have been a risky thing for Peter Jackson to include. Also, he wasn't relevant to the movie version. LotR: The Movies is different from LotR: The Book.

    I mean if you want to talk about important stuff that shouldn't have been cut, Tom Bombadil is probably the very last thing. The Scouring of the Shire wraps everything up in an important way, and to a lesser extent I thought the Voice of Saruman was a sad omission. But thinking back, I would say that even those elements weren't important parts of the movie adaptation. It's a different story, really.

    Drez on
    Switch: SW-7690-2320-9238Steam/PSN/Xbox: Drezdar
  • Options
    Dunadan019Dunadan019 Registered User regular
    edited June 2010
    Irond Will wrote: »
    Dunadan019 wrote: »
    Daxon wrote: »
    HerrCron wrote: »
    Irond Will wrote: »
    I did not enjoy reading the lord of the rings. It read like something by james fennemore Cooper and also had too many lame parts (Tom bombadil especially o god)

    That said, they are enduring and more or less created an entire genre of literature.

    I like LotR, but yes, the entire section with Tom bombadil is just awful.

    I skip it every goddamn time.

    You have to realise that if you're forced to skip an entire section of a book then that book obviously did not go through enough editing and revisions and good authorship to be a good book.

    He is somewhat excused cause he was the first to write fantasy and so mistakes are allowed, I'm just happy authors have refined the art since.

    you are, perhaps, the worst literature critic.

    I can't even retort to something like this. I feel like simultaneously laughing and crying.

    You don't think that there is anything out of lord of the rings that could maybe be pared down in the interests of keeping the action moving or maybe untangling some of the more irrelevant and unnecessary subplots?

    cut down the first book of fellowship to maybe about a quarter the size.

    Dunadan019 on
  • Options
    DrezDrez Registered User regular
    edited June 2010
    Drez wrote: »
    Nexus, why don't you love me no more? We never hang out. :(

    well would you like to hang out?

    I dunno. Maybe next week? You tell me. You know my schedule. I have none.

    Drez on
    Switch: SW-7690-2320-9238Steam/PSN/Xbox: Drezdar
  • Options
    HerrCronHerrCron It that wickedly supports taxation Registered User regular
    edited June 2010
    Arch wrote: »
    HerrCron wrote: »
    Arch wrote: »
    HerrCron wrote: »
    Arch wrote: »
    HerrCron wrote: »
    Arch wrote: »
    HerrCron wrote: »
    Irond Will wrote: »
    I did not enjoy reading the lord of the rings. It read like something by james fennemore Cooper and also had too many lame parts (Tom bombadil especially o god)

    That said, they are enduring and more or less created an entire genre of literature.

    I like LotR, but yes, the entire section with Tom bombadil is just awful.

    I skip it every goddamn time.

    TAKE THAT THE FUCK BACK RIGHT NOW

    NEVER!

    Hey dol! merry dol! ring a dong dillo! Ring a dong! hop along! fal lal the willow! Tom Bom, jolly Tom, Tom Bombadillo!!!

    Arch, you're going on the list.

    what list?

    The list of people who have quoted Tom bombadil at me.

    It's a lot longer than you'd imagine.

    well maybe it is because tom bombadil is awesome

    That might be the reason, but I'm fairly certain it is not.

    HerrCron on
    Now Playing:
    Dragon Ball FighterZ [PC] - Sure is a lot of not killing Goku going on right now.
    Celeste [Switch] - She'll be wrestling with inner demons when she comes...
  • Options
    DrezDrez Registered User regular
    edited June 2010
    Dunadan019 wrote: »
    Irond Will wrote: »
    Dunadan019 wrote: »
    Daxon wrote: »
    HerrCron wrote: »
    Irond Will wrote: »
    I did not enjoy reading the lord of the rings. It read like something by james fennemore Cooper and also had too many lame parts (Tom bombadil especially o god)

    That said, they are enduring and more or less created an entire genre of literature.

    I like LotR, but yes, the entire section with Tom bombadil is just awful.

    I skip it every goddamn time.

    You have to realise that if you're forced to skip an entire section of a book then that book obviously did not go through enough editing and revisions and good authorship to be a good book.

    He is somewhat excused cause he was the first to write fantasy and so mistakes are allowed, I'm just happy authors have refined the art since.

    you are, perhaps, the worst literature critic.

    I can't even retort to something like this. I feel like simultaneously laughing and crying.

    You don't think that there is anything out of lord of the rings that could maybe be pared down in the interests of keeping the action moving or maybe untangling some of the more irrelevant and unnecessary subplots?

    cut down the first book of fellowship to maybe about a quarter the size.

    I would just cut down on all the traveling. Maybe add a fast travel option, ala The Elder Scrolls: Oblivion.

    Drez on
    Switch: SW-7690-2320-9238Steam/PSN/Xbox: Drezdar
  • Options
    ElendilElendil Registered User regular
    edited June 2010
    Peter Jackson should have cut all those stupid parts where Legolas did things to fit all that other stuff in there


    anyone who's read the books knows that Legolas did nothing

    Elendil on
  • Options
    DrezDrez Registered User regular
    edited June 2010
    Elendil wrote: »
    Peter Jackson should have cut all those stupid parts where Legolas did things to fit all that other stuff in there


    anyone who's read the books knows that Legolas did nothing

    hahah

    wait, I thought you said you never read the books.

    Drez on
    Switch: SW-7690-2320-9238Steam/PSN/Xbox: Drezdar
  • Options
    JustinSane07JustinSane07 Really, stupid? Brockton__BANNED USERS regular
    edited June 2010
    Elendil wrote: »
    Peter Jackson should have cut all those stupid parts where Legolas did things to fit all that other stuff in there


    anyone who's read the books knows that Legolas did nothing

    But Orlando Bloom is dreamy so he had to get plenty of screen time!

    Note: I haven't actually seen the LOTR movies in full.

    JustinSane07 on
  • Options
    ElendilElendil Registered User regular
    edited June 2010
    Drez wrote: »
    Elendil wrote: »
    Peter Jackson should have cut all those stupid parts where Legolas did things to fit all that other stuff in there


    anyone who's read the books knows that Legolas did nothing

    hahah

    wait, I thought you said you never read the books.

    my name is elendil, drez

    Elendil on
  • Options
    JustinSane07JustinSane07 Really, stupid? Brockton__BANNED USERS regular
    edited June 2010
    Btw, where the hell has Orlando Bloom been since the third Pirates of the Carribbean movie? He looked like his career was going to rocket into orbit after being in both POTC and LOTR and it just kinda....where'd he go?!

    JustinSane07 on
  • Options
    Best AmericaBest America __BANNED USERS regular
    edited June 2010
    Yeah the treatment of Saruman was probably what irked me the most. Condensing his dialogue with Theoden and simply clipping the rest made Saruman seem totally and completely impotent. Plus, I mean, getting knifed by some dude. When you're technically a divine entity. ... hm.

    Everything changed in that scene was very jarring, from the mistreatment of dialogue to the reappropriation of purpose from a parley to Gandalf pleading for information because "[Saruman] was deep in the enemy's counsel," asking where Sauron would strike when ... there is only one place Sauron is geographically capable of striking. There are a lot of moments like that in the movies, though, where the actions of the characters are completely illogical and inexplicable when compared with what those same characters knew in the books instead. Gandalf is the most egregious because he's not all that goddamn wise or helpful or much of a leader in the movies, but it crops up for the others from time to time, as well (especially with the hobbits).

    Best America on
    right you got it
  • Options
    DaxonDaxon Registered User regular
    edited June 2010
    Drez wrote: »
    Daxon wrote: »
    A good writer writes well and has an interesting story with appropriate pacing and tension.

    Tolkien succeeds at "writing well" and possibly "interesting story" but fails the latter, probably more vital components of writing.

    Well, first off, you said he's "not an author." False. He is an author. You don't have to be a good writer to be an author, you just have to write something. And he was also wildly successful, so... yeah. I don't know how you can say he "was a linguist, not an author" with a straight face. Assuming your face was straight when you said that. I don't know. Maybe you were laughing your ass off when you typed it.

    Second, I don't agree that LOTR doesn't include an interesting story. I think the story is actually the most interesting part. I actually feel that The Lord of the Rings is more interesting in summary than in reading, which is why I think the movies were so popular (at least, I believe that was part of the reason). The way he guides the story is less deft, in my opinion, but not so much that I would call him a poor writer. He did an amazing job building his world with words alone. That is not something many writers can do effectively without it coming off as chintzy. I mean, I couldn't even get through 250 pages of the first Wheel of Time novel. And try reading Krondor: A Betrayal by Raymond E. Feist. I think my brain tried to commit suicide as I read through it to the bitter end.

    Tolkien turned pure fiction into a world that is believable within its own fictional sphere. Same goes for Neuromancer, and George R. R. Martin's books. It's something a lot of hack-ish fantasy and science fiction writers try to do, and few of them actually manage it. But Tolkien took his own imagination and created a fully believable, gigantic world with it despite its complete difference to the real world. That is not something a poor writer could accomplish. And it was not the product of someone who is only a linguist. Of course being a linguist helped, but compare something like Dan Brown, who hits you over the head with his knowledge of Symbology (going so far as to use his protagonist as a vehicle for lecturing the reader on symbology), and what Tolkien does with it. Tolkien uses his linguistic skill to shape his world without being so in-your-face about it. It's just...a part of the prose.

    So while you have every right to find the works boring - as do I, in large part - it's an altogether different matter to say he wasn't a good writer. I won't say that is objectively false, but as far as I'm concerned it is subjectively stupid, and maybe dishonest.

    I wasn't really serious when I said he wasn't an author, he obviously is because he has written books. What I kind of meant was that he approached the writing of LotR not as an author would but as someone who has obsessed over their creation has far too much and wants to include every tiny irrelevant detail because they've spent so much time on it.

    I did say it was a possibly interesting story though, it's alright.

    The man had no concept of how to write well though, writing well implies that you can write an interesting and compelling text which makes the reader continue reading. 3 pages describing the intimacies of hobbits and their relationship to food is not a compelling read. On my most recent attempt to reread the series I only got 2 pages in before I felt that it would be a complete and utter waste of time.

    The Name of the Wind is an example of a book that has a massive world with massive detailing but we're only told the details that are relevant to the story at the time making it, by far, a much better book than LotR. Admittedly Patrick Rothfuss has the advantage of decades of fantasy to work from which is why Tolkien can be excused a lot of his faults.

    It does however not stop LotR from being an awful read.

    Daxon on
  • Options
    ElendilElendil Registered User regular
    edited June 2010
    Denethor was the worst part times like a billion

    best part of the books

    the dire, dire low point of the movies

    Elendil on
This discussion has been closed.