Lord of the Rings

[Fumagine]

I think it is more accurate to say that JRRT's works paved the way for modern fantasy writers.  Much of his inspiration came from the Finnish Kalevala.  Quenya owes much of its structure to Finnish, just as Sindarin does to Welsh.

One difference I see is that a great deal of old mythology came from attempts to understand the creation and workings of the world.  Tolkien created new languages and a world to go with them.

Exactly. Tolkien, according to his letters, wishes to give England a secular mythology. Something like the Roman Pantheon, or the Norse gods. He wanted England to have a legendary history of it's own. Of course, he was not so deluded so as to think that England would adopt a wholly fictional tale written by a single author as any kind of historical background. But being a scholar of Old English (which is, for those who do not know, an entirely different language from what many name "Old English", also known as Shakespearean English or Pre-standard English, from the 16th and 17th century - no, this is the english of Beowulf, not the english of Hamlet, illegible to those who have not studied it's framework) he wanted very much to build on his hobbies and loves (linguistics (especially of Britain and Northern Europe), nature, mythology) to create the world of Ea, Arda, on which Middle Earth rests.

 

JRRT is often called the father not because he created it, but because of his fame and popularity he created an avenue for the genre to be reborn in a way it had never quite been celebrated before. Certainly mythology was an oft-seen matter in the Victorian era and previous, but it had been a minor thing left as a tool of symbolism - not as the joy of world creation and magical theory alone and for itself.

 

EDIT: I love LOTR, I love love Silm. I first read both when I was 10, and though it was a struggle I plugged through every tolkien book (or Christopher Tolkien book) I could get my hands on. The Ardalambion was my friend in middle school, long before any of my friends cared to know about the internet.

Edited October 7, 2010 by Fumagine

[me4him101]

I really love the books and the movie. I used to have the ROTK gameboy game and thought it was fun.

[dragon_mando]

okay so just talk about lord of the rings, i have a question,

Aragorn is the heir of Isldur but his father is Arathorn, how does that work should Arathorn be the heir of Isldur??

Bloodline was what was being referred to. We can only assume that Arathorn had passed on, leaving Aragorn to be the only surviving member of the line.

 

A very good book trilogy, though a bit heavy for a lot of younger readers. I want to read them again some time.

[darkangel787]

VERY heavy for younger readers. When I was...tennish, I picked them up, worked my way through the first book, then screamed and put them all down.

Now years later, I picked them up and DEVOURED them. They're so GOOD :3

[Russianbear0027]

you know, LotR is quite awesome in all of its aspects. and silm, while a little harder, was quite good as well. (like many, I started the series when I was about ten, abandoned it, then picked it up again when I was around 12-13)

my favorite book in middle earth would have to be the Hobbit, even though it seems few of you agree with me.

 

FYI for everyone, I'm not 100% sure, but I read somewhere that LotR was originally to be just a sequel to the Hobbit and of a lighter tone. but then it sort of evolved until it became what it is now.

 

PS

Tolkein actually created the largest artificial languages in the world for his books, though the vocabulary is not quite complete for any of them.

Edited October 14, 2010 by Russianbear0027

[Enitsnid]

you know, LotR is quite awesome in all of its aspects. and silm, while a little harder, was quite good as well.

my favorite book in middle earth would have to be the Hobbit, though it seems few of you agree with me.

 

FYI for everyone, I'm not 100% sure, but I read somewhere that LotR was originally to be just a sequel to the Hobbit and of a lighter tone. but then it sort of evolved until it became what it is now.

 

I agree with you about the Hobbit. It really was better than the trilogy in my opinion. The Hobbit was nice because it had a very light, wimsical tone and it read like a classic fairy tale. The problem with the trilogy is that Tolkein decides to take everything too seriously and spends 1/3 of the whole book just describing the landscape the characters treked through. If I want to read about majestic mountains and tall trees, I'll read a national geographic, but in lord of the rings I want some action and deep drama. Talking about trees just doesn't do it for me.

[stickyseal]

I like The Two Towers. (book & movie)

[TikindiDragon]

I loved the trilogy but I wish I read the books before I saw the movie. I always read the book before the movie but in this instance I didn't have a choice. I liked the ending too, it wasn't just another happily ever after. I read them when I was ten and finished them in about a week.

I always found it better to watch a movie before I read the books. Otherwise I spend the whole time being disappointed because the movie doesn't match up to my expectations

 

Did that with LoTR - the elves arriving at Helms Deep especially ticked me off!

[Quasismiles]

NOM NOM NOM ON HOBBITS!

[Sub-Scorpio]

it took a month to finish the entire series but it was such a great actually the other day I went and bought the simarillion which aparently is how the lotr world started, I hope it is good. but back on lotr, jrr tolkien is a brilliant writer it is sad that a lot of his stuff wasn't finished but thank god his son is working to finish everything. on a more visual note a lotr movie marathon is not a good idea

[Lady_DragonRider]

I have read all of the books in the trilogy plus the Hobbit and loved them. They are slow in a few places, and if you don't like a lot of dialogue, don't read them.

[kingsdaughter613]

Tolkien was basicly writing a ballad style history. It can be really hard to read his books, but I read them in junior high so that is no excuse not to. He really changed the face of fiction; when we think of elves we think of Tolkien's version.

 

He created his own language, Sindarin. I'm currantly teaching myself the language...

 

All his books and stories tie into each other. I love the way he gives you that feel of history.

 

I also think the movies did a good job of bringing his vision to the big screen. Nothing like the books though... Books forever!

[Axarr]

I tried. I really did. But i couldn't get through. It was like maple syrup. Really sweet, but thick and hard to move through.

[Inziliel]

you know, LotR is quite awesome in all of its aspects. and silm, while a little harder, was quite good as well. (like many, I started the series when I was about ten, abandoned it, then picked it up again when I was around 12-13)

my favorite book in middle earth would have to be the Hobbit, even though it seems few of you agree with me.

 

FYI for everyone, I'm not 100% sure, but I read somewhere that LotR was originally to be just a sequel to the Hobbit and of a lighter tone. but then it sort of evolved until it became what it is now.

 

PS

Tolkein actually created the largest artificial languages in the world for his books, though the vocabulary is not quite complete for any of them.

my favorite book in middle earth would have to be the Hobbit, even though it seems few of you agree with me.

(RE: the quote ^) Actually, I agree. The Hobbit is...simpler, happier. <3 It holds a special place in my heart.

 

LoTR is where the heavier, epic, history-changing things really happen, though...I don't know. X'D; I guess it has a special place in my heart, too. <3 But while it's enjoyable and inspiring, it just doesn't make me laugh as often or end as happy-smiley. LoTR is definitely a more intense beast. ;P Though, that's why it's impact and subject matter ends up being so much deeper--and, perhaps, more meaningful.

 

 

(Now onto random/separate thoughts/responses):

 

I originally had The Hobbit read to me by my father as bedtime stories. Along with my two siblings. However, his work schedule and our homework stuff (especially the older sibling) got bad part-way through and we never finished it...I held off for years, hoping we'd pick it back up some day, and not wanting to "go on" without them. =P But the movies started coming out, and it was hard to follow without reading the books.

 

So, I read the books. THEY WERE AMAZING! I had seen the first movie before finishing the book on my own, and was SO SAD that Tom Bombadil ended up cut out of it entirely. D: He had been my favorite part that we'd gotten through when we'd started reading!

 

 

There were lots of wonderful things about the movies! Still, I always love books better. Movies always seem to have unnecessary changes of good scenes as well as the necessary (though regretful) cuts for length reasons...but as movies, the LoTR movies were pretty groundbreaking! They combined different techniques to make brand-new methods for filming (especially using crazy perspective tricks to make the sizes and proportions look right!) They forced cutting-edge CGI stuff from their programmers and just...URGH IT'S SO AMAZING IT'S PAINFUL! X'D; And the actors!! ALL OF THEM ARE FANTASTIC! <3 They are just the best!

 

In fact, they're casting for The Hobbit now...anyone been following? I'm kind of excited about it!! ...a little scared, too, admittedly...but also, excited!! <3

 

 

The books...they're just SO amazing.

 

I admit that Tolkein's style sometimes grated on me, with the long descriptions...but when it was the (in my opinion) more-interesting parts, I was really glad for so much detail! I love it. <333! It definitely seems a bit like an older style, with long, flowery prose, at times. I had a similar annoyance when reading Nathaniel Hawthorne, but when I read Hawthorne I didn't find the book itself to be as interesting, so it just became agravating. Tolkein's amazing stories make it tolerable--even enjoyable, at times! It is thick and syrupy, though. Can't argue with that.

 

IN FACT--I once put it down for a couple weeks (which became months as it got lost in my move shortly after...=_=)--because I just...COULDN'T TAKE the slow syrup in the middle of a long battle. It was one of the lesser battles, and there were just...TOO MUCH DETAILS! I don't even remember exactly which one it was, anymore. X'D; Only that I had to go back chapters and chapters when I finally found the book again, and when I read it after that long break (half-devoured it, really >_>) it wasn't nearly as tedious as it had seemed to me that first time. X'D; <3 Sometimes I just need to step back for a while, I guess. :3

 

 

I don't agree with the opinion that the characters aren't developed. Forget where I read that--somewhere early on in the thread? ...but, in any case, I disagree. D: How can you read about Boromir and see his downfall and subsequent redemption (saving Merry and Pippin) and not see emotion? Or, if that's not strong enough, the scene with Denethor II and his madness when he thinks he's lost BOTH his sons because he was so unappreciative of the younger one? It's a hectic, crazy scene...but don't you think there's some sort of emotional background in a father going crazy with loss of all his children? What about Éowyn and her sorrow, and loneliness? What about Éomer when he thinks his sister has been killed? Merry and Pippin, when they find each other again?

 

...and, maybe most of all, loyal Sam Gamgee and sad, tortured Frodo Baggins? If Aragorn and Arwen are meant to be a sort of symbolic fruition of deep, loyal, romantic, lasting love...I think Sam and Frodo are the parallel for the sort of loyalty and devotion and "platonic love", so to speak, that can only be achieved with the closest and dearest and truest of friends--and maybe family, if you're just that fond of your family that the blood-ties and "family duty" can be disregarded as the cause of your affection/loyalty.

 

 

Really, the series is inspiring in every way. @_@ It's absolutely amazing. I can't even explain...

 

...I'm not even such a big/strong fan! I admire and am afraid of at once, the intense fandom of a family I know...the mother instilled it in her children, and her oldest son knows more about LoTR than anyone I've ever met. I think he's just read and seen everything about the books, movies, letters, and anything else that's ever been released, EVER--or perhaps even just rumored--8000 times apiece. XDDD;; I'm almost not kidding about that. It's ridiculous and incredible. X'D;

 

 

...<3 <3 <3 (x3, if the board allowed more emoticons. >_>)

[Fortune86]

(18) *pokes Inziliel*

 

I haven't been able to read the LOTR books for a long time, as my mother lost our copy. I couldn't help but feel a lot of time and effort could have been saved if Elrond had just pushed Isildur into the fire when he had the chance.

[Alpha Gryph]

I must say, as much as I like LOTR's concept and as much of a fantasy fan I am, I'm not a fan of the books. I guess it's Tolkein's writing style, it really drags on for me. I much prefer the Harry Potter or Inheritance series. I read the Hobbit and half of the first book and I just... Can't find it in me to finish reading.

 

The movies I'd like to get into though. I've seen the first half of the first movie. And plan on seeing all before the Hobbit crawls into theaters.

[Brave 7eart]

I've seen a little on LOTR Fellowship of the Ring but my Dad won't let me watch the movies until i read the book. LOTR books are sooooo intimidating!

[Aeria]

I just got my books from the library the other day ^.^ Almost done with the Fellowship of the Ring so far.

 

It's fascinating to see how the high fantasy genre began with the LoTR.

[KatPower]

I am the only one that elected to learn the Dwarvish alphabet, rather than the Elivish one?

 

I confess that when I read these days I tend to skip straight to Rivendel at the start, and most of what Frodo/Sam are doing later on. I do love the books, but I tend to find Frodo himself a little boring.

Yes you probably are, but i have to agree. i skip to Rivendel as well and find Frodo boring. I've always like the Hobbit more because I find Bilbo to be a bit more devious. Frodo's too true of heart most of the time except when he treats Sam badly. And then its just like what the fooo man.

 

I really cherish the books all the same. J.R.R. has quiet the imagination.

[Rancid_16oz]

I'm on the second book!

I had to scroll through the first one again to remember everything though, lol.

 

question; was tom bombadil in the movie?

if he was i don't remember; it's been so long since i've seen it o.o

 

i was arguing with my sister about it

[lightbird]

No, Tom Bombadil was completely skipped in the movie, as well as most of the mythology.

[TikindiDragon]

No, Tom Bombadil was completely skipped in the movie, as well as most of the mythology.

Not to mention the rangers being totally replaced (for reasons I never did work out ) by elves later on in the movies. That was one major change in the movies I could never see the point in. I mean, a lot of it made a kind of sense (mostly from a needing to keep the time down perspective), and to a certain extent I'll even give them shoe-horning Arwen in at every oppertunity. But Elves at Helms Deep? Really?

 

Edit: making it clear the replacement of rangers by elves happens in the movies. I think it may have sounded like Tolkien did it in the books when I originaly typed it, which is just silly.

Edited July 28, 2011 by TikindiDragon

[Rancid_16oz]

Thanks for clearing it up for me :3

 

He was one of the best parts of the book, that's why I was confused as to whether or not he was in it. lol

Edited July 28, 2011 by Rancid_16oz

[Takaya-Cordelain]

I loved LotR. They are the best books I've ever read in my whole life. I personally think the movies ruined them. I mean, Frodo was a ll emo and depressed(even before he got the ring), Legolas was like "lets be best friends" wheras in the books Legolas and Gimli are not supposed to be at all friendly until like the very end(not the very end but close). I think they did Merry and Pippin quite well though. But yeah, I excpected to be dissapointed anyway.

[OceanSecrets]

I love the books. I really enjoyed reading them. (Still do, in fact.) I didn't actually end up reading them until the first movie came out. I asked my mom what this new movie hype was about and she, horrified that her daughter had yet to read them, handed me the set and said, "Read!" I've been a fan ever since.

I like a lot of older books (like by Sir Walter Scott, Kipling, and R. L. Stevenson) so I enjoyed the style of writing as well as the stories themselves.

Like other I tend to skip through to the parts I like. Frodo is kind of boring often, my favorite parts to read involve Rohan. (Might have something to do with my affinity for horses.) The Hobbit is fun to read. It has a different style and is lighter to read. I love the riddles, teasing, and songs.

 

The movies I thought were pretty good. I think they did Gollum really well. (It really helped me 'cause before I saw the movies I could not envision what he looked like at all. I thought of him as a green critter with webbed feet and hands. I knew it was wrong, but I couldn't get the right thing!) Most of the changes I didn't really mind, or just adjusted myself to. (So little time, so much book! after all.) The only thing I truly hate and despise in the movie is that Gandalf falls back from the Wraith King in the third movie! In the book it clearly states that both Gandalf and Shadowfax withstood him and were ready to fight him! (In white in case someone who hasn't gotten that far doesn't want to know (third movie/book).)