Ziggy Stardust said:

I asked her, and she said The Lion, The Witch, and the Wardrobe.

Then she wanted to know why I was asking this. I said "nobody" and ran out of the room.

Actual literal lol.

Tyrphanax said:

CP3S said:

captainsolo said:

xhonzi said:

theprequelsrule said:

RedFive said:

Tyrphanax said:  ....

Also, J.R.R. Tolkien is an awful writer.

First of all, I like that no one even felt the need to refute this unbelievable statement.  However, when I saw this I had to come here and present it as evidence to the contrary:

Meh. Robert E. Howard is far superior to Tolkien as a story teller.

I too find Tolkien to be a frustrating writer.  I want to read his stories, but I struggle with his words.

Me in 6th grade: Oh, I've got to read a book on this list, why not try The Hobbit? 2 pages in: Okay, I'm good.

Whoa! I somehow missed that comment. I will refute it to hell and back, and then all over again. Unbelievable is right! Tolkien is brilliant! I love the way he writes, as have countless others, as evident by the popularity of the books since they were first published.

But it seems most people queef eloquent on the greatness of Stephen King's writing, and yet I've never managed to make it more than a few chapters into one of his books before wanted to beat my own head in with a blunt object. While unquestionably bad writing exists, once you get into the realm of decent to fantastic writing, it becomes very much subject to the reader's tastes.

Tolkien just rambles on and on a lot of the time about really boring and unnecessary detail and extrapolation. Not to mention the forty-five million three-page tuneless songs in every book. Ugh. And the grammar is lacking, as is the sentence structure. I just find myself feeling like I'm slogging through a mire of jumbled words and it hurts my brain.

The posted passage is good, but for every good passage he writes, there are ten passages that make me want to fall asleep and never wake up.

I barely finished FOTR over the span of months. I didn't get that far into TTT over the span of months. It was like pulling teeth. Any book that I'm finding excuses not to pick up again are bad in my... er... book.

I think I can see where a lot of this is coming from.  Yes, he uses a lot of big words and antiquated language - he was a philologist after all.  He helped write the goddam dictionary for christ's sake!  But I studied English in college, and I've always been a huge nerd when it comes to history and fantasy, so to me getting through those difficult passages and words is a challenge that I enjoy.  For example, most people think, "ugh, another name I have to remember!", while I can't wait to look through the genealogy tables and tale of years to figure out what's-what.

And one of the things certain people love about Tolkien is his descriptiveness.  One man's "boring and unnecessary detail and extrapolation" is another man's bread and butter, so to speak.  However, saying that he has "bad grammar" and sentence structure is just bone-headed.  Maybe it's not for you, but bad?

RedFive said:

The man helped write the goddam dictionary for christ's sake!!

WHY ALL THE TOLKIEN HATE IN HERE?  HIS BOOKS ARE VERY WELL WRITTEN.  AS FAR AS THE OPINION THAT  HIS STUFF IS HARD TO READ GOES, IF YOU HAVE AT LEAST A THIRD GRADE READING LEVEL THEN YOU SHOULDN'T HAVE ANY DIFFICULTY READING HIS BOOKS.

I am a third grader, and I like Tolkien.

Ziggy Stardust said:

I am a third grader...

Don't be ageist....or a lair.

Unless Wyoming schools are that far behind...

Hey! Shut up!

(runs outside, puts on cowboy hat, gets on horse, Yellowstone erupts.)

PSYCHO_DAYV said:

WHY ALL THE TOLKIEN HATE IN HERE?  HIS BOOKS ARE VERY WELL WRITTEN.  AS FAR AS THE OPINION THAT  HIS STUFF IS HARD TO READ GOES, IF YOU HAVE AT LEAST A THIRD GRADE READING LEVEL THEN YOU SHOULDN'T HAVE ANY DIFFICULTY READING HIS BOOKS.

Hard to read?  Or unenjoyable?

I don't know that anyone here is saying they don't comprehend his writings.  But in the case of the 1,000 year history of Gondor being laid out by a gate guard RIGHT BEFORE THE END OF HUMANITY AND THE (middle) EARTH ITSELF*! 

I just think that's bad pacing.

I liked the LOTR movies a lot.  Enough to buy them.  Enough to decide to give the books a read, including The Hobbit.  It was ok, but nothing I'd want to read again.

*shrug*

Well, I am currently reading the sci-fi LOTR equivelent known as Dune.  It will take me ages to get through this considering how busy I am lately, but so far it is quite fascinating.  Definitely a different type of science fiction, but I really enjoy it.  It took me a long time to get around to picking this up because I once saw the 1984 film (I was quite young at the time, making me appreciate it even less I'm sure) and realized how awful it was.  I couldn't imagine any story that film was based on being so amazing.  Now I am happy to prove myself wrong.

About to read the new (special edition you might say) version of Kim Newman's very moreish Anno Dracula.

Each book in the series has been bolstered with new material in a build up for the long awaited release of the fourth (and probably last) in the series Johnny Alucard.

To add to the novelty I shall be reading it via the one of those new 'fangled' *ahem* electronic book machines.

It's rare for me to be overcome by evangelical zeal for books but I must have purchased this at least ten times to give away or replace after lending it out only for it never to return so I'm interested if the slight remix will have a positive or negative effect on the piece.

I'm up to the part where the group frees Puzzle.  (Seriously, why can't the prince just say "Donkey" even once?)

Pennsylvania Jones said:

I'm up to the part where the group frees Puzzle.

Spoiler Alert! :p

TV's Frink said:

Pennsylvania Jones said:

I'm up to the part where the group frees Puzzle.

Spoiler Alert! :p

Arrrgh!

Asian?

Ah...I'm glad you brought up sequels.  My brother, who has always been a far more prolific reader than I, said that he didn't enjoy anything after the first book.  I have always remembered that, but since getting into the first book, I didn't want to believe it was the only good one.   I'm glad to see you like those two sequels.  I'll check them out when I finish this one.  What do you think of the Anderson/Herbert prequels?  And Asterisk, I know what you mean.  It is a novel of subtlety and people, not of action and gadgets.  The science fiction elements provide an interesting setting, but the characters as individuals and societies actually drive the story.

While we are on the topic of the movies, though not on topic of the thread, I easily could see a good epic film as well.  Lawrence of Arabia is an excellent analogy.  I recently downloaded the Alternative Edit made by Spicediver from FE.org.  I didn't want to watch to much to prevent spoiling the story (since it's been so long since I saw the original 1984 that I don't remember the story anyway).  But even with his editing skills, I can't help but dislike what was originally filmed.  The Baron was already an obviously sick man in the novel, but the movie takes that to a ridiculous extreme.  I recently checked out the miniseries from our library, and I hope to watch it soon, if I can possibly get the chance.

CP3S said:

Pennsylvania Jones said:

I'm up to the part where the group frees Puzzle.  (Seriously, why can't the prince just say "Donkey" even once?)

I take it you aren't the biggest fan of Puzzle being referred to as an ass?

I'm not the biggest fan of the prince calling him an ass EVERY SINGLE TIME HE REFERS TO HIM!!!