For what it is worth…I do not find Tolkien’s work to be altogether appealing. However, I do consider LOTR to be a literary masterpiece to which I compare all others.
Tolkien was a master of the English language. However, he was more of a master in linguistics in general. I had to read LOTR many times before I finally started to realize the parallels that exist in the speech of the characters. He created a dialect which only exists in his books…a dialect I oftetimes find myself speaking while in the middle of LOTR.
No…LOTR is not written in perfect english (the use of ’ instead of " truly frustrates me). However, the rules he created in the language of LOTR are rarely broken…and if they are, there is a cite in an appendix which either supports the use or corrects the error.
I also like his character development as well. He doesn’t dwell into the inner thoughts of the characters as he seems to be writing as an observor…not a creator. He is writing a history, not a story. The inner dealings of the characters is captured very well by the actions those characters take. He communicates through dialogue what the character is thinking very well. Furthermore, his use of poetry (songs) also tends to express the overall mood of his characters.
I am a Tolkien fan…I’ll admit it. I also love the movies, though they leave much to be desired.
In this, as in so many things, I am a polytheist. Tolkien is one god in the fantasy/SF firmament, true, but there are many gods and goddesses as great as - or greater than - he is. (In particular, I think Ursula Le Guin and Madeline L’Engle depend very little on him for their worldbuilding, and Le Guin is better at it - and that’s just off the top of my head.)
Lucas, on the other hand, is a false prophet at best. He had one great vision - one possibility of apotheosis - and he has thoroughly squandered it. He has even gone so far as to rewrite his own holy book - high blasphemy, that.
I seem to recall an anecdote about Tolkien when he was Professor of English Literature at Oxford; at one point a critic made a remark to the effect that the writing skills on display in his books were remarkably poor, and perhaps he could benefit by consulting the Oxford English Dictionary once in a while.
Tolkien replied, “I wrote the Oxford English Dictionary.”
The point being that a lot of Tolkien’s linguistic idiosyncracies were just that… conscious, studied deviations from “correct English.” For example, “elven” really isn’t a word, he just used it because he thought it sounded better than the proper adjective “elfin.”
I assumed when he said [the use of ’ instead of " ] he meant the British style of using single quotes ( ’ ) where in the U.S. the standard would be double quotes ( " ).
Terrifel, a slight exaggeration, but he certainly took pride in his work there early in his career.
As for the rest, I don’t care much for Tolkien myself, but I understand both his importance and his attractions for others. You just have to expect some rebuttal when you start throwing around words like “genius” or - OMG! - “Messiah.”
What really burns me is that so many of his fans seem to think that he invented fantasy, without any knowledge or understanding of all the fantasy that came before him or that is being written today by people other than his imitators. I honestly believe that that lack of understanding and the overwhelming number of his imitators - not the man himself - has been a bad thing for fantasy overall, and that it almost destroyed modern fantasy, urban fantasy, and fantasies based on non-western cultures. These types of fantasy are now getting some attention again, but it was a long time coming.
Well Exapno your allergy of Tolkien and his writing is dually noted.
I merely wrote the OP with the intention of inspiriting a discussion of Tolkien’s influence on Fantacy writers after him. As for his writing style. Tolkien studied before he wrote a single phrase, his writing was the furthest thing from haphazard I can think of. And I do believe the Quote Terrifel was remarking on was when a fellow approached a critic, he inquired about Tolkien’s editor … the immediate response was “…one doesn’t go around editing Tolkien…”
Or something to that effect. Tolkien, in my opinion, was a meticulous, almost surgical writer. He did not publish LOTR until well into his 50’s I believe. He was no amateur, and I think the reason people laud him is because he was so meticulous and scientific in his writings.
Macdonald was John the Baptist; CS Lewis was Paul; George Lucas could have been Pope Linus but is now the AntiChrist; Steven Spielberg is Pope Anencletus*
G
(I had to check my Eusebius to find that one.)
_“My Mom walked in one day while I was checking my Eusebius;
I was pretty embarassed.”