now personally I have loved LoTR each and every time I’ve read it. I have also been personally resposible for at least three other people reading it (and loving it. I can understand why some people don’t like it so much though, it can be a bit dry at times, but it’s something that should be read with an open mind
Woohoo! OfficeGirl!
Anyways - it’s interesting to hear everyone’s different experiences with the book, and it mirrors almost exactly what I expected - some who claim it to be the best book they’ve ever read, some who think it’s dull, and some who forgive the slow bits because the rest is so great.
Well, I’m definitely going to stick it out as long as I can. If I find I’m not enjoying it by the halfway point, I’ll probably give up. I’m fairly sure that when the fellowship are fully assembled is when the real adventure happens.
I much prefer more modern fantasy - anything by Robin Hobb (Megan Lindholm) is fantastic. Julie Jones. Dave Duncan. These are authors not a lot of people know of, though. But they take fantasy in the directions I really enjoy, with a sense of humour and humanity I can relate to. Whereas LotR is not easy to relate to. Written in an era of stilted writing style, about an era of ancient and archaic speech, using characters that aren’t human in the first place - it all distances it from me a bit.
This is a good thing - to have a multitude of distinct races written so deeply is a great skill, and I admit he pulls that off, but at the expense of risking alienating the reader. Some embrace it, some reject it, I personally feel a bit put off by it.
So there ya go.
Tolkien really shines (in my opinion) not in his ability as a storyteller, but in his command of prose and language. Really, the man is pure genius in his prose. While 'The Lord of the Rings" may not be the most rousing epic tale you’ve ever read, take a serious look at the structure of the prose you are reading…to make a jazz analogy, listen to the notes he’s not playing…
Beyond LOTR, the Silmarillion is a must-read for the pinnacle of prose, I literally weep reading some of the emotional sentences he penned, he writes the closest thing to pure emotion in that book that you will ever find…
So yes, LOTR is really that good. His other writings (Silmarillion, Lost Tales) are even better…
and 4 of your 5 points:
"- too much political intrigue and corruption
- huge complicated battles with detailed strategy descriptions
- soppy romance (a la Melanie Rawn)
- explicitly described gratuitously violent acts committed by the good guys"
…are the very reason that these books are so grand and incredible. His books are all about epic struggles and epic tragedy…the greatest heroes die tragically, the greatest loves are torn asunder, the purest motives are corrupted, the greatest kingdoms are laid to ruin…
If you can’t take the heat, get out of the forge 
I really don’t like prose.
Really really really.
And don’t forget his Barsoom series, the first of which, A Princess of Mars, was published in 1912. 
I read LotR once in high school, and had many of the reactions in this thread: massively impressed with the complexity, but frequently wondering when things were going to get going again. In a way, this made the experience more authentic; real life isn’t very evenly paced. The languages/alphabets were what riveted me, though; because they are so often a weak point in fantasy. No-one has done a more thorough job on these than Tolkien.
Don’t forget that many people consider Tolkien great because his world seems so real.
This “realness” is reinforced by all the details about what people ate, what the passing countryside looked like, how monotonous and boring the journey was, etc. It’s all atmosphere.
After all, not all fantasy fiction writers keep in mind that most people have to eat, sleep and go to the bathroom. Their work may make for a faster, rollicking read, but the memory of it doesn’t stay with us as long.
The diaries of the travels of famous people can be boring and fascinating at the same time. Why? Because it’s a slice of life. It’s real.
But now that’s just making excuses for him.
This is fiction in the form of entertainment, it’s not intended to be real. Realistic, maybe, but he has the power to avoid the dull bits to keep our interest up - he has failed to do that for many people (me included) and this is a count against him.
I’m not like most people - my criticisms against some forms of entertainment are often wildly different to what others seem to get from them. I don’t like American Beauty but do like Titanic. There aren’t many people who can say that. But when I see something go in a dumb direction when it didn’t have to, it ruins it for me.
Lord of the Rings could’ve been much more exciting, or at least interesting than it is so far. Instead he describes trees, has his characters sing pointless little songs that take up two pages, and has them wander around the hills for weeks at a time.
I also liked Titanic better than American Beauty. Judging by box office figures, so did many people. You are neither alone nor weird. It’s only in the context of snooty film critics (or snooty Dopers) that you’re an anomaly.
I seem to be caught in an anomaly. Can entertainment be monotonous, yet fascinating and memorable?
Yes…I think it can. Guess that makes me the weird one.
Remember the film “Koyaanisqatsi”?
Monotonous.
Fascinating.
Memorable.