Matt Colville, and Most Tolkien Critics, Are Wrong

Janx

Hero
I wasn't intending that comment to be the end-all, be-all of why genre fiction today doesn't match Tolkien's style. I
For example, we can turn to demographics. What have been the socio-economic changes in the population of pleasure-readers since the time of Tolkien and Hemingway? If more people are reading, but those people have less time for reading, that will put a pressure on the written form - books you can choke a horse with won't sell so well. Similarly, sequels and series are apt to sell better, for as time to read drops, desire for surety that you'll like the resulting work would probably rise.

Not the first time I've seen speculation on TV format influencing story telling (and thus writing). It's also why I alluded to the influence gatekeepers have on writing and language. As consumers, content producers are either programming us or fine tuning the formula to fit our wetware tastes. it's why Cambell came up with the Hero's Journey as something that works.


It's related that you mention on DVR and such might change how stories are told again (no more aligning story beats to commercial breaks). Netflix and the internet is changing how writers are advised to present their story. Slow starts are frowned upon because people will flip to another thing (book, video, social media, etc) if it doesn't hook them. Netflix sees this pattern with how many people sample start a show, and cut to something else. A writer has 10-50 pages to hook you on the story question and characters, so we see the inciting incident a lot sooner nowadays.
 

log in or register to remove this ad



Shasarak

Banned
Banned
I agree with Umbran that many people's trouble with Tolkien is likely more a result of modern people's lack of attention span due to television and screens than anything to do with his writing. I saw the same thing when Chris Claremont came back to the X-Men in 2000. Fans have the attention span of squirrels on crack and couldn't handle his deliberate story pacing, so he was out within six months and they brought in some people to hack out some terrible wrap ups.

Personally I wonder if it was true that modern people have such bad attention spans then how come modern novels like Game of Thrones, Wheel of Time and Harry Potter are so much longer then Lord of the Rings and apparently just as popular.
 

cbwjm

Seb-wejem
Personally I wonder if it was true that modern people have such bad attention spans then how come modern novels like Game of Thrones, Wheel of Time and Harry Potter are so much longer then Lord of the Rings and apparently just as popular.
I agree. I don't think it is bad attention spans, instead I think it is more to do with how engaging the book is. A book could be 800 pages long and it would still be read if the reader finds the book engaging whereas one half the size might be dropped due to writing which the reader had trouble engaging with. Even limited time to read won't dissuade people from reading a long book. If you can only get through a chapter a night but those chapters are a great read then it hardly matters if it will take a few weeks to read the book.
 

Shasarak

Banned
Banned
I agree. I don't think it is bad attention spans, instead I think it is more to do with how engaging the book is. A book could be 800 pages long and it would still be read if the reader finds the book engaging whereas one half the size might be dropped due to writing which the reader had trouble engaging with. Even limited time to read won't dissuade people from reading a long book. If you can only get through a chapter a night but those chapters are a great read then it hardly matters if it will take a few weeks to read the book.

That is what I found when trying to read Shakespeare, the language was almost impenetrable it is so much better to read a translation then the original work.
 

doctorbadwolf

Heretic of The Seventh Circle
Personally I wonder if it was true that modern people have such bad attention spans then how come modern novels like Game of Thrones, Wheel of Time and Harry Potter are so much longer then Lord of the Rings and apparently just as popular.

Yeah, I think the short attention span thing is entirely a myth. Older works are hard for many people because they have different vocabulary, diction, and other linguistic elements, than we're used to.

I agree. I don't think it is bad attention spans, instead I think it is more to do with how engaging the book is. A book could be 800 pages long and it would still be read if the reader finds the book engaging whereas one half the size might be dropped due to writing which the reader had trouble engaging with. Even limited time to read won't dissuade people from reading a long book. If you can only get through a chapter a night but those chapters are a great read then it hardly matters if it will take a few weeks to read the book.

Exactly. I literally have ADHD, and even when I'm not in "hyper-focus" mode, I can usually read just fine if the book engages me. Even when I was young, and my ADHD was worse, and more "lack of attention span" vs my older "hyper-attention and crap executive function" ADHD, I read LoTR no problem, but couldn't get through some of the much simpler books people got for me, because I can't keep reading something that bores me.

That is what I found when trying to read Shakespeare, the language was almost impenetrable it is so much better to read a translation then the original work.

IMO, Shakespeare is worth learning the language, because a lot of the depth of the work is lost in translation, but I would support a modern abridged version of LoTR, perhaps written by Guy Kay and another linguistically gifted modern fantasy author. I doubt it would ever happen, even if the Tolkien Estate was down for it, though. Even with Kay being the guy who helped Chris Tolkien write the Silmarillion.
 

Ovinomancer

No flips for you!
Yeah, I think the short attention span thing is entirely a myth. Older works are hard for many people because they have different vocabulary, diction, and other linguistic elements, than we're used to.
Tolkien isn't old enough for this. Still using modern English. You might find a word or two, or a phrase to be odd, but not difficult to understand. Now, Tolkien's naming and places can certainly cause difficulty in reading.



Exactly. I literally have ADHD, and even when I'm not in "hyper-focus" mode, I can usually read just fine if the book engages me. Even when I was young, and my ADHD was worse, and more "lack of attention span" vs my older "hyper-attention and crap executive function" ADHD, I read LoTR no problem, but couldn't get through some of the much simpler books people got for me, because I can't keep reading something that bores me.



IMO, Shakespeare is worth learning the language, because a lot of the depth of the work is lost in translation, but I would support a modern abridged version of LoTR, perhaps written by Guy Kay and another linguistically gifted modern fantasy author. I doubt it would ever happen, even if the Tolkien Estate was down for it, though. Even with Kay being the guy who helped Chris Tolkien write the Silmarillion.[/QUOTE]

How odd that you'd support a stripped down, story-focused version of LotR while you defend that the lengthy descriptions are part of it's being a great novel.
 

Mercurius

Legend
I agree. I don't think it is bad attention spans, instead I think it is more to do with how engaging the book is. A book could be 800 pages long and it would still be read if the reader finds the book engaging whereas one half the size might be dropped due to writing which the reader had trouble engaging with. Even limited time to read won't dissuade people from reading a long book. If you can only get through a chapter a night but those chapters are a great read then it hardly matters if it will take a few weeks to read the book.

I have been a high school teacher for about a decade and have seen a rather startling decline in, if not "attention spans," than the ability to become engaged in material that is not overtly stimulating. By this I mean books in general, stories that don't shock and wow you, or aren't immediately accessible and easy to read.

Not all students, but as an overall trend. It is rather disheartening.

And yes, I do think it has to do with access and usage of "smart"phones and various technologies that facilitate constant neuro-stimulation. So when you speak of "how engaging the book is," to me it speaks of a generation of young people who have access to endless forms of easy, passive, and creatively bereft forms of entertainment. Yes, we should find more engaging stories to read, but we also need to teach the capacity to become engaged, and this requires bringing back that old bugaboo: boredom.

I'm not exactly decrepit, but I remember having to fill the boredom of those endless summers of childhood with books, with TV only at night or on Saturday morning and no personal entertainment devices. It was this boredom that gave my imagination the opportunity be ignited. Kids have less and less opportunity to be bored, and thus find their own means of filling it with creative and imaginative activity. Every kid as their personal "entertainment device," which in my view is doing them a terrible, terrible disservice. We are keeping them from the fertile source of creativity: blessed boredom.

Speaking of which, I decided to read Lord of the Rings with a small class of 11th graders. We're a few chapters in and so far so good. The biggest hurdle is that most of them have seen the movies, some many times, so I'm trying to encourage to try to "dissolve" the pre-fabricated imagery (as good as it generally was), and enter into Tolkien's Secondary World afresh.

So far (a few chapters in) they are taking pretty well to the book, with lots of lively conversations. Maybe I'm biased, though, as I'm having a blast. Just today I gave a 20-minute lecture on the various orders of beings. It isn't every day that I get to talk about how the Istari and Balrogs are of the same general ontological status.

But with teenagers (and kids in general), the teacher's enthusiasm about a subject goes a long way in perking their interest. The fact that A) the students respect and like me, B) I'm clearly passionate about Tolkien, means C) they're more engaged with the book than if I was, say, teaching A Tale of Two Cities, which I have no love of (blech...no offense, @doctorbadwolf ;)).

Anyhow, @Ovinomancer, can you tell me exactly why you think it is a "bad novel?" What specifically? It is the first time I've read it all the way through in maybe two decades, so I can approach it afresh.
 
Last edited:

cbwjm

Seb-wejem
[MENTION=59082]Mercurius[/MENTION] One thing I will definitely agree with is that when a teacher is interested and engaging with a topic, students tend to pay attention. It's something I noticed myself as a student at uni.

I don't know if I fully agree with attention spans and devices but thinking about it more as I write this, maybe people do need to switch off more. Certainly as a teacher this is a phenomenon that you would be in better position to see. All I can say is that my nieces, and nephews, despite having devices still love to read and draw and play. They aren't teenagers though. I do wonder if it might have more to do with that period of life than easy access to devices and the internet.
 

Remove ads

Top