A Critique of the LotR BOOKS

[Darrin Drader]

I don't think you'll have to worry about me listening to Whisperfoot's notions of what literary criticism is appropriate or not.

Flamefest resumed!

 

[KenM]

Pointless stuff in a novel. LotR is not a novel. Read Book 2 of the Iliad and Book 1 of Paradise Lost.

If its not a novel, how come it can be found in the FANTASY NOVEL section of bookstores? Its being published as a novel, it looks like a novel, its marketed as a novel, its a novel.
I have always been bored and can never make it though the books, but I love the EE DVD's.

 

[Nightfall]

I would like to point out Paradise lost is an epic POEM not a novel in the truest sense of the word. Illiad I could see as a novel but it's really just an oral epic poem in any case.

Secondly, while I could decry a lot of what's said on this thread by BOTH sides, what I will say is this thread has become utter pointless other than to bash people's opinion to nothingness. So congradulations folks. This has to be the WORST thread I've read ever. And yes I could have gone elsewhere but I was hoping for some stimulating talk. So far I just see a bunch of modern people bash the old people who bash the new people who are in turn bashing all. So congrats.

 

[shilsen]

I would like to point out Paradise lost is an epic POEM not a novel in the truest sense of the word. Illiad I could see as a novel but it's really just an oral epic poem in any case.

I think I'm the one who brought up those examples, and I never wrote (or meant) that any of them are novels, because they aren't. Both are epic poems, as you say. I used them to argue that the LotR is a very unusual text - epic prose. Not novel either.

 

[shilsen]

If its not a novel, how come it can be found in the FANTASY NOVEL section of bookstores? Its being published as a novel, it looks like a novel, its marketed as a novel, its a novel.

Because there is no fantasy epic section in existence anywhere on the planet. Good thing too, since only LotR would show up in it

 

[Gez]

And the 20th centuy added Man Vs. Software.

Actually, it's an older theme than this. Man vs. its creation. Frankeinstein was on that theme. The Jewish tale of the Golem too. As it can be understood as Man usurping God's power (and creating new lifeforms), I say it can be traced back to the Tower of Babel. Otherwise, the creation fighting the creator, or vice-versa, can be found in a different way in Norse or Greek mythology, with gods battling titans, Chronos eating his children, and all that stuff.

 

[Storm Raven]

1) Frodo waiting for months before leaving AFTER it was found that without a doubt, he has the One Ring.
In the other thread, various rationalizations have been forwarded, none of which is remotely convincing to me.
They ignore the facts that Gandalf KNEW it was the One Ring, yet still allowed Frodo to kick back for months before leaving, thus creating the danger with the Ringwraiths later.

He allows Frodo to create a plausible story for his desire to leave, sell his house, and wrap up his affairs. As a hobbit normally would. Bilbo's sudden disappearance caused enough of a stir that having Frodo also suddenly dissapear would have caused questions to be asked that Gandalf didn't want asked. The key to moving the Ring was sercrecy, and avoiding unexplained disappearances is a pretty good step to achieving that goal.

You maybe would not have done things that way if you were in a similar situation, or written things that way if you were writing the story, but caution does not mean someone made a mistake.

2) The orcs killing each other to allow Sam to advance into Mordor. Without this silly plot device, Sam would most certainly have been captured. Based on the plot and forces that Tolkein himself described, there was no way for the Quest to have succeeded without pulling male-brain stunts like having an entire fortress kill themselves the exact moment that Sam & Frodo needed them not to be there.

But you fail to understand that the orcs set to killing each other exactly because Frodo was there, and because they were left leaderless (Sauron's attention being elsewhere, and the Witch-King having gone to lay siege to Minas Tirith). Left unattended, the story repeatedly shows how orcs become clanning, and how different groups of orcs tend to infight amongst each other. Frodo's expensive and pretty equipment caused the orcs to bicker over who got to have the items (and who got credit with "the boss" in Barad-Dur for finding it). Orcish bickering turns into violent fighting pretty easily.

As to your question about garrison: it was probably stripped pretty bare. Most of the forces seem to have been committed to the invasion of Gondor, which means that there was likely only a skeleton force left behind.

 

[Storm Raven]

You say "Oh, and they were in Rivendell for 2 months, after deciding to destroy the ring, they then waited a couple months for more information."
If that's true, I'll add that to the list of things I think Don't Work in LotR.

Of course, you don't know why they waited after deciding to destroy the Ring before setting out, so you come to a rash conslusion. (Elrond sent out scouts to investigate the surrounding area for dangers before sending to Fellowship out. Until they reported back, he didn't want them marching into the wilderness.)

The orcs act like Yo-Yo's on a puppetmaster's strings. They ping-pong back and forth between being exceedingly good in battle, and deadly/scary adverseries, to being buffonish bumblers who literally are frightened by shadows as Sam ascends the stairs alone in their own fortress.
One second, an orc spins like a cat to kill another orc, the next he's incompetent when faced with a stumbling Samwise "orc-slayer' Gamgee.

You do realize that the orcs Sam fights are the guys who were left behind when the Witch-King took his forces to attack Minas Tirith. The guys one would not expect to be very good warriors, since they were kept out of one of the most important engagements of the war.

 

[Storm Raven]

* Focusing too much on details that have nothing to do with moving the storyline. While I like the detail, even I have to admit that detailed descriptions of the landscape grow repetitive, and take focus away from what the characters are doing.

For me, this is one of the strengths of the books. In too many books, the writing is so "tight" that everything has a point, a purpose, and relates in some way to the main story. As a result, there is no mystery, there is nothing that is outside the scope of the main story. If everything has a purpose, then everything that appears "on camera" (as it were) is important. To me, this detracts from a story, because it simplifies the action down to the tunnel vision version of what we see. Tolkien's strength on this is that you get the impression that there is a larger world out there, of which this story is only one story among many.

Further, in most novels, there is nothing that is "normal" to serve as a baseline. In too many novels, the characters leap from one action sequence to another, running from place to place, and event to event. But if everythign is action, then action becomes routine. In a book contructed in a more "standard" manner, the balrog scene would have been lost, because it would have been surrounded with a half dozen other big tension filled action scenes. In FotR, it sticks out as unusual, because Tolkien took the time to establish normal life in the rest of the book.

* Lack of an indentifiable villain. "Identifiable" as in a character which the reader can actually "see" and get an idea of what makes him tick. The closest Tolkien comes is Saruman, and even he is a bit of a cipher. Tolkien's villains, for the most part, are faceless and, ultimately, uninteresting.

I also find this to be a strength. The biggest weakness of many books is that they try to describe a villain like Sauron. But when an author tries to describe a horrible, scary, terrible evil villain, they usually resort to what they consider to be horrible, scary, and terrible. If I don't agree with his opinions in this regard, the villain is diminished for me when I read it. (The example that springs to my mind is Dennis L. McKiernan's Modru character in the Iron Tower trilogy, when described, he's just a ratty man in an iron mask, which made him seem silly when I read the books). By describing Sauron in terms of the reactions that other characters have to him Tolkien allows the reader to fill in for himself what Sauron is like, and preserves his power as a villain.

 

[CCamfield]

I agree with Stormraven about the villains in LotR. If Tolkien had presented some of the book through Sauron's eyes, I think that would have personified him and reduced his impact.

Otherwise I can mostly just chime in agreement about the LoTR being an epic which follows different conventions from novels generally. That may make it a less enjoyable read for many, novel or no.

On the subject of divine providence, let me just quote a short passage about Sam from near the end of The Two Towers as he confronts Shelob:

'Galadriel!' he said faintly, and then he heard voices far off but clear: the crying of the elves as they walked under the stars in the beloved shadows of the Shire, and the music of the Elves as it came through his sleep in the Hall of Fire in the house of Elrond.

Gilthoniel A Elbereth!

And then his tongue was loosed and his voice cried in a language which he did not know:

A Elbereth Gilthoniel
o menel palan-diriel
le nallon si di'nguruthos
A tiro nin Fanuilos!

And with that he staggered to his feet and was Samwise the hobbit, Hamfast's son, again.

What's going on here? Sam, of all people, is having some sort of aural vision and quoting Elvish that he doesn't know. And it's right after this that he gathers up his courage, and the vial of Galadirel blazes with light, driving Shelob away.

The answer, I think, is that he's being touched by the divine. That section ends with Tolkien writing that he "becomes Sam again". (It's been a while since I read enough Tolkien to recall the names of the higher beings.)

So when someone says that divine providence plays a role in the books, it really does. The divine forces of good want the heroes to succeed and aid them in their quest at various points. I think Frodo has points of similar inspiration in the book. Gandalf also makes a comment that the ring was meant to find Frodo.