Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Desdichado" data-source="post: 1309857" data-attributes="member: 2205">Umbran said it earlier, but before I read his post, I was thinking of making the same point -- Lord of the Rings is neither a modern novel, nor a historical-style epic -- it's a hybrid creature that incorporates elements of both in many ways.  Saying that Lord of the Rings doesn't hold up under modern criticisms for it's failing as a modern novel is both a cop-out, and at the same time partly true.Many of the "flaws" with the work are deliberate, and Tolkien knew very well that they weren't appropriate for a modern novel, but that they worked in the context he needed them.LotR really is a unique beast -- which is why it fails even a casual attempt at serious literary criticism and yet has become probably the classic work of our century as well as the best-selling work (besides the Bible) of all time.  Rather than arguing about parts that don't work for us individually, and trying to explain why they were done that way, I think it's perhaps more appropriate in the vein of the thread's probably purpose to simply state what doesn't work for you and why.For me, I'm disappointed in recent readings with how ineffectual the Nazgul seem to be throughout Book 1.  Although atmospherically and through description, they are established as credible and frankly quite potent and frightening threats, their actions continually bely their ability to actually stop Frodo and Co.</blockquote>

Verification