Who else thinks Tolkien is NOT the godfather of fantasy adventure?

Question

I'm so sick of people claiming that Tolkien is the godfather of fantasy adventure. Yeah, Lord of the Rings & Hobbit were good, but they were extremely bland. Besides, any one ever hear of Robert E. Howard?- known mostly for creating Conan. Personally I think he's the godfather of fantasy adventure. Who do u like?

Answer 1

The oldest works which could fall into that category would probably be the works known as the Grail Traditions, the elements of Arthurian Legends relating to the Grail Quests. That would make the "godfather" (although a more apropo term might be "apical ancestor") of fantasy adventure Chrétien de Troyes, writing in the 1100s.

He obviously influenced Tolkien.

Answer 2

The main reason Tolkien is considered the originator the the fantasy genre is that he was one of the first people to go mainstream. In fact, Tolkien didn't consider his novels fantasy or adventure, but thought of them as a modern british epic, comprable to Beowulf, The Halevala, The Illyiad or The Odyessy. He wanted to create an enduring mythology for his country, not start a new genre of writing. So while you and others may consider his work bland, it was at the time of it's publishing something new, different and exciting.

I've not read anything by Robert E. Howard, but I think that many authors contributed to the successful rise of the Fantasy genre, and it's entirely possible that he was another pioneer in the field.

As a reader, I'm fond of many authors, including Tolkien, though I prefer his poems and short stories to LOTR).

Answer 3

Well, Tolkien borrowed his ideas from other mythological fiction, but he is the one that just about every fantasy writer since LOTR has used as a reference. Tolkien and the Story of King Arthur are the two main influences on the fantasy genre. I have read literally hundreds of these novels (I am embarassed to say) so I think I have a good sense of the genre. If you like Conan you should try the Elric saga by Michael Moorcock. There is a lot of sex and violence, plus the plots are much more interesting and epic than the Conan books. There are a lot of people that are bored with the goody 2 shoes guys taking on the really nasty guys. So, I can appreciate your point of view to some degree.

Answer 4

That depends on your perspective, I suppose. All ancient cultures have aspects of the fantastical, often stemming from their religion or spiritual lore. This was often transcribed into books, or spoken story or even artwork and passed down through generations. I think a great example of this would be Greek mythology. But if we're talking only of written story that does not stem from religion, we could look to Shakespeare's plays, or all the fairy tales that we grew up with that started with 'Once upon a time...'

As to comparing Tolkien to Howard.... They are so different, where would you begin? Howard is definitely a more lively read, and I like his body of work, from Conan the Cimmerian to his more gothic work. I must point out that a large portion of his work was also published in 'Weird Tales' a magazine that catered to unconventional and fantastic stories.
Tolkien on the other hand, doesn't get nearly as dark and heavy and is more of a dry read. He was incredibly detailed in in world, even going so far as to create an entire elven language, but all of his material WAS presented so that the reader had to have a very vivid imagination. What I've noticed is that I enjoy reminicing about his books more that I enjoy actually reading them, because my memory more lively than the way he phrases things, although he did write some good battle scenes. Also, if it is of any interest, his stories were published later than those of Robert E. Howard.

I feel that a lot of the way both of them wrote was influenced by all the writers they were exposed to, and much of it would be considered dull by today's standards. So to summarize, I like them both, and as far as creation of something utterly new and unheard of, you must properly define a time without fantasy adventure.

Answer 5

This isn't a question. Yahoo answers isn't the place to try to get reaffirmation for your own preconceived notions. You obviously just want to get on a soapbox or start a fight.

Also, remember that Tolkien was breaking new ground for the epic fantasy genre. Howard did this also (as they lived in the same era) but for sword and sorcery genre. The genres of the two authors are drastically different. You can't really compare them.

Also, in my humble opinion, calling Lord of the Rings "bland" is a simply ignorant statement. The books may be "slow moving" at times, but "bland" implies that the story and characters are uninteresting. This is simply not true. The Lord of the Rings is full of rich symbolism, multilayered and deeply emotional themes, and represents a good portion of the authors lifes work. Please don't overgeneralize something you obviously know little about.

Answer 6

I don't think Tolkien created fantasy adventure. However, the term "godfather" is a possibility based solely on the fact that he established a lengthy story-telling method that is now used (albeit in a much faster pace) by authors such as Eddings, the author of the Wizard's Rules books (whose name escapes me at this late moment) and even, to some degree, Orson Scott Card. Tolkien deserves respect for bringing fantasy from the status of myth to that of a novel; the term "novel" was applied to his works and established them as literature primarily for their linguistic value to start with, I believe. Tolkien was, after all, more of a linguist and a complicated scene-setter than a strict fantasy writer. He in no way created the types of characters he used or the story lines. The characters were pulled from various fantasy cultures (Celtic, primarily I believe) and he had to follow specific rules based on the common beliefs/cultures that he borrowed them from. His story is a basic hero tale set within a fantastical landscape that remains based in a reality - his grass is green, there's a big volcano, there are large creeks, and trees are helping fight a fight (a common theme in modern fantasy and one found relating to druids). He's not a creator of fantasy adventure, but he's certainly borrowed it and improved upon it by giving it credibility in the literary world.

Answer 7

I agree with you, Tolkien is not the godfather of fantasy adventure. Fantasy is as old as the ancient Greeks. Homer was one of the first with The Oddsessy and the IIlad. T.S. Eliot wrote the epic poem Childe Rolande Where the Dark Tower came before Tolkien. Even C.S. Lewis did fantasy adventure before Tolkien, with The Chronicles of Narnia series. Tolkien was one of the few people who did an epic like that, and yeah, I do think the story is bland.

Answer 8

Considering that Asimov beat Tolkien for a special award for Trilogy. (1965?) (Foundation Series vs. Lord of the Rings)
I would give Asimov the title while concurring with several of the previous posts that fantasy-adventure goes back to the earliest writings such as Illiad. (I have read that there has been some proof found to validate Homer's writings.)

Answer 9

Hear hear! Tolkein certainly laid some wonderful foundations, but he sure as hell does NOT get credit for all of Dragonlance (for example). Personally, I find Margaret Weis to be a most incredible author of fantasy.

Not so much for fantasy, but at least for fiction, I also find Poe to be a wonderful source, and Shakespear's "A Midsummer Night's Dream" was incredibly influencial on modern fantasy.

Celtic folklore inspired Aurthurian legend, and Homer's Illiad and Oddesey have had fantasy impact on stories worldwide!

I honestly HATED the LOTR books. I found them boring and rambling, but I loved what they did with the movies.

Still, Tolkein, while he contributed a good deal, is certainly not the godfather of fantasy adventure.

Answer 10

Long before Tolkien there was Wells and Lovecraft and others. Try reading H.H. Munro (better known as Saki).