Fans of Tolkien: Do you actually like his style of writing?

Question

Now, don't get me wrong, I love Tolkien. I love the history he made for Middle-earth, and the detail he put into it, but to be honest I find reading 'The Lord of the Rings' a little tedious. His style seems a bit stilted to me, and the constant stops for poems and songs kind of drives me a little nuts. And we all know how 'exciting' the 'Silmarillion' is for so many fans! ;) So I'm wondering if I'm a bad Tolkien fan for not liking his style of writing, or if I'm not alone.

Answer 1

I adore Tolkien's style and I loved the language in his books. I often read his sentences more than once, I so love the way they are constructed.

Answer 2

I do actually.
I don't find reading 'The Lord of the Rings' tedious. I love the poems and songs and the histories and ddetails explained
so well. But I also am aware that I may be in a minority on
this. I can see how someone would find it tedious or boring or stilted, especially since I tried reading it out loud to my younger sister once. Yeah, *that* went well.

However, considering that I have yet to make it through the Silmarilion, my liking of the style of LOTR could have been influenced by the fact that I already knew the plot (I don't remember a time when I didn't know how it ended) and could therefore enjoy the longer route the narrative took without getting anxious for "what happens next?"

Answer 3

I love his writing style.

What I found most fascinating about the LOTR trilogy was the way it changes from one book to another, becoming progressively darker as we get closer to Mount Doom and the final epic battle for middle earth.

In the very begining of The Fellowship, we start with a party and some lovely lighthearted scenes, by the end we have battled orcs and the fellowship is sundered. When we get to Return of the King, the language and style of writing is almost apocalyptic, rather like the language of The Book of Revelations.

To be honest, I usually skim the peoms and songs. But I understand that they are very important. The songs represent the oral tradition of elves, men, drawves etc. They are an essential part of each race's identity. Also some refer to or describe key events in the history of middle earth, events which were partly responsible for the present.

The story had to have epic poems and songs because Tolkien was trying to create a mythology for Britain, based on oral tradition. Other European countries had such a tradition and mythology but Britain didn't. Because of her history the stories, songs and poems which native Britons had were lost when they were invaded (Angles, Normans, etc.)

I plan to one day devote time to reading the poems and songs only to try to appreciate them more.

I had no difficulties reading Silmarillion. In fact I'm in the process of committing the events to memory, but I think I'm very alone on that. Many fans seem to have difficulty with the writing style, so you aren't alone there, in fact you may be the normal one :)

Answer 4

I guess with Tolkein the issue is the material is dense, there is a lot of content packed in to his writing. His interests in languages and a desire to create an "English" mythology took precedent over any stylistic considerations. I think if he could have drawn more of a balance between "The Hobbit" which was essentially a children's book and "The Lord Of The Rings" his appeal might have been a bit broader. As far as "The Silmarillion" goes it is pretty much for the die hards.
I waded through it but in all honesty it was a lot of work.
I think the movie(s) did an admirable job of updating and tweaking the stories for the contemporary audience while remaining as true to the story as possible.

Answer 5

Today I heard two different critics discussing this new book as well as the whole Tolkien catalog. Both regard him as brilliant, yet each one also called up issues of writing style. They didn't agree with you - LOTR is the masterpiece, they each said - but they did talk about the difficulties of reading The Silmarrillion and the new one. These last two were said to be without richness or character, just detail-laiden - whereas LOTR (and Hobbit) do have strong sense of story and vivid imagery.

My opinion? I couldn't even read Silmarrillion, but I loved Hobbit and LOTR. However, I've never done a second read-through.

Answer 6

Yes, I like his style... and you're not (IMO) "a bad fan" for having trouble / issues with his style.

But then again, I first read "The Hobbit" and "The Lord of the Rings" back in 1976... and have read them once a YEAR from 1980-2007 (geek-alert!!)

I LIKE his more formal English... it conveys the imagery and characters far better than "modern-English".

I JUST read "The Silmarillion" this last year... oh GOD I felt like I should have had a highlighter and notebook to take notes for a History final !! BUT STILL I loved the insight it provided !!

FRODO LIVES !!

Answer 7

haveing read the thing multiple times since 1970, I must disagree with those "tedious" experts. It is a question of style (1920 - 1950 's English) that I agree with.

Answer 8

Technically, to 'suitable comprehend' the franchise you may might desire to examine it in this order: The Silmarillion, the youngsters of Húrin, The Hobbit, The Fellowship of the hoop, the two Towers and The return of the King. even although, to truly savour the books, you may might desire to examine it like this: The Hobbit, The Lord of the rings, The Silmarillion and the youngsters of Húrin. The Sil is a heavy e book, and admittedly very few human beings might discover it interesting in the event that they examine it earlier LotR. babies of Húrin is unquestionably coated contained in the Sil, yet Christopher Tolkien desperate that it would suitable artwork as a e book aside (and admittedly, I agree). satisfied analyzing, and welcome to midsection-earth :)

Answer 9

You can skip over the poems and not lose much. But I think of the language as a challenge rather than a turnoff.

Answer 10

Yeah, it's kinda tough to get through those books, but they're well worth it. =D