News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Is Tolkien Actually Any Good? (2003) by noonespecial on Saturday May 29, 2010 @09:34PM (#1389657)
Tolkien was not a 'perfectionist', inventing history because Middle-earth demanded it. Inventing history was a little game, a 'secret vice'; Middle-earth grew out of the game. And it is clear that he did not take the game half as seriously as some of his fans.

This is supplied as a criticism, but for me this is what makes Tolkien great. I dislike immensely that feeling that authors are just throwing in fantasy-ish sounding names and toss-away references to "deepen" the story. I can tell when they're doing it, its cheap feeling, and it sucks.

The one thing you know for damn sure about Tolkien, is that when he mentions some ancillary character or place reference, not only did he not make it up on the spot, there's very likely a whole file cabinet drawer on it somewhere because he'd been thinking about it for 20 years.

It made his world huge, internally consistent at nearly every turn, and immensely satisfying to read about even if his prose was "dense" or "cliche".

The fact that it wasn't intended explicitly to be a book, and was something he did for his own amusement is probably a key ingredient in the magic.

There are no comments on this comment yet.