[allanon]

Well,Thai'shar I think that you are right...
but if you want series better than LotR,try
"Riftwar saga"...It isn't so big,but it is terrific.
Bardos,I read one Moorcock book soon[I don't know the English name] and it was great,especially the final.
But I have one question.Tolkien fans think that if you don't think that Tolkien is the best,you don't like him-but this is not true!
I like him,but I prefer Feist or Jordan[his first books!!!]and sometimes even "formulaic" Brooks.Also,I can't understand why they hate Terry Brooks-he is very nice author.They are like football fans
and it is not funny!I must say that I love Feist,Brooks,Jordan,Tolkien,LeGuin,I like Eddings,Howard,Moorcock,Zelazny,even Goodkind,and I don't like Oliver Jonson,Kerr and Rawn.But I don't hate them-I don't buy their books!!!

[Pluvious]

Hmm...I post specific examples of why I don't like Tolkein and nobody challenges them. Interesting. Instead Jordan fans invade and branch out aimlessly like the author they so admire.

It seems we are getting the same arguments when people praise the mighty Tolkein and Jordan. I will state them here so people won't have to go through the trouble of posting it again on another thread, and can simply come here and refresh their memories as to why they "think" they like these two authors.

Tolkein: He was the first and he was a linguist and knew about mythology.

Jordan: He is popular, his books are big, and he has a fun world.

Ok, there you go. No reason to go anywhere else now.

[Bardos]

I think I need to make a point clear here: I am NOT a Tolkien fan. If you want to know the truth, I don't like Tolkien all that much. But that doesn't mean I don't respect him.
There's a difference between what you like and what you respect.
And I don't want to offend anyone who likes Jordan. I read him too, tho' he doesn't move me the way other authors do -neither do I respect him, ofcourse.

[Metosblat]

I dislike Tolkien.
I've already posted in at least five different sections why.
All i wanna say is that if any author is to still be remembered in 50 years it's George R R Martin. Because he deserves it!
He is Amazing! Anyone who has reading his books will know what I'm talking about, and to anyone who hasn't read the song of Fire and Ice I PITY YOU!

[Curufinwe]

The two important things for a fantasy writer is in my opinion :

A. To create a realistic setting ( world ). Realistic in how the society, cultures, magic etc works.

B. To create an interesting plot.

Tolkien was the master of A but maybe not so good at B.

Jordan is the master of A and has an complex plot. But he has far too many plots and takes too much time go get anywhere with the story.

Martin has a good mix of A and B.

Feist started out rather poorly in Magician, which is like a recollection of a RPG story. With elves, dwarves and the lot. Not at all good at A, but in the later works he has developed the setting. And cut down on the elves and dwarves. Feist is very good at B though, with a lot of surprising twists to his story. I think his best books are the novels in between the two Sagas, "Prince of the blood" and "King's buccaneer".

Donaldson is a great writer, perhaps the best of the modern fantasy writers. But he is difficult to get started with and many seem to have difficulties in enjoying him. Probably Brooks and Eddings fans ...

Eddings does reserve some credit though. His setting is awful and the plot not good, but it is fun to read the books one time. If you read them in the way you read a comic book.

[Giarc]

*LOL*
Nice job with the Jordan jibe Pluvious!

Regarding your criticisms of Tolkien.

1>"My problem with this is that I read fantasy to read the tales of "interesting" characters that I can "believe" will actually be having an impact-through their adventures-on a much larger world."

Fair enough...but perhaps Tolkien's message is not to underestimate the efforts of little people. I'm sure Sauron similarly disregarded the hobbits as a threat...to his eventual sorrow. It's human nature to be impressed with obvious power (beit sorcery, brawn, financial might, whatever) and unfortunately we are quick to disregard the poor, the weak, the downtrodden. Tolkien's books are a wake up call to those who think that might is right (to quote the cliche) and this is (to me) one of the great themes that make his work outstanding. Perhaps your preference for the style of main characters is different than Tolkien chose to use but that doesn't necessarily mean it's a flaw in his work.

2>" "I fear those Black Riders, and I am sure it is unsafe to stay in one place long..."
This is one of many instances where I just want the characters to shut up and get going."

Fair enough. But then again, in real life people whine and complain, or just start jabbering uselessly when things aren't going so good, or when they are frightened. Do you really think that sensitive, highly social, and rather frightened creatures such as the hobbits are simply going to shrug stoically in the face of danger without comment? I think that's simply an example of his characters being consistent with their nature. *shrug* That's just my opinion of course. http://www.sffworld.com/ubb/smile.gif Of course, if it were Aragorn saying it I might agree with you....

Cheers,
G.


[This message has been edited by Giarc (edited January 07, 2001).]

[Ntschotschi]

Some Tolkien short-comings:
There is no love-story.He's prude.
He's airing the views of a class society: For example the relationship between Frodo and Sam. Frodo always stays the "master"
Too much description of landscape.(When I read it to may children I always had to skip that part).
Sauron's motives? He's bad, evil.
How do you know that? The Nazguls only "followed" Frodo in the first book.
Did they do anything to him? No!Couldn't they have easily killed him? Yes!
He attacked them first. So they have a bad reputation. So what?
Nevertheless: I love him!

[wynnyelle]

i love the books i love despite knowing that they indeed have flaws. No such thing as a perfect book. I'll be honest, I couldn't get into Tolkien's work past the Hobbit, which I moderately enjoyed. I've tried three times to read the Fellowship of the Ring but could never get past 100 or so pages. I'm not sure why but I believe it has something to do with the reasons stated in the post directly above this one, particularly those having to do with character.
Then again, it's been a while since I tried to read Lord of the Rings. Maybe I ought to give it a shot again...

[Rupert Avery]

Tolkien's crap
Jorden's crap
Feist is the best
Whatever!!

We all keep hearing theses same things over and over again when all the question was, How you feel about Tolkien's work? Now I like his books and think they are a great read.but he is not my fav writer.Every time you say a bad word about Tolkien or Jorden people seem to sense it and jump on there PC and attack every other writer they can think of.How many times has a topic been taken over because of the subject WHO IS THE BEST?
When in truth this Question has only one answer. EACH TO THERE OWN.

[Bardos]

I agree with you, Roo. Each one of us is only natural to have his/her own prefences. Whas is great for me maybe bad for you, or moderate for someone else. Lets not be absolute.