Tolkein is a bad writer - discuss

Smurfin

Just thought I'd post this to get some debate going, as I've increasingly become mystified by the hype surrounding JRR Tolkein.  I first read LOTR trilogy when I was 13, and I think I read it 3 or 4 times in total in my younger years.  The story itself is first class, and completely broke the mould for its day, spawning endless authors and stories which are inspired by his works.

I can't disagree with that, and Tolkein's influence can be seen in many works, both new and old.  Indeed, without Tolkein I wonder what the face of "fantasy" fiction would even look like now.

However, that said I recently tried re-reading the trilogy and really struggled.  His writing style is poor in my opinion, his pacing and plots way off the mark, and what he really needed was a really good editor.

Honestly, I find his writing style to be very unengaging - endless description, poorly executed battle scenes, and far far too many instances of scenes (entire chapters even) which do little or nothing to further the story.

Don't get me wrong...it really is a fantastic story and what an imagination!  But I'd put money on it that any publishers of today would reject a similar manuscript out of hand, simply because of the reasons above.

Of course, the books were written a long time ago when writing styles were different anyway, however the fact remains that by today's standards, the writing is - in my opinion - poor.

And has anyone tried to read The Silmarrilion

Discuss.

*dons flame suit and waits for the execution squad*

Theydon Bois

Completely agree. I am one of those raised on Feist and Gemmell which have excellent character descriptions, detailed fight scenes and emotional overtones, and to read 60 pages on the Council of Elrond and walking through the swampy swamps of swampland was more than I can bear. Its well documented that Tolkien had no love for the characters and only wrote the book to create a world in which to base his love of languages, creating Elvish from this.

However, much love and gratitude goes to the man simply from the seeds of fantasy that he created. Without his early works, would we have the genre that we know and love today?

Smurfin

I agree completely....without Tolkein, where would the George R R Martins, Robin Hobb and Joe Abercrombies of this world be?

BAN5HEE

I agree with you. I love the books but if push comes to shove I would much rather watch the movie then drag myself through the book. I find myslef skipping pages when reading it.

bosque

I think you're confusing the pacing of Tolkien's novel with the style.  Tolkien's style is how he chooses to construct his sentences; his pacing is the measured story structure which you find slow.  

However, to suggest Tolkien's writing is poor by comparison with "today's standards" implies you feel that the modern practice is superior to a classically-trained author.  We'd need to hear which modern authors you feel are so much better than Tolkien - so far all you've really said is you think Tolkien is boring.

Smurfin

I understand that, both the pacing and style leave alot to be desired imho, although editing is a biggie here too.


Robin Hobb
George R R Martin
Scott Lynch
Joe Abercrombie

I think all of the above are better writers than Tolkein.

No I haven't.  I've said his writing is meandering and unengaging, with reams of exposition, unexciting battle scenes, and complete chapters which do little or nothing to enhance the story.  The story itself (LOTR obviously) I think is superb, it's just not told very well.  I think Tolkeins admission that he cared not for his characters sums it up really....

BAN5HEE

Steven Erikson and Geogre RR Martin in my opinion are running circles around Tolkien.

Smurfin

Funnily enough, I've got some Erickson books but got stuck part way through Gardens of the Moon, just seemed so grand and massive that none of the characters mattered....?

JayLaFunk

BEWARE,
Methinks Gollum will be paying little Smurfin a visit...

Jay

p9ul

I thought I'd have to wear a flame suit for saying I preferred the LOTR movies than the book!

I read the book after seeing the first 2 movies, and thought the changes that were made to the story made it better and easier to follow (ie making the movie events chronological). Would agree that whole passages of the book are pointless with regards to the story, no wonder Tom Bombadil (sp?) was axed by Peter Jackson.

I also read the Hobbit at school and found it difficult to follow, although I doubt I'll revisit it prior to the movie version of that tale being released.

Can't comment on The Silmarrilion, although a mate of mine has "tried" to read it and his review consisted of the abbreviations ***?