Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
First hundred pages of LotR
51 views
Skip to first unread message
Igenlode Wordsmith
May 8, 2013, 7:37:14 AM5/8/13
to
While reading in passing a recent children's book review
http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2013/may/04/sun-catcher-sheila-rance-review
I was struck by the allusion in passing to the "notoriously stodgy"
first 100 pages of "The Lord of the Rings".
I was always under the impression that the people who complained about
Tolkien's prose were objecting to the landscapes and 'epic' style of the
later sections -- I would have thought that the 'hobbitry' of the
beginning and its more immediate concerns (being chased by mysterious
hooded creatures rather than dealing with ancient Gondorian history and
the unexplained reincarnation of a major character) was more accessible
to the younger reader.
But apparently not, or at least it would appear that the high-flown
prose is not the object of the complaint.
>From this particular (very positive) book review, it would seem that the
writer finds the fantasy world-building process itself tedious and
prefers his books to cut to the action (though on the other hand, he is
praising the gradual revelation of a complex backstory...) I suppose
one can have too much info-dump when writing a fantasy set-up, though in
the case of J.K.Rowling, also cited, it is the background detail that in
hindsight I find more compelling than the travails of the actual
characters. However, in comparison to 'modern' fantasy, I wouldn't have
thought that Tolkien's opening was especially full of info-dump either.
Perhaps it is -- he likes to go off on little discursive asides about,
say, hobbits and mushrooms -- but certainly not more so in the opening
pages than in the description of the circles of Minas Tirith,say, or the
construction of Orthanc.
And there *is* action: the hobbits are being continuously hunted
(and/or threatened by the landscape!) until they reach Rivendell. So I
am tempted to interpret the 'notoriously stodgy' as a complaint about
lack of hack-n-slash!
--
Igenlode Visit the Ivory Tower http://ivory.vlexofree.com/Tower/
** Melodrama is the art of knowing how precisely too far to go. **
http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2013/may/04/sun-catcher-sheila-rance-review
I was struck by the allusion in passing to the "notoriously stodgy"
first 100 pages of "The Lord of the Rings".
I was always under the impression that the people who complained about
Tolkien's prose were objecting to the landscapes and 'epic' style of the
later sections -- I would have thought that the 'hobbitry' of the
beginning and its more immediate concerns (being chased by mysterious
hooded creatures rather than dealing with ancient Gondorian history and
the unexplained reincarnation of a major character) was more accessible
to the younger reader.
But apparently not, or at least it would appear that the high-flown
prose is not the object of the complaint.
>From this particular (very positive) book review, it would seem that the
writer finds the fantasy world-building process itself tedious and
prefers his books to cut to the action (though on the other hand, he is
praising the gradual revelation of a complex backstory...) I suppose
one can have too much info-dump when writing a fantasy set-up, though in
the case of J.K.Rowling, also cited, it is the background detail that in
hindsight I find more compelling than the travails of the actual
characters. However, in comparison to 'modern' fantasy, I wouldn't have
thought that Tolkien's opening was especially full of info-dump either.
Perhaps it is -- he likes to go off on little discursive asides about,
say, hobbits and mushrooms -- but certainly not more so in the opening
pages than in the description of the circles of Minas Tirith,say, or the
construction of Orthanc.
And there *is* action: the hobbits are being continuously hunted
(and/or threatened by the landscape!) until they reach Rivendell. So I
am tempted to interpret the 'notoriously stodgy' as a complaint about
lack of hack-n-slash!
--
Igenlode Visit the Ivory Tower http://ivory.vlexofree.com/Tower/
** Melodrama is the art of knowing how precisely too far to go. **
de...@pointerstop.ca
May 8, 2013, 6:40:37 PM5/8/13
to
On Wednesday, May 8, 2013 8:37:14 AM UTC-3, Igenlode Wordsmith wrote:
> While reading in passing a recent children's book review
>
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2013/may/04/sun-catcher-sheila-rance-review
> I was struck by the allusion in passing to the "notoriously stodgy"
> first 100 pages of "The Lord of the Rings".
>
> I was always under the impression that the people who complained about
> Tolkien's prose were objecting to the landscapes and 'epic' style of the
> later sections -- I would have thought that the 'hobbitry' of the
> beginning and its more immediate concerns (being chased by mysterious
> hooded creatures rather than dealing with ancient Gondorian history and
Well, we're hardly the people to recognize "stodgy" in Tolkien, but I can't imagine the first 100 pages being "stodgy". Tom Bombadil still seems like he's grafted onto the story, and for years I had a problem with much of /The Two Towers/ but the beginning?? It's certainly not "notorious".
> While reading in passing a recent children's book review
>
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2013/may/04/sun-catcher-sheila-rance-review
> I was struck by the allusion in passing to the "notoriously stodgy"
> first 100 pages of "The Lord of the Rings".
>
> I was always under the impression that the people who complained about
> Tolkien's prose were objecting to the landscapes and 'epic' style of the
> later sections -- I would have thought that the 'hobbitry' of the
> beginning and its more immediate concerns (being chased by mysterious
> hooded creatures rather than dealing with ancient Gondorian history and
John W Kennedy
May 8, 2013, 9:27:08 PM5/8/13
to
a kind of sense, but "stodgy" just seems mad.
--
John W Kennedy
"The blind rulers of Logres
Nourished the land on a fallacy of rational virtue."
-- Charles Williams. "Taliessin through Logres: Prelude"
Message has been deleted
Mike Sullivan
May 9, 2013, 1:16:05 PM5/9/13
to
On May 8, 4:37 am, Igenlode Wordsmith <Use-Author-Supplied-Address-
Header@[127.1]> wrote:
> While reading in passing a recent children's book reviewhttp://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2013/may/04/sun-catcher-sheila-rance-...
some who couldn't get into them, giving up in the first 100
pages or so.
The common complaint was "too many characters, places,
and strange names I couldn't keep up with".
I read it first in college and I know I missed a whole lot in
my first reading, indeed I missed so much that the second
reading was the most satisfying as many things still surprised
me, there was still a lot of drama, and I was better clued in on
who was who and where was where.
I think what drew me in to finish the first time was that
JRRT's attention to detail, geography and history,
made me intensely curious about
his world. It was just familiar enough, but a foreign place I
wanted
to visit.
Header@[127.1]> wrote:
> While reading in passing a recent children's book reviewhttp://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2013/may/04/sun-catcher-sheila-rance-...
> I was struck by the allusion in passing to the "notoriously stodgy"
> first 100 pages of "The Lord of the Rings".
>
> I was always under the impression that the people who complained about
> Tolkien's prose were objecting to the landscapes and 'epic' style of the
> later sections -- I would have thought that the 'hobbitry' of the
> beginning and its more immediate concerns (being chased by mysterious
> hooded creatures rather than dealing with ancient Gondorian history and
> the unexplained reincarnation of a major character) was more accessible
> to the younger reader.
in my family, we had members who loved the books and
> first 100 pages of "The Lord of the Rings".
>
> I was always under the impression that the people who complained about
> Tolkien's prose were objecting to the landscapes and 'epic' style of the
> later sections -- I would have thought that the 'hobbitry' of the
> beginning and its more immediate concerns (being chased by mysterious
> hooded creatures rather than dealing with ancient Gondorian history and
> the unexplained reincarnation of a major character) was more accessible
> to the younger reader.
some who couldn't get into them, giving up in the first 100
pages or so.
The common complaint was "too many characters, places,
and strange names I couldn't keep up with".
I read it first in college and I know I missed a whole lot in
my first reading, indeed I missed so much that the second
reading was the most satisfying as many things still surprised
me, there was still a lot of drama, and I was better clued in on
who was who and where was where.
I think what drew me in to finish the first time was that
JRRT's attention to detail, geography and history,
made me intensely curious about
his world. It was just familiar enough, but a foreign place I
wanted
to visit.
de...@pointerstop.ca
May 9, 2013, 7:18:48 PM5/9/13
to
On Thursday, May 9, 2013 12:28:32 AM UTC-3, Lewis wrote:
>
> "Stodgy" means "long words".
Oh, you mean words of more than one silla-whatsit...
>
> "Stodgy" means "long words".
Oh, you mean words of more than one silla-whatsit...
0 new messages