Dolly’s review of The Lord of the Rings > Likes and Comments

63 likes · like
Comments (showing 1-5 of 5) (5 new)    post a comment »
dateDown arrow    newest »

message 1: by Gr8grendel (new)

Gr8grendel Tolkien is a master character builder, I also felt he left little to the imagination. It was as if he drew the picture and left me to paint it. Everything was so detailed what room was there left for the imagination, except coloring it (though many times that was already prescribed).

I do agree with your opinion on Tom Bombadil he was one of my favorites. The only one that I recall that handled the ring without hesitation, greed or regret!


message 2: by Jaimey (new)

Jaimey Dolly I totally agree with your review. The idea of the reader having to read between the lines and the way characters and races were portrayed through the writing style is spot on. People need to read the classics and not forget the literary genius and beauty of storytelling that is behind fantasy. So glad I have just reread his work.


message 3: by Meagan (new)

Meagan I loved your review.


message 4: by Don Incognito (last edited Jun 30, 2012 10:53AM) (new)

Don Incognito Gr8grendel wrote: "Tolkien is a master character builder, I also felt he left little to the imagination. It was as if he drew the picture and left me to paint it. Everything was so detailed what room was there left f..."

I respectfully disagree. I think the reviewer is right to claim Tolkien is not a character builder, because not all his characters have depth. Legolas is largely blank; he travels with the characters, helps them in battle, occasionally speaks, and doesn't develop. Aragorn is more of an archetype.

I was so starved for character complexity (inner and interpersonal conflict) that the part (in Return of the King, I believe) with the slain king's heirs being upset for one reason or another, such as the warrior princess wanting to join the war party but being rebuffed and her generally butting heads with Aragorn, impressed me. At least half the characters made such a negligible impression on me that while writing this comment, I've remembered those characters' names only with difficulty. It took me a while to remember "Aragorn"; I was going to call him "The King--whatever his name is, the one they initially call Strider." I only just remembered the princess's name; isn't it Eowyn? And her brother's name...I think it also starts with E.

And Sauron...I was always frustrated by him. I have never read a book involving a war of good and evil in which the leader of evil never makes an appearance at all. I don't see how I could have missed it, but Sauron's non-presence is so peculiar that I wonder. Except...I know this is an epic and epics are plot-driven, and it occurs to me that the Iliad, the Odyssey and the Aeneid don't have a central villain either.

Tolkien's non-human races and individual characters are far more interesting and memorable than his human characters or even his Hobbits. Like the reviewer, I like the Ents (and, more generally, the concept of sentient trees that move and speak), and Tom Bombadil fascinates me. Too bad Bombadil was hardly central to the plot.

In writing this comment, I realize that as I read LotR, I made the mistake of reading the trilogy as a (long) novel rather than as an epic.


message 5: by Bobby Mitchell (new)

Bobby Mitchell Read The Silmarillion, The tales of Numeror, and the Unfinished Tales to get a good idea of Sauron. Other post- written books deal with him to.


back to top