Standing the Test of Time

[Tonyblack]

I'll probably annoy a few people here by saying this, but I don't think Lord of the Rings has a lot of depth either. Sure it's an epic tale and mostly very well written, but parts of it are as boring as hell and almost totally pointless to the plot. I found it a lot harder to relate the characters with humanity than I do with DW books.

I'll go back to Swift here and say that his characters in Gulliver are far more recognisable as 'us' than Tolkien's. Tolkien has become dated in a relatively short time.

Having said that - I've only read LoTR once and I'm not in any great hurry to read it again, so maybe it's unfair of me to make the comparison.

[inca]

I'll probably annoy a few people here by saying this, but I don't think Lord of the Rings has a lot of depth either. Sure it's an epic tale and mostly very well written, but parts of it are as boring as hell and almost totally pointless to the plot. I found it a lot harder to relate the characters with humanity than I do with DW books.

I totally agree with you - it is the exact reason Tolkien was on my mind.
(I do reread Tolkien occasionally though.) But whatever its flaws, it is still a classic. The impact of the book can't be denied and it is not fading into oblivion soon.

I also think books, stories, (but also movies and music) can deliver on many levels. Pratchetts books are great on parody and fun, with lots of teasers for mind and intellect. They have great insight in society. But they appeal less to certain emotions: I've never cried because two people loved each other so much, or sat and read with my heart rate up from tension. LotR on the other hand, I would qualify it more like a scenic walk, enjoying the views rather than the story. (And not even because they are so very well described but because they resonate somehow.)
There are all sorts of needs my mind has, some intellectual, some emotional, some other, and I feed them with different books and stories and music. And I think on all of them, there can be some classics that will stand the test of time.

[raisindot]

I'll probably annoy a few people here by saying this, but I don't think Lord of the Rings has a lot of depth either. Sure it's an epic tale and mostly very well written, but parts of it are as boring as hell and almost totally pointless to the plot. I found it a lot harder to relate the characters with humanity than I do with DW books.

I'll go back to Swift here and say that his characters in Gulliver are far more recognisable as 'us' than Tolkien's. Tolkien has become dated in a relatively short time.

Wow, still haven't seen the lightning bolt from JANus yet.

So maybe it's safe to say I totally agree. It's a great tale, but the characters have as much depth as flypaper, the dialogue is as stilted and wooden as the walking trees, and hundreds of pages consist of little more than geographical walking tours. It's like reading the lyrics of a 300-hour Yes album.

[Sjoerd3000]

I'll probably annoy a few people here by saying this, but I don't think Lord of the Rings has a lot of depth either. Sure it's an epic tale and mostly very well written, but parts of it are as boring as hell and almost totally pointless to the plot. I found it a lot harder to relate the characters with humanity than I do with DW books.

I'll go back to Swift here and say that his characters in Gulliver are far more recognisable as 'us' than Tolkien's. Tolkien has become dated in a relatively short time.

Having said that - I've only read LoTR once and I'm not in any great hurry to read it again, so maybe it's unfair of me to make the comparison.

I agree Especially the first book is a bit boring

[Tonyblack]

I could have happily throttled Tom Bombadil.

[ChristianBecker]

Hey!

[Doughnut Jimmy]

I could have happily throttled Tom Bombadil.

Tom Bombadil is great, so there

I agree LOTR is not a character driven story although both Frodo and Sam have some moments of interesting character development, but the creation of middle earth as a complete world that you can visualise is brilliant.

I would also suggest that most of Pterry's characters are basically stock characters with very little development (exceptions probably Vimes and Tiffany)