h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Now that I'm back from my extended lunch break...

My take on it::
Both LOTR and TH, (but mostly the Simirillian) were originally sagas conjured up by Tolkien for his personal amusement. Once The Hobbit (published as a children's book) caught on, he felt obliged to give a bigger glimpse into Middle Earth to the public. The result was LOTR, and later The Simirillian. The important fact was the first: ...for his PERSONAL AMUSEMENT, and most everything in the books reflect on that.

If he wasn't amused by it, he wouldn't have written any of it, or even go through the trouble of mapping it all out. If we aren't amused with it, we shouldn't even bother to read past the book jacket, much less argue with people who DO like it and try to explain why they are completely off-base for having their own opinions of what is good and acceptable, and what is bad and silly.

...as for me seemingly changing my opinion all the time: This forum is abouding in both fantastically good points and terrible misunderstandings, as well as those who like to reword the latter as to contribute to them (for personal amusement, I'd assume).

I seem to recall that the way JRRT described it, he was half way through the hobbit (or perhaps LOTR) when he had to go and write the Silmarillion to keep everything straight in his head.

... same thing. (It wasn't published at that point, right?)

A thing that most of you seem to forget, is that as soon as a saga gets bigger than a certain size (ie star trek), you have to make a thing like the star trek bible, so that when you need to do something that you have already done, you can actually find out how you did it, without having to re-read all of the work that you have written in that sci-fi universe. If you don't, you get crucified by our more pedantic readers, for doing it slightly (or totally) differently in two different places in the story. This is also why there was enough stuff lying around for his son to wright the ten? volume epic detailing the history of middle earth.

okok...another point of view I know, I keep throwing this stuff in..

First, I have read several of the postings and I Hear that complaint of "holes" in the stories. But on the other hand, those same people are saying that they have not read all of the books.

First, the Hobbit was written as a Children's story. Therefore, most adults find it simplistic.

LOTR, is a little different, however.
1 - You really must read all of the books before you start to say things like holes. Tolkien created a world and life's that had depth and meaning. If you were to write about the life of anyone in particular, there would be holes because there are other things you do not know about yet, that is called developing a character or a story. The development fills in the holes. If you want to debate the holes, go to www.theonering.net . There are people there who will happily go into depth about this with you. I do not have the time here and now.
2 - Something else you must keep in mind, that what is referred to as the trilogy and is picked up in the local book store in 3 separate books was really supposed to be one book (hey printed it that was to make it easier to carry around, essentially). Therefore, if you only read the first book of LOTR, than you have read a third of a book. You can find people who debate this stuff daily (ok, so they have no life), and if there were any holes, I am sure they would have found and exploited them by now. One of the great thing about the Tolkien books is the completeness and detail he paid to his books as well as the lack of contradictions you will find in almost every other book (even the non-fiction ones, unfortunately).


3 - There are other things you must read such as the Silmarilion (I do not have the spelling in front of me, please forgive) that gives you a more of a look to this world. It will also tell about Gandalf and the other characters, ancestors, etc.

I thoroughly understand if it is just not your taste in reading or style, There are things that are not in my taste. I just request that you not say things like that about books you have not read.

As a foot note, I have read ALL of the books, several times in fact. I am female and considered well educated (although a bit tired and sick right now). I just want to say that I voted for the books and I think that being voted best of the millennium was an award rightfully given. Without him, I truly believe that fantasy would not be anything like it is today.

Since I'm the first and the longest sustained detractor of TLOTR on this site I assume you were referring to me as one of the people that hasn't read all of TLOTR. I can assure you I have read all of it. I will confess to not having read the simarillion though, but since (as has been perviously mentioned) one of the people who said there was holes in TLOTR was Tolkein himself it makes it a bit hard for you to claim that it hasn't got any.

My advice to you is to read ALL the previous posts on this site (if only for a laugh.) then perhaps re-consider your comments.

On the subject of 'The Hobbit' however I must say that I LIKED IT!
It was straight forward not 'Simplistic' as you somewhat arrogantly say. (No there's nothing wrong with being arrogant, Hell I'M arrogant)

And lastly what does you being female have to do with it??