RE: [mythsoc] wonderful
> From: Carl F. Hostetter. . . the parts _you_ find to be
> defects aren't necessarily the ones the _author_ would count as aVery nicely put, Carl.
> defect, and are likely parts that other readers consider marvelous or
> even essential . . . (. . . my favorite parts of Tolkien's works are definitely not the
> action-packed sequences). It doesn't necessarily mean, in and of
> itself, that the book is defective. It is a subjective statement of
> personal preference and of criticism of an author's work and style
> based on personal expectations not met.
It's always a good reading group exercise for everyone to reveal what's his or her favorite part of LotR; we all like the same book, but we like it for very different reasons. For me, the trees; for Taum, the languages; for Darrell Martin, the horns of Rohan; &c. As Tolkien himself observed, "passages or chapters that are to some a blemish are all by others specially approved" (Foreword to the Second Edition). Personally I enjoy the change of pace between the early, middle, and late chapters. I remember reading Stephen R. Donaldson's remark that if he were writing the book he'd drop all the Hobbiton/Shire material, all the "walking bits", and concentrate entirely on Sam and Frodo's grueling journey near and through Mordor (to which I thought: you would). I agree with greenman re. the excellence of The Hobbit, though.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]