How could the books have been improved?

[IronParrot]

The only way I can see LotR's being improved is if it was longer.

But which part of the story would you like fattened up, I wonder?

[Lizra]

I sure hope it's not the overly long descriptions of where the rivers began to flow, or other compass heavy topographical descriptions!

[Melko Belcha]

Originally posted by IronParrot
But which part of the story would you like fattened up, I wonder?

Anything and everything, from conversations to descriptions of the land, the more detail the better, IMO.

[IronParrot]

Well, I don't know about that. I certainly wouldn't want LOTR to be full of lengthy passages on how elven dresses are laced together, with an overly self-conscious Arwen having a four-page inner monologue on the subject of her neckline... like some writers tend to do (cough Robert Jordan cough).

But in all seriousness, I think the reason why I have never thought any of Tolkien's imitators matched up to him - well one of them, anyway - is that Tolkien knew when to quit, and his imitators often don't.

I understand your desire to know more about Tolkien's vision of Middle-Earth but I think he was right to put the extraneous material in the Appendices (and to another extent, in what was later published as The Silmarillion).

[durin's bane]

I agree with IronParrot. Tolkien gives enough explainations in his writing. If you want more details, read the appendices. They give a lot of information that couldn't be bothered being put in the main book.