Tolkien: Style or Substance?

Beren3000 · 12-31-2004, 11:28 AM

This is a topic that has been bothering me for some time: what makes Tolkien so popular? Is it because his writing style is exceptional or because of the stories themselves? Or is it both?
I personally don't find Tolkien's style all that (that sounds almost like blasphemy on the Moot

) but, seriously, I only find some passages to be extremely well written (and of course the poetry) but for the rest of his work...the style seems ordinary. What do you guys think?

Minielin · 01-02-2005, 02:27 AM

His work just has such grandeur and a sense of epic history about it. The plotlines are interesting and highly entertaining, and the themes have a sense of importance and are easy to take to heart (though I'm sure I'm not doing a particularly good job of explaining my point on that).

Wayfarer · 01-02-2005, 06:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beren3000

This is a topic that has been bothering me for some time: what makes Tolkien so popular? Is it because his writing style is exceptional or because of the stories themselves? Or is it both?
I personally don't find Tolkien's style all that (that sounds almost like blasphemy on the Moot

) but, seriously, I only find some passages to be extremely well written (and of course the poetry) but for the rest of his work...the style seems ordinary. What do you guys think?

Yes.

Beren3000 · 01-02-2005, 09:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wayfarer

Yes.

You mean "yes the style is ordinary" ?
Does that mean you prefer the story itself over the style?

Lizra · 01-02-2005, 11:14 AM

I vote for substance. The style is good, but it's the content that got me hooked.

Telcontar_Dunedain · 01-02-2005, 12:24 PM

I think in LotR it's more substance thatn style (even thought the style is good to), but in The Sil I'd say it was both. His style is more poetic in the SIl than it is in LotR.

Lizra · 01-02-2005, 02:13 PM

The Sil! The style was ick! If it wasn't for the content...I would have NEVER bothered to read the whole thing! IMO the writing style of the Silmarillion made reading it torture....like a dry textbook...

***Earniel*** · 01-02-2005, 02:31 PM

The style of the Silmarillion wasn't exactly one of its strong points, sadly enough. I still maintain that if Tolkien had lived long enough to devote the time and attention he gave LoTR to the Silmarillion, it would have been a stunning book, and much more accesible.

I don't think Tolkien's style was the reason for the succes of the Hobbit and LoTR since they're both quite different in style. I'm going for substance all the way.

Lizra · 01-02-2005, 02:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eärniel

The style of the Silmarillion wasn't exactly one of its strong points, sadly enough. I still maintain that if Tolkien had lived long enough to devote the time and attention he gave LoTR to the Silmarillion, it would have been a stunning book, and much more accesible.

Ahhh!

Wouldn't that have been nice! Yes, the Sil is 2 dimensional...it had no depth. It would have been wonderful with more time and detail, and "storytelling".

Radagast The Brown · 01-02-2005, 05:10 PM

The Sil is the best. Must better than LotR in my opinion - although, I'm not sure if it's only the content or the style too. I didn't mind the style at all, I think it's part of what the Silmarillion is supposed to be - some kind of history book of the elves.

(It's not dry!

)

**Nurvingiel** · 01-02-2005, 05:24 PM

It's not his fault the style in the Sil is... how it is. He didn't finish the manuscript, and as you all know, his son had to edit it. Of course Christopher couldn't know what to edit. An editor working with the original author and/or the author would have tidied it up nicely.

I think style and substance are deeply intertwined in any book. As for LOTR, it's ultimately about the substance for me. However, I love the style, and it's partly due to style that I re-read the series. And re-re read.....

Wayfarer · 01-02-2005, 06:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beren3000

You mean "yes the style is ordinary" ?
Does that mean you prefer the story itself over the style?

No. What that means is that, to the question of 'Style or Substance', I answer 'Yes'.

The Silmarillion isn't even JRR. It's CJR. So you can't base anything on that.

**Nurvingiel** · 01-02-2005, 06:15 PM

Sure the Sil is JRR! He wrote the content. CJR put it together and did some editing. Admirable work, but that doesn't make him the author. Either way, I prefer the style of LOTR to the Sil. But that's another thread maybe.

Beren3000 · 01-02-2005, 06:22 PM

I don't find a difference between the Sil. and Lotr in terms of style. The ordinari-ness is the same. But when we get to the good parts, I find the Sil. has much more (and much better) good parts than Lotr.
Wayfarer, the Sil. is definitely JRRT's work!

Beren3000 · 01-03-2005, 09:16 AM

Ok, another way to look at it:
Do you think that the same Tolkien stories would attract a wider audience if they were written by a different author? Would you have reacted differently to such stories and probably not have become fans?

inked · 01-03-2005, 11:37 AM

Tolkien's style is that of an older story-telling format: a combination of the Icelandic saga, medieval romance, and history. It is an inherent part of the work and distinguishes it from imitators. It grew out of the love of languages and their context. So it IS uniquely and irreplicably JRRT. Note the confirmation on this forum of 1)the Tolkien rip-off thread and 2)the enormous number of analytical threads dissecting the multiple components.

His imitator have borrowed ideas but NONE have duplicated the effects because style and substance are so intertwined.

As to substance, the complexity of the inherent philosophical and Christian (the Roman Catholic worldview of Tolkien) basis as understood in the unique person of JRRT and as expressed by him will never be duplicated precisely because the are the soul of the man in the work! Ahh, the glory of the individual redeemed and through his person redeeming the work he loves! Those fractured beams of Eternity through the prism that is JRRT just makes one rejoice and say, Gloria patri et filii et spiritus sanctus, eh?

zephyrgirl · 01-03-2005, 11:40 AM

I just find it astonishing that Tolkien can create a whole Mythology, I guess why it appeals to me so much is party because it's an escape from the real world, and Tolkien was just a great story teller!

Minielin · 01-03-2005, 02:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zephyrgirl

I just find it astonishing that Tolkien can create a whole Mythology

Exactly! Not to mention the languages, cultures with their own often extremely detailed histories... there's just so much there and it's all so fascinating!

BTW: 100th post. Yay.

brownjenkins · 01-03-2005, 03:28 PM

i'd say substance... as pointed out by others, the "whole world" approach to his story is what made it incredible

stylistically, i wouldn't call jrrt one of the best... but his ability to change his "voice" according to the material is pretty impressive... lost tales is even more in the early-mythological style than the silmarillion, while the hobbit is very much geared towards the younger reader

in some ways i think the lotr suffers a bit in style because he was trying to write a out of his realm of expertise... to make it more of a "popular novel" after his failure to get earlier works published

he may have simplified things more than he needed to... much like what he did to the lost tales when reworking them for the silmarillion

Pytt · 01-03-2005, 05:58 PM

as many others have said, substance is the thing! the style in Hobbit and LoTR isn't that bad, quite good actualy, but it is the substance that takes it of this earth and onto a wholy new level.
in Sil, the style don't work out very well, but the substance is really amazing!

but substance, definitive...

12-31-2004, 11:28 AM	#1
Beren3000 Fëanorophobic Join Date: May 2004 Location: Between the pages of a book Posts: 1,417	Tolkien: Style or Substance? This is a topic that has been bothering me for some time: what makes Tolkien so popular? Is it because his writing style is exceptional or because of the stories themselves? Or is it both? I personally don't find Tolkien's style all that (that sounds almost like blasphemy on the Moot ) but, seriously, I only find some passages to be extremely well written (and of course the poetry) but for the rest of his work...the style seems ordinary. What do you guys think?

01-02-2005, 02:27 AM	#2
Minielin Elven Warrior Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: I dwell in possibility. Posts: 247	His work just has such grandeur and a sense of epic history about it. The plotlines are interesting and highly entertaining, and the themes have a sense of importance and are easy to take to heart (though I'm sure I'm not doing a particularly good job of explaining my point on that). __________________ "...then how shall I Revive the dying tones of minstrelsy, Which linger yet about lone gothic arches, In dark green ivy, and among wild larches?" Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum.

01-02-2005, 11:14 AM	#5
Lizra Domesticated Swing Babe Join Date: May 2002 Location: Reality Posts: 5,340	I vote for substance. The style is good, but it's the content that got me hooked. __________________ Happy Atheist Go Democrats!

01-02-2005, 12:24 PM	#6
Telcontar_Dunedain Warrior of the House of Hador Join Date: Aug 2004 Posts: 4,651	I think in LotR it's more substance thatn style (even thought the style is good to), but in The Sil I'd say it was both. His style is more poetic in the SIl than it is in LotR. __________________ Then Huor spoke and said: "Yet if it stands but a little while, then out of your house shall come the hope of Elves and Men. This I say to you, lord, with the eyes of death: though we part here for ever, and I shall not look on your white walls again, from you and me a new star shall arise. Farewell!" The Silmarillion, Nirnaeth Arnoediad, Page 230

01-02-2005, 02:13 PM	#7
Lizra Domesticated Swing Babe Join Date: May 2002 Location: Reality Posts: 5,340	The Sil! The style was ick! If it wasn't for the content...I would have NEVER bothered to read the whole thing! IMO the writing style of the Silmarillion made reading it torture....like a dry textbook... __________________ Happy Atheist Go Democrats!

01-02-2005, 02:31 PM	#8
*Earniel* The Chocoholic Sea Elf Administrator Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: N?n in Eilph (Belgium) Posts: 14,363	The style of the Silmarillion wasn't exactly one of its strong points, sadly enough. I still maintain that if Tolkien had lived long enough to devote the time and attention he gave LoTR to the Silmarillion, it would have been a stunning book, and much more accesible. I don't think Tolkien's style was the reason for the succes of the Hobbit and LoTR since they're both quite different in style. I'm going for substance all the way. __________________ We are not things.

01-02-2005, 05:10 PM	#10
Radagast The Brown Elf Lord Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Israel Posts: 6,975	The Sil is the best. Must better than LotR in my opinion - although, I'm not sure if it's only the content or the style too. I didn't mind the style at all, I think it's part of what the Silmarillion is supposed to be - some kind of history book of the elves. (It's not dry! ) __________________ Lalala... poof! AboutNewJersey.com - New Jersey Travel and Tourism Guide

01-02-2005, 06:22 PM	#14
Beren3000 Fëanorophobic Join Date: May 2004 Location: Between the pages of a book Posts: 1,417	I don't find a difference between the Sil. and Lotr in terms of style. The ordinari-ness is the same. But when we get to the good parts, I find the Sil. has much more (and much better) good parts than Lotr. Wayfarer, the Sil. is definitely JRRT's work!

01-03-2005, 09:16 AM	#15
Beren3000 Fëanorophobic Join Date: May 2004 Location: Between the pages of a book Posts: 1,417	Ok, another way to look at it: Do you think that the same Tolkien stories would attract a wider audience if they were written by a different author? Would you have reacted differently to such stories and probably not have become fans?

01-03-2005, 11:37 AM	#16
inked Elf Lord Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: sikeston, MO, usa, earth, sol Posts: 3,114	Tolkien's style is that of an older story-telling format: a combination of the Icelandic saga, medieval romance, and history. It is an inherent part of the work and distinguishes it from imitators. It grew out of the love of languages and their context. So it IS uniquely and irreplicably JRRT. Note the confirmation on this forum of 1)the Tolkien rip-off thread and 2)the enormous number of analytical threads dissecting the multiple components. His imitator have borrowed ideas but NONE have duplicated the effects because style and substance are so intertwined. As to substance, the complexity of the inherent philosophical and Christian (the Roman Catholic worldview of Tolkien) basis as understood in the unique person of JRRT and as expressed by him will never be duplicated precisely because the are the soul of the man in the work! Ahh, the glory of the individual redeemed and through his person redeeming the work he loves! Those fractured beams of Eternity through the prism that is JRRT just makes one rejoice and say, Gloria patri et filii et spiritus sanctus, eh? __________________ Inked "Aslan is not a tame lion." CSL/LWW "The new school [acts] as if it required...courage to say a blasphemy. There is only one thing that requires real courage to say, and that is a truism." GK Chesterton "And there is always the danger of allowing people to suppose that our modern times are so wholly unlike any other times that the fundamental facts about man's nature have wholly changed with changing circumstances." Dorothy L. Sayers, 1 Sept. 1941

01-03-2005, 11:40 AM	#17
zephyrgirl Sapling Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 4	I just find it astonishing that Tolkien can create a whole Mythology, I guess why it appeals to me so much is party because it's an escape from the real world, and Tolkien was just a great story teller!

01-03-2005, 03:28 PM	#19
brownjenkins Advocatus Diaboli Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Reality Posts: 3,767	i'd say substance... as pointed out by others, the "whole world" approach to his story is what made it incredible stylistically, i wouldn't call jrrt one of the best... but his ability to change his "voice" according to the material is pretty impressive... lost tales is even more in the early-mythological style than the silmarillion, while the hobbit is very much geared towards the younger reader in some ways i think the lotr suffers a bit in style because he was trying to write a out of his realm of expertise... to make it more of a "popular novel" after his failure to get earlier works published he may have simplified things more than he needed to... much like what he did to the lost tales when reworking them for the silmarillion __________________ Your reality, sir, is lies and balderdash and I'm delighted to say that I have no grasp of it whatsoever.

01-03-2005, 05:58 PM	#20
Pytt The Supreme Lord of The Northern Eagles Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: trondheim, norway Posts: 1,388	as many others have said, substance is the thing! the style in Hobbit and LoTR isn't that bad, quite good actualy, but it is the substance that takes it of this earth and onto a wholy new level. in Sil, the style don't work out very well, but the substance is really amazing! but substance, definitive... __________________ Don't Panic!

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Research paper on Tolkien	The Telcontarion	Writer's Workshop	10	12-16-2007 12:04 PM
Whats on your Bookshelf?	hectorberlioz	General Literature	135	02-12-2007 07:26 PM
My 10Kth post - Tolkien and a California Girl	Rían	General Messages	52	11-12-2005 10:38 PM
Your intials Tolkien style acronyms	afro-elf	Middle Earth	128	06-24-2002 08:38 PM
a little orientation needed	DrFledermaus	The Silmarillion	9	02-12-2001 05:48 AM