>>7886058

Genre fiction is never well written

tolkien a shit. same fandom with star wars...

i like the style. maybe it's because it's literally one of the first books i ever read by myself, but it feels comfy in a somewhat old fashioned but sincere way.

>>7886058
Patricians know The Hobbit to be his best work. It's also more comfy.

>>7886081
I guess I assumed this would be different since it's considered such a classic and Tolkien had some literary chops.

>>7886058
It's like you've never read ancient literature.

The world building is the main draw of LOTR

I think it's overly detailed and incredibly dull. I don't mind it as a vessel for Tokien's new languages, but I'd almost rather just read a primer on how to speak them.

>>7886058
>reading anything without looking at context
Tolkien intentionally wanted the language to be that way to resemble Old English style of writing.

>>7886565
This. I think it is written fine, you just need to understand that what we think of as good writing come from conventions that are pretty recent. Criticising The Iliad, Gilgamesh, or the contents of the bible for not adhering to modern writing conventions would be absurd (not to say you couldn't argue they are badly written).

>>7886081
What nonsense. Writing genre fiction doesn't render itself to bad use of language. You may argue that the sort of writers genre fiction attracts lack talent in the literary sense, but that doesn't mean you can pass the absolute judgment that ALL genre fiction is badly written.

Beside which, there is more to Lord of the Rings than the language used and the flowing of the text. It wasn't created to be good, sublime prose. It was created to show the world, to convey emotions and tell a story. In my opinion, it does that very well, regardless of how you view the text line by line

>>7886058

It's awful if you're trying to read it like a story. It's supposed to be read like the old myths or sagas.