Post-Colonial critics have latched onto the racism inherent in The Lord of the Rings, pointing out the hierarchies between the races: from the "superiority" of the elves, to the "chosen" role of "European" Men of the West under the leadership of Aragorn, to the lesser races of Dwarves and Hobbits (the former are "lesser" because they are "too greedy" and the latter are "lesser" because they are children). Post-Colonialists look to the "orientalization" of Sauron's forces and the configuration of evil as an inherent quality of Orcs and "the dark folk." They point out Tolkien's family's history as a cog in the mechanism of English Imperialism, and his own birth in one of the most blatantly racist colonies of all, South Africa (while he did leave at three years old, his family's presence there at all suggests that some of the classic colonial opinions about the colonized "dark races" helped form the man who wrote these books), as possible reasons for this racism. These criticisms further suggest, at least to me, that the archetypal source of all fantasy's entrenched racism -- even those books being written today -- is The Lord of the Rings. Those fantasy authors who have followed Tolkien consistently and inescapably embrace his configuration of the races (yes, even those like R.A. Salvatore who try and fail to derail this configuration) and the concepts of good and evil that go along with them, which leads to the stagnation and diminishment of their genre. Another heavy one, the ending can be seen in many different ways, from just a megalomaniac battle overkill to the deeper meanings of the journeys that make the victory of the good ones possible. Or that everyday people don´t understand the power they could have if they would work together against a dictatorship, economic inequality, and grievances. Or that the evil is still lurking in everyone and that it takes a permanent struggle to keep the peace by controlling the inner demons. Endless interpretations until eternity beyond the straight road to Aman. Actually, I read Tolkien's masterful Middle Earth fantasy corpus, beginning with The Hobbit in the early 70's and finishing the Lord of the Rings almost a decade later, before this anniversary edition came out. (I also read all four books to my wife in the early 80's; she loved them too!) I have always enjoyed it, understatement, but for some reason this re-read is more special than ever. I had almost forgotten how much was different from the films, and despite having read LotR once before since the films, I seem to be getting more from the book this time than ever before.

But of COURSE I read ‘em all, immediately upon release from Lord Sauron's ward from hell - but through a dense cover of numbing neuroleptic thunderclouds. Perhaps the one place where political events in Tolkien's own life affect the narrative is in the episode at the very end of The Scouring of the Shire. Here we see History catch up with the Idyllic and somewhat isolated Shire where violence (the sad, pathetic revenge of Saruman on Bilbo and Frodo for having thwarted his plans) rages across the land, nature is destroyed, and industrialization arises. This represents the Industrial Revolution but also the coming of age for Tolkien himself in WWI and, I would argue, the bombing of Oxford during the Battle of Britain during WWII that he experienced first-hand as well. It is interesting that this is included as a coda after the main action of the epic is already concluded, as if he had this one other thing to say before sending Gandalf, Frodo and Bilbo off to Grey Haven with the Elves, thus definitively ending the pre-Modern Middle Earth (and by extension Medieval and Revolutionary Europe) and entering into the Modern/Industrial Age. It must often be so, Sam, when things are in danger: someone has to give them up, lose them, so that others may keep them.’ I am so very grateful to have been given the chance to come along on the journey of the Fellowship of the Ring. To visit so many wonderful places in a land of myths and magic. To meet so many fascinating men, elves, dwarves and other legendary peoples and creatures...The fact is that these flaws do exist in The Lord of the Rings. They are present. They are easy to find. But few of Tolkien's rabid fans want to hear about them. And so here we are 20th Feb 2019 and I've finished Book 2. I must admit I had wondered if after such a gap from reading LotR and watching the films so many times if I would enjoy the book(s) as much, I think I can now 2/3rds of the way through safely say that somehow the film experience has made me love the book more (if that is possible). In ancient times the Rings of Power were crafted by the Elven-smiths, and Sauron, the Dark Lord, forged the One Ring, filling it with his own power so that he could rule all others. But the One Ring was taken from him, and though he sought it throughout Middle-earth, it remained lost to him. After many ages it fell by chance into the hands of the hobbit Bilbo Baggins. I think, all the time, about the fact that were it not for one moment of pity Frodo takes, on someone who he knows will try to hurt him, this entire story would have been different—would have ended on a far, far darker note. but, much more problematic, to all other genres for half a decade or something. Thanks for that, J.R.R!

Post-Tolkien readers share that special fellowship that comes from holding your breath with Frodo and Sam, from suffering with Gandalf and cursing Saruman, from swinging a weapon with the united forces of an entire fairytale up against Mordor. After everything has been established in the first part, the whole scenery can lift off, get far darker and hopeless, introduce new friends, foes, and people not sure which to choose, and in general create the outline for the genre itself. I assume that the mysticism, nerdgasms, and glorification around Tolkiens´ work and its immense impact make it (subjectively for me too, not even mentioning the nostalgic touch) one of the most fertile cornerstones of the maybe biggest popular fictional genre. The story began as a sequel to Tolkien's 1937 fantasy novel The Hobbit, but eventually developed into a much larger work. Most important is the fact that Tolkien was a wordsmith. He was not only a scholar at one of THE most famous universities in the world; he was not only fluent in several languages; he was not only keen on any mythology you can think of. He combined all of that in his writing. Apparently, he didn't write it to get published, thinking nobody would be interested, and thus wrote to his heart's content.Eddison's work contains an invented world, a carefully-constructed (and well-researched) archaic language, a powerful and unearthly queen, and a central character who is conflicted and lost between the forces of nobility and darkness. Poul Anderson's The Broken Sword, which came out the same year as The Fellowship of the Ring, has distant, haughty elves, deep-delving dwarves, a broken sword which must be reforged, an epic war between the armies of light and darkness, another central character trapped between those extremes, and an interweaving of Christian and Pagan worldviews. Lo que me ha dejado muy impresionado también es la concepción de Tolkien de toda la mitología, de los nombres de los personajes que estimo ha partido de la mitología nórdica, de crear un nuevo lenguaje, el élfico y de la invención de los distintos pueblos, ciudadelas, la Comarca y muchas locaciones más. Most of my standards for comparison also derive from this tome. I have yet to encounter a mentor character in fantasy who can compare to Gandalf, or a fictional love story that can compare to the tale of Aragorn and Arwen. I have yet to encounter a setting as detailed or writing as flawlessly eloquent as this. And those are only a few examples of aspects in which I consider The Lord of the Rings to be superior to all others. Interesting how the prologue is an info dump on hobbits and smoking, far from a traditional setup of a large adventure

Including all sorts of adventures with Gandalf, Gollum, dragons and monsters, in the quest to destroy the One Ring! John Ronald Reuel Tolkien: writer, artist, scholar, linguist. Known to millions around the world as the author of The Lord of the Rings, Tolkien spent most of his life teaching at the University of Oxford where he was a distinguished academic in the fields of Old and Middle English and Old Norse. His creativity, confined to his spare time, found its outlet in fantasy works, stories for children, poetry, illustration and invented languages and alphabets.

Multibuys

It's no accident that the hero of this series is the most underestimated of all people: a Hobbit. There are the godly elves, but this series focuses on men's capacity to fail and triumph. The outsiders save the world. The books are racist; they are sexist. They are not perfect. And I must criticize the elements of The Lord of the Rings that make me uncomfortable and deserve no praise. But my complaints and the complaints of critics make Tolkien's achievement no less great. And any student of the great Epics, like the Norse Eddas, the Bible, or the Shahnameh can see what Tolkien is trying to achieve with his worldbuilding: those books presented grand stories, but were also about depicting a vast world of philosophy, history, myth, geography, morality and culture. They were encyclopedic texts, intended to instruct their people on everything important in life, and they are extraordinarily valuable to students of anthropology and history, because even the smallest detail can reveal something about the world which the book describes.

The little boy grew into adolescence. He read other books, few of them fantasy. He discovered a passion for history, and started reading that. He read classics and sci-fi and mysteries and even religious texts. He read books considered by some as among the best books ever. And none of them could ever hope to compare to what was still the boy’s favourite book. This new boxed set offers readers a new opportunity to discover Tolkien’s remarkable world of Middle-earth and to follow the complete story of Bilbo Baggins and the Hobbits’ part in the epic quest for the Ring. We all know that this story isn't about Frodo. On the surface some might presume so, but they'd be utterly wrong. Anyone can see clear as day that it's Sam's story. But for those who needed a moment longer, I shall simply quote the author and indeed the character himself:But they said it ALL. All three of these books. By throwing the Ring into Mount Doom, we give up the Siege against Reason (our diseased and Irrational Self-Justification). And that is pretty much exactly how I would describe it. Sublime it is. I realised that I would never come closer to an actual description of The Lord of the Rings. This is to me not only the main pillar on which the fantasy genre stands, but the ultimate masterpiece of literature. One Ring to rule them all, One Ring to find them, One Ring to bring them all and in the darkness bind them Some random observations per book below, if one has never read the books or seen the movie don't dive in. It has become dogma among fanboys and fangirls that the bastions of The Lord of the Rings are unassailable. Criticize Tolkien's work -- academically or otherwise -- and you put yourself in almost as much danger as a chatty atheist trying to engage in a theological discussion in a coliseum full of Jehovah's Witnesses (how many of those folks will make it into the afterlife? Isn't there a limit?).