I thought Veeky Forums was memeing me when they said Tolkien is garbage

I thought Veeky Forums was memeing me when they said Tolkien is garbage.

It's true. His writing is truly awful.

boring and longwinded. didnt even get through half of the fellowship of the ring

>I prefer style over substance
>I've never read beowulf

No, you're just raised on modern stripped-down prose. If you're used to late 19th-century novels, his writing seems be comfy as hell.

He has neither.

And I'm not buying one book on the off chance it's good when I know for a fact his other works are shit. No, thanks.

The Silmarillion is still the best book of the lot

baowulf doesnt have 3 page long descriptions of bushes

It's just so comfy

>Just why Mr. Frodo was selling his beautiful hole was even more debatable than the price...

lol

>t. random nobody who never wrote nor sold a single book in his entire life and thinks his opinion about the matter is worth anything but shit.

I absolutely love how the Elves' own historians didn't ever record or apparently acknowledge the existence of the Hobbits until LOTR's very events, and nothing in the Tolkenian corpus can tell where they came from or when.

Or how Christopher had to cobble together fragments with conflicting information his father left him in order to finish a working edition of the Silmarillion, exactly what scholars of mythology have to do to reconstruct texts and stories to publish.

...isnt that the purpose of this board? discussion? and let me guess...you've written a book and managed to sell?

Neither does any other book Tolkien wrote. Jesus, you kids and your ADD-attention spans.

gonna need you guys to pack your bags and go back to r/books right now.

>why aren't they sword fighting like in the movie? :(

what did tolkien mean by this?

>you're just spoiled by modern writing
Always this bullshit excuse. Impressive.

>If it's so bad, why don't you do better? XD
You literal child, fuck off and die.

It does, fanboy. LOTR has a terrible pace, you could the entire book in half and you'd lose 1% of the plot. Tolkien's descriptions are AWFUL and this has nothing to do with "old style writing".

The action sequences are the second worst thing in his books.

Good night, kid. Your taste is fucking awful, and this isn't worth any more of my time. Go read whatever you think is worthy of you.

Guys people are allowed to have different tastes on things...
Does Veeky Forums think there's one objectively correct taste in art? That would make a good thread of its own.

back to r/books with you

aww was it too difficult for baby?

Damn it, Tolkien

>anglos will continue pretending their pulp version of the Kalevala has literary value for at least the rest of the century
what went wrong

He was selling Bag End.

His writing is thoroughly alright.

SOMETIMES that's enough.

It's like food. You can't eat caviar all the time. Sometimes you have to come back down to earth and eat a bowl of porridge or something.

What I will say is this:

Heaney's Beowulf > Tolkien's Beowulf

Pic related.

Hobbits were absolutely irrelevant. Literally nobody even cared about their existence until after the events of LOTR. That's why they were perfect for the job.

>Heaney's Beowulf > Tolkien's Beowulf
I don't think many people would deny this.

But on topic, Tolkien is probably one of the most successful prose stylists ever. The only reason you'd think the prose is bad is if you're judging it from romantic/modernist/whatever standards which are completely against everything Tolkien was trying to do.

>Tolkien is probably one of the most successful prose stylists ever
yes truly a remarkable talent

Somehow never got around to thinking of it this way, but makes perfect sense... Thamks user.

>That would make a good thread of its own.
What a great idea. That'd be the first thread on this board on the subject. Just imagine the debate, guise!

>Her cunt became the world