ASOIAF - Will Martin Finish It?

I was looking at my Fantasy books seeing where my new Dick set will go and that got me thinking about ASOIAF. Many FSDers have been buying the books. Do you think Martin will actually finish the series?

For me, I think it’s unlikely that he’ll finish another two books. I bought the books because I love them. I originally read them in Ebook format years ago during a tough time in my personal life. I really hope he will finish them, but am happy to have the books I read and loved either way.

According to his “not a blog” he made a lot of progress on Winds of Winter due to not being able to to travel the past year. So possibly that one will be done soon (fingers crossed but not holding my breath.)

As to A Dream of Spring- I really hope so because I’d like to see his ending vs the tv series. I hope/assume his is better.

Like you, so far I am happy with what I have, but I am not going to invest in nice copies until it is/if it is finished.

Edit: I should add I won’t be upset if it is never finished or if it is years from now. I take books happily as they come. No pressure.

Edit 2 - fixed last book title to Dream of Spring. Clearly a a mandela effect happening here.

I don't think that he will finish it. Highly unlikely. Even if by some miracle he manages to get Winds of Winter out, A Breath of Spring is going to be an absolutely humongous task for him, which he hasn't even begun (going by his blog posts).

Plus, let's be honest, he doesn't have any incentive to continue working on this series. Money? He has plenty of. He even signed a new deal for development of some other works of his. Fame? Influence? He has all that. The only thing left is creative satisfaction. I personally think that he has stopped feeling any satisfaction with the ASOIAF series. People know the ending because of the (horrendous) season 8 of GoT. The way to get there would be an interesting read, however, I don't think he wanted his "creative child" to be taken over by D&D and raised in such an abusive way. He keeps making promises and giving hints about his writing but it never really goes anywhere.

So, I don't think that this series will be ever finished by George. There is a small chance that somebody else takes over when he passes like it happened with Robert Jordan. I would have loved for it to be completed since I like the books a lot. I have the regular paperbacks, since the illustrations of the FS edition look not quite right to me.

>1 RRCBS: I am pretty sure that he had made some provisions (notes? Or even have someone in mind) in case he dies before he finishes the series. Books sometimes take a long time - and even if the authors are not Martin’s age, things happen. I had learned to be patient - and if WOT managed to get finished by Sanderson despite Jordan’s expansion of the story to almost crazy levels, the much more contained and clean story here should be less of a problem.

My opinion is that he almost certainly won’t.

He’s taken 9 years and counting to write the penultimate book, and logic suggests that the final book will be even harder to finish as he can’t defer any decisions. That’s assuming he only has 2 more books to write, he’s been mostly wrong about that so far (the series was originally intended as a trilogy!).

Robert Jordan is a good reference point, he died believing 1 more book was needed, and left copious notes and even the final chapters fully written. When Brendan Sanderson took over he realised it would in fact require three more books to finish.

He did finish it, but even then it took 6 years rather than the 3 he expected!

It seems that writers are very bad at judging how close the finish line is, and how long it will take them to reach it.

Nope. He's lost the plot.

I loved the first three but I feel like the magic was lost in books four and five. Lots of meandering and searching and scenes with little payoff.

>7 Charon49: Totally agree. Book four was a slog and five was my least favorite. A clear cut trilogy would have been ideal.

I gave up during A Feast For Crows because I had the distinct sense that the book was wasting my time with extraneous details. I think authors and editors owe a duty to their readers to respect their time, and it felt like a line had been crossed where that wasn't happening any more. It's a shame, because the earlier books were, indeed, riveting.

Give the man a break. He has continually updated fans via his blog about the progress and difficulties, and the myriad distractions in his work.

If he doesn't manage to finish it, it'll be interesting to see what history's take on ASOIAF is in a few decades time. Phenomenally popular in it's day, but unfinished. If Tolkien had never got around to publishing The Return of the King would we still read the first two books today?

I also think A Dream of Spring will forever remain a dream. Still hopeful for The Winds of Winter though.

I agree that the fourth and fifth books were not as riveting as the first three. The story seems to have lost momentum, with the characters all scattered. Not to mention the host of new characters that popped up.

I don't think George RR Martin owes his readers to finish the series, though I also understand the frustration of the fans. I fear that he is having trouble drawing together the strands of the story to a satisfactory conclusion (in the same way that he had trouble unravelling the Meereenese knot), especially with the pressure from the TV show. I certainly don't see how to do so in two more books. In any case, I don't envy his position.

Maybe I'm in the minority - I'm not a science fiction or fantasy fan but I listened to all of the books on audio and enjoyed them immensely. I've dabbled in some fantasy on my car rides and running including Rothfuss, Sanderson, Gaiman (why and how is American Gods so popular?!?) and Hobb and I enjoy Martin much more than the rest.

Although I am hoping the series is complete or Martin is pulling everyones leg and the final books will be published after his death, I don't think the series being incomplete takes away from the brilliance and unique world Martin has created. Maybe fantasy is different but with literature there are so many wonderful books that were left incomplete: The Aeneid, Dead Souls, The Trial, The Castle, Man Without Qualities, The First Man, The Canterbury Tales, Billy Budd just to name a few. The TV showed still puts a sour taste in my mouth but even if another line is not written I am thoroughly content with Game of Thrones.

(edit typo)

It's hard to see it. I think it would be disappointing that the only ending to that series will be the tv series finale which was rubbish and a far cry in execution from what he probably intended for the books so I hope he does it as I do like the series. The last book left it with so many plot threads at play that it is hard to see it finished in just two books. He will finish Winds of Winter after that who knows.

>11 Levin40:

I was about to write the same thing in response to >10 ranbarnes:. It's Martin's legacy. If he doesn't finish them on his own (and also, if he doesn't weave a better story than the TV series), no one will remember the series as his; they'll just remember HBO's work.

>13 Joshbooks1: Same, love the books, even if unfinished. Never watched the TV show hit not a tv person at all anyway. Will be happy either way to have the ASOIAF books from FS even if it’s only those already published!

It's true that, on past form, time is not on his side to get the whole thing wrapped up. But, who knows how it'll go - he may confound everyone's expectations, getting the wind in his sails and race to the finish, wrapping up WoW later this year, then knocking out a Dream of Spring in just a further year or two. He has said that the last two books are going to be massive: at least 1500 manuscript pages each (will the Folio Editions run to 3 volumes?), so it may be that it will take more than two more books to finish the story, just as happened with books 4 & 5. I think it is reasonable to expect, at the very least, that we will get WoW. After that, it's in the lap of the gods.

>15 treereader: I'm already there. I read the books when they first came out and was a big fan. But the time it took to publish and my personal satisfaction with the tv series just left me done with the books. I'm content with the tv series ending and don't need to wait anymore for the books and will not read them when they come out.

Personally, I think that if he completes Winds of Winter, it's very likely that he'll also finish Dream of Spring (relatively) quickly afterwards. You can't really finish a penultimate novel without knowing how the series will end - so hopefully when WoW comes out he won't need to take another decade to write DoS, since he won't need to figure everthing out again.

I wonder what in retrospect he thinks of his decision to cut one or both of the two big battles originally planned for A Dance with Dragons (battle on the ice between Stannis and Bolton and/or the battle in Mereen between Dany and the slaver forces). It left that large book without a major battle, which I think is a weakness. He may have thought he would follow up with Winds of Winter relatively quickly when he made that decision. I wonder if he would make the same decision if he could have foreseen how long the sixth book would take to publish.

Note: it will be 10 years this July that Dance with Dragons was published.

>21 adriano77:

So, are there any true series where installment waits have gone on this long?

Disgraceful.

>21 adriano77: disgraceful?
True series?

Any artist is entitled to take however long they need to create what they create. The entitlement of some people.

I mean Kingkiller Chronicles third book is running into the same issue. I think he finishes WoW for sure and will stay optimistic for the final installment. No point on brooding over something we don't have.

>22 ranbarnes:

A true series as in predetermined and structured rather than a loose continuation or spin-offs tying into one another.

And yes, disgraceful. He flipped his readers' loyalty into HBO cash and obviously can't be bothered now. Getting a conclusion is a reasonable expectation when buying into a 'true series' and it's probable there won't be one. But yeah, just entitlement, heh.

>24 adriano77: A little harsh, no? I would truly be interested how many of us would actually pass up on tens to hundreds of millions for our loyalty to our readers. He's older, overweight, probably has a several comorbidities. Life is short and who cares about one's legacy or renown when one dies... He'll be dead! If he can enjoy his life and spend his renaming years in what makes him happy, whether that is writing or something else, good for him. He nor any other author owes us, the reader, anything.

>25 Joshbooks1:

Sure, take the money. But it's pretty clear he knowingly strung people along for almost a decade.

>26 adriano77: That sounds pretty entitled. He doesn’t owe anybody anything.

I read all of the books and thoroughly enjoyed them.

There’s still a chance he finishes them. We just need to get George to take some leisurely walks in Maine, next to a distracted driver in a minivan.

>23 PrestigeWorldWide: This one is worse in my mind. Rothfuss has been actively hostile to his readers on several occasions and makes a point to let people know he’s doing anything but actually writing. Not a fan any longer.

>28 Sorion: I agree. At least George is apologetic and tries to keep fans in the loop.

>21 adriano77: Not a book, but Half-Life is now pushing 17 years between true installments. As with ASOIAF it was critically acclaimed and hugely popular but even more frustrating as a sequel has never even been announced. At this rate, if they ever release HL3 only the previous generation will remember the story...

>28 Sorion: Agreed. Just before reading Name of the Wind, I was watching a lot of PR's interviews and stuff. He gets so riled up when someone mentions Doors of Stone (I think that that is what the third installment is called?). It was really frustrating and antagonising. Then, I ended up actually reading the NotW and disliked it so much that, thankfully, I don't have to care about him or The Kingkiller Chronicles anymore.

I personally don't think that it is entitled to expect an author, who asked people to get invested and read their Parts 1-5 (thereby making the series popular enough for an HBO production), to actually take out the Parts 6-7. Martin's fanbase has been supporting him since the 90s! Just imagine how long that is!!! My entire life almost. And to get no real resolution just because the author became too rich to have to care? Of course he owes his fans (old and new) the last two books. It isn't as is he is extremely sick or something. He has simply been too busy with promoting and writing for the TV series, writing Fire and Blood, etc. He also couldn't deal with the pressure of fan expectations and the deadlines he himself kept setting up and then not meeting.

I too really enjoyed books 1-3, with the 4th and 5th being not good enough. However, I love the series as a whole and it is so disappointing to know that it will never be completed.

And even though I like ASOIAF waaayyyyyy more than anything by Brandon Sanderson, I do appreciate that he is not only very transparent regarding his progress, he is also very consistent in his output. His fans sure can depend upon him to deliver the books at the rate promised. I haven't read the Stromlight Archive, so I don't know if it's any good, but those who like it will see the 5th book (completing the first arc) come out by 2024. That means, an entire 5 book (1000+ pages each) epic series would have come out since Martin last released a book. (Approximately) Plus a lot of other shorter works.

But even though BS is reliable, I still can't start a series which hasn't been completed yet. Burned too bad by Martin.

At this point, I don't know who can scratch that particular high-stakes, epic fantasy itch for me.

>31 sekhmet0108: >28 Sorion: Rothfuss had a bit of a breakdown as far as I know. He has been talking recently enough about his mental health issues while trying to complete the third book. But you are quite right about his treatment of fans as he has been known to be antagonistic towards them for years. His comments in the past have come across as quite arrogant and have bit him in the ass. When the first book took off he said that he had all three books completed before the first was even released so they would be rolled out one after the other pretty quickly. He then realized this was not the case and had to do major changes to book 2 which took four years to get released after the first. He hit a wall with book 3 as he said it was a trilogy but having read the first two I don't see how he could finish it in one book. His last installment like George has been ten years ago. I wish him well in the case of his mental health issues but I will not be running to read his next book when its released.

In the case of George I hope he does finish it. Success more than anything has stymied his output as you can see he was releasing more regularly at the start of the series. He just has his fingers in too many pies though I hope he pulls it off. I do like his prequel books and Dunk and Egg stories also. I have not read the main series since the last installment as far as I recall and I don't feel a need to revisit it until the next release which I will read whenever that may be.

I admire Sanderson's output and communication with his fans but I don't like his writing. I did not like it with the last WOT books and got two books into Stormlight and left it at that. His worldbuilding can be great but his dialogue can be cringe worthy. Joe Abercrombie is another writer who has a great output and has great communication with his fans. He regularly updates his website with where he is on a book. He is one I still enjoy to read.

>31 sekhmet0108: Have you looked into Steven Erikson's Malazan Book of the Fallen? Epic fantasy - 10 volumes: all finished! Plus a plethora of other related Malazan stories, by Erikson and Ian C Esslemont.

>32 assemblyman:

I have been listening to the First Law books. (I have this weird guilt thing when I only read fantasy, so I try to combine it with a language I have learnt so that I can enjoy the story and keep my foreign languages 'fresh'. So I only listen to audiobooks in German.) Anyways, I am kicking myself that I didn't read these. Maybe even in English (First language). It is so good! There might be places where his story telling skills could be improved, but I love the characters. Even the secondary ones are just so interesting! My favourite so far (I am around 1/3rd of the way through Last Argument...) is Major West. But I like Logan Ninefingers too. After I finish the trilogy, I am going to listen to Best Served Cold. Then take a break and read some classics.

I too find Sanderson's writing lacking somehow. And at least Mistborn, Elantris and Warbreaker lack a certain emotional quotient too. I saw an interview of his in which he said that he was a very even tempered person, like the opposite of someone who is bi-polar. He doesn't experience the very low lows or the very high highs. And I believe that it shows in his work. Fantasy is a genre which is so huge and requires such a range of characters and emotions, that his having never felt anything like that makes his protagonists come across as shallow and a bit pale. I know that he is good with the twist in the end and all...but he can never be a favourite of mine. Neither does his prose captivate me, nor does his protagonists.

I really hope Folio Society try to print The First Law. If they can do Farseer, then why not FL.

>33 waystation72: Years ago I read Gardens of the Moon. I found it to be okay (maybe a 6), but i never felt compelled to read on. In fact, I found it a bit complicated and it put me off of Fantasy, since I thought all epic Fantasy was going to be that hard to comprehend. I had only read Harry Potter, LOTR, Eragon series, Narnia and ASOIAF till then.

Since then I have read quite a bit more fantasy and am running out of good material. I might just give Malazan a try to be honest. I really need something epic!

>28 Sorion: I completely agree. While I enjoyed the first two books in his trilogy, I find Rothfuss himself annoying and pretentious, a particularly cloying specimen of wokesterism, with all the nauseating virtue signaling which accompanies that species of aggressive secular puritanism.

>21 adriano77: I know they're not everyone's cup of highbrow tea, but Jean M Auel's Earth's Children series:

The Clan of the Cave Bear, 1980
The Valley of Horses, 1982
The Mammoth Hunters, 1985
The Plains of Passage, 1990
The Shelters of Stone, 2002
The Land of Painted Caves, 2011

gives me a little hope. She's 12 years older than GRRM...

>36 iesamina:

Good point. Thing is, though I have the last two I haven't read them yet. I gave up sometime during the long wait and couldn't summon the enthusiasm when they finally arrived,

>22 ranbarnes: Stephen King's The Dark Tower series took a long time to finish, (22 years) but he did finish it. He even wrote another book in 2012 that was a bonus book, but one you didn't have to read to complete the series. GoT is going on 25 years since the first book was published.

Anyone who feels it vitally important to be able to finish reading a series which they start can surely restrict themselves to starting series which have already been finished, of which there are plenty. The risk is always there in an unfinished series: even with the best will in the world, the author could die in a traffic accident one book from the end. That's the chance you take when you start.

In any event, GRRM is 72 years old, long past the age at which most people retire, and I think expecting him to keep on writing even if he doesn't want to (or to write other than what he wants to write) is rather unfair. Isn't he as entitled as the rest of us to spend some time enjoying the fruits of his labours?

>34 sekhmet0108:

Abercrombie's the best fantasy writer going, IMO. His characters are so memorable. Glokta, come on! Highly recommend Best Served Cold! I've read it three or four times. I actually have the Subterranean Press copies of these and would suggest checking them out - the art's very nice in most.

-edit. Small critique though - his worldbuilding doesn't have the same breadth as, for instance, GRRM. But few do. And by this, I mean fullness of 'history' to really ground things.

I personally don’t think fans are owed anything. Fans don’t support an author to be nice, they do it because they derive pleasure from the author’s work. There’s no obligation on either side.

>40 adriano77: The Subterranean Press editions are nice. I have The Heroes in that edition as its my favorite book of his to date. I mainly read classics now but I still would read anything he releases.

It is really intriguing to actually hear (or see) someone articulate that they are owed something by an author. Like there is some sort of debt to pay, and the author shouldn't sleep well at night until the pound of flesh is surrendered.

>42 assemblyman:

Funnily enough, I'd say The Heroes is my least favourite. I can't even remember why exactly. But I've never gone back for a reread while I've done so for every other book. Have you seen their (Subterranean's) take on A Little Hatred? I'm very happy with it.

>45 adriano77: I just find it very readable (I’ve read it a few times) and funny. I have a particular soft spot for Curnden Craw and his Dozen. I saw the artwork for A Little Hatred and it looks really impressive.

>38 Eastonorfolio:
I'm sure GRRM intends to finish, and I suspect he wants the monkey off his back as well. Naturally there is no guarantee. He has also said he wants to write more material set in the world he has built. I'm starting to think that the response to the final series of the TV show is part of the problem, he wants it to be much richer and more satisfying. So far the books have been.

>39 PeterFitzGerald:
I agree, I don't think writers owe us, we are not crowdfunding their projects. (Yes, I bought your book, now you better make me happy with the next one, or else)

If it were not for the television series, where would it stand today? Would FS even have released it? I have to admit, I had never heard of the book series until Game of Thrones the television series came out.

I’d say no. He doesn’t look very healthy although I wish him the best. I only hope that if he does finish, it ends differently from the HBO series. Nobody wants to read that.

It seems we have a few Joe Abercrombie fans here - where would you recommend starting with his books? I've been interested for a while but unsure about the optimal place to dive in. Is the third book of the First Law trilogy the monumental downer I've heard about?

As for GRRM, I haven't read any of the books or seen the TV series, but hope he finishes it. Does he "owe" it to his fans? I could lean either way on that question - there are reasonable points to be found on both sides. But his apparent lack of robust health does make me think it's not all that likely. I would love to be found wrong though.

>46 assemblyman:

Good call on the humour - forgot to mention that. Another of his strengths.

>47 ranbarnes:

Start with The Blade Itself, of course. The book by itself is very good but what's satisfying to discover is how he improves as a writer with each subsequent outing. I wouldn't say the third in that trilogy is a downer necessarily. It's perfectly fitting for what he's doing and it isn't something that'll leave a bad taste in your mouth at all because you see it coming and it balances out, IMO.

>39 PeterFitzGerald: I take your point about only starting completed series, but it does require sufficient people to take a punt buying the initial books in order for the rest to be published!

I have no problem with Martin retiring at 72, in fact my preference would be for him to have finished the series years ago and be enjoying a well earned rest, but we don’t always get what we want.

Call it entitlement if you want, but readers are justified in feeling disappointed and even frustrated with Martin.

After publishing 4 books in 9 years, he then published 1 in the next 15.

During that 15 years, he’s written multiple tv scripts for HBO, a trilogy of prequels, many other short stories, and 2 lore books with a third to follow. I believe he’s even now working as a writer for a fantasy video game called “Elden Ring” which is completely unrelated to ASOIAF (which I am looking forward to as it happens).

It’s not like he hasn’t been working, he’s been working his backside off. But he can’t reasonably claim he has been doing everything he can to finish the series.

Of course he’s free to do whatever he likes. And his fans are free to feel frustrated.

>52 Uppernorwood:
This was my point of view.

It either works both ways or no way at all. Either the author expects people to take a chance on an incomplete series and pick up books as and when they come out, with the sales compelling the publisher into publishing the next title in the series, where the author owes a completed story to the readers.

Or, the readers wait for a series to be completed before they take the plunge, thereby risking the discontinuation of the series since it didn't garner enough support. In this case, the author obviously owes nothing to the readers.

Since Martin, I have chosen to put myself firmly in the latter category. I am not investing my time and energy into incomplete series anymore. I don't owe the author anything and they don't owe me. In George's case, he does owe his fans (and himself!) ASOIAF is pretty amazing but if it doesn't get completed, it won't end up leaving that great an impact as it possibly could.

"a pound of flesh" lol
Complete the story you started, George != "pound of flesh"/don't retire/don't rest

>40 adriano77: Abercrombie’s been on my list to try forever, because I’ve heard his work compared to Glen Cook’s earlier Black Company novels (though I haven’t gotten to reading anything by Abercrombie yet).

I mention this mostly for the benefit of people looking for a good fantasy series. The Black Company novels also have the advantage of generally being tight self-contained reads, despite also telling a more expansive story.

(Unless you hate 20th century war stories, because Cook uses some of that style, even though it’s a fantasy setting.)

>48 Eastonorfolio: "If it were not for the television series, where would it stand today? Would FS even have released it?"

Bingo!

I, for one, would have never heard of GoT had it not been for the serialization on television. I don't have an HBO subscription, so I wouldn't have discovered it via general programming. The hype surrounding the show made me aware...slowly. I didn't watch or read any of it until succumbing to peer pressure around season 6 or 7. So, no, I would not have expected GoT to have been given any attention by Folio. I'll take it one step further, though. If it weren't for the (guaranteed) success of a GoT book campaign, Folio probably wouldn't have pursued some of its subsequent fantasy and (perhaps) science fiction titles, either.

>54 abysswalker: The Black Company is my personal favorite fantasy series of all time. His writing is at times workmanlike but his storytelling is fantastic. You feel like you become a part of the Black Company.

I’m still a little in love with The Lady.

He builds the Dominator up so well throughout the series and I love the payoff at the end. The later Books of the North aren’t quite as good but still enjoyable in their own right.

Croaker is the perfect protagonist.

>1 RRCBS:

>42 assemblyman: I wish I could have got my hands on those. They look so good. Even A Little Hatred looks really nice. Ah well...maybe some day.

I think the odds are that he will still finish it, as he's old but not sick. And not even that old.

The general disappointment people had with the TV conclusion may be more of a motivator for him to finish it on his own terms. Plus the surely overwhelming sense of closure it would bring him.

>52 Uppernorwood: I think it's fair for fans to be disappointed it has taken so long, but 'frustrated' does seem entitled. He has done a lot of other great stuff, and who could begrudge him the chance to take on all this TV work?

I think we could do with more artists who do things on their own terms, and not to external deadlines. That said, I am glad I didn't re-read the books as I was planning to about 10 years ago in preparation for the apparently imminent final instalments.

>54 abysswalker:

First heard about Black Company more than ten years ago, mostly good things, but just never got around to actually checking them out.

I see there are ten books - all worth it or is the quality uneven?

>60 adriano77: I've only read the contents of the first two Tor paperback omnibus volumes, which collect the first six novels (three each); I recall the quality being consistent. I think I enjoyed the first few the most, probably due to the sense of exploration when first encountering the setting (at least in my memory; it has been a while), but I never recall the plot dragging or being disappointed by the story.

I believe there are four Tor omnibus volumes collecting all the novels. I can't speak to the last couple (which each contain two more novels), but I do intend to read them at some point (probably after a re-read of the first two).

>61 abysswalker:

Going to check out the first one in digital format, then, if it checks out, go big with the paperbacks!

-edit. Read a few pages and just wanted to comment that the narrator's "voice" (if that's what it's called) is really... odd. The vocabulary like "cool", "yo" and "busting our butts" next to talk about wizards is really off-putting, haha. I'll see how this goes.

>60 adriano77: See >56 Sorion:

Funny, this is one series I've never had any notion to tackle.

I think once you have read Tolkien, everything else appears as straw.

>64 LesMiserables: absolutely disagree.
Tolkien may be the most famous fantasy writer of all time, but not the first and certainly not the only one worth reading. There are works of fantasy just as good as anything written by the deified Tolkien.

>64 LesMiserables: I struggle to put the two authors in the same category. GRRM is clearly inspired by and borrowing from Tolkien but he appears to be much more interested in human politics and generally has a bad opinion of humanity. I read ASOIAF about one year after reading The Silmarillion, The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings. GRRM is clearly on a lower tier of language and general erudition. It feels as if GRRM's world was created to suit the story he wants to tell while Tolkien's world feels like it exists independently of the story and we are seeing but a small part of it. I would not say you are missing any sort of great art by skipping GRRM, there is some good character building but it seems like he doesn't know how to use the characters and usually defaults to killing them off. I heard the books described as disappointment porn for people who have a sad ending fetish. I wouldn't go that far but there is some truth in that.

George actually posted update on his "not a blog" recently (https://georgerrmartin.com/notablog/2021/04/13/not-a-blogging/), and it look like he really struggling.

>64 LesMiserables: I would say the opposite. Tolkien is a wonderful creator of mythology, but the themes of his books are very specific.

There’s virtually no political or social aspect to his stories, and very little humour. And sex barely seems to exist.

I love Tolkien, but he’s far from being the final word in fantasy.

Man that is a really sad update. Sometimes it's hard to remember these public figures don't exist in a vacuum.

On the top of Tolkein, I think some people place to much value on the value of "the intelligence" of a book. Once I was at a music festival and was trying to convince the people I was with to watch Weezer play. They told me that Weezer has no musical talent, their music was paint by numbers and that they contribute nothing to the lasting legacy of music. Finally they caved. After the concert one fellow I barely knew came up to me and said "You know what, that was really fun."

Not every book has too be "intelligent" to be worth time. We read to have fun and escape, as well as to educate ourselves. I will tell you I had a lot of fun reading GoT. I did not have fun reading Silmarillion. Just read what makes you happy.

>69 PrestigeWorldWide: “Just read what makes you happy.”

I think that both this sentiment and, for lack of a better term, a more ambitious or aspirational stance toward reading can coexist.

Some books require effort to enjoy. Just like you have to be bad at tennis before you can develop enough skill to make the activity enjoyable.

There’s nothing wrong with reading books that make you immediately happy; I enjoy plenty of books like this. However, a reader who cleaves too strongly to this maxim will be missing many unknown pleasures. In my opinion.

>70 abysswalker: I agree. I try to challenge myself with at least half the books I read a year, trying something new or different. If I'm feeling spicy I might even read non-fiction. I won't say no to the new Stephen King book though.

I think people are a little biased to the "challenging" books here. I see people on my apps who read and only read pop fiction. I think it's better than TV and there is still lessons to be learned from every book so I am happy for them. We all need so escapism and I can imagine worse ways of spending time.

There certainly is something to be said about the educational value of books though, I agree.

Maybe I should learn to challenge myself with what I read too...try something different.

My sweet spot is 19th century British, French, German and Russian literature, Golden Era detective fiction, 20th century German fiction (Manns, Bölls, etc.) And Fantasy (usually epic). I also like reading biographies and some history.

Things I can't read : Romantic, 19th century American, YA, fairy/folk tales.

I want to expand my reading, but there is still so much I haven't read in the areas which do interest me, that I never get around to challenging myself. I haven't even read all the works by my favourite authors (George Eliot, Hardy, Dickens, Trollope, Dostoyevesky, Wodehouse, etc.)

So much to read...so little time.

>35 ultrarightist: “... I find Rothfuss himself annoying and pretentious, a particularly cloying specimen of wokesterism, with all the nauseating virtue signaling which accompanies that species of aggressive secular puritanism.”

You ain’t lyin’.

>19 Xandian97: “Personally, I think that if he completes Winds of Winter, it's very likely that he'll also finish Dream of Spring (relatively) quickly afterwards. You can't really finish a penultimate novel without knowing how the series will end - so hopefully when WoW comes out he won't need to take another decade to write DoS, since he won't need to figure everthing out again.”

I think this is the most logical outcome, but I hope we’re not being over optimistic.

>71 PrestigeWorldWide: PrestigeWorldWide

Good name.

>75 St._Troy:

"Books and prose...books and prose"

>74 St._Troy: there’s some logic to that. Maybe the longer he takes to write the penultimate book, the more likely it is we’ll get both books quickly, or neither.

However a third possibility and that he decides this isn’t the penultimate book at that at least 2 more are required afterwards. This could allow him to complete The Winds of Winter by kicking the can down the road on major decisions.

>68 Uppernorwood: Does there need to be sex in Tolkien, or any book for that matter? Tolkien has romance and children often follow from those unions, so the sex is there, just not explicit.

Tolkien also had strong views on society, politics, morality. But again, he was not explicit. As he famously remarked, he disliked allegory whereas contemporary writers feel they have to be more directly explicit with politics and lay the allegory on with a thick trowel.

Tolkien may not be the beginning and the end for fantasy (although I rarely read any other fantasy apart from Tolkien as most of it seems a pale imitation). But all fantasy writers seem to take Tolkien as their starting point, and none have remotely matched his achievement in my view. Game of Thrones leaves me pretty cold to be honest. It’s the sort of thing I might download on my Kindle to read on holiday but that’s about it. Sorry to offend any devotees.

>78 Quicksilver66: rarely read any other fantasy apart from Tolkien as most of it seems a pale imitation
How can you possibly know other works are a "pale imitation" if you don't bother to read them?

Does there need to be sex in Tolkien, or any book for that matter?
Not in all books, but in some books, yes absolutely. Sex is a natural part of life as well as human culture. Sex has been explored in literature for thousands of years. From Greek myths and epics to Lady Chatterley's Lover and beyond, sex should continue to be explored in books in numerous and various ways.

none have remotely matched his achievement in my view
As I noted in an earlier post, Tolkien is probably the most famous fantasy writer, but I certainly disagree with you that none have even "remotely matched" his achievements. H.P. Lovecraft has in my opinion influenced fantasy as much as Tolkien, arguably more, and he died in 1937 which coincidentally is the same year Tolkien published The Hobbit - point being that Lovecraft was not influenced one iota by Tolkien, whereas there has been talk that Tolkien was influenced by Lovecraft even if he never acknowledged him. Similarly, Tolkien noted he liked R.E.Howard (the father of sword and sorcery) who likewise predated Tolkien and likewise was never acknowledged as an influence, although there has always been talk that Tolkien was influenced by Howard.

Seems to me that many Tolkien devotees are adamant that he be regarded as the once and future king, whereas as >68 Uppernorwood: noted, while Tolkien is fabulous he nevertheless is not the first nor the last word on fantasy.

>79 astropi: I like and admire Lovecraft a great deal and yes, he has had an influence on fantasy/horror (as has Poe) and I do not deny his influence. Tolkien’s influence has been on classical or “high fantasy”, and that’s what I’m referring to.

You can’t really compare Lovecraft to Tolkien. Tolkien created a secondary world down to the finest detail - a remarkable achievement and no one else has done it. It’s not just a question of having a few maps and a few exotic sounding names. What other writer has created logically consistent languages, writing systems, place names, histories, chronologies, mythologies, maps, terrain in the way Tolkien has done? Certainly not Martin. It’s unique.

There is evidence that Tolkien read and liked Lovecraft’s “the Doom that came to Sarnath”. In fact he owned a copy in his personal library. There is also evidence that he read Clark Ashton Smith. As Holly Ordway has pointed out in “Tolkien’s Modern Reading”, Tolkien’s knowledge of modern writers has been underestimated. But I see no direct Lovecraftian influence in Tolkien’s writing at all - or any influence from any of the “Weird Tales” circle. Tolkien’s mythology and style was fixed before Lovecraft or Howard came on the scene. I see more influence from William Morris and Lord Dunsany (and Dunsany also influenced Lovecraft, along with Poe). But Tolkien’s strongest influence was of course Anglo-Saxon literature, Norse and Finnish mythology.

I have read other fantasy but I admit I’m not very well read in the genre. But I don’t have to be well read to know that no other fantasy writer has come near to replicating Tolkien’s achievement. And a cursory glance of many fantasy novels will show the influence of Tolkien, but without the depth or the vision.

As for sex, my point is that Tolkien was perfectly aware of sex in Middle Earth, as are his readers. I still don’t see the need to necessarily be explicit about it. Neither do I understand why, if Tolkien preferred not to be explicit about it, it condemns him as a writer. Neither do I see sex as being necessary in any successful fantasy book (or any other genre). It’s only necessary in pornographic literature. Most fantasy writers include sex and violence for titillation- it’s not the mark of a profound writer. Neither do I see any more explicit sex in the Greek myths than in Tolkien. The Silmarillion and Tolkien’s other tales of the First and Second Age contains references to sex, incest, lust and rape - just as do the Greek myths. But Tolkien stops short on giving us the graphic details.

Tolkien is not the first and last word on fantasy, I agree. But he is certainly the writer that has achieved the most in the genre. I’m not sure what modern fantasy would be like without Tolkien.

>79 astropi: I don’t think Howard influenced Tolkien all that much, if at all, but he did strongly influence a parallel development in fantasy arising from the pulps, often called “swords & sorcery” now. If I had to pick three greats in that parallel tradition, I’d choose Howard, Lieber, and Clark Ashton Smith. Jack Vance too, but many “fantasy” readers now will be put off by the sci-fi elements of his greatest works (though there weren’t clear genres back then the way there are now). His “Lyonesse” trilogy is squarely within the modern fantasy genre, and is wonderful, but is for some reason rarely read even by fantasy fans now (I think this is a marketing failure more than anything else).

Swords & Sorcery is more based around the older picaresque form, and arguably works by Ariosto and Cervantes, etc. This tradition is notably amoral compared to modern epic fantasy, even epic fantasy of the edgy variety. Conan, Fafhrd, and the Gray Mouser are rogues and scoundrels. Moorcock, Gene Wolfe, M. John Harrison, and China Mieville all grow from this soil.

If you enjoyed The Book of the New Sun you owe it to yourself to check out Viriconium (Harrison).

Lovecraft was part of that pulp scene as well, and at least the “dreamlands” stories can still be recognized in the lineage of the modern fantasy genre. Lovecraft, Howard, and Smith all collaborated on the mythos “cinematic universe” avant la lettre; at least Smith and Lovecraft were pen pals in this regard. I forget whether Howard had correspondence with the others, but read Tower of the Elephant and tell me that’s not part of the same broader field of ideas.

I am a fan of Tolkien, and the way he repurposed the mythopoetics of biblical, Celtic, and Scandinavian folklore. Few people can challenge him in that mode. Maybe E. R. Eddison (The Worm Ouroboros) which was earlier than The Lord of the Rings and is wonderful if you see it as the modern fantasy development of Greek epic poetry. It can be a slog for modern readers due to the archaic approach to character (which has little of the modern novelistic sensibilities). Compared to Tolkien, I am more delighted by Vance; he’s a virtuoso at the top of his game.

Honestly, Martin’s song of ice and fire is just as much wars of the roses fan fiction as it is a work of imagination. I enjoyed what I read of it, which was the first three novels, but after watching the HBO series I’m skeptical he has any fantastic vision to deliver beyond internecine political power struggles. Martin does have an ear for the archetypal (“winter is coming” and so forth).

>80 Quicksilver66: good call on Lord Dunsany. Shared antecedent of both traditions.

>82 abysswalker: Indeed. If you read Tolkien’s first Middle Earth tale, The Fall of Gondolin, in the second volume of the Book of Lost Tales, it’s almost pure Dunsany. It only seems more to us now because we are aware of the corpus of mythology that Tolkien subsequently created around it.

>81 abysswalker: FWIW I did plug for M. John Harrison's Virconium & Kefahuchi Tract, Mieville's Bas Lag & Vance's Lyonesse in the recent FS fantasy survey.

>84 waystation72: Hopefully we weren't the only ones- I suggested Vance and Harrison, too.

Interesting debate. It seems that Mervyn Peake hasn't warranted a mention so far (particularly re >78 Quicksilver66: 'all fantasy writers seem to take Tolkien as their starting point'), a major influence on a completely different school of modern fantasy than the Tolkien-influenced. Here's what China Mieville had to say. I don't necessarily agree with his dismissal of Tolkien but he does make some good points:

In Tolkien, the reader is intended to be consoled by the idea that systemic problems come from outside agitators, and that decent people happy with the way things were will win in the end. This is fantasy as literary comfort food. Unfortunately, a lot of Tolkien's heirs--who may not share his politics at all--have taken on many tropes that embed a lot of those notions in their fantasy.

Peake is just incomparably better. His writing is textured and lush, his ideas are complex, his characters defy pigeonholes. The politics embedded in the Gormenghast trilogy are sometimes tragic, and never simplistic. Peake is one of the few writers of fantasy that mainstream critics treat with respect. It's true that Peake doesn't fit neatly into the genre--though he's revered by fantasy fans--and didn't have the sense of writing in a genre tradition, unlike most fantasy writers. He's inside and outside fantasy at the same time.

I think that's what gave his writing such a sense of uniqueness--it's hard to trace influences on Peake (in genre and out). And although his influence has been very strong, it's been quite diffuse and nebulous. It's nowhere near as strong, for example, as Lord of the Rings, which was easily and totally assimilated into the genre of fantasy.

The nicest thing anyone ever said about Perdido Street Station was that it read like a fantasy book written in an alternate world where the Gormenghast trilogy rather than Lord of the Rings was the most influential work in the genre.

>86 Levin40: You raise an interesting point about Peake, Levin. I did think about him and his wonderfully odd book, of which I am a great fan. I may be wrong (and happy to be corrected if I am) but I’m not sure that Peake has many imitators in the fantasy tradition (apart from your reference to Mieville). Gormenghast is gloriously idiosyncratic. Peake may have had greater influence as an illustrator than as a writer.

Mieville is entitled to his views, but I know whom I would rather read. I disagree with his analysis that Tolkien is “comfort food”. Evil is never fully defeated in Tolkien’s world and it’s made clear that the temptation to evil will always remain and from time to time it will triumph. His outlook is sombre, particularly in The Silmarillion. But Tolkien was writing in a mythopoetic and spiritual vein and his work is fundamentally Catholic and holds out the prospect of a distant salvation. Many modern fantasy writers find this distasteful and some prefer amoral heroes in a relentlessly dark world without hope. Again, I know which I would rather read.

>84 waystation72: >85 SolerSystem: I asked for Lyonesse as well. I also asked for The Sparrow and I see FS follows Mary Doria Russell on twitter so who knows...

>87 Quicksilver66: I think it's a case that, as Mieville points out, it's just so much harder to trace the influence of Peake. His work can't really be imitated in the same way Tolkien's can. But in terms of major writers perhaps more influenced by Peake than Tolkien, I would put Moorcock and Gaiman amongst them and I'm sure there are others. If you're interested, the full interview with Mieville is here. His views are of course heavily influenced by his socialist leanings. For instance he states that:

Tolkien's worldview was resolutely rural, petty bourgeois, conservative, anti-modernist, misanthropically Christian and anti-intellectual.

Which perhaps has some truth in it but is certainly a bit harsh. Is it possible to be both 'anti-intellectual' and an Oxford don? That would be some impressive cognitive dissonance.

This Mieville guy (who?) sounds like a Tumblr/Twitter parody.

>89 Levin40: Tolkien was absolutely anti-modernist and anti-intellectual which you had to be in order to be a follower of Pius X. Here is a nice scholarly article
https://dc.swosu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1289&context=mythlore
People like to put Tolkien on some pedestal shouting "he's the greatest!" while willfully ignoring the numerous faults in his works. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, and after reading Tolkien and Martin (and others) I can say that Tolkien did a wonderful job of world building, but his characters are by and large quite boring and cliche while (many of) Martin's are far more fleshed-out and interesting. The problem with Martin alludes back to the original poster - he's simply not going to get the series finished! Such a shame, reminds me a bit of Gormenghast which as others have pointed out, is (in my opinion) superior to Tolkien in most every way. Although perhaps that's not being entirely fair to Tolkien, I still really enjoy his works particularly The Hobbit which I view as great children's literature.

>90 adriano77: Are you being serious? China Miéville is one of the most acclaimed fantasy writers alive today.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China_Mi%C3%A9ville

>91 astropi:

Being serious.

>89 Levin40: It would indeed be cognitive dissonance. Tolkien was one of the most gifted philologists and Anglo-Saxon scholars of his time. He clearly thought deeply about many issues.

>90 adriano77: I agree. Writers should keep away from Twitter. There are many good writers, such as Philip Pullman, who have belittled themselves with ill judged tweets.

>91 astropi: Everyone knows Tolkien’s characteristic ticks, even besotted fan boys such as myself. His characters were not fully fleshed out in the way of most modern writers.

But, as abbyswalker pointed out above in relation to E.R. Eddison, Tolkien wrote in an archaic mode without the sensibilities of a modern novelist. His characters were playing a part in an epic history that was bigger than they were. Tolkien’s chief character is Middle Earth, its geography, people’s and history, all of which Tolkien portrayed in exquisite and convincingly realistic detail.

I don’t believe that there is any critical consensus which generally esteems Peake more than Tolkien. Part of the problem is that comparing the two is like comparing apples and pears. They are very different. Peake wrote in the tradition of the Gothic with a liberal dash of Dickensian caricature. Tolkien wrote in the tradition of the heroic and mythological romance. It’s a question of taste as to which one prefers. I love Peake, but he lacks the narrative drive of Tolkien and Gormenghast can be quite a plodding read in parts. What saves it is Peake’s lush prose, his comic characterisation and the sheer oddness of his vision.

Many of Tolkien’s most vociferous critics, such as Mielville, usually have an ideological, often left wing or woke axe to grind. They despise Tolkien’s conservative outlook, unable to forgive him for being born in the 1890’s or for being a traditionalist Catholic.

>95 Quicksilver66: True. I'm afraid Mieville's comments, as quoted above, tell me more about Mieville than about Tolkien.

Whatever one may think of Mieville's position on Tolkien, it is more or less a rehash of Michael Moorcock's 1978 essay Epic Pooh (which as you can probably guess from the mocking title, is far from generous to old J. R. R.). An updated version of this full essay is available on the web for anyone curious (link to pdf).

>95 Quicksilver66: Many of Tolkien’s most vociferous critics, such as Mielville, usually have an ideological, often left wing or woke axe to grind. They despise Tolkien’s conservative outlook, unable to forgive him for being born in the 1890’s or for being a traditionalist Catholic.
I would argue it is staunch defenders of Tolkien that appear to have axes to grind and points to prove. I think Miéville's critique of Tolkien is valid. Here is his argument in a nutshell
https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/279616-when-people-dis-fantasy-mainstream-reade...
He notes that Tolkien is undeniably an important writer and of course there are aspects of Tolkien's writing he admires. However, he notes how cliche and stereotypical Tolkien can be, and he's right. As someone that has always enjoyed Tolkien since a wee lad, I'll be honest, the more I run into people that say "Tolkien is God incarnate" the less and less I like his work and the more I'm swayed into the other camp.

>97 abysswalker: Thank you for that. By the way, I think Le Guin > Tolkien in most ways.

>98 astropi: Is he cliche or did he create the archetype the cliche is based off of? In other words is it only cliche because it’s been copied so many times?

Personally not a LOTR fan though I admire the author and the work he put into it.

>100 Bob_Reader: He said that Boris Johnson should be lynched from a lamp post. More precisely, he said he “thinks of a rope and a lamp post” when he hears the prime minister’s name. There was a media storm after which Pullman retracted the tweet but refused to apologise. He said that of course he was not advocating hanging the PM, which I’m sure is true, but it was ill judged.

I think the world would definitely be a better place without Twitter.

>98 astropi: Don’t believe I said that Tolkien was “god incarnate” Astropi!

As for having an axe to grind, I read that Mielville, according to Wikipedia, “is active in hard-left politics in the UK, and has previously been a member of the International Socialist Organization (US), and the short-lived International Socialist Network (UK). He was formerly a member of the Socialist Workers Party, and in 2013 became a founding member of Left Unity. He stood for Regent's Park and Kensington North for the Socialist Alliance in the 2001 UK General election, gaining 1.2% of votes cast.”

None of this is to say that Mielville is not a good writer. I have yet to read him. But he’s undoubtedly coming at Tolkien from an ideological perspective.

>100 Bob_Reader: the world is a worse place for all social media, and therefore a better place without it. I’m convinced of that.

I’m technically a millennial, so not an aged philistine by any means. But Twitter is poisonous. I deleted my account last year and haven’t looked back.

Twitter makes monsters of the best people. As others have said, intelligent people say crass and ignorant things on Twitter.

Philip Pullman, AC Grayling, Richard Dawkins have tweeted just on the subject of Brexit things which are appalling. They are wonderful writers of books. Do yourself a favour and read them, but ignore their tweets.

As an aside, although this forum isn’t really social media as such, it still seems to bring out conflict sometimes in a way that would never happen if we were all speaking face to face. Insults over where books are printed and the packaging for God’s sake!

>103 Uppernorwood:
I'm not sure I entirely agree. In the end it's all subjective, but one has to be careful not to decry reasonable alternative points of view as anything other than that. I'd be interested in specific examples of what you class as 'insults' because I don't see much of that on this forum, at least on a personal level (and if there were it'd be against the Ts&Cs). Where you might see 'conflict' and 'insults', I might see a passionate and interesting debate. Of course, it's always possible to portray an earnest debate about anything other than 'saving the world' as a bit silly if one wants. But this is a forum about Folio books, so I'm not in the slightest bit surprised that people talk passionately about things like where the books are printed and how they're packaged if they feel these factors are impacting quality. The very anonymity which might bring out the worst in people also allows then to speak freely to a certain extent. That doesn't generally happen in face-to-face conversations because social etiquette (i.e. fear of being banished from the tribe) often makes one hold back. Is that always a good thing? There are advantages and disadvantages to both situations.

I'm with you on Twitter though.

>104 Levin40: I believe most of the debate on FS is good natured and inspired by passion. We do occasionally get ourselves into hot water though. About 9 years ago on this forum we had debates about Australian pricing and whether or not the leather used on the Folio Poets and some other titles was real leather or reconstituted leather. It became quite rancorous at times, which I now regret. At one stage the LibraryThing police descended upon us and read the riot act.

>97 abysswalker: Thank you for posting this. An interesting read, as is anything coming from the pen of Moorcock, but dripping in the class and anti-British hatred which is sadly typical of so many English intellectuals. He even manages to get Margaret Thatcher into his critique. I think, as JacobHolt said in reference to Mielville (96 above) this tells us more about Moorcock than Tolkien.

Tolkien bores me, as he should, since he wrote The Hobbit for children, and LOR for young adults. To look for anything but a conventional world view with such a target audience makes no sense.
When he died, Iris Murdoch obtained and used his writing desk. Although a philosopher by trade, she didn't use her fiction primarily to push a philosophy, but rather to entertain, which is why so many still read her.

>21 adriano77: There is another series that is ongoing and is immensely popular. It's similar to GoT because it's also been turned into a television series with lots of sex and nudity. The television series might be more popular than the book series. I'm talking about "Outlander". I haven't read any of the books but the first one came out in 1991. The last book came out in 2014 with a new book announced later this year. Seven years between books seems like a long time but she did it. The author plans to finish the series with her next book (book ten).

Mieville makes the common error of mistaking a characteristic for a fault; Tolkien is no more to blame for not being Martin or Peake (or Mieville) than they are for not being him. Few writers aim to satisfy their critics' personal metrics (nor should they).

"The world is a worse place for all social media."

The world is a worse place for all humans. Sort of true...and yet a rather questionable statement.

Anything is how one makes it. I find social media to be rather pleasant. I am on 'bookstgram' (readalongs, fun book reviews, cool pics, discussions, etc.), FB (only for buying and selling of FS books) and reddit (my favourite). I am not on twitter. I hardly ever have an unpleasant encounter on any of these platforms. And they allow me to connect with a ton of other people I would never otherwise get to know.

Are there terrible aspects to social media? Sure. As there are terrible aspects to all of us. Is everyone here that certain that they have never been the 'toxic element' in a social media interaction?

As for comments by Philip Pullman and others, it's their point of view. Just because they happen to be authors, does not mean that they are not allowed to have opinions or share them publicly. They disapproved of Brexit (understandably) and let people know that. To put them on this pedestal where they aren't allowed to be normal people is what is wrong. And to take everything so very seriously is another mistake people make when dealing with social media.

At the end of the day, if one feels more at peace without social media, then that is great. However, it would be amiss to judge and condemn all social media this hastily.

For one, how much worse would the pandemic lock downs have been without social media! And social media has made so many cool things happen! From BLM, to the whole GME squeeze, ALS ice bucket challenge, and 1000s of other things.

I am far from being "best people", but I am quite sure that if I were to join Twitter, it would not make anything of me that I am not already.

Twitter (and all social media) is a tool, and as with all tools, we need to consider the consequences of using it when doing so, especially since social media has brought some new consequences to us. As sekhmet0108 says, there is quite a positive side to it (I like to think LT is part of that).

>106 Quicksilver66: Seems to me that some are simply trying to pigeonhole criticism of Tolkien into something negative. Again, YOU are entitled to your opinion, and Moorcock is very entitled to his. I tend to side with Moorcock and while I certainly don't agree with all his opinions I certainly can understand his hatred for what today we call "social injustices". Also, Moorcock noted
http://www.tangledwilderness.org/pdfs/mmlb10-michael-web.pdf

"My books frequently deal with aristocratic heroes, gods and so forth. All of them end on a note which often states quite baldly that one should serve neither gods nor masters but become one’s own master."

Have no idea how anyone can view that as anti-British hatred or anything remotely similar to that. Perhaps hatred for the aristocracy, but most people hate the aristocracy for good reason.

I just watched a Patrick Rothfuss do a stream on Twitch and he touched on some good points discussed here. He seems like a really genuine dude and acknowledged that he snaps when people mention the book. It really seems like he is just worn down and the fear of disappointing people can be quite paralyzing.

>91 astropi: Tolkien was absolutely anti-modernist and anti-intellectual which you had to be in order to be a follower of Pius X.

I'm confused. Are you say that Tolkien was an anti-intellectual because he was a Catholic?

>115 LesMiserables:
I highly suggest you read this paper which I linked to in post 91 - it will answer your questions
https://dc.swosu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1289&context=mythlore

>107 Jayked: "Tolkien bores me, as he should, since he wrote The Hobbit for children, and LOR for young adults."

In 1939, 2 years after the publication of The Hobbit and 15 years before the publication of LOTR, Tolkien gave his lectures "On Fairy Stories", in which I think he argued that it is as appropriate for grownups to read fairy stories as for children to do so. Thus, I am a little surprised to hear that he wrote LOTR "for young adults". Did he say that somewhere?

"To look for anything but a conventional world view with such a target audience makes no sense."

Well, there's 1954-conventional, and then there's 2021-conventional. Wouldn't Tolkien's world view be quite unconventional now?

"When he died, Iris Murdoch obtained and used his writing desk. Although a philosopher by trade, she didn't use her fiction primarily to push a philosophy, but rather to entertain, which is why so many still read her."

If Murdoch hadn't written to entertain rather than to push a philosophy, she might have only sold as many books as Tolkien!

>116 astropi: That makes more sense. Tolkien like Pius X were concerned by the greatest sin of all - Pride.

All modernists echo - non serviam - the pre-original sin.

In case anyone wants to read beyond Pope St. Pius X's encyclical, I high recommend the wonderfully illustrative yet brief deconstruction by the late great Michael Davies, in 'Modernism.

>117 cpg: The irony is that Murdoch was a fan of Tolkien and the LOTR. She even wrote him a fan letter -

‘Dear Professor Tolkien. I have been meaning for a long time to write to you to say how utterly I have been delighted, carried away, absorbed by The Lord of the Rings….anyway, don’t trouble about answering this, which is simply an enthusiastic and grateful fan letter. With all very good New Year wishes (I wish I could say it in a fair Elven tongue). Yours sincerely - Iris Murdoch”

Tolkien was surprised to receive this letter as he knew her work to be very different to his own. Clearly this did not stop her being able to appreciate a writer in a very different mode to hers. It also shows what a generous and warm person she was.