Rating: 
Summary: A Master Work
Review: Conventional wisdom posits that it takes 100 years before it is safe to consider a book a "classic." It has only been about 50 years since The Lord of the Rings was published but I am confident that another is not needed before we can call this book a master work. Why do I say this? Because The Lord of the Rings deals with those perennial problems that all human beings have to deal with: the perils of ambition, the necessity of friendship, the need for courage and hope...among others. What makes this book a classic is that it transcends the genre of fantasy. Rather than being a fantasy book, it is a book about the perennial qustions of good and evil told through the medium of a fantasy story. If you have not read the Lord of the Rings, you should do so now.
Rating:
Summary: In the words of W.H. Auden and the author himself. . .
Review: H.H. Auden, considered one of the greatest English-language poets of the 20th C., said that if someone didn't like LOTR he would never trust that person's literary judgement again.
J.R.R.T. said of those who found the work 'boring, trivial, or contemptable' that he didn't mind, as he had similar opinions of those people's works, or the sort of writing that they apparently preferred.
"The Hobbit" is the story of a well-to-do middle-aged bachelor who is pulled out of his narrow, smug, snug existance and is introduced to a larger world. Some of it is beautiful, some of it is horrible, but all of it is larger, bolder and more exciting than what he had known hitherto--and he finds that he's a lot braver and a lot cleverer than anyone (including he himself!) thought he was.
"The Lord of the Rings" is all about the uses, abuses, and corrupting effects of power, and the difference between domination and leadership; it also deals, the same as in "The Hobbit", although on a larger scale, with the inner strength that small, ordinary persons find within themselves when placed in extraordinary situations.
Also, J.R.R.T. was an environmentalist before it was fashionable.
If these themes are dull, what could be called exciting?
Rating: 
Summary: Movie covers get worse and worse
Review: I adore the books and the movies, but every time the publisher releases a new set of paperbacks with movie cover art, their choice of covers get worse and worse. The current cover art for Fellowship of the Rings is particularly bad, since it features Frodo in Shelob's lair. They should have kept the cover art from the first release, when the first movie came out.
Rating:
Summary: Startling, like lightning from a clear sky.
Review: I've just finished reading the Lord Of The Rings for the second time. My first reading of it was about three years ago. Amazingly, (and I think this says something of the quality of the story itself) I would say I enjoyed it even more this second time around. It is so sweeping and wide that it still thrills, never losing any of its unpredictablity even if one is already familiar with the ending. Tolkien's Middle Earth is so immense, such an entire "sub-creation" (as the author himself referred to it)... complete with its own creatures, history, languages, and breathtaking landscapes... I believe it is without parallel in fantasy literature of any era. This book is myth, rather than allegory. By that I mean that there is not really meant to be any strict one-to-one correspondence to specifically theological, political, or psychological aspects of our own "real" world. No-one in Middle-Earth is named Mr. Worldly-Wiseman or Mr. Evangelist or Mr. Charity. No, here we meet people and things like Tom Bombadil, Gollum or Treebeard... hobbits, elves, dwarves, ents, orcs and yes, even Men. And yet, as with great allegorical works all of these characters gravitate to one of two poles or extremes that can be seen as "good" or "evil". The Lord of The Rings is truly about a grandiose struggle between the FORCES of good and evil. In Chapter 2 of Book 2 we read that "Good and ill have not changed... nor are they one thing among Elves and Dwarves and another among Men." An interesting thing about the book is how Tolkien's brand of "dualism" very subtly points to the reality that ultimate Good or Evil is something yet greater (or beyond) any of the characters that try to perpetrate either of them. This is most clear in a statement by Gandalf in Book 3 during "The Last Debate" where he says "Other evils there are that may come; for Sauron is himself but a servant or emissary. Yet it is not our part to master all the tides of the world, but to do what is in us for the succour of those years wherein we are set, uprooting the evil in the fields that we know, so that those who live after may have clean earth to till. What weather they shall have is not ours to rule." If Sauron (who throughout the book appears as the evil to be reckoned with) is "but a servant or emissary"... then we must consider the question... an emissary of what? Or whom? And similarly, if all of the "good" that the Fellowship of The Ring strives to achieve will yet not "master all of the tides of the world"... then where is this locus of ULTIMATE good? Gandalf makes it clear that their own "goodness" is limited to the years wherein they are set. At the end of The Lord of The Rings, the future yet belongs to the good AND the evil that lie beyond the powers of any of the characters that have played a part in the present conflict. Maybe we are supposed to wonder... who IS the Lord of the rings? Almost 50 years ago C.S. Lewis, a friend of Tolkien's, said of The Lord of The Rings: "Such a book has of course its predestined readers, even now more numerous and more critical than is always realised. To them a reviewer need say little, except that here are beauties which pierce like swords or burn like cold iron; here is a book that will break your heart." And I too, could go on forever about it, but my best suggestion is for you to quit reading this, and just read the book. Or re-read it! The best review would be terribly inadequate. Tolkien's Middle-Earth is as impossible to imagine before you go there as it is to forget about once you've been.
Rating:
Summary: The Lord of the Rings
Review: My goodness - I am really surprised by some of the criticism of this boxed set!! I have read through all the books twice and I never even noticed a typo! Not one! (I am sure there are some typos, but I failed to see them.)
And I really like the movie photo covers! I like the connection it makes between the movies and books.
I bought this boxed set of paperbacks to be my "reading copies" of LOTR. I find I can get more "comfortable" with a paperback as opposed to a big hardback. Since they are small, they are easy to stick in my pocket/purse and take with me. I did not purchase this boxed set anticipating fancy maps and artwork! (For that, I will purchase the more expensive hardback editions.)
I think some of the reviewers had unrealistic expectations of this boxed set...
With all that said, I read these books after seeing the movies. I can understand why fans were concerned that the movies would not do the books justice. The books are so descriptive, imaginative, and full of brilliant detail. But I think Peter Jackson did an awsome job with the movies.
There is so "much" in these books, that you really must read them more than once to take it all in... I'll probably read them for the third time later this year.
Rating:
Summary: Perhaps the Greatest Stories Ever Written...
Review: The LOTR Trilogy and The Hobbit are, as said, perhaps the greatest literary works ever written! The absolute genius of Tolkien blindingly shines through the pages of these epic novels. Regardless of the edition you have, the quality of his words are the same. Tolkien's exceedingly detailed descriptions of the places, people and creatures of Middle-Earth make the tales even more pleasing to read. His incredible imagery, symbolism and superb talent lend themselves invaluably to these terrific volumes of fantasy. Like a spider's web, Tolkien intricately and expertly weaves several subplots around the main plot of Frodo's quest to cast the One Ring into Mount Doom. Each member of the Fellowship is created and fully developed along with several other essential characters. I simply cannot rave enough about these books!
On a side note, some who have written reviews compare the novels to the fantastic films, both favorably and unfavorably. My suggestion is to keep them as separate as possible in your mind's eye. While, of course, acknowledging that Peter Jackson's film were spawned only because of Tolkien's brilliance, remember that no film could ever truly capture the essence that is Tolkien's LOTR because the stories were intended to come to life in the imaginations of their readers. Similarly, the theatrical editions of the LOTR trilogy have the advantage of a multi-million dollar budget and special effects teams to create the spectacular scenes.
I recommend these stories to anyone who can read. They are fantastic, incredible, amazing, epic and a must-read for all!
Rating:
Summary: Tradition heroism? Please actually read it!
Review: There is some truth in many complaints of The Lord of the Rings - it contains diversionary episodes that fail to forward the plot, it fails to fully develop some characters, it even falls short of the demands of style-mongers. Nevertheless, other critics make one wonder if they have actually read it - those complaining that he espouses some Conan-the-Barbarian ideal or " Wagnerian pomposity".
Tolkien goes out of his way to give us an example of this type of ideal and show us what he thinks of it - he portrays this very ideal in Boromir, the foolheaded character that blows his horn as he sets out on a secret mission because tradition commanded it and it made him feel all heroic inside. While brave and a great swordsman, he also falls easily into the temptation of the Ring and is dead before a third of the story is out. No - Tolkien's ideals are clearly otherwise: it is the small and weak and hierarchically ignored that are the true heroes of this novel. It is the Hobbits and the women that destroy the evil in the land. If critics are blind to a point even this central, then how are we to value their opinions?
In sum, while Tolkien's prose is admittedly not that of Jane Austen, Tolkien's remarkable gift for imagination is unequalled by any other writer modern or ancient - it is rivaled only by whole peoples. Read it.
Rating:
Summary: Childhood Fantasies
Review: These books captured my imagination like no other books ever have. Tolkien's vision is astounding. His ability to use words to paint such an enormous and vivid picture is without equal. I cannot get enough of Middle Earth. Although these are fantasy novels, everything is so real. There is no way I can do justice to Tolkien's masterpeice with these few words. Middle Earth is a place where childhood dreams, nightmares, and fantasies all come true in bright, vivid colors.
Rating:
Summary: Words cannot describe the Brilliance.
Review: These two book are possibly, no are, the best books ever. Tolkien creates realistic characters and makes a vivid world that seems like it existed long ago. Read these books, you will not regret it. If you ebjoy these read CS Lewis's Chronicles of Narnia.
Rating: 
Summary: Great for the price.
Review: This is the best collection set I have found for LOTR without drying up your wallet. It doesn't cost near as much as the hard cover sets yet its quality is far better than some of the cheap paperback collections. The books are very durable and stylish (great cover art). The print is also small enough to keep the books compact yet not so tiny that you need a magnifying glass just to read. There is also a matching copy of "The Silmarillion". If you are looking to get a nice collection set of LOTR and The Hobbit without spending an arm and a leg, look no further.
|
