"No"

Sure it's a refutation technically, but what I meant (my bad - I should have been more specific), is that it's not a strong or logical one. I was using " refutation" in a more limited scope than you possibly were. A solid refutation would require you to elaborate on why enrichment is not a human need, after I talked a bit in my first comment about how abstract concepts like that are.To be fair, I could have added more evidence as to why I understand them to be needs.

Your definition of rights is arbitrary to me (i edited my last comment too late). Also to be fair to you, I wasn't really talking about rights. Just needs. All I was addressing were needs.

You should actually read my first comment. It doesn't seem like you did. That said (partially because of that), any discussion on this might not go anywhere, and I will possibly not respond again as a result. I've been on your side of things, and I don't think your position on needs (and possibly rights, based on the few words youve said on them) is convincing or compelling, so this is becoming increasingly pointless to me, to be honest. You're talking past me, and don't seem interested in reading my comment. I'm talking past you. Kind of pointless.

Oh I don’t disagree that location and culture figure into it. Tolkien was a linguist who was fascinated by ancient languages, so it’s not super surprising his dialogue is very old fashioned.

However, that 20 year difference is a big gap in terms of entertainment and modern story telling sensibilities. Tolkien grew up with silent films, by the time he’s in his 50s, Hollywood is just starting to develop the visual storytelling we’re familiar with today and move away from more theatrical and presentational performances and become more realistic.

Compare that to the media Herbert grew up with, and you’ll see a stark difference in how the west adopted storytelling sensibilities. The influence of Checkov and how western audiences gravitated towards realism really gets cemented by the middle half of the 20th century.

The same jump in storytelling styles happened in writing as well. By the 60s we’re seeing stories that also really start to focus on realism in regards to dialogue. Especially in sci-fi. Fantasy tended to be more stylized. And maybe that’s in part because Tolkien set the bar, and because fantasy tended to be about creating modern myths, whereas sci-fi tended to be about exploring ideas that humanity was dealing with in that moment (or obsessing about).

So long story short: I agree that there are many factors that influence writing style. But also a 20 year gap in the time those writers were active saw a massive amount of change in how people wrote stories. Media was taking large leaps forward. And while I do think Dune is more modern in its Prose, it does still feel somewhat dated, but not nearly so much as Tolkien.

TL;DR: reading Tolkien can be a slog, maybe try a dramatic audiobook?

I'm a die-hard Tolkien fan, with almost encyclopedic knowledge of his world. I read and watch the trilogy once a year, and own every book and resource relating to the Tolkien universe. I still tear up from the books and movies thirty years later. I've run a TTRPG in Middle Earth for years and don't plan on stopping.

All that to say, I always warn people interested in reading the books that they are extremely dry and often tedious to ingest. It seems that especially British authors of the time that the Professor started writing were like this. Tolkien was about 45 when the Hobbit was published, and in his 60s when the Fellowship was published. So in that period he's an old set-in-his-ways academic who probably spent a lot of time reminiscing on simpler times in the drastically changing post-WW2 world. Even looking at his major early influences like George MacDonald or Andrew Lang, they were very similar in overly descriptive scene setting and limited dialogue. I don't believe he ever set out to be an author either, but just fell into it, so the writing is rather elementary.

Most of that other folks have already stated, so forgive me for the rambling rehash. Suffice it to say, if you're finding the book too difficult, might I recommend a dramatic audiobook? There's one on Spotify under the name Roads Go Ever On that is fantastic, and includes various voice actors and even licensed music from the movies. The Lament of Boromir from The Two Towers made me weep openly!

In any case, enjoy the legendarium however you wish, no gatekeeping here! Cheers.

I'm currently reading 7/10 of the series (Finnish translation). I adore it. The style of Proust works on me like a spell.

I plan to read it eventually but it’s such a huge endeavor that I’m afraid I’ll start it but never finish it.

Write them a letter! I've done it a few times for work that's really touched me and have gotten a couple letters back, it's pretty cool and I'm sure appreciated.

I liked Tolkien, but not enough to reread them again. I realize now that I like the movies better than the books, although I do mourn the fact that they didn’t include Tom Bombali (pretty sure I spelled his name wrong) and Goldberry. If there was ever a novel that focuses on Eowyn as main character I would so be on board to read that novel. I feel like The Lord of Rings could do better if they had focused on few characters and broke them into series of each character so I don’t get lost with all the storylines I’m supposed to follow.

However, I am glad others have come to love Tolkien. I am also fine with people not liking him. His prose is not for everyone.

Loved Jane Eyre and only read Charlotte.

I read based on mood. So, as nice as a monthly TBR sounds in practice, it's one I simply can't uphold.

Omg yes I love Spader!! I also really like Mark, he's so cute.

Thank you for the recommendation, I'll check it out!

It absolutely is a refutation. You are confusing wants with needs (as well as not understanding what a right is).

Yes, the game world is one of my favs!! And thank you for the recommendation I'll check it out!

I was so obsessed with this series when I was younger. I reread the first book when Covid first hit because I was terrified and just needed a good comfort read. I'd really love to reread the whole series again someday. The characters are just so great (Spader is my favourite), and the worlds are so fun and imaginative. The whole thing is just so fantastic.

If you're looking for something to read when you're done with the series, I really recommend Sylo by the same author. It's more of a sci-fi based, but it is really good.

Honestly fair, I have mixed feelings about that part, too. It was cool to see earth in 3 different timelines and how events from one affected the others. But I agree, I also kinda wish there were more of the crazy worlds.

Tolkien's style reads more like mythology than modern prose. He's not poor at dialogue but his characters talk more like people in archaic epic literature than actual people. It's an intentional part of the worldbuilding but I understand how it can be alienating.

That's not a refutation of the point, and I have to conclude from that that you fail to understand humans and our needs on the whole.

I read it a long time ago and enjoyed it a lot. All the different and interesting new worlds we get introduced to in each book were quite fun. I specially remember that game world thing fondly. If you haven't read it before, try Demenata series by Darren Shan. It's YA and has some of that traveling to other worlds thing.

Another of the ever-growing number of things that will likely be notable to future historians studying the decline and fall of the US.

Neither of those are needs. You are confusing wants with needs.

I enjoyed the Hobbit much more than the Lotr. The Hobbit was a perfect book. The rest of the series is definitely worth reading as well, but in my opinion not on the same level as The Hobbit.

No I’ve quit reading this on 3 other occasions in my life, I’m doing the series now. Even if I hate it by then end, I’m finishing it this time

My favorite parts were always the descriptions of landscapes as they move through them. And there's a great bit where Sam looks up at the stars near the end that's really beautiful... but you'll have quit by then.

I'd write, I know that they definitely appreciate it, BUT remember they DO NOT owe you any kind of a response.

I think you're misunderstanding what I said as well. I disagreed with you that libraries don't fulfill any human needs and therefore should not be subsidized, and argued to the needs that libraries do absolutely serve. I also disagreed with your (implied) denial of abstract and intangible things (like entertainment and enrichment) as human needs.

Edit: also "rights are negative" seems arbitrary to me. Depends entirely on where you place your reference point.

Than you, that’s really interesting, because I think it’s true that I’m culturally trained not to see seeking wealth or status as heroic. People do it of course, but it’s not something you are supposed to draw attention to, so people have to find subtle ( and often hypocritical) ways to flaunt their wealth and power. And heroism is associated with selflessness, being flashy or ambitious is kind of contradictory to the concept as I learned it.