Hello. If you want to find interesting information about Tolkien's works, I recommend David Day's books. They are collections of information about middle-earth and they are fun to read. I also enjoy reading books about what inspired Tolkien's writings because they are cool and give me a lot of inspiration for Dnd. I have read the Lord of the Rings books, the Hobbit, Beren and Luthien, will read Tolkien's Sir Gawain and the Green Knight soon (Hopefully), and have seen the movies and watched Rings of Power. and liked it.
Be warned, David Day is known for being *really* inaccurate to the point of just making stuff up. Not saying you can’t enjoy his work, but take it with a pinch of salt!
(And now I’ll probably disappear for another year. A wizard is never late, he arrives precisely when he means to!)
Hello. If you want to find interesting information about Tolkien's works, I recommend David Day's books. They are collections of information about middle-earth and they are fun to read. I also enjoy reading books about what inspired Tolkien's writings because they are cool and give me a lot of inspiration for Dnd. I have read the Lord of the Rings books, the Hobbit, Beren and Luthien, will read Tolkien's Sir Gawain and the Green Knight soon (Hopefully), and have seen the movies and watched Rings of Power. and liked it.
Be warned, David Day is known for being *really* inaccurate to the point of just making stuff up. Not saying you can’t enjoy his work, but take it with a pinch of salt!
(And now I’ll probably disappear for another year. A wizard is never late, he arrives precisely when he means to!)
That’s probably true, I had only just watched the movies when I read his book and I honestly just remember liking it so I’m probably not the best to talk about it lol. Nice to see a club veteran back tho!
Hello. If you want to find interesting information about Tolkien's works, I recommend David Day's books. They are collections of information about middle-earth and they are fun to read. I also enjoy reading books about what inspired Tolkien's writings because they are cool and give me a lot of inspiration for Dnd. I have read the Lord of the Rings books, the Hobbit, Beren and Luthien, will read Tolkien's Sir Gawain and the Green Knight soon (Hopefully), and have seen the movies and watched Rings of Power. and liked it.
Be warned, David Day is known for being *really* inaccurate to the point of just making stuff up. Not saying you can’t enjoy his work, but take it with a pinch of salt!
(And now I’ll probably disappear for another year. A wizard is never late, he arrives precisely when he means to!)
It is interesting how there are several species of giant talking animals. There were the eagles, there was one giant talking dog named Huan, there was the giant talking cats led by the demon cat Tevildo (I will name the next cat I get that), there were the spiders and sort of the wolves. Even giant talking trees.
Just something I found interesting and might spark conversation on here.
It is interesting how there are several species of giant talking animals. There were the eagles, there was one giant talking dog named Huan, there was the giant talking cats led by the demon cat Tevildo (I will name the next cat I get that), there were the spiders and sort of the wolves. Even giant talking trees.
Just something I found interesting and might spark conversation on here.
Tolkien was a scholar when it came to language so I think he wanted to incorporate language into almost anything he could which I think is really cool and inspired so many different things for him and other authors.
Yeah. Tolkien was a master of languages and did it really well. I know a lot of people who try to create languages for their own worlds, whether they be DND homebrew worlds or settings for books they are writing. Generally, I advise against it. At least not a complete language, a few words, maybe some phrases are fine, but it ain’t a great idea to create a whole language for your world just because it sounds cool and other famous authors do it.
Tolkien spent years developing his work, so if you want to create a language, you should be willing to give a lot of time to it, not just make up a new fantasy word that sounds cool for everything.
Languages have structure and laws, and they become really unrealistic when one tries to substitute every English word with a cool sounding fantasy word.
Also, a lot of writers that have made up fantasy languages randomly put the words in the story because they think it sounds cool. In real life, people don’t really do that regularly or without a reason. It can also be confusing or annoying for the readers to see holarae every time the characters say bread. Why didn’t they just say bread? In the real world, a person fluent in English won’t randomly substitute English words for Spanish words unless they are in a PBS kids show. I know this, I interact a lot with people who have English as their second language (or third, or fourth, or even fifth!). If it was special bread, then there is a reason to give it a different name. If it is the magical blessed bread that is baked by unicorn fairies living in the clouds, then call it holarae if you want.
If someone is willing to put the time and energy into creating a language, then they can do it and it could be great. But to do that, you have to study at least one other language from your first one, you have to study and think about language itself, you have to read books where they did it well, you have to interact with people that speak more than one languages, and more. It is awesome when it is done right, but it is easy to do it wrong and can really mess up a story, so I generally advise against it.
This is just my opinion on making up languages for a story, and it is a little random. But it sort of fits in and I hope someone found it interesting or helpful.
Yeah. Tolkien was a master of languages and did it really well. I know a lot of people who try to create languages for their own worlds, whether they be DND homebrew worlds or settings for books they are writing. Generally, I advise against it. At least not a complete language, a few words, maybe some phrases are fine, but it ain’t a great idea to create a whole language for your world just because it sounds cool and other famous authors do it.
Tolkien spent years developing his work, so if you want to create a language, you should be willing to give a lot of time to it, not just make up a new fantasy word that sounds cool for everything.
Languages have structure and laws, and they become really unrealistic when one tries to substitute every English word with a cool sounding fantasy word.
Also, a lot of writers that have made up fantasy languages randomly put the words in the story because they think it sounds cool. In real life, people don’t really do that regularly or without a reason. It can also be confusing or annoying for the readers to see holarae every time the characters say bread. Why didn’t they just say bread? In the real world, a person fluent in English won’t randomly substitute English words for Spanish words unless they are in a PBS kids show. I know this, I interact a lot with people who have English as their second language (or third, or fourth, or even fifth!). If it was special bread, then there is a reason to give it a different name. If it is the magical blessed bread that is baked by unicorn fairies living in the clouds, then call it holarae if you want.
If someone is willing to put the time and energy into creating a language, then they can do it and it could be great. But to do that, you have to study at least one other language from your first one, you have to study and think about language itself, you have to read books where they did it well, you have to interact with people that speak more than one languages, and more. It is awesome when it is done right, but it is easy to do it wrong and can really mess up a story, so I generally advise against it.
This is just my opinion on making up languages for a story, and it is a little random. But it sort of fits in and I hope someone found it interesting or helpful.
I honestly agree with you. Like, all of the languages in the real world took ages to become what they are now, so for one person to make a language all on their own in a short amount of time would be pretty hard, but if done right, pretty rewarding, too.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
⌜╔═════════════The Board══════════════╗⌝
...and started me on my way into my next chapter in life...
Yeah. Tolkien was a master of languages and did it really well. I know a lot of people who try to create languages for their own worlds, whether they be DND homebrew worlds or settings for books they are writing. Generally, I advise against it. At least not a complete language, a few words, maybe some phrases are fine, but it ain’t a great idea to create a whole language for your world just because it sounds cool and other famous authors do it.
Tolkien spent years developing his work, so if you want to create a language, you should be willing to give a lot of time to it, not just make up a new fantasy word that sounds cool for everything.
Languages have structure and laws, and they become really unrealistic when one tries to substitute every English word with a cool sounding fantasy word.
Also, a lot of writers that have made up fantasy languages randomly put the words in the story because they think it sounds cool. In real life, people don’t really do that regularly or without a reason. It can also be confusing or annoying for the readers to see holarae every time the characters say bread. Why didn’t they just say bread? In the real world, a person fluent in English won’t randomly substitute English words for Spanish words unless they are in a PBS kids show. I know this, I interact a lot with people who have English as their second language (or third, or fourth, or even fifth!). If it was special bread, then there is a reason to give it a different name. If it is the magical blessed bread that is baked by unicorn fairies living in the clouds, then call it holarae if you want.
If someone is willing to put the time and energy into creating a language, then they can do it and it could be great. But to do that, you have to study at least one other language from your first one, you have to study and think about language itself, you have to read books where they did it well, you have to interact with people that speak more than one languages, and more. It is awesome when it is done right, but it is easy to do it wrong and can really mess up a story, so I generally advise against it.
This is just my opinion on making up languages for a story, and it is a little random. But it sort of fits in and I hope someone found it interesting or helpful.
I honestly agree with you. Like, all of the languages in the real world took ages to become what they are now, so for one person to make a language all on their own in a short amount of time would be pretty hard, but if done right, pretty rewarding, too.
I have to keep this thing alive until Lego gets here. Discussion topic: What aspects of the movies and books are better and worse than each other in your opinions? I believe combat is a little more detailed in the movies, but that’s natural because they’re movies. The books follow the story over a longer period of time but add small enjoyable details like Tom Bombadil. The movies give more action to some of my favorite characters (ahem, Legolas, ahem) but the books have more character development overall. Thoughts?
I have to keep this thing alive until Lego gets here. Discussion topic: What aspects of the movies and books are better and worse than each other in your opinions? I believe combat is a little more detailed in the movies, but that’s natural because they’re movies. The books follow the story over a longer period of time but add small enjoyable details like Tom Bombadil. The movies give more action to some of my favorite characters (ahem, Legolas, ahem) but the books have more character development overall. Thoughts?
The movie is better at telling a story. It doesn't have unnecessary, anti-climactic plot elements such as the Scouring of the Shire, or plot-ruining characters such as Tom Bombadil, and is actually a far better story than the books.
The books are better at creating a mythology. It shows how the world is so much larger than the films show, including weird deities like Bombadil, and how the adventure always continues, such as during events like the Scouring of the Shire. They have the worst story writing and have moments that are infuriatingly pointless to plot and character development, but they work epically well at creating a mythology, which was Tolkien's original intention.
I have to keep this thing alive until Lego gets here. Discussion topic: What aspects of the movies and books are better and worse than each other in your opinions? I believe combat is a little more detailed in the movies, but that’s natural because they’re movies. The books follow the story over a longer period of time but add small enjoyable details like Tom Bombadil. The movies give more action to some of my favorite characters (ahem, Legolas, ahem) but the books have more character development overall. Thoughts?
The movie has cool action and stuff, but it got the ents wrong, and I loved the ents. Tolkien was writing a mythology for England. That was his whole goal. But I don't think I would say that Tolkien's work has bad story writing. It did have unnecessary bits, but they add to the world and make it more life-like. Life has unnecessary bits. The story might be hard to follow sometimes, but I think it is going a little too far to say that it is the worst story writing.
I have to keep this thing alive until Lego gets here. Discussion topic: What aspects of the movies and books are better and worse than each other in your opinions? I believe combat is a little more detailed in the movies, but that’s natural because they’re movies. The books follow the story over a longer period of time but add small enjoyable details like Tom Bombadil. The movies give more action to some of my favorite characters (ahem, Legolas, ahem) but the books have more character development overall. Thoughts?
The movie is better at telling a story. It doesn't have unnecessary, anti-climactic plot elements such as the Scouring of the Shire, or plot-ruining characters such as Tom Bombadil, and is actually a far better story than the books.
The books are better at creating a mythology. It shows how the world is so much larger than the films show, including weird deities like Bombadil, and how the adventure always continues, such as during events like the Scouring of the Shire. They have the worst story writing and have moments that are infuriatingly pointless to plot and character development, but they work epically well at creating a mythology, which was Tolkien's original intention.
I think that's pretty harsh. Characters like tom bombadil and extra bits are what I love about the books, sure, they aren't needed, but they add to the world and the story. I also don't think Tom Bombadil ruined the plot in anyway, I mean no disrespect to your opinion but the extra scenes are what makes the story seem life-like instead of following one single adventure story with no breaks or fun characters.
I think that's pretty harsh. Characters like tom bombadil and extra bits are what I love about the books, sure, they aren't needed, but they add to the world and the story. I also don't think Tom Bombadil ruined the plot in anyway, I mean no disrespect to your opinion but the extra scenes are what makes the story seem life-like instead of following one single adventure story with no breaks or fun characters.
I don't really think so. One of the first things you learn about story structure is that it has to have a beginning, a ramp up, and then an end. But The Lord of the Rings has three beginnings, (Shire, Bombadil, and Rivendell), and three endings (The destruction of the ring, the scouring of the Shire, and Frodo's journey to Valinor), which is the opposite of what good story writing is. But it's exactly what you see in myths like The Odyssey. Plus, the world holds such a rose-tinted view of Tolkien (not just you guys) that the point I make must be more blunt to be properly noticed.
I think that's pretty harsh. Characters like tom bombadil and extra bits are what I love about the books, sure, they aren't needed, but they add to the world and the story. I also don't think Tom Bombadil ruined the plot in anyway, I mean no disrespect to your opinion but the extra scenes are what makes the story seem life-like instead of following one single adventure story with no breaks or fun characters.
I don't really think so. One of the first things you learn about story structure is that it has to have a beginning, a ramp up, and then an end. But The Lord of the Rings has three beginnings, (Shire, Bombadil, and Rivendell), and three endings (The destruction of the ring, the scouring of the Shire, and Frodo's journey to Valinor), which is the opposite of what good story writing is. But it's exactly what you see in myths like The Odyssey. Plus, the world holds such a rose-tinted view of Tolkien (not just you guys) that the point I make must be more blunt to be properly noticed.
I think it is wrong to say that what Tolkien did is the opposite of good story writing. He just did it in a different way. Lord of the Rings is a great story, The Odyssey is a great story, so how can you say that a great story is bad story writing? It is just a different, less common, method of telling a tale that is neither better nor worse than something written in the normal way. Actually, writing something in a less common way might even be laudable. Tolkien meant to write differently, it was supposed to be a mythology. But myths are not bad stories just because they aren't written the way we write them now. I do realize that people do view Tolkien in rose-tinted glasses, but he did do a lot of incredible work.
I think that's pretty harsh. Characters like tom bombadil and extra bits are what I love about the books, sure, they aren't needed, but they add to the world and the story. I also don't think Tom Bombadil ruined the plot in anyway, I mean no disrespect to your opinion but the extra scenes are what makes the story seem life-like instead of following one single adventure story with no breaks or fun characters.
I don't really think so. One of the first things you learn about story structure is that it has to have a beginning, a ramp up, and then an end. But The Lord of the Rings has three beginnings, (Shire, Bombadil, and Rivendell), and three endings (The destruction of the ring, the scouring of the Shire, and Frodo's journey to Valinor), which is the opposite of what good story writing is. But it's exactly what you see in myths like The Odyssey. Plus, the world holds such a rose-tinted view of Tolkien (not just you guys) that the point I make must be more blunt to be properly noticed.
I think it is wrong to say that what Tolkien did is the opposite of good story writing. He just did it in a different way. Lord of the Rings is a great story, The Odyssey is a great story, so how can you say that a great story is bad story writing? It is just a different, less common, method of telling a tale that is neither better nor worse than something written in the normal way. Actually, writing something in a less common way might even be laudable. Tolkien meant to write differently, it was supposed to be a mythology. But myths are not bad stories just because they aren't written the way we write them now. I do realize that people do view Tolkien in rose-tinted glasses, but he did do a lot of incredible work.
Be warned, David Day is known for being *really* inaccurate to the point of just making stuff up. Not saying you can’t enjoy his work, but take it with a pinch of salt!
(And now I’ll probably disappear for another year. A wizard is never late, he arrives precisely when he means to!)
Wizard (Gandalf) of the Tolkien Club
That’s probably true, I had only just watched the movies when I read his book and I honestly just remember liking it so I’m probably not the best to talk about it lol. Nice to see a club veteran back tho!
I'm the Valar (leader and creator) of The Lord of the Rings/The Hobbit/Anything Tolkien Cult!
Member of the Cult of Cats, High Elf of the Elven Guild, and Sauce Priest & Sauce Smith of the Supreme Court of Sauce.
If you want some casual roleplay/adventures in Middle Earth, check out The Wild's Edge Tavern, a LotR/Middle Earth tavern!
JOIN TIAMAT'S CONGA LINE!
Extended Sig
Does he really do that? That is disappointing.
Oh no...
4th page...
I have some work to do...
Back in black baby
I feel like we've talked about almost everything in the LotR universe so..
Should we
A: Roleplay a LotR scene
B: Debate about something
C: Share opinions on characters/scenes/anything
D: Other (Rank movies/books, quiz eachother, its up to you)
Back in black baby
It is interesting how there are several species of giant talking animals. There were the eagles, there was one giant talking dog named Huan, there was the giant talking cats led by the demon cat Tevildo (I will name the next cat I get that), there were the spiders and sort of the wolves. Even giant talking trees.
Just something I found interesting and might spark conversation on here.
Tolkien was a scholar when it came to language so I think he wanted to incorporate language into almost anything he could which I think is really cool and inspired so many different things for him and other authors.
Back in black baby
Yeah. Tolkien was a master of languages and did it really well. I know a lot of people who try to create languages for their own worlds, whether they be DND homebrew worlds or settings for books they are writing. Generally, I advise against it. At least not a complete language, a few words, maybe some phrases are fine, but it ain’t a great idea to create a whole language for your world just because it sounds cool and other famous authors do it.
Tolkien spent years developing his work, so if you want to create a language, you should be willing to give a lot of time to it, not just make up a new fantasy word that sounds cool for everything.
Languages have structure and laws, and they become really unrealistic when one tries to substitute every English word with a cool sounding fantasy word.
Also, a lot of writers that have made up fantasy languages randomly put the words in the story because they think it sounds cool. In real life, people don’t really do that regularly or without a reason. It can also be confusing or annoying for the readers to see holarae every time the characters say bread. Why didn’t they just say bread? In the real world, a person fluent in English won’t randomly substitute English words for Spanish words unless they are in a PBS kids show. I know this, I interact a lot with people who have English as their second language (or third, or fourth, or even fifth!). If it was special bread, then there is a reason to give it a different name. If it is the magical blessed bread that is baked by unicorn fairies living in the clouds, then call it holarae if you want.
If someone is willing to put the time and energy into creating a language, then they can do it and it could be great. But to do that, you have to study at least one other language from your first one, you have to study and think about language itself, you have to read books where they did it well, you have to interact with people that speak more than one languages, and more. It is awesome when it is done right, but it is easy to do it wrong and can really mess up a story, so I generally advise against it.
This is just my opinion on making up languages for a story, and it is a little random. But it sort of fits in and I hope someone found it interesting or helpful.
Summoning Dark I love your sig XD
⌜╔═════════════ The Board ══════════════╗⌝
...and started me on my way into my next chapter in life...
⌞╚════════════ Extended Signature ════════════╝⌟
Thanks Yondor, yours is great too. I ain’t just saying that, it made me laugh out loud.
Haha, ok, good. That's the goal
⌜╔═════════════ The Board ══════════════╗⌝
...and started me on my way into my next chapter in life...
⌞╚════════════ Extended Signature ════════════╝⌟
I honestly agree with you. Like, all of the languages in the real world took ages to become what they are now, so for one person to make a language all on their own in a short amount of time would be pretty hard, but if done right, pretty rewarding, too.
⌜╔═════════════ The Board ══════════════╗⌝
...and started me on my way into my next chapter in life...
⌞╚════════════ Extended Signature ════════════╝⌟
Yeah. Tolkien was a master at it.
I have to keep this thing alive until Lego gets here.
Discussion topic: What aspects of the movies and books are better and worse than each other in your opinions? I believe combat is a little more detailed in the movies, but that’s natural because they’re movies. The books follow the story over a longer period of time but add small enjoyable details like Tom Bombadil. The movies give more action to some of my favorite characters (ahem, Legolas, ahem) but the books have more character development overall. Thoughts?
Back in black baby
The movie is better at telling a story. It doesn't have unnecessary, anti-climactic plot elements such as the Scouring of the Shire, or plot-ruining characters such as Tom Bombadil, and is actually a far better story than the books.
The books are better at creating a mythology. It shows how the world is so much larger than the films show, including weird deities like Bombadil, and how the adventure always continues, such as during events like the Scouring of the Shire. They have the worst story writing and have moments that are infuriatingly pointless to plot and character development, but they work epically well at creating a mythology, which was Tolkien's original intention.
Frequent Eladrin || They/Them, but accept all pronouns
Luz Noceda would like to remind you that you're worth loving!
The movie has cool action and stuff, but it got the ents wrong, and I loved the ents. Tolkien was writing a mythology for England. That was his whole goal. But I don't think I would say that Tolkien's work has bad story writing. It did have unnecessary bits, but they add to the world and make it more life-like. Life has unnecessary bits. The story might be hard to follow sometimes, but I think it is going a little too far to say that it is the worst story writing.
I think that's pretty harsh. Characters like tom bombadil and extra bits are what I love about the books, sure, they aren't needed, but they add to the world and the story. I also don't think Tom Bombadil ruined the plot in anyway, I mean no disrespect to your opinion but the extra scenes are what makes the story seem life-like instead of following one single adventure story with no breaks or fun characters.
Back in black baby
I don't really think so. One of the first things you learn about story structure is that it has to have a beginning, a ramp up, and then an end. But The Lord of the Rings has three beginnings, (Shire, Bombadil, and Rivendell), and three endings (The destruction of the ring, the scouring of the Shire, and Frodo's journey to Valinor), which is the opposite of what good story writing is. But it's exactly what you see in myths like The Odyssey. Plus, the world holds such a rose-tinted view of Tolkien (not just you guys) that the point I make must be more blunt to be properly noticed.
Frequent Eladrin || They/Them, but accept all pronouns
Luz Noceda would like to remind you that you're worth loving!
I think it is wrong to say that what Tolkien did is the opposite of good story writing. He just did it in a different way. Lord of the Rings is a great story, The Odyssey is a great story, so how can you say that a great story is bad story writing? It is just a different, less common, method of telling a tale that is neither better nor worse than something written in the normal way. Actually, writing something in a less common way might even be laudable. Tolkien meant to write differently, it was supposed to be a mythology. But myths are not bad stories just because they aren't written the way we write them now. I do realize that people do view Tolkien in rose-tinted glasses, but he did do a lot of incredible work.
You're misunderstanding what I mean.
Frequent Eladrin || They/Them, but accept all pronouns
Luz Noceda would like to remind you that you're worth loving!