Tolkien was by no means an "over-detailer" in the stories themselves. LOTR, for all
of it's
reputation as a huge book, is really quite small by today's "saga" standards. Tolkien
was a master
of spice, of sprinkling details amongst a plot like Easter Eggs in a field.
Jewel-like nuggets of
information that just begin to hint at the epic scope of Middle-Earth, but just enough
to tease and
inspire, and never long enough to bore or bog down.
It all doesn't get "over-detailed" until one (of their own anal-retentive volition)
seeks out all of
the Appendices, fan-written encyclopedia's, guidebooks, etc. and (again, of their own
volition)
absorbs the world's minutiae down to the roots. Like a good cook, Tolkien should be
more revered
for what he left OUT than for what he left IN.
A lean book has to have a point of view. In LOTR Tolkien was brutally efficient at
writing
everything from the Hobbits POV. We never really get into anyone else's brains
emotionally. We see
them react emotionally, but we don't fully become one with their thoughts the way we
do the Hobbits.
There is scarcely a single chapter in which a Hobbit doesn't show himself (probably
the chapter(s)
describing Aragorn, Legolas, and Gimli's hunt into Rohan are the sole ones).
When an author tries to give us everyone's POV at some point, that is when the story
becomes like a
soap opera. Jordan would have written hundreds of pages describing Sauron's plottings
with the
Nazgul in Barad-dur, or Gandalf and Saruman dissecting the intricacies of the
hierarchy of the
Istari. All secrets revealed, all tombs unearthed, all of Middle Earth illuminated
like a drunk
staggering in the blinding, unforgiving glare of a policeman's searchlight.
To call Tolkien an "over-detailer" is to do him a great disservice. He was a master
illusionist,
which many misinterpret as being a master builder. They are far from being the same
thing. One is
time-consuming, dreary, and cumbersome, the other light and ethereal...and magical.
Leo
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
> Behalf Of Mike Mott
> Sent: Friday, December 01, 2000 10:45 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [rehfans] Thud and Blunder revisited
>
>
> >
> > Howard and Burroughs may not be topping the best-sellers lists but their
> > works still sell decades after their deaths. Is the compressed writing
> > style going to outlast the fully-detailed pseudo-realism that Anderson
> > advocated?
>
> All things being equal, Tolkien was/is the ultimate over-detailer of fantasy
> fiction. This is why THE HOBBIT is by far and away the best-written, most
> entertaining book he produced. He didn't mire it down with
> opulently-detailed world-building.
>
> --Mike
>
