J.R.R Tolkien vs. George R.R. Martin

[laggyteabag]

I have always been a lot more invested in A Song of Ice and Fire than I have been with The Lord of the Rings. Same is true for the series/ movies too.

 

[Ryan Hughes]

The two must now fight to the death deep within the caverns of Moria, uninterrupted, to decide who is the better author. So, escapist, who will claim the crown (or throne) of fantasy literature?

Well, can I point out that Tolkien survived the trenches of WWI, but was so terribly traumatized that he suffered PTSD for the rest of his life? While he supported WWII on the home front, he was still very skeptical of the war itself, which is not surprising after seeing what he saw during "The Great War." In the end, I really cannot see Tolkien wanting to fight at all, he would much rather smoke a pipe and drink a round with Martin than fight him to the death, as he inevitably wished for human conflict to vanish in favor of fighting against what he considered the real enemy.

That being said there is no question. Tolkien is the better artist by far, and Martin is nothing but a pale shadow of his brilliance, combining Tolkien's fantasy -rather clumsily- with classical Chinese literature, like Romance of the Three Kingdoms and Water Margin (sometimes known as Suikoden or All Men are Brothers.) Tolkien's prose is vastly superior, as is his own imagination, and in every aspect of writing that I can think of, Tolkien is the better artist. Also, you really do not get to survive WWI without being somewhat tough, despite how Tolkien's moral narrative in LotR may attempt to undermine how we commonly see "war heroes" and such. So yeah, Tolkien would win instantly.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Interestingly, IIRC, Tolkien didn't invent the pointy ears and Scottish accents, but they got tacked onto Tolkien style elves and dwarfs anyway.

Been a while since I've read any Tolkien so I genuinely can't remember if he ever mentions elves having pointy ears.The scottish accents though did that just come from the LOTR movies or were they being used before then I wonder?

I think he mentioned the shape of the ears as being a bit odd, but not actually pointed.

The accents have been around for ages, no idea when and who that started.

 

[MetalDooley]

I think he mentioned the shape of the ears as being a bit odd, but not actually pointed.

The accents have been around for ages, no idea when and who that started.

Possibly to do with the fact that Scottish people are stereotyped for drinking,fighting and being a bit miserly which kinda fits the dwarven persona so I'd imagine it was started by an English person

 

[MetalDooley]

In the end, I really cannot see Tolkien wanting to fight at all, he would much rather smoke a pipe and drink a round with Martin than fight him to the death,

Martin was a conscientious objector during Vietnam so chances are he wouldn't want to fight either.Looks like it's going to be a pretty dull scrap

 

[Grape_Nuts]

Tolkien wins. No contest. Not even close.

 

[Thaluikhain]

I think he mentioned the shape of the ears as being a bit odd, but not actually pointed.

The accents have been around for ages, no idea when and who that started.

Possibly to do with the fact that Scottish people are stereotyped for drinking,fighting and being a bit miserly which kinda fits the dwarven persona so I'd imagine it was started by an English person

Eh, Tolkien originally had them as Semitic, but that's been dropped...probably for the best.

OTOH, could also describe Australian bogans, which would have been...interesting.

In the end, I really cannot see Tolkien wanting to fight at all, he would much rather smoke a pipe and drink a round with Martin than fight him to the death, as he inevitably wished for human conflict to vanish in favor of fighting against what he considered the real enemy.

Martin comes from a working class background, doesn't he? I'd imagine Tolkien would rather smoke a pipe and drink, maybe, but perhaps by himself...

 

[Fox12]

In the end, I really cannot see Tolkien wanting to fight at all, he would much rather smoke a pipe and drink a round with Martin than fight him to the death,

Martin was a conscientious objector during Vietnam so chances are he wouldn't want to fight either.Looks like it's going to be a pretty dull scrap

So it devolves into a drinking contest, perhaps? Bring out the barrels of beer!

 

[beastro]

Tolkien no contest.

This sums up my opinion of Martin:

I think the thing with game of thrones is that the tv series are very good, in comparison to other tv series, while the books are only moderately good in comparison to other books of this genre, or any genre.

Where Martin has gotten it right with the books is with the pacing and change of scenes, the plot is sufficiently complex that you will read till midnight about the slave cities for the odd chance you will find out the next instalment will let you find out what is happening on the wall before you go to bed. Then, just as you are getting wise to his tricks, he introduces a tenth, or an eleventh thread and sucks you into this narrative so that by the time you are sick of this new element its a relief to head back to the slave cities. Also the suspended plot elements - you know the dragons are going to kick ass at some point, but the possibility is flagged multiple books before the reality, similarly with Bran and the northern succession.

Some people find the pace and structure annoying, perhaps most readers - but lets not loose sight of the fact that the structure is selling a lot of books, which after all is the point of the exercise.

To me that summarises Martin, a superior plot and structure smith, a master of the hook, but a mediocre to average practitioner of all other aspects of narrative.

In short, you can tell his real medium is TV,

 

[Gethsemani_v1legacy]

Tolkien no contest.

This sums up my opinion of Martin:

-snipped description-

In short, you can tell his real medium is TV,

I can actually totally agree with that. I've been trying to figure out for a long time why I find ASOFAI so mediocre yet kept reading on through all five books. That's a pretty good explanation.

 

[Whateveralot]

A joke thread? Is that really a thing?

Does that mean there are joke conversations and heck, joke physical interactions? And what does this mean for the content of this thread? Doesn't that invalidate the entire OP and can this thread now be locked?

Or is the "joke" that people who take this serious can now be joked upon for taking it serious? Isn't Tolkien VS. Martin a very valid and good issue of open and honest debate about literature and cinema?

I don't understand.

 

[Silvanus]

I vote for Martin (not that votes would mean much in a Trial-by-Combat like this).

LOTR is a great story, but isn't terribly engaging to read. It boils down to a fairly straightforward tale of good versus evil, and he frequently feels the need to devote several pages to the lyrics of irrelevant elf-songs or something similar.

ASOIAF, on the other hand, is far from straightforward. There is wide and genuine disagreement over who constitutes a hero, a villain, a redeemed villain, a victim, etc-- almost every character is grey. The same cannot truly be said about the characters in LOTR (not even Gandalf the Grey). It's unclear where the story will lead; it's unclear who will survive. That makes for a more engaging story, as far as I'm concerned.

Plus, while nobody can doubt Tolkein's incredible influence, he is frequently cited as having defined the fantasy setting, or invented the building-blocks that fantasy writers work with. That isn't really true. Elves, Dwarfs, wizards, trolls, goblins/Orcs... even Middle Earth is taken from Norse Mythology, and the concept of a ring that drives others to covet it and corrupts its holder is from the Ring of the Nibelungen. He popularised these ideas, modernised them, but can we truly give him all the credit for that? Doesn't it partially lie in how he was received; in the public, and who they chose to read and remember? The influential nature of his work is not inherent in the art itself, and we should judge the books on their own merit, not appeal to what came after.

 

[Albino Boo]

Plus, while nobody can doubt Tolkein's incredible influence, he is frequently cited as having defined the fantasy setting, or invented the building-blocks that fantasy writers work with. That isn't really true. Elves, Dwarfs, wizards, trolls, goblins/Orcs... even Middle Earth is taken from Norse Mythology, and the concept of a ring that drives others to covet it and corrupts its holder is from the Ring of the Nibelungen. He popularised these ideas, modernised them, but can we truly give him all the credit for that? Doesn't it partially lie in how he was received; in the public, and who they chose to read and remember? The influential nature of his work is not inherent in the art itself, and we should judge the books on their own merit, not appeal to what came after.

He didn't popularise northern european mythology. Tolkien introduced it to the baby boomers and as with everything generation, they thought they were the special ones who were first to discover it. Beowulf was a standard school text throughout the english speaking world until the mid 20th century and like the Iliad and the Odyssey, it was part of having a classical education. Wagner completed his opera cycle Der Ring des Nibelungen in 1874 and played to packed house for the next 40 years, when German cultural popularity plummeted on the world scene. It wasn't until the 70s that Wagner became acceptable again with new productions set in modern dress and therefore scrubbed clean nazi iconography and with a distinctly left wing reading of the text.

 

[Silvanus]

He didn't popularise northern european mythology. Tolkien introduced it to the baby boomers and as with everything generation, they thought they were the special ones who were first to discover it. Beowulf was a standard school text throughout the english speaking world until the mid 20th century and like the Iliad and the Odyssey, it was part of having a classical education. Wagner completed his opera cycle Der Ring des Nibelungen in 1874 and played to packed house for the next 40 years, when German cultural popularity plummeted on the world scene. It wasn't until the 70s that Wagner became acceptable again with new productions set in modern dress and therefore scrubbed clean nazi iconography and with a distinctly left wing reading of the text.

On the whole, I agree. I would suggest that Tolkein popularised it more than Wagner ever would have, and that his work is a lot further reaching than Beowulf, but your point remains-- that we both agree on-- that the ideas, the genre, the settings and themes were there before him.

 

[Ramzal]

I find that enjoying both equally and for different reasons is a better stance.

 

[K12]

When it comes to readability "A song of ice and fire" beats "the lord of the rings" hands down, partly due to expectations (as a sequel to the Hobbit the buggering about at the beginning would be easier to enjoy because you aren't just waiting for the main fight to get going) and partly because it was written 60 years ago.

I think the Lord of the Rings has suffered a lot from being a trend setter. The culture of the elves and dwarves isn't really that interesting to modern readers because everybody else copied it. It feels like the themes and mood are very "been there done that" when at the time it was basically unique.

I usually recommend the movies over the books with Lord of the Rings because it is so much better paced and cuts out a lot of the waffling that might put people off (as well as all the bloody songs!). I'd treat the books as a extension of the film rather than the "true version".

Whereas I think Game of Thrones and ASOIAF are great companions to each other. I slightly prefer the books but the TV series has made many changes that I really like. It'll be interesting to see how well it ages and if every epic fantasy for the next fifty years will have incest and the honour/power dichotomy as major themes.

 

[Aerduin]

The ghost of JRR appears in a dream to Steven Erikson, telling him to take up the mantle and fulfill his destiny.

GRR whimpers from behind the sofa.

 

[Little Woodsman]

Tolkien:"Are you sure you want to do this old spot?"

Martin:"Actually I'm sure I don't want to do this, but the fans are clamoring for it.

Tolkien: "Ah yes. The fans, the fans. {looks critically at Martin for a moment} Well if we must then I suppose we'd best get on with it."

{Tolkien suddenly charges forward. Surprised, Martin tries to take a step back, only to realize that Tolkien had been distracting him by talking while C. S. Lewis stealthily got behind him on hands and knees. Martin trips, falling backwards over Lewis.}

Martin: "Hey, no fair!"

Lewis: "Love and war old chap! Anything goe...."

{Lewis is interrupted as Issac Asimov charges in to the fray, knocking the others over with his tremendous bulk.}

Tolkien: "Now see here! This fray is for fantasy authors!"

Asimov: "Wasn't your friend just saying 'Anything goes'?"

Martin: "Ha ha! Looks like things are evenin..."

{Martin is suddenly drowned out as Anne McCaffrey joins the battle, using a megaphone to amplify her already prodigious voice to stunning levels.}

{McCaffrey in turn is bowled over by L. Sprague DeCamp, who is wearing a bearskin kilt, swinging a broadsword and trying to control a very agitated warhorse.}

{DeCamp is pulled from his warhorse by a whip-wielding Vonda McIntyre.}

{Battle continues with more and more fantasy/sci-fi authors joining in a grand melee until the dust settles and the only one left standing is the Bionic Harlan Ellison, who is awarded a Mickey Mouse Teapot for his epic victory}

(Many thanks to whoever it was that wrote Invasion of the Snody Batchers for Starlog magazine all those decades ago.)

 

[Little Woodsman]

OH, and somehow I read the title as George Takei vs George R R Martin.

See, now I have to do it....
---------

{Martin stands on the field in his GoT battle gear. Takei shimmers in to existence with the standard transporter effect light-show, wearing his Classic Trek uniform. Martin raises his sword. Grinning, Takei pulls out a phaser.}

Martin: "Now wait a minute..."

{Takei does not wait but immediately shoots Martin. Martin collapses giggling hysterically. Takei turns and addresses the audience.}

Takei: "Don't worry fans, this is a specially modified phaser that is stuck permanently on the 'tickle' setting."

{Martin tries to get up still laughing a little. Takei shoots him again with the same results as the first time.}

Takei: {still grinning} I just hope Brad doesn't get angry with me for spending so much time tickling another man!"

 

[Drizzitdude]

Tolkien is the father of pretty much all modern fantasy, the guy went into so much work to create a living world with all these mythological creatures ripped from various different mythologies and cultures and pretty much created fantasy as we know it today. Elves being tall, slender warriors who are ageless and kick ass with bows? Tolkien made that a thing. Dwarves being short but stout berserkers who are the greatest known smiths in the universe? Tolkien made that a thing. Granted, the elf thing was done in norse mythology beforehand (same with the dwarves being badass smiths bit) but Tolkien is the one that formed it into the fantasy genre. Nearly every fantasy trope we consider mainstay today was made a thing by Tolkien. Orcs? He invented them, and now you see them everywhere. Many of us cannot argue that Dungeons and Dragons made a huge impact on the fantasy genre, but most of their creatures and tropes were taken from Tolkien (who may I add, did it 40 years beforehand) and put into their own lore. Even when it comes to something as simple as a Rangers class identity (a class equally skilled with both melee and ranged weaponry, where as Rangers in other fantasy sources are usually limited to bows). The point I am making here is, Tolkien made a huge impact on the fantasy genre, he praxtically invented fantasy as we know it today.

What has Martin done? Made a series of books about political intrigue in a fantasy setting. Sure, it is well written, sure there are plenty of silly plot twists and betrayals to keep it interesting. But ten years from now, I won't be able to remember a quarter of the characters in Game of thrones, but I will still be able to list off all the major players in the war for the ring and every event that happened. Don't get me wrong, I enjoy the show, I have read the first couple of books but it just isn't memorable to me. It isn't magical, it isn't something I look forward to. It is just there. I think it is something that will easily pass from peoples memory, and I actually find it slightly offensive to even try to compare someone who practically invented the fantasy genre, to someone who just wrote in it.

Tl'dr: I vote Tolkien