The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum - View Single Post - is Silmarillion better than Lord of the rings?

The Squatter of Amon Rûdh · 02-16-2003, 12:07 PM

The Silmarillion and The Lord of the Rings are very different books. The Lord of the Rings was written as a novel to fulfil the inevitable demand for a sequel to The Hobbit, and Tolkien used it to tie in Bilbo Baggins' adventure with the enormous sweeping vistas of his mythology. The Silmarillion, on the other hand, is a posthumous collation of his life's work, representing a not inconsiderable task on the part of its editors. I do not believe that such works can be adequately compared, especially since The Silmarillion did not have the benefits of its author's final polish.

I like the works equally, for completely differing reasons. The Silmarillion is an enormous literary achievement, representing sixty years of loving development, writing, re-writing and reconsideration. Without it there would be no Lord of the Rings as we know it, and its majestic language and epic style have a grandeur not normally seen in modern fiction.

The Lord of the Rings on the other hand is a brilliantly conceived novel that set the standard for a whole genre (one which has not been equalled to my mind). Look at the standard stock races of fantastic fiction and you will see J.R.R. Tolkien's signature, beneath those of the medieval saga poets he so admired. Even Warhammer 40,000, set 38,000 years in the future has Orcs, Dwarves, Men and Eldar looking much as though they had stepped from Tolkien's work for a brief holiday. It's a lovingly crafted story, in which new depths are found at every reading, and which covers almost every aspect of human experience. In adopting a more familiar approach in The Lord of the Rings Tolkien made the characters more accessible and human, which isn't to say that the characters in The Silmarillion are inaccessible, but that it can take more time and effort to get to know them properly.

Each book, then, has its advantages and disadvantages, but both testify to a prodigious talent, an astonishing erudition and a poetic, romantic soul. I would not want to choose between them, even if I could.

02-16-2003, 12:07 PM	#15
The Squatter of Amon Rûdh Spectre of Decay Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Bar-en-Danwedh Posts: 2,178	The Silmarillion and The Lord of the Rings are very different books. The Lord of the Rings was written as a novel to fulfil the inevitable demand for a sequel to The Hobbit, and Tolkien used it to tie in Bilbo Baggins' adventure with the enormous sweeping vistas of his mythology. The Silmarillion, on the other hand, is a posthumous collation of his life's work, representing a not inconsiderable task on the part of its editors. I do not believe that such works can be adequately compared, especially since The Silmarillion did not have the benefits of its author's final polish. I like the works equally, for completely differing reasons. The Silmarillion is an enormous literary achievement, representing sixty years of loving development, writing, re-writing and reconsideration. Without it there would be no Lord of the Rings as we know it, and its majestic language and epic style have a grandeur not normally seen in modern fiction. The Lord of the Rings on the other hand is a brilliantly conceived novel that set the standard for a whole genre (one which has not been equalled to my mind). Look at the standard stock races of fantastic fiction and you will see J.R.R. Tolkien's signature, beneath those of the medieval saga poets he so admired. Even Warhammer 40,000, set 38,000 years in the future has Orcs, Dwarves, Men and Eldar looking much as though they had stepped from Tolkien's work for a brief holiday. It's a lovingly crafted story, in which new depths are found at every reading, and which covers almost every aspect of human experience. In adopting a more familiar approach in The Lord of the Rings Tolkien made the characters more accessible and human, which isn't to say that the characters in The Silmarillion are inaccessible, but that it can take more time and effort to get to know them properly. Each book, then, has its advantages and disadvantages, but both testify to a prodigious talent, an astonishing erudition and a poetic, romantic soul. I would not want to choose between them, even if I could. __________________ Man kenuva métim' andúne?