[ainur]

Hey, Magician!

You've cited a number of points about Tolkien's work which Lyta Underhill has eloquently responded to above. I have little to add, except on the point of Tolkien's "Black and White" view of the world (or universe.) One need not agree with an artist's philosophy or theology (in fact, I do not) to appreciate his skill in expressing it. Even Hitler was a dynamic and persuasive speaker.

On this issue, many people make the mistake of expecting an artist to approach his work in a like manner to his contemporaries. From this viewpoint, Tolkien should "read like" Joyce or Faulkner or at least Hemingway. He does not. Deliberately so. His approach to story-telling has more in common with Dickens or Hugo or Tolstoy, even Robert Louis Stevenson. I believe one should read Tolkien the way one reads these nineteenth century authors, and appreciate what he has added to their genre, rather than expect of him what one expects of his twentieth century contemporaries. It is neither better nor worse. It's just different and requires a different critical approach.

Are there plot-holes? Yes. The Great Eagle Mystery that Lyta cited is one. There are others. I will leave you to find them yourself. The point is that while the plot is consistent with Tolkiens philosophy, I don't believe it is ultimately his point in telling this story. His main interest, it seems to me, was in ennui, in the world of Middle Earth, its peoples, its characters, its languages and history and landscape (right down to the buttons on Bilbo Baggins waistcoat or the contents of his larder.) These are the things, at least for me, that I recall within me when I think of 'Lord of the Rings.' It may be fun to debate why the Eagles are Tolkien's perennial deus ex machina, or how Gollum got out of Moria, or why Balrogs only die on mountainsides, (it is fun!) but these things do not take away from what Tolkien himself set out to do with this work, and whether or not he succeeded. His intent may not be consistent with your expectations, but that is ultimately your issue, not his. Perhaps you're just not a fan? That's okay. I know only one person in my life that has even read Tolkien, and he reads everything.

Did Tolkien succeed with his intent? The short answer, without example to prove it, is yes. I think so. Try re-reading with this in mind, and you might come to the same conclusion. (and you might not! That's okay. At least you'll know you gave it a fair chance.)