[The Saucepan Man]

A very interesting topic littlemanpoet, and one that certainly has me thinking, since I would certainly place LotR (together with The Hobbit) apart from other examples of fantasy literature in terms of its impact on me.

But I do have one question. You put the Question as follows:

The Question(s): Is mythic fantasy qualitatively different from other genres of literature, and if so, how? Another form of this question might be rendered: Why do I love LotR and find so few books that come anywhere near its standard?

And you answer this Question by positing that it is because LotR brings unity of meaning, in the sense of unifying the abstract and the concrete within the story.

Now it is a long time since I read any fantasy literature other than LotR. But it does seem to me that the examples of unity of meaning that you and Helen have given are commonly found in other stories within the fantasy genre. For example, there are often beings present who have a unity of spiritual and physical presence in the same way that you describe Tolkien's Elves. Similarly, fantasy stories will often contain beings who unify the animal and the human, much as you describe Hobbits. Fantasy novels will also often unify the spoken word and/or music with power, and almost all of them equate the concepts of light/good and darkness/evil.

So what is it about LotR that sets it apart from these other stories that use similar techniques (often, indeed, borrowed from Tolkien). Is there something more than just unity of meaning that lends LotR its mythical quality? Or is it simply that Tolkien uses this technique more effectively than any other authors in this genre? If so, how?

And what of the (no doubt) many people who have read LotR who do not find it making any impact on them, or any impact which is significantly greater than other works of literature that they have read?