New Republic Article

[Hama]

He also seems to have a problem with everyone voting LOTR as the best book of the 20th century again and again.

Well, I'd hesitate to call it the best book of the 20th century - I haven't read enough books to say that and I probably never will, but as an expression of popularity it can't be denied.

It's a book that attracts different sorts of people, and, this is key, keeps them returning to it again and again. It's the most re-readable book I've ever read.

The article author seems to be a bit of a literary snob... the gap between we the general public and him is that we see a book in terms of whether it is a good read, while he is looking for literary merit: well, that's his choice. I believe that popularity is a form of literary merit, especially when that popularity keeps the book going years after its creation: he mentions Danielle Steele, but who will remember her in 50 years' time? (apologies if I am out of line here, as I've never read her).

"Goodness me, no women! Can't have that!". I can't help but disagree here. In many ways, the portrait of Eowyn is one of the most sophisticated in the book she has more dimensions than a number of the chief male characters.

Plus he says that postmen and tobacco don't appear in LOTR, which is, alas, wrong. Check your facts dude.