Examples of Impact - The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum

Evisse the Blue · 02-18-2005, 12:17 AM

One example of this may be the number of fantasy writers that have decided to immitate Tolkien and write about imaginary worlds of their own, that showed a lot of resemblance to Middle Earth.
I'm sure others will come up with more valuable examples.

radagastly · 02-18-2005, 12:52 AM

The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings virtually invented Fantasy as a modern genre, seperate from Science Fiction (or Scientific Romance, as it was called back then.) There are, of course, other examples of Fantasy that pre-date the invention of Middle Earth, but none were literally set in their own world, but in some aspect of our own, whether it was the planet Mars or Venus of Edgar Rice Burroughs, which was reached from the earth, or Lilliput, reached by ship from England. These involve world-creation, but they are accessable from where we are (in theory, of course!)Also, nothing before it even attempted the level of detail that Tolkien put into his creation. That is, at least in part, what led it to be the fore-runner of the fantasy genre.

I'm afraid I can't give you any more answer than that. Many writers of Fantasy are aware of Tolkien's place in the creation of their genre, and I believe that is the main source of their citing him as such a profound influence. That and the detail with which he imbued his world. Many writers attempt (usually unsuccessfully) to duplicate that level of detail and realistic (or believable) millieu.

I'm sorry. I know you asked for specific examples, and I seem to have none that I can cite at the moment. If I think of any, I will return and post them.

Essex · 02-18-2005, 03:43 AM

I don't think I'm giving anything away here, but if you haven't read His Dark Materials you won't know what I'm going on about, so skip this post if you think you're going to read it at some stage

Quote:

Many writers of Fantasy are aware of Tolkien's place in the creation of their genre, and I believe that is the main source of their citing him as such a profound influence.

Yes, Radagastly, and even when some fantasy writers state that Tolkien's work has no real effect on them, they still nick his ideas to use in their books.

E.G. Phillip Pullman has been pretty negative (and I think patronsising) regarding his opinions on Lord of the Rings, but he doesn't mind stealing the end of LOTR (ie the Gray Havens) and using exactly the same idea in the end of his Trilogy.

Sorry, I've got a bee in my bonnet for any fantasy writer who slags LOTR off. Very childish, I know.......

Celebuial · 02-18-2005, 03:57 AM

I agree about the end of His Dark Materials and would like to point out that most books I've read after LOTR aeem to be copying Tolkien at some point. Some obvious examples are Stephen Donaldson's The Chronicles Of Thomas Covenant, and Rowling's Harry Potter, but even people like Stephen King (see The Dark Tower Books) have been known to 'copy'. Although some books are obvious copies with the Author adding nothing new of their own, others have created their own worlds and languages thanks to Tolkien's inspiration.

Essex · 02-18-2005, 05:34 AM

Yes, and Stephen King even goes so far to actually mention Frodo and Sam's trek across Mordor, and Cirith Ungol in his Dark Tower series.

Lalwendë · 02-18-2005, 06:12 AM

It's an interesting question as to exactly what an author has to do to either plagiarise or to emulate Tolkien, and more importantly, to avoid both of these pitfalls. If a book is epic in scale and tone then it seems to be classed as emulation, while if it includes so much as a dwarf or an elf then it is classed as derivative. Ultimately, all works of fantasy, even those which are only tangentially considered fantasy, will now be compared to Tolkien; his work has now become a frightening yardstick against which all other works are judged. I often wonder if more superb works are never written, as good writers are so afraid of being compared in this way?

What distinguishes the good from the bad? And more importantly, the unique from the derivative? And should writers even try to think in this way?

Thinking about what made Tolkien so unique, his linguistic ability was a central factor, but could anyone come close to his near obsessive attention to detail? Would anyone else possess his level of knowledge? If they did then it would also have to be coupled with another rare gift, that of storytelling, and possibly also with the willingness to devote a lifetime to one work. So, it is quite possibly a big mistake for a writer to even attempt to follow in Tolkien's footsteps.

What else separates good from bad? Books which attempt to deal with 'big ideas' rather than, or at least alongside, adventure. This seems to be behind the success of Philip Pullman. Writing for a specific audience has enabled JK Rowling to create something sufficiently original to have spawned its own industry and fan base. And bypassing it all has been Terry Pratchett who has instead gone for humour, underneath which any possible links can be explained as parody - and I hasten to add, I don't think this is wrong in the slightest!

But all of the above have been accused of copying Tolkien, despite their originality. Is it inevitable that any new fantasy or epic works will be compared to Tolkien? The recent Jonathan Strange and Mr Norrell was compared to Tolkien but it was only the size of the book which bore any real similarity. Writers were producing mythic, epic and fantasy works before Tolkien, but they are not all influences on him, so why must every work which comes after necessarily be classed as derivative? Are they really derivative? I'm asking this as someone who likes writing and is often afraid of the Tolkien yardstick!

narfforc · 02-18-2005, 06:54 AM

Without going too deep into this, I think that some of the early writers such as Lord Dunsany, The Brothers Grimm and later Lewis Carrol and Robert E Howard gave an otherworld feeling to their works. The stories of Edger Rice Burroughs(John Carter of Mars series) gave you the feeling that you were off this world. Then you have H.G.Wells and Jules Verne, these stories in their day were of the fantastic, out of this world, the idea that man could go beyond his natural boundaries. What Tolkien did was instead of looking at another writers format or blueprint, he re-invented one that was already there. He took us back to the tradition of the ancient bards, to Beowulf, to The Eddas and The Volsunga Saga, back to The Tuatha de Danaan and Tir-na-nog, to lands of wizards and druids. Tolkien brought us back home to our world, that world drifts at the edge of our memory. We recognize all the things our ancestors held dear, and the things they feared, we see a hope that mankind can be so much more. In the days before Video, Television and Radio, people talked to each other, they told stories, man is a communicator. Our ancient kin told these stories of virtue and vice, inventing Gods, Warriors and Demons to play their parts, these are what we now call Mythology, do you recognize the format. What Tolkien has done in fact is go full circle. I now have rows of books re-telling stories of Arthur, of Cu Chulainn and the heroes of yesteryear. What some of the weak copyists have failed to understand is, it isnt how long and boring you make a series of watered down myth or populating your world with copied (Middle-Earth) peoples that matters, it is how believable it is.

P.S When people are writing fantasy stories, they are not all copying Tolkien, they are doing what we a species has always done, look beyond.......................

Lalwendë · 02-18-2005, 12:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by narfforc

Tolkien brought us back home to our world, that world drifts at the edge of our memory. We recognize all the things our ancestors held dear, and the things they feared, we see a hope that mankind can be so much more.

I think this sums up just why Tolkien's writing does have such a grip on us. It is about a whole other world, yes, but it is one we can recognise. Not only did Tolkien make use of archetypal figures, but he also drew on what he knew himself. He had experienced grief, longing and war, so he writes about these as one who knows what they are like. He also included what he loved, the countryside, poetry and even his ale and tobacco. And then he simply allowed his imagination to conjour up new ideas as he worked. There was little plan, he didn't keep to his deadline (I would say he didn't need to, he already had a job), and he had no market in mind. All this added up to making LotR what it is.

What I'm trying to say is that Tolkien's work is unique. It has had a huge influence, but it is indeed hard to find those concrete examples. There are the works which copy him, and those which deliberately draw on his own influences, we can easily spot those, but what of the rest? I think that his influence is so large, one of the greatest impacts it has had is to make writers do something different, so I'm not that surprised that its hard to find concrete examples.

02-18-2005, 12:17 AM	#1
Evisse the Blue Brightness of a Blade Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: wherever I may roam Posts: 2,685	One example of this may be the number of fantasy writers that have decided to immitate Tolkien and write about imaginary worlds of their own, that showed a lot of resemblance to Middle Earth. I'm sure others will come up with more valuable examples. __________________ And no one was ill, and everyone was pleased, except those who had to mow the grass.

02-18-2005, 12:52 AM	#2
radagastly Shade of Carn Dûm Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Washington, D. C., USA Posts: 299	The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings virtually invented Fantasy as a modern genre, seperate from Science Fiction (or Scientific Romance, as it was called back then.) There are, of course, other examples of Fantasy that pre-date the invention of Middle Earth, but none were literally set in their own world, but in some aspect of our own, whether it was the planet Mars or Venus of Edgar Rice Burroughs, which was reached from the earth, or Lilliput, reached by ship from England. These involve world-creation, but they are accessable from where we are (in theory, of course!)Also, nothing before it even attempted the level of detail that Tolkien put into his creation. That is, at least in part, what led it to be the fore-runner of the fantasy genre. I'm afraid I can't give you any more answer than that. Many writers of Fantasy are aware of Tolkien's place in the creation of their genre, and I believe that is the main source of their citing him as such a profound influence. That and the detail with which he imbued his world. Many writers attempt (usually unsuccessfully) to duplicate that level of detail and realistic (or believable) millieu. I'm sorry. I know you asked for specific examples, and I seem to have none that I can cite at the moment. If I think of any, I will return and post them. __________________ But all the while I sit and think of times there were before, I listen for returning feet and voices at the door.

02-18-2005, 03:57 AM	#4
Celebuial Wight Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Cardiff during term time/Leicester in the holl's Posts: 129	I agree about the end of His Dark Materials and would like to point out that most books I've read after LOTR aeem to be copying Tolkien at some point. Some obvious examples are Stephen Donaldson's The Chronicles Of Thomas Covenant, and Rowling's Harry Potter, but even people like Stephen King (see The Dark Tower Books) have been known to 'copy'. Although some books are obvious copies with the Author adding nothing new of their own, others have created their own worlds and languages thanks to Tolkien's inspiration. __________________ Ú cilith ‘war. Ú men ‘war. Boe min mebi. Boe min bango.

02-18-2005, 06:12 AM	#6
Lalwendë A Mere Boggart Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: under the bed Posts: 4,737	It's an interesting question as to exactly what an author has to do to either plagiarise or to emulate Tolkien, and more importantly, to avoid both of these pitfalls. If a book is epic in scale and tone then it seems to be classed as emulation, while if it includes so much as a dwarf or an elf then it is classed as derivative. Ultimately, all works of fantasy, even those which are only tangentially considered fantasy, will now be compared to Tolkien; his work has now become a frightening yardstick against which all other works are judged. I often wonder if more superb works are never written, as good writers are so afraid of being compared in this way? What distinguishes the good from the bad? And more importantly, the unique from the derivative? And should writers even try to think in this way? Thinking about what made Tolkien so unique, his linguistic ability was a central factor, but could anyone come close to his near obsessive attention to detail? Would anyone else possess his level of knowledge? If they did then it would also have to be coupled with another rare gift, that of storytelling, and possibly also with the willingness to devote a lifetime to one work. So, it is quite possibly a big mistake for a writer to even attempt to follow in Tolkien's footsteps. What else separates good from bad? Books which attempt to deal with 'big ideas' rather than, or at least alongside, adventure. This seems to be behind the success of Philip Pullman. Writing for a specific audience has enabled JK Rowling to create something sufficiently original to have spawned its own industry and fan base. And bypassing it all has been Terry Pratchett who has instead gone for humour, underneath which any possible links can be explained as parody - and I hasten to add, I don't think this is wrong in the slightest! But all of the above have been accused of copying Tolkien, despite their originality. Is it inevitable that any new fantasy or epic works will be compared to Tolkien? The recent Jonathan Strange and Mr Norrell was compared to Tolkien but it was only the size of the book which bore any real similarity. Writers were producing mythic, epic and fantasy works before Tolkien, but they are not all influences on him, so why must every work which comes after necessarily be classed as derivative? Are they really derivative? I'm asking this as someone who likes writing and is often afraid of the Tolkien yardstick! __________________ Gordon's alive!

02-18-2005, 06:54 AM	#7
narfforc Ghost Prince of Cardolan Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Muddy-earth Posts: 1,297	Without going too deep into this, I think that some of the early writers such as Lord Dunsany, The Brothers Grimm and later Lewis Carrol and Robert E Howard gave an otherworld feeling to their works. The stories of Edger Rice Burroughs(John Carter of Mars series) gave you the feeling that you were off this world. Then you have H.G.Wells and Jules Verne, these stories in their day were of the fantastic, out of this world, the idea that man could go beyond his natural boundaries. What Tolkien did was instead of looking at another writers format or blueprint, he re-invented one that was already there. He took us back to the tradition of the ancient bards, to Beowulf, to The Eddas and The Volsunga Saga, back to The Tuatha de Danaan and Tir-na-nog, to lands of wizards and druids. Tolkien brought us back home to our world, that world drifts at the edge of our memory. We recognize all the things our ancestors held dear, and the things they feared, we see a hope that mankind can be so much more. In the days before Video, Television and Radio, people talked to each other, they told stories, man is a communicator. Our ancient kin told these stories of virtue and vice, inventing Gods, Warriors and Demons to play their parts, these are what we now call Mythology, do you recognize the format. What Tolkien has done in fact is go full circle. I now have rows of books re-telling stories of Arthur, of Cu Chulainn and the heroes of yesteryear. What some of the weak copyists have failed to understand is, it isnt how long and boring you make a series of watered down myth or populating your world with copied (Middle-Earth) peoples that matters, it is how believable it is. P.S When people are writing fantasy stories, they are not all copying Tolkien, they are doing what we a species has always done, look beyond....................... Last edited by narfforc; 02-18-2005 at 06:58 AM.

02-18-2005, 05:34 AM	#5
Essex Ghost Prince of Cardolan Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Essex, England Posts: 886	Yes, and Stephen King even goes so far to actually mention Frodo and Sam's trek across Mordor, and Cirith Ungol in his Dark Tower series.