[DaughterofVana]

My love for the books isn't so whistful as that of everyone else (IE, no "fond memories from childhood," etc... I was reading myself to sleep when I was younger, rather than my parents taking me to Middle Earth at night!). I love LOTR because I love a good book, and that's really as deep as it goes. I started writing my own stories at thirteen because I couldn't find any books that rivaled the stories I was making up with my barbies... and, deciding thirteen was too old for barbies, I started typing them down instead. Six years later I'm glad I didn't find out about Tolkien (and Lewis) sooner; I don't think I would have ever written as many books and short-stories as I did.

Though I admire Tolkien (well, struck dumb by him, actually) at his ability to flesh out a world with a history for his characters, it bares noting that he keeps all the "deep stuff" for the appendicies--the history adds flavor to the story, and not vice versa. The histories, really, are grace notes in the symphony, and should be read as such--at least the first time around. [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img] Only later does one go back and realize that the grace notes are a tune to themselves. This is really what seperates him from other fantasy writers, who clumsily write on such a grand scale (ironically, perhaps trying for what Tolkien attained gracefully) that it's hard to keep a story going with all the background. It's all well and good if the conquests of the protagonist's father's half-brother was important to character development, but sometimes it's much too much and becomes almost painful to wade through. Can't think of any names right now, but I'm sure someone out there knows what I'm talking about.

-'Vana