[Boromir88]

I was kind of like Fea and morm combined, and this is probably why I only read the Sil completely through once.

It's really a story I didn't enjoy, or not in the way that I enjoy Lord of the Ring. I think this is where the problem occurs of reading the Sil.

As morm says it feels incohesive. Yes, there's this timeline of events, but it's not really one set storyline like there is in LOTR. We also have to remember the manner in which The Sil was put together. As CT talks about, doing so was a huge and difficult task, as trying to fit together the best and most cohesive story as was possible. The Sil was more or less a collection of stories that took place over a long period of time. He wanted to put together the Sil into a rough timeline creating a clear story. But, it doesn't work to the same effect LOTR did, because it's a collection of mini stories.

I didn't get the same feel as I do when reading LOTR. LOTR there is a lot of progression as this is a story spanning a little over a year about Frodo's journey with the Ring and Aragorn's journey of becoming a King. Now there is some background and historical information, but it felt much more like a story and it was put together. This was easy to do, and to show developement and progress of the characters, because it focused around one story in a rather small amount of time.

With The Silmarillion, it is a history over several thousand years, so it feels choppy, I didn't feel as connected to the characters. I think Folwren referring to it as a history book fits in quite right. As The Sil is a group of stories spanning over a vast period of time...to do to The Sil what Tolkien did to LOTR would be virtually impossible.

Also as Fea put it, it's just so many facts and information to digest. To digest all that info I mean my mind would just simply explode. So, I treat The Sil more as something to refer to, if I'm looking for an argument to discuss/debate, rather than a story to sit down and read like LOTR.