What fantasy book have you read that gave you the same 'feel' LotR?

[McCaber]

I know it's not fantasy at all, but I get a lot of analogous vibes from Frank Herbert's Dune. At least from the first four volumes of that series.

[Snowdog]

As far as engrossing me into the world that is made, the only other fantasy book series to ever do that to me other than Tolkien was Glen Cook's Black Company series. The writing is nothing like each other, for one is smooth and eloquent, while the other is rough and direct. But I got involved in the story and the characters of botk much to the same degree..

[Aganzir]

Originally Posted by Anguirel

Ah the Orkney Faction, the only clan who can compare with the sons of Feanor; and I've always been in love with Morgause

When I first read The Once & Future King earlier this year, I couldn't get over how much they reminded me of clan Fëanor.

I agree with Morth though; it does have a similar feel to LOTR.

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

I am currently reading The Fionavar Tapestry by Guy Gavriel Kay, and seconding Lommy (who, as it happens, recommended the book to me), I must say for myself that if there was ever an author who gave the feel at least a bit similar to Tolkien, it is Guy Gavriel Kay in The Fionavar Tapestry (I have read other book by him before, but it was very different, most of his other books are the sort of "history-inspired fantasy"). But the Fionavar Tapestry is unbelievably similar, something between Silmarillion and LotR. I guess it has a lot to do with the fact that GGK helped Christopher Tolkien with the revisions of the original Sil. But I really, really recommend it - after just reading the first volume. It has the sort of "old fantasy world" with good vs. evil, but not just like some random Dungeons and Dragons-style thing, but really, very much like LotR/Sil. And there are the themes and feelings which one generally associates with LotR and Sil, too. Besides, it is incredibly epic, almost over the top, but that makes it only good. I am glad I overcame my disbelief when I heard the plot summary - don't trust first impression. It is really worth reading it all. And once you are halfway through, you can't get away from it anymore.

And let me underline once again. I have never, ever encountered anything that touches Tolkien in the same way. Everything else is either too superficial (all the general Dungeons and Dragons stuff, or even things like Raymond E. Feist), too 'grimly realistic' (Martin), too naive (Eragon), or simply lacks the depth.

Not to say it doesn't have flaws, and there is obviously still something it lacks in regards to Tolkien, but it gets as close as one can. The semi-naive approach (since it was apparently GGK's first book) at times is counterweighted by the "deep moments" - which come mostly later in the book, but... they totally make up for it.

[Alcidas]

I like George R.R. Martin's work very much. In many ways, I think his world is deeper than Tolkien's. But it does not quite give me the same feeling as Tolkien...

[Galadriel]

Originally Posted by Alcidas

I like George R.R. Martin's work very much. In many ways, I think his world is deeper than Tolkien's. But it does not quite give me the same feeling as Tolkien...

I'm curious to know what the difference in feeling was.

[Mithadan]

Martin's work is more grey and grimy. Unlike Tolkien, there is little by way of clear cut right and wrong or good and bad.

[Alcidas]

Originally Posted by Galadriel

I'm curious to know what the difference in feeling was.

It is difficult to put into words, but I will give it a go.

Tolkien's writing has a lyrical beauty of sorts that Martin just cannot match. I think he has drawn so much from our common literary heritage that it is almost impossible to read any of his works without feeling the resonances with previous works of literature, like Tennyson's 'horns of Elfland gently blowing'. I am not saying that he would have consciously created such resonances, as some modern authors may deliberately seek to do, but that, given his background, it would have probably come naturally to him, in the same way that one cannot read the poetry of Keats without at least subconsciously being reminded of the imagery of Shakespeare.

Martin's writing is different, and his is a modern novel written for a modern, 21st century reader. I think it is a great deal more realistic with a better sense of time and distance. The lack of a clear-cut distinction between Good and Evil characters and the literary device of telling the story from different points of view really makes for a good read, but, as I said, it does not have the same 'feel' as Tolkien.

I hope this makes some sense.