Originality in fantasy Post-Tolkien

[One of the Nine]

I havn't personally read "The Sword of Shannara," but my brother is and he says that it is very much like "The Lord of the Rings." The only thing that is different is that Shannara has more books than LotR.
I can't think of any series that I have read with almost the exact plot line as LotR, but one thing I have noticed is that a lot of people like to knock LotR and some have even gone to the length of writing books that make fun of LotR. Not to stray from the original subject too much, but my dad owns a copy of "Bored of the Rings." I have half a mind to read it, but I'm still thinking...

[Imladris]

I don't know if this topic has done but I'm going to answer just because this particular issue is a sore spot with me.

Alright. Is it just me, or do most fantasy/sci-fi (emphasis on the fantasy though) books seem to copy Tolkien in some form or another?

I think that we are forgetting that Tolkien himself copied most shamelessly. He built most of his own mythology upon already existing Norse mythology (such as Beowulf). The whole scene with Bilbo stealing the cup is based on a scene in Beowulf. Even his languages were built on already existing languages.

I was just wondering what other people think about this; do books nowadays seem only to remake what's already been done by Tolkien? Or are they just doing what's been done for thousands of years? And also, what books have you read that are similar to Tolkien's work and what are entirely new or groundbreaking as far as the fantasy genre goes?

There are only a few storylines in this world that we could number them on one hand. What makes a story, however, is the way you tell that story. That's what Tolkien did. He told a common story line and he made it unique.

Sometimes, when I read these sort of threads (nothing against you Lumiel), it seems as if people view Tolkien as the king of all fantasy -- and that's simply not true. It's illogical to say that Tolkien is the accumulation of the fantasy genre and that anything written is a mere rehash and rip off. That would be denying the uniqueness and creativity of human nature.

Of course Tolkien was a major turning stone in the fantasy genre. So was Shakespeare. Shakespeare coined many words -- is it wrong to use them? Tolkien helped build the fantasy genre. He gave a new and better definition to elves. Why not use it? That would be like ignoring mechanical advances because they were built on someone else's shoulders.

Yes, there are some shameful copies. But there are only a few. The Chronicles of Prydain by Lloyd Alexander, The Chronicles of Narnia, George MacDonald (was he before or after Tolkien?) and many others are not rip offs -- yet they are fantasy.

[starkat]

I really disagree with you about the Chronicles of Narnia being a copy of Tolkien's work. Lewis and Tolkien for one were contemporaries. Not to mention that one is geared for an older audience while the other is geared for children. Why do you think the CoN are copies of Tolkien's work?

[Imladris]

You misread me:

The Chronicles of Prydain by Lloyd Alexander, The Chronicles of Narnia, George MacDonald (was he before or after Tolkien?) and many others are not rip offs -- yet they are fantasy.

I said they were not ripoffs.

Cheers,
Imladris

[starkat]

I'm sorry. I'll pay closer attention in the future. Thanks for correcting me.

[Eruwen]

I agree with Imladris on this topic, Lumiel, but I would like to elaborate a little on it.

It amazes me sometimes how much is in Tolkien's writings of Middle Earth. Whenever I sit down to read or write, even when it comes to reading the Bible, I find things that resemble Tolkien. I see character and place names that seem familiar and countless events that are parallel to those of Tolkien. I don't think it's necessarily the fact that writers want to copy Tolkien, it's just the fact that it's hard to write anything that doesn't resemble it in some way.

Tolkien's stories have so many plot lines within plot lines and so many events that happen, that it's hard to find an event that Tolkien did not write about. I have found that the Lord of the Rings itself is packed with just about every type of incident and character type possible. Take the movie "A Beautiful Mind", for instance. You could take Russell Crowe's character and say that the writers were copying Gollum by making the character Skitzo. That's one of the less defining examples there, but it's all I could come up with at the time.

My point is that yes, some writers for some reason are cynical and feel a need to copy and criticize Tolkien, but most do not. Many are just stuck in a rut, whether they know it or not, of not being able to write a story that does not veer towards Tolkien. Tolkien was a very good and broad writer. Sadly, he has made it hard on all of rising writers to be creative in our works. That's just how it is.

[Gothmog]

Originally Posted by Eruwen

It amazes me sometimes how much is in Tolkien's writings of Middle Earth. Whenever I sit down to read or write, even when it comes to reading the Bible, I find things that resemble Tolkien.

I doubt that the Bible is inspired by Tolkien

It's true that many of the fantasy stories written after LotR are similiar, but I thinks it's unevitable that authors get inspired by Tolkiens world. They're not copying (well, there are those who do) and I think they deserve full respect for they're work, which is unique for them. OK, they borrow some stuff from the master himself, mr JRRT, but almost every book ever written is similiar to something else.

To say that all fantasy-writers are copying Tolkien is like saying that every story copies from the great ancient play-writers that made masterpieces like The Oddysée (is it spelled like that in Eng. ?) or Oidiphus etc etc...

Just my opinion