Login | Register
 
Message Board | Latest Posts | Your Recent Posts | Rules

Thread: who is the modern day tolkien

Is this discussion interesting? Share it on Twitter!

Bottom of Page    Message Board > General Discussion > who is the modern day tolkien   
who will write something as great as the lord of the rings or the silmarillion or the hobbit who do you think Pixie Smilie Wary Smilie hmmm think about that
Paul Stewart and Chris Riddell do briliant fantasy books, even though lots of them are for children they are still thrilling. They even did a spoof of LOTR!
Quote:
who will write something as great as the lord of the rings or the silmarillion or the hobbit who do you think

A lot of authors are trying, and failing, although Guy Gavriel Kay's works are the closest you can get to LOTR, imho.

You might as well ask "Who will make a movie as great as Showgirls"...
Quote:
You might as well ask "Who will make a movie as great as Showgirls"...
Or even, "Who will make another planet like Earth? Writing an epic like J.R.R. Tolkien's is a very hard act to follow, imho.
Undoubtly, Tolkien is already high among the stars where us mere mortals cannot reach... But maybe, just maybe, there will be one person who will come along the road and make miracles come true... You never know anything for sure in this world... Wink Smilie
"Who will make a movie as great as Showgirls".. Big Laugh Smilie attitude showgirls........... Very Big Grin Smilie
Since as the saying goes'there is nothing new under the sun' you just might be surprised from what part of the world some little child playing in the sandbox will emerge and write something just as earth shaking and staggering for his or her own generation. Anything can happen.
This is going to unnerve some of you, but I see a huge similarity between JRRT and George Lucas, producer/entrepreneur and creator of the Star Wars saga. He does work in a different medium, instead of writing books, he presents his vision in theatrical form; however, the similarities are numerous. One thing that they have in common is the way they incorporate vague cultural myths and loose religious undertones into their work. Another is the presence of the idea that good does always triumph over evil, but not without certain sacrifices from a lot of the central characters. Yet another parallel between the two, and perhaps the biggest contribution from both, is how they created whole layers of history, languages, cultures, species and lands purely out of their own imaginations. It boggles the mind to think that one could dream all of it up in their heads. I do think Tolkien went only but a little more in depth with these aspects of his storytelling, but again, I attribute this to the medium in which these artists chose to tell their story. Written text is much more conducive to detail than film. That is my humble opinion, and yes, I really am a Star Wars geek as well. (Cue the arrows being shot at me!) Shaking Head Smilie
If we are going to drag science fiction into it, then I believe Frank Herbert has done at least equally well with his Dune saga as Tolkien with LOTR, et al.
After thinking it over Laurelindehe I agree about Lucas, yes I do agree. Several t hings had religious overtones, some Jewish in my opinion and some Christian. I am a Messianic Jewess so I picked up on stuff that sort of startled me.
I thought the prequels were somewhat comic bookie, well the first, but really I love the Starwars. I really do.
Did you see the spoof on Darth Vader by wierd Al Yankovic, it was brilliant really.
That was a funny spoof! Of course, I've always loved Weird Al. He's very underrated as a comic.
As far as the Tolkien/Lucas comparison goes, I have felt that the two are like to one another for quite awhile, but I know that there are a lot of differences in their work as well that some folks might say makes them too different to compare. Those differences are what make them unique artists in their own right, but just because I feel that George Lucas is a modern-day Tolkien of sorts does not mean that only my opinion is right. I welcome a better comparison!

(By the way, dear LeeLee, may I ask where in the world you hail from? I am just curious and I am sorry to all that I'm off topic.)
Quote:
Yet another parallel between the two, and perhaps the biggest contribution from both, is how they created whole layers of history, languages, cultures, species and lands purely out of their own imaginations.

This is something that any producer/author of speculative fiction does. Only the depth differs; I for instance think that the Star Trek universe has much more depth than Star Wars when it comes to this.

It is after all, possible to learn how to speak Klingon.

I am rolling on the floor laughing and that is painful, I have a foot injury. Oh dear Vir! Now I am wondering if you descend from the great Mr. Spock. You are the same kind of dead pan funny.
Please tell me in real life you actually smile and laugh and are not always day and night cynical. Cynical, perhaps you descend from Spock on the one side and Jack Benny on the other/

Sweet girl I am now and have been quite a while on the west of Canada in the mighty and spectacularly beautiful British Columbia. Why, do you sort of see me floating aimlessly on the raft of life up and down Middle-Earth!!
While that is true Vir that all sci fi directors , producers and such go for a certain genre feel, still Lucas has a noble whimsical and beautiful edge to his work that I don't think many others do; just as JRR had the same noble, whimsical and beautiful edge to his work that somehow lifted and edified in a way that most other writers of fantasy, myth and so on or combination did not show in his day. But that is just my opinion and I wait with bated breath to be shot down like a dove in flight by the mighty hunter Vir. Smile Smilie
Quote:
While that is true Vir that all sci fi directors , producers and such go for a certain genre feel, still Lucas has a noble whimsical and beautiful edge to his work that I don't think many others do

Yes, Jabba the Hut, the Ewoks and the other creatures from the petshop that was Return of the Jedi sure looked noble and not entirely ludicrous...

Of course, one could rebut this by mentioning those squeeking annoying furballs that infested Captain Kirk's ship on several occasions, but that is besides the point.
Excuse me for my abruptness, but I must say that though I had my crazy-about-Star-Wars period, I have never equated Star Wars with LOTR. Never once have I done so. Star Wars is a spectacular series of movies, but honestly I think Tolkien's world is much more finely created, with intricate languages invented, an entire history reaching way into the beginning of days, and a great thoroughness in the crafting of characters that reflect human nature in many respects.

Of course, admittedly, Star Wars is only six movies, and you cannot hope to put a whole history of galaxies into six movies, but in terms of character depth, I think LOTR provides characters that seem more real, whereas Star Wars is simply breathtaking, and out-of-this-world. I mean, certainly you don't meet people like Anakin or Jabba every day. And you don't meet Galadriels or Feanors every day either, but while both worlds are fantastical, Tolkien incorporates more human elements into his world. We see characters like Frodo, Sam, Eowyn, Gimli etc. who we can relate to easily, in terms of personaliuty, of course, whereas in SW, the characters are very much exaggerated with Anakin as the fallen angel, Luke as the pure hero, Sidious as the chief evil etc. You understand it, get awestruck by it, but it is somehow harder to relate to.

In Tolkien, you get both the sweeping scenes of otherworldly majesty and the humble human traits, which makes it fantasy, but more belieavle and deep fantasy.

Just my opinion here. Star Wars fans, don't get offended!
I couldn't it better myself CaptTink Wiggle Smilie

But Star Wars has a different genius altogether, sure it's fantasy, and sure it's epic, but in detail you don't see as much with Star Wars, like Clover said, you feel closer to the characters of LOTR as they are more 'human'...

Btw, I love Star Wars, the films are superb... classic, although you can only get so much detail into one film about lore and history. The most detail I can think of with Hoth is that it's an Ice-Planet with alot of mountains... I'm sure that books of it give them justice in that area...
I dont no if anyone will write a book quite like the lotr but i think in my opinion stargate is a legend of a show.
Quote:
We see characters like Frodo, Sam, Eowyn, Gimli etc. who we can relate to easily, in terms of personaliuty, of course, whereas in SW, the characters are very much exaggerated with Anakin as the fallen angel, Luke as the pure hero, Sidious as the chief evil etc. You understand it, get awestruck by it, but it is somehow harder to relate to.
One could easily say the same for LOTR: replace Anakin by Boromir/Fëanor, Luke by Aragorn and Sidious by Sauron, etc.

Characters from both universa are generally, bar a few exceptions, largely onedimensional.

Quote:
The most detail I can think of with Hoth is that it's an Ice-Planet with alot of mountains...
...And fluffy cave monsters.
"Fluffy cave monsters" -- LOL

In any case, I am a big SW fan, or was until the last two movies came out *grimace*. I like the books and the movies, but they do not have the poignacy of Tolkien. LOTR just pulls at the heartstrings in a way most other books do not. They both are made up of archtypes, but LOTR goes a level deeper, gets into the character's minds, hearts and souls. Aragorn wasn't wanting to make something more of his life like Luke, who was sick of going to pick up power converters. Luke is more like a Disney character...searching for something more, something different *gazing at the stars, twirling on hilltops*. Aragorn has to live up to what others believe him to be, and that is more our own reality, the struggle to live up to others expectations as well as our own.
Well said!
Quote:
Aragorn has to live up to what others believe him to be, and that is more our own reality, the struggle to live up to others expectations as well as our own.

Again, one might easily apply this to Star Wars - for instance Luke, who was trying so hard to live up to Master Yoda's expectations but not even being able to get his ship out of the swamp. Not to mention, the whole Being-the-last-hope-of-the-Jedi-against-the-Empire shtick.

Both Aragorn & Luke were born with a great destiny and had to suffer great ordeals to prevail.

Quote:
Aragorn wasn't wanting to make something more of his life like Luke, who was sick of going to pick up power converters.

Aragorn was trying to become King and marry a sultry she-elf. I believe he was trying very hard to make something more of his life.
Quote:
Again, one might easily apply this to Star Wars - for instance Luke, who was trying so hard to live up to Master Yoda's expectations but not even being able to get his ship out of the swamp. Not to mention, the whole Being-the-last-hope-of-the-Jedi-against-the-Empire shtick.

Both Aragorn & Luke were born with a great destiny and had to suffer great ordeals to prevail.


That's true, but as I said, there isn't the same poignancy. In LOTR, there is the sense that although something great is gained, something that may have been even better and possibly more beautiful is being lost.

Quote:
Aragorn was trying to become King and marry a sultry she-elf. I believe he was trying very hard to make something more of his life.


Aragorn wasn't trying to become king immediately. He was struggling with this destiny. It's interesting that both Aragorn and Luke were in love with women who were related to them though. Hmmm...
There are a lot of great authors out there today. JRRT is my favorite by far, and all others come in a distant second. But I do have other favorites: Anne McCaffrey is a genius in her own right, having written several multi-book series that I found both readable and enjoyable: Her Dragonrider series, her Brainship series, her Talents series are all well-written and best-sellers.
Then there's David Eddings, another multi-series author with some good ideas; Margaret Weiss and Tracy Hickman with their Dragonlance books; and has anyone here ever read Terry Pratchett? I never thought silly fantasy could be any good after reading The Harvard Lampoon's "Bored of the Rings" until I started reading Pratchett's Discworld books.
As for Star Wars, it is a good movie series, but if I may be so bold as to suggest (see how Tolkien has influenced the way I speak and write?) that in addition to watching those movies, you read the books for the movies. I saw the first Star Wars movie back in '77, and after the first few times, someone gave me the book, which I still have after all these years. In the same way that people who watch the LOTR movies don't see how and why some things actually happen in the books, you miss some interesting parts in Star Wars if you don't read the book.
I know, I went off on a tangent, but here's the point I'm trying to agree with: There are some really great authors out there, and a lot of them write stuff worthy of being made into a movie, but none of them are fit to be compared to the Professor. Even the LOTR movies. which is a great series, are missing something that the books project into the mind
Besides all of the above authors, I enjoy reading Neil Gaiman Sandman Series, Neverwhere, Coraline, Stardust, American Gods and also his Good Omens co-written with Terry Pratchett. However, he is not in the Professor/s league either.

And certainly neither is that mid-twentieth century hack, Harry Stephan Keeler who wrote fantastical webwork novels that depended on coincidence to tie every thing together at their endings, but I still get a kick out them because they are so horrible. Read Smilie
I also read Good Omens, but not any of Gaiman's other books. Terry Brooks' "Elfstones" series is another good one, but again nowhere near as good as LOTR. And then there was one author, whose name escapes me, whose books were such a blatant plagiarism of LOTR I was surprised that it was allowed in print. The characters, their purpose, and their different adventures were almost line for line taken from LOTR.
By the way, Grondmaster, I like your little icon. I had that same image on a set of bookplates one of my older sisters gave me for Christmas. Later that year, for my high school graduation, she also gave me the collector's editions of The Hobbit and LOTR, and I put the plates on the inside covers since they were so appropriate.
Quote:
Grondmaster, I like your little icon. I had that same image on a set of bookplates one of my older sisters gave me for Christmas.

That's where it came from, the bookplates I found in my Christmas stocking one year in the seventies. I also had a leather bookmark with the same image, but I seam to have lost it; probably it's hiding somewhere between the pages in one of my my hundreds of books.
Alright! I confess! Since this thread was obviously created to lure me out of hiding, I owe it to everyone to make this revelation. I am the modern Tolkien. I'm sure that you've all had suspicions for quite some time, so there it is. Now you know.
I agree that Frank Herberts Dune and the rest of the series (I prefer the first 3) are amazing. If we are comparing directly to LotR and not all of Tolkiens works, then Dune does lack the time definition of Tolkiens works. The Dune world focuses on cycles, while Tolkiens world takes place among set distinct ages. However, that's not really the question - I would say Frank Herbert like Tolkien is in a world of his own. He and Tolkien aren't really comparable except as amazing authors and creators of worlds - Herbert is not a modern anything, Dune is the one and only Dune, and contains a lot that Tolkiens books barely touch on.

Maybe Raymond E Feist for a more modern writer of adventure fantasy. Magician contains the same elements of innocence lost, journeying, and follows a group of people. Oh yeah, and there are elves and dwarves ;-) The character development of primarily Frodo and Sam when I read LotR was what really made me put the book down at the end, think of the beginning and realise the scope of what I had just read. I felt the same sort of thing with Pug and Tomas in Magician, what they had lost and gained, and where they had been to bring them to the end of the story.

I guess it comes down to what you see as the main elements is LotR or other of Tolkiens works - the genre, the world building, the charaters.... It adds up to what struck you when you first read it and where else you have found that same magic.
Good topic but you all seem to not have read some great works that can be compaired to LoTR, First off Donaldson's Books the chronicals of thomas covnet, then you have the even more modern Eragorn who's writter has most definetly strived to create a world much like midle earth he is still young and didn't master what tolkien had mastered at that time, to tell the truth he just hasn't seen enough. My vote though goes to Terry Brooks with his "Shannarra" series. Yes he broke the series up more then tolkien but is his world less vivid? Yes he failed to creat intracate languages but then how many can? Terry Brooks is a master on the same level if not just a step bellow.
Terry Brooks' books are all very enjoyable. People stare themselves blind on the first book "Sword of Shannara" that is indeed very similar to LOTR which Brooks himself admitted (and honestly, how many fantasy books are not similar to LOTR?), but that book still contains enough material that makes it stand out on its own, especially the memorable characters.

Besides, the two sequels are certainly among the most beautiful stories I've ever read. "Heritage of Shannara" is kind of a cash-in on the original Shannara, but still interesting to read.

It was Mr Brooks that made fantasy literature popular again in the beginning of the eighties with Shannara, after decades of silence.

Quote:
Maybe Raymond E Feist for a more modern writer of adventure fantasy. Magician contains the same elements of innocence lost, journeying, and follows a group of people. Oh yeah, and there are elves and dwarves ;-) The character development of primarily Frodo and Sam when I read LotR was what really made me put the book down at the end, think of the beginning and realise the scope of what I had just read. I felt the same sort of thing with Pug and Tomas in Magician, what they had lost and gained, and where they had been to bring them to the end of the story.

Magician, Silverthorn and Darkness over Sethanon are excellent, but after that the series drifts off into a tedious action-adventure with very weak characters (at least, compared to the original characters). The entire "Serpentwar" series should never have been written, imho.

Frankly, after drudging through those books I decided never to read a Feisty book again.

Quote:
Aragorn wasn't trying to become king immediately. He was struggling with this destiny.

In the books, there is no indication anywhere that he was struggling with his destiny. In the movies, on the other hand, he is of course shown as a pathetic, whiny weakling that can't even beat a Wargrider.

Quote:
It's interesting that both Aragorn and Luke were in love with women who were related to them though.

It's just the Force.
Quote:
Quote:
It's interesting that both Aragorn and Luke were in love with women who were related to them though.


It's just the Force.
No, it is probably due to the psychosis of their creators. Two more of these examples are Turin and that Greek King Ope'. Elf With a Big Grin Smilie Though, in Aragorn's case, Arwen's kinship was so many generations removed from his that it was practically non-existent, which was why his bloodline (Dúnedain) required the renewal of her Elvish/Maiar bloodline in his descendants.
Frankly, there is no modern day Tolkien, nor will there ever be one, for Tolkien's writing is vastly different from what fantasy authors are writing today; if we look at fantasy series/novels that have appeared since 1980, one notices a vastly different approach - the shift from true storytelling to a focus on characters.

Tolkien wrote one of the finest stories ever written in English literature, and what is almost unanymously considered as the definitive story of fantastic fiction; he provided a blue-print from which fantasy authors ever since have taken inspiration and ideas, and elements to model their own works, even though Tolkien's attention is not on flashy magic or red-blooded action (indeed, battles aside all combat scenes rarely last two paragraphs).

But as Tolkien wrote his magnificent story in the tradition of the old Germanic sagas & myths from Snorri Snurluson, it is inevitable that the story falls short in characterisation - the focus is the events surrounding the characters, not the characters themselves. Tolkien's characters are (figuratively speaking) either black or white, and the few ones in grey are forced to choose, and torn apart by fate if they refuse to choose (Túrin, Fëanor, et al).

For modern day fantasy, this is exactly the reverse: huge attentions are given to long descriptions of the characters' looks, their motivations, thoughts and the interactions between them, rather than the story. More often than not, this turns modern day fantasy novels in nothing but a voluminous series of psychoanalytic description or snappy banter where nothing happens save a group of people travelling through lands with exotic names and meeting hazards everywhere they go that are swiftly solved by means of sword & sorcery. Entertaining, but fleeting, and nothing of a redeeming value unlike what Tolkien wrote.

For the biggest reason why Tolkien's story appeals to so many readers, and why it stays in the memory of the majority of readers, is its inherent message -- mainly that hope, friendship & sacrifice overcome over darkness. It seems that very few modern-day writers are trying to convey a message through their works (save the occasional political ones, which is simply bad taste), but are simply trying to appeal to the masses by providing an entertaining story to earn their daily bread.

Indeed, here arrives another great difference with Tolkien & modern day authors: Tolkien did not write what he wrote to make a living, the foremost reason why he wrote is why Da Vinci painted or why Rodin made sculptures - partly for himself, and partly because he wanted to share something of himself with humanity.
wow Vir, your words ring as positively true and indisputable. To even contemplate another like him, the noble and deep and precise way JRR had of tale telling, the way the entire world of the characters was shaped so perfectly we too can walk in and inhabit that world and share the experience-no I don't think too many would rise to such a challenge again. It took, what ,fifteen years and so much revision and who would have that tenacity and vision, that strength and purpose of character? If there are to be any more like him, then the world once more will be blessed and enriched in a once in a life time manner as our generations have been.
There were many great artists, philosophers, writes etc., in all times before and I believe there will always be until the end of all humanity. But none of the founders of new ways in art could be compared with those coming to follow his/her's steps. There is no modern days Tolkien as there is no modern days Shakespeare or Van Gogh, or Sappho or... And there can not be. There are and will be many great in the same area though.

--
p.s.: Ultimate knowledge does not exist. Only opinions and theories... (by Albert Einstein)