olhon.info Science Ebook The Lord Of The Rings Bahasa Indonesia

EBOOK THE LORD OF THE RINGS BAHASA INDONESIA

Wednesday, September 11, 2019


Lord Of the Rings - Kisah ini ditulis dari tahun sampai dan menjadi salah satu Novel Sudah Diterjemahkan Ke Bahasa Indonesia. Download: The Lord of the Rings Deluxe Edition [Pub] The Lord of the You can download in the form of an ebook: The Lord of the Rings. You can download in the form of an ebook: The Hobbit, this is a A great edition for the price By Paco Review for The Lord of the Rings I ll.


Ebook The Lord Of The Rings Bahasa Indonesia

Author:DELAINE MOSCOSO
Language:English, Spanish, French
Country:Egypt
Genre:Academic & Education
Pages:207
Published (Last):24.07.2016
ISBN:853-5-42056-742-8
ePub File Size:24.78 MB
PDF File Size:17.55 MB
Distribution:Free* [*Regsitration Required]
Downloads:31395
Uploaded by: DEIDRA

- [Review Bahasa Indonesia] The Lord of The Ring: The Two Towers -J.R.R. Tolkien. The Ocean at the End of the Lane (eBook). VitalSource\. Three Rings for the Elven-kings under the sky,. Seven for the Dwarf-lords in their halls of stone,. Nine for Mortal Men doomed to die,. One for the Dark Lord on his. [Download] EBOOK The Return of the King (The Lord of the Rings, Book 3) >> olhon.info?asin=

Embeds 0 No embeds. No notes for slide. Download novel-the-hobbit-versi-bahasa-indonesia-pdf 1. English PDF 1 8. PDF pages File size: Tolkien good books by saying they cant stop reading them, well, I really could not stop reading. It is yet again another different look at an authors view. Click button and Read Online Now: You just clipped your first slide!

Popular Novel Luar Terjemahan Books Clipping is a handy way to collect important slides you want to go back to later. Now customize the name of a clipboard to store your clips. Visibility Others can see my Clipboard. Cancel Save. The many reviews about The Hobbit before purchasing it in order to gage whether or not it would be worth my time, and all praised The Hobbit: You can download in the form of an ebook: The Hobbit, this is a great books that I think are not only fun to read but also very educational.

Download novel-the-hobbit-versi-bahasa-indonesia-pdf Download novel-the-hobbit-versi-bahasa-indonesia-pdf Download Report. Kewirausahaan versi bahasa Indonesia Education. Not today. But I am still willing to admit my love. View all comments. Considering that The Lord of the Rings is one of the most popular books of the last century, it's surprising to see how few reviews there are here.

I get the impression that many people feel guilty about liking it. It's a phase you go through, and the less said about it, the better. I think this is unfair to the book, which, I am prepared to argue, is a whole lot better than it's generally made out to be; I don't think its huge success is just evidence that people have no taste. It's something t Considering that The Lord of the Rings is one of the most popular books of the last century, it's surprising to see how few reviews there are here.

It's something that can be read at more than one level, and, before dismissing it, let's take a look at what those levels might be. On the surface, it's a heroic fantasy novel, and quite a good one. It's a gripping, well-realized story, with an interesting fantasy world as background. Under the surface story, it's also clear that there's a moral discourse.

It's not an allegory; as Tolkien points out in the foreword, he hated allegory, and we certainly don't have an in-your-face piece of Christian apology by numbers.

None the less, the author has constructed some inspiring and thought-provoking symbols. The Ring confers great power, but the only way to defeat Sauron is to refuse that power, and destroy it, even at great personal cost.

Frodo's self-sacrifice is quite moving. I also think that Gandalf is an unusually interesting Christ-figure; sufficiently so that many people refuse even to accept him as one, though, at least to me, the argument on that point seems convincing. And let's not miss the obvious point that Gandalf is killed, and then returns reborn in a new shape. I find him vastly more sympathetic than C. Lewis's bland Aslan, and he is the book's most memorable character. But I don't think the morality play is the real kernel either.

What makes LOTR a unique book, and one of the most ambitious experiments in literary history, is Tolkien's use of names.

All authors knows how important names are, and use them to suggest character; though when you think about what is going on, it is rather surprising how much can be conveyed just by a name. Proust has a couple of long discussions about this, describing in great detail how the narrator's initial mental pictures of Balbec, Venice and the Guermantes family come just from the sounds of their names.

Tolkien goes much further. Most of his names are based on a family of invented languages, linked by a vast complex of legends and histories, the greater part of which are invisible to the reader and only surface occasionally. The astonishing thing is that the technique actually works. The interrelations between all the invented names and languages make Middle-Earth feel real, in a way no other fantasy world ever has. When some readers complain that characters and locations are hastily sketched, I feel they are missing the point.

Tolkien was a philologist. He loved languages, words and names, and tracing back what the relationships between them say about their history. In LOTR, he's able to convey some of that love of language to his readers. You have to read the book more than once, but after a while it all comes together. There are literally hundred more things like this, most of which one perceives on a partly unconscious level.

The adolescent readers who are typically captivated by LOTR are at a stage of their linguistic development when they are very sensitive to nuances of language, and programmed to pick them up; I can't help thinking that they are intuitively seeing things that more sophisticated readers may miss. Perhaps the simplest way to demonstrate the magnitude of Tolkien's achievement is the fact that it's proven impossible to copy it; none of the other fantasy novels I've seen have come anywhere close.

Tolkein's names lend reality to his world, because he put so much energy into the linguistic back-story, and before that worked for decades as a philologist. Basically, he was an extremely talented person who spent his whole life training to write The Lord of the Rings. In principle, I suppose other authors could have done the same thing. In practice, you have to be a very unusual person to want to live that kind of life. The guy is invited to a posh house, and sees this incredibly beautiful, smooth lawn.

It's like a billiard table. Just seed, water, mow and roll regularly, and anyone can do it! View all 71 comments. Writing a review of this masterpiece is impossible. Finding your courage - The Fellowship of the Ring Not all the par Writing a review of this masterpiece is impossible.

Finding your courage - The Fellowship of the Ring Not all the party have been fully tested. With them travel four young hobbits, the most unlikely of companions for such a journey. They are the overlooked, the forgotten about, the race that is casually discarded and considered insignificant in the wider world. And perhaps this has been the downfall of society in middle earth previously. The forces of darkness exploit everything they can get their hands on, from giant spiders to rampaging trolls, from dragons to orcs, from men of the east to the undead, Sauron tries to wield it all.

This is something the forces of good have not fully considered until recently. Within the bosom of the hobbit beats a strong heart of fortitude and resilience.

You can learn all that there is to know about their ways in a month, and yet after a hundred years they can still surprise you at a pinch. Bilbo showed them how he could resist the ring.

It is something he has overlooked. Of course you are. And I'm coming with you. And this I also say: The Dark Lord has Nine. But we have One, mightier than they: He has passed through the fire and the abyss, and they shall fear him.

Download novel-the-hobbit-versi-bahasa-indonesia-pdf

We will go where he leads. But he was also a great wonderer and a great quester. He was an unearther of dark secrets and mysteries. And Middle-Earth no longer needs such a figure, darkness is now on her doorstep; it is no longer hidden. So Middle-Earth needs a man or Istari with far sight that can unite the scattered forces of Rohan and manipulate events in order to ensure that the King does, indeed, return.

It needs a methodical man of great wisdom and intelligence; it needs a stagiest: And he has come. Girl Power! Frodo was saved on the river by an Elf-lord called Glorfindel. So when Eowen battled the Witch King, it is the first major moment Tolkien gave to a female hero. In a vastly male dominated genre, it was great to read this scene. And here's a gif I like: View all 10 comments.

Look at thisss, hobbitses! Not bought at flea market for ten francses. Catalogue says worth seven hundred dollarses. Oh yes, Not knows about bookses, gollum. But can't touch, can't read, she says too valuable. Going to eat fish instead, but nice birthday present, oh yes precious. View all 39 comments. Oct 12, Leo. The true source of the fantasy fiction genre.

Sam is the typical accidental hero. He is the girl or boy next door, the ordinary folk.

Sam is you and me and represents the courage we The true source of the fantasy fiction genre. Sam is you and me and represents the courage we all have inside of us. He shows that when the going gets tough and the shit hits the fan it is the most unlikely of us that step up.

Hero's are not always musclebound hunks. Not always the James Bond type character or the brilliant lawyer bringing justice to the deserving. Almost all of the time the hero is the one that does the things that go unnoticed, uncelebrated. There is a hero in all of us whether we know it or not. View all 28 comments.

Dec 17, Markus rated it it was amazing Shelves: Three thousand years after the defeat of the Dark Lord Sauron before the slopes of Mount Doom, a magic ring falls into the care of Frodo Baggins, a young hobbit from the Shire. Aided by his gardener Samwise Gamgee and the mysterious wizard Gandalf the Grey, he takes the ring on a journey to Rivendell, a hidden refuge of the Elves.

A story starting, as the stories often do, with 'once upon a time' Once upon a time, there was a little boy who have never read a fantasy book. Thinking back on it, it does seem like an awfully sorry state of affairs.

The one day he discovered this huge brick called The Lord of the Rings , and started reading it. It would change his life forever. The little boy grew into adolescence. He read other books, few of them fantasy. He discovered a passion for history, and started reading that. He read classics and sci-fi and mysteries and even religious texts. He read books considered by some as among the best books ever. Later that little boy would grow up to become a man though he probably never will grow up completely, mind you.

And he started reading fantasy again. A Song of Ice and Fire was one of the first attempts, and it quickly turned into a favourite. But compared to The Lord of the Rings? It was followed by tons of other fantasy series, among them Narnia , The Inheritance Cycle , Shannara and so on. And he loved them all. But every once in a while, he had to go back to this huge brick to remember that there existed something even better.

Where is the horn that was blowing? Where is the helm and the hauberk, and the bright hair flowing? Where is the hand on the harpstring, and the red fire glowing? Where is the spring and the harvest and the tall corn growing? They have passed like rain on the mountain, like a wind in the meadow; The days have gone down in the West behind the hills into shadow.

How do you actually describe the book you both love more than any other, and also consider the best book ever written from a more or less objective point of view? I knew what it meant, but not the exact definition. So I checked. And that is pretty much exactly how I would describe it. Sublime it is. I realised that I would never come closer to an actual description of The Lord of the Rings.

This is to me not only the main pillar on which the fantasy genre stands, but the ultimate masterpiece of literature. No contest even. I am so very grateful to have been given the chance to come along on the journey of the Fellowship of the Ring. To visit so many wonderful places in a land of myths and magic.

To meet so many fascinating men, elves, dwarves and other legendary peoples and creatures Are there any negative things to mention? I sit beside the fire and think of people long ago and people who will see a world that I shall never know.

But all the while I sit and think of times there were before, I listen for returning feet and voices at the door. There is nothing in either fantasy or any other genre to match it.

It certainly surpassed all the magical worlds that had come before it, and none created since that time have been able to surpass it in turn. Writers like Robert Jordan and George R. I have had tons of delightful experiences while venturing into magnificent worlds of fantasy, in Westeros and Narnia and so many others. But Middle-Earth is like a fictional home.

I seem to have left behind parts of my heart and soul by the waterfalls of Rivendell, the ancient trees of Fangorn forest, the plains of Rohan and the marble walls of Minas Tirith.

And I do not regret that for one second. Most of my standards for comparison also derive from this tome. I have yet to encounter a mentor character in fantasy who can compare to Gandalf, or a fictional love story that can compare to the tale of Aragorn and Arwen.

I have yet to encounter a setting as detailed or writing as flawlessly eloquent as this. And those are only a few examples of aspects in which I consider The Lord of the Rings to be superior to all others. These musings can only begin to describe how much this book means to me. It sparked my passion for reading at a young age. It made me love the fantasy genre and all that came with it.

It made me start creating worlds of my own, and in the end find one in particular that I liked so much I started writing stories set in it. Why, it even made me intrigued by poetry eventually. On my third and fourth and fifth reads of this book, I started looking beyond the immediately visible. And I found something more to admire: And not only literarily, but historically, politically and philosophically as well. It is so much more. A legend trapped in words on pieces of paper.

This is to me the apex of human creativity and imagination. The very best form of art a human mind can produce. There have been many books that I have cherished through the years, and I expect there will be many more to come.

But The Lord of the Rings will always be the one I treasure the most of them all. It has changed me forever. As it once changed the world forever. I'm afraid this was not so much an actual review as simply a story about my experience with and passion for this book. If you've been patient enough to read to the very end, I thank you for your attention. I'll leave you with the most beautiful passage Tolkien ever wrote, and my favourite literary quote of all time View all 65 comments.

May 25, J. Keely rated it liked it Shelves: Authors who inspire a movement are usually misunderstood, especially by those they have inspired, and Tolkien is no exception, but one of the biggest misconceptions about Tolkien is the idea that he is somehow an 'innovator of fantasy'.

He did add a number of techniques to the repertoire of epic fantasy writers, and these have been dutifully followed by his many imitators, but for the most part, these techniques are little more than bad habits. Many have called Tolkien by such epithets as 'The Fa Authors who inspire a movement are usually misunderstood, especially by those they have inspired, and Tolkien is no exception, but one of the biggest misconceptions about Tolkien is the idea that he is somehow an 'innovator of fantasy'.

Many have called Tolkien by such epithets as 'The Father of Fantasy', but anyone who makes this claim simply does not know of the depth and history of the fantasy genre.

For those who are familiar with the great and influential fantastical authors, from Ovid and Ariosto to Eddison and Dunsany to R. Howard and Fritz Leiber , it is clear that, long before Tolkien, fantasy was already a complex, well-established, and even a respected literary genre.

Eddison's work contains an invented world, a carefully-constructed and well-researched archaic language, a powerful and unearthly queen, and a central character who is conflicted and lost between the forces of nobility and darkness.

Poul Anderson's The Broken Sword , which came out the same year as The Fellowship of the Ring, has distant, haughty elves, deep-delving dwarves, a broken sword which must be reforged, an epic war between the armies of light and darkness, another central character trapped between those extremes, and an interweaving of Christian and Pagan worldviews. So, if these aspects are not unique to Tolkien, then what does set him apart? Though Dunsany, Eddison, and Anderson all present worlds where light and dark come into conflict, they present these conflicts with a subtle and often ironic touch, recognizing that morality is a dangerous thing to present in absolutes.

Tolkien or C. Lewis , on the other hand, has no problem in depicting evil as evil, good as good, and the only place they meet is in the temptation of an honest heart, as in Gollum's case--and even then, he is not like Eddison's Lord Gro or Anderson's Scafloc, characters who live under an alternative view of the world, but instead fluctuates between the highs and lows of Tolkien's dualistic morality.

It is a dangerous message to make evil an external, irrational thing, to define it as 'the unknown that opposes us', because it invites the reader to overlay their own morality upon the world, which is precisely what most modern fantasy authors tend to do, following Tolkien's example.

Whether it's Goodkind's Libertarianism or John Norman's sex slave fetish , its very easy to simply create a magical allegory to make one side 'right' and the other side 'wrong', and you never have to develop a dramatic narrative that actually explores the soundness of those ideas.

Make the good guys dress in bright robes or silvery maile and the bad guys in black, spiky armor, and a lot of people will never notice that all the 'good guys' are White, upper class men, while all the 'bad guys' are 'brutish foreigners', and that both sides are killing each other and trying to rule their little corner of the world.

In Tolkien's case, his moral view was a very specific evocation of the ideal of 'Merrie England' , which is an attempt by certain stodgy old Tories like Tolkien to rewrite history so that the nobility were all good and righteous leaders, the farmers were all happy in their 'proper place' working a simple patch of dirt , while both industrialized cultures and the 'primitives' who resided to the South and East were 'the enemy' bent on despoiling the 'natural beauty of England' despite the fact that the isles had been flattened, deforested, and partitioned a thousand years before.

Though Tom Bombadil remains as a strangely incoherent reminder of the moral and social complexity of the fantasy tradition upon which Tolkien draws, he did his best to scrub the rest clean, spending years of his life trying to fit Catholic philosophy more wholly into his Pagan adventure realm. But then, that's often how we think of Tolkien: Even those who admit that Tolkien demonstrates certain racist, sexist, and classicist leanings as, indeed, do many great authors still praise the complexity of his 'world building'.

And any student of the great Epics, like the Norse Eddas, the Bible, or the Shahnameh can see what Tolkien is trying to achieve with his worldbuilding: They were encyclopedic texts, intended to instruct their people on everything important in life, and they are extraordinarily valuable to students of anthropology and history, because even the smallest detail can reveal something about the world which the book describes.

So, Tolkien fills his books with troop movements, dull songs, lines of lineage, and references to his own made-up history, mythology, and language. He has numerous briefly-mentioned side characters and events because organic texts like the epics, which were formed slowly, over time and compiled from many sources often contained such digressions. So Tolkien certainly had a purpose in what he did, but was it a purpose that served the story he was trying to tell? Simply copying the form of reality is not what makes good art.

Art is meaningful--it is directed. It is not just a list of details--everything within is carefully chosen by the author to make up a good story. Without that meaning, then what Tolkien is doing is just a very elaborate thought exercise. Ostensibly, Scrabble supposedly is a game for people who love words--and yet, top Scrabble players sit an memorize lists of words whose meaning they will never learn. Likewise, many literary fandom games become little more than word searches: The point of literary criticism is always to lead us back to human thought and ideas, to looking at how we think and express ourselves.

If a detail in a work cannot lead us back to ourselves, then it is no more than an arbitrary piece of chaff. Anything which does not materially contribute to the story, characters, and artistry of a work can safely be left out. Tolkien's embarrassment of detail also produced a huge inflation in the acceptable length of fantasy books, leading to the meandering, unending series that fill bookstore shelves today.

My Fantasy Book Suggestions Feb 05, Luffy rated it it was amazing. The Fellowship of the Ring begins with the Shire and winds its way through the barren lands that lie on the way to Mordor. I tried to read this part of the book once, but DNF it then.

Then I picked up the trilogy bound in one volume and went through it fairly steadily. I've read that Tolkien wasn't as original as first claimed.

Nevertheless Tolkien take on traditional myths was unique and groundbreaking. The Eddas, the Welsh my The Fellowship of the Ring begins with the Shire and winds its way through the barren lands that lie on the way to Mordor.

The Eddas, the Welsh myths, and Norse myths all are the foundation for this great story. This was a reread and was a satisfactory one because I wanted to reach my favorite parts. I looked forward to read Tom Bombadil's part again. Did it. Then the Rivendell parts, ditto. Slowly I wound my way, sometimes following Sam and Frodo, sometimes Aragorn. Gandalf appears relatively scantily towards the third book. Five well deserved stars, indeed.

View all 13 comments. Lord of the Rings I have read LotR many times over the years, in fact it is I think the book I have read the most in this world, which i suppose makes it my favourite book, albeit closely followed by half a dozen others shout if you want to know or take a gander at my favourites shelf.

I have always enjoyed it, understatement, but for some reason this re-read is more special than ever. I had almost forgotten how much was different from the films, and despite having read LotR once before since t Lord of the Rings I have read LotR many times over the years, in fact it is I think the book I have read the most in this world, which i suppose makes it my favourite book, albeit closely followed by half a dozen others shout if you want to know or take a gander at my favourites shelf.

I had almost forgotten how much was different from the films, and despite having read LotR once before since the films, I seem to be getting more from the book this time than ever before. As anyone who actually reads my reviews will know, I very rarely need to use spoilers as I leave other people to read the book themselves, so you will find no or few spoilers in this review.

The first book weaves an amazing tale with incredible characters in a well constructed world. The characters and situations make you smile, laugh and even cry as the journey begins, the Fellowship is put together and at the close of this book, so cruelly broken. Having somehow forgotten the differences to the film, I thoroughly enjoyed the differences, especially Tom Bombardil and the river daughter, and surprisingly I enjoyed all the poems, some brought tears to my eyes, is it the first time I have really read them??

February brings Again I think the book well outshines the film although the people I see inhabiting the characters are those from the films. Suffice to say the story continues apace and one falls in love with the characters even more. One is there fighting alongside them or willing them on when the going gets tough.

The poems and rhymes again were a revelation to me and made the story even more enchanting, enthralling and yes again emotional. It is slightly unsettling to be sitting on one's sofa on a Wednesday afternoon, fire lit, surrounded by ones three cats, sipping from a giant mug of coffee and finding tears streaming down ones face as you attempt to read what has become of the valiant loyal Sam or how Gandalf was returned to Middle Earth as the leader of his order.

Most unsettling, hmm is it age?? And now I must again wait until next month to start book 3, such willpower ha ha. Again different to the film, but yet again immeasurably superior. I put "just" in my marking of 5 stars and I think it is only just a five star read. Nothing is really "wrong" with this book, it just isn't as good ad the previous 2 in my opinion. Yes the battles are more epic, the journeys are more dangerous, the stakes are even higher the safety of the the world and the finale in Mordor is unbelievably dramatic but for some reason, despite being truly emotional about many scenes, yes there were tears rolling down my face, I still felt it was for some reason just not quite as good.

That said it was still amazing writing, both tense and dramatic, with pure poetry scenes littered throughout the book Faramir and Eowyn in the House of Healing the decision by Arwen Evenstar to accept a mortal life with Aragon Sam's determination to get to the top of Mount Doom and enough cliffhangers to last a lifetime.

I think it reaffirms my view that the films are good, but the book is another level and just truly awesome. I look forward to both discovering even more in my next read and being reduced to an emotional wreck yet again.

View all 12 comments. Apr 23, Natalia Yaneva rated it it was amazing Shelves: So, Terry Pratchett read all night long and for the whole next day too. He read the novel for 26 hours with some small breaks, of course — the bladder of a year-old is not a water-skin after all. In the years to come he continued to reread the book each year. This is how it goes, brilliant minds resonate in accord. Then you step outside the hobbit hole and the limits of the known and you plunge into adventures — you had been yearning so much to lose those familiar faces for a while and see if some glorious song might be sung for you too.

After that though you slowly realize that you carry a truly heavy burden on your shoulders, that you have responsibilities and failure means too much, it means the world. And like in life there are glimpses of hope, but also precipitous collapses in pitch-dark depths, you are sometimes alone among the multitude and sometimes there is a friend to lend you a helping hand, and you put one foot in front of the other and keep going because you know that nobody is going to wage that battle for you.

There be wonders. Who can say where the road goes? Where the day flows?

Only Time View all 16 comments. Sep 12, Evgeny rated it it was amazing Shelves: I decided to read a one-book edition of the classic, just the way it was written. I will however split my discussion between three parts of it. I need to mention that I will not bother hiding any spoilers as I have trouble believing any modern person living in civilized enough parts of the world to have internet access has not read this one or at least has not seen the movies — which for all their faults were decent, but I am not talking about that abomination called the movie version of The Hob I decided to read a one-book edition of the classic, just the way it was written.

I need to mention that I will not bother hiding any spoilers as I have trouble believing any modern person living in civilized enough parts of the world to have internet access has not read this one or at least has not seen the movies — which for all their faults were decent, but I am not talking about that abomination called the movie version of The Hobbit.

As I mentioned before I hope everybody and their brother are familiar with the plot, so the only purpose this description serves is pure amusement. My first time I read this I was quite young. The end of the book I will refer to this work as a book, not a trilogy gave me the worst book hangover I ever had before. Much later on I saw the movies and reread it.

I matured and became more bitter and cynical. My initial rating of 5 stars still stands. This is a classic of epic fantasy against which all other epic fantasy works were judged up until now and will be judged in the foreseeing future. There is a reason countless carbon copies of this epic exist — of different quality.

It is very much arguable whether it was different enough not to be called a blatant rip-off, but the next two parts of his trilogy were different enough. What would happen if you replace Frodo with a biggest whining asshole you can think of and leave everything else intact: You would get Thomas Covenant series by Stephen R.

Donaldson; it gets recommended a lot and for some reason nobody is bothered by its similarities to The Lord of the Rings. These two are just the best-known examples. It would be very much unfair to call The Lord of the Rings the first work of fantasy. Lord Dunsany, Robert E. Howard, and others were writing what is considered fantasy today way before J. To my complete surprise I found the book an easy read on my second time through.

Even the dreaded endless poetry did not bother me too much and no, I did not skip over it. What follows is my criticism of some occasional flows in otherwise great classic epic fantasy book. I will split it into three parts to keep some semblance of organization. The Fellowship of the Ring. I was very curious to discover that Tolkien uses goblins and orcs interchangeably.

The Lord of the Rings

When this story was briefly retold in The Lord of the Rings, goblins became orcs. In modern fantasy these two races are very much distinct. I always imagine goblins to be green guys on a weak side, more like bothersome troublemakers while orcs are brutes with tusks and armed for a battle.

Initially it took Frodo a while to get his behind moving and a because of this a lot of people complain about slow start.

Novel The Lord Of The Rings Full Trilogi

I was one of the complainers during my first read, but I found I like the slow-moving beginning the second time around. You will get a big picture of pastoral life in Shire to fully appreciate what would be lost to darkness. Tom Bombadil gets my award for being the most pointless character ever to grace a work of fantasy.

This would be the only part where the movie did better than the original source: Add to this his annoying habit of speaking in bad poetry and my award is entirely justified. What the heck happened to Radagast? He was supposed to be a great wizard equal to both Saruman and Gandalf, however after unwittingly sending the latter to a trap he disappeared without a trace.

In my humble opinion this is still the best third of the whole book. The Two Towers. Please correct me if I am wrong, but I think Tolkien created the first fantasy trilogy if you consider his big book being split in three parts by the publisher. In this case he was also the guy who created the first Middle Book of a Trilogy Syndrome case.

See a Problem?

The idea is that the first book has to have an interesting beginning of a conflict and the last book has to have an exciting conclusion which leaves the second book with the boring job of building a bridge between the two.

The Two Towers clearly shows this. I also do believe that the second part about Frodo and Sam being miserable can be made much shorter without any loss. I have the impression that while Tolkien tried to show the tragedy of a war, he still glorifies battles if they are fought for the just cause. Much later it was Glen Cook in his Black Company who showed that war is a really dirty business, no matter what side.

The Return of the King. Once again the part about the misery of Frodo and Sam can be shortened, but not to the extent as in The Two Towers. It looks like the editors were asleep at their job as much at the time the book was written as they are now. Did anybody else had the impression that Gandalf the White was more useless overall than Gandalf the Grey? Did you notice that Sauron never ever makes a personal appearance?

Tolkien made an excellent job of creating a menacing bad guy without showing him even once. This was also probably the first time an extremely annoying trope was used: This one made an appearance countless times ever since and by now really overstayed its welcome.

You might also like: THE ULTIMATE FAKE BOOK PDF

The last line of the book is brilliant and is as a perfect ending as it could possibly be. I only found one other fantasy series which came close to this perfection: This part is shorter as it contains numerous appendices, notes, etc. Reading them actually gave me a headache. They do contain some minimalistic info about the further fates of surviving characters. To make a long story short the mortal guys died with time.

I also realized that Middle Earth is not a nice place to live as wars were raging non-stop through its long history. In the conclusion I have a seemingly unrelated advice to my American friends. Do you have a tough choice in November between voting for a really bad person and an equally bad person? I will make it easy for you: View all 38 comments. Mar 20, Michael Finocchiaro rated it it was amazing Shelves: One of the greatest trilogies of all time and certainly the measuring stick to which all subsequent fantasy-style writing is compared, The Lord of the Rings trilogy still stands at the top of the stack.

Its realism, the characters and monsters, the storyline, the epic battles, and the quest motif are all drawn with incredible care by Tolkien in his chef d'oeuvre. My favorite was The Two Towers but all three are absolutely stunning. It has been a few decades since I read them so perhaps this year One of the greatest trilogies of all time and certainly the measuring stick to which all subsequent fantasy-style writing is compared, The Lord of the Rings trilogy still stands at the top of the stack.

It has been a few decades since I read them so perhaps this year I will have to journey back to Middle Earth once again. View all 14 comments. The story began as a sequel to Tolkien's fantasy novel The Hobbit, but eventually developed into a much larger work. Written in stages between and , The Lord of the Rings is one of the best-selling novels ever written, with over million copies sold.

The title of the novel refers to t The title of the novel refers to the story's main antagonist, the Dark Lord Sauron, who had in an earlier age created the One Ring to rule the other Rings of Power as the ultimate weapon in his campaign to conquer and rule all of Middle-earth.

Nineteen of these rings were made. These were grouped into three rings for the Elves, seven rings for the Dwarves, and nine rings for men. From quiet beginnings in the Shire, a hobbit land not unlike the English countryside, the story ranges across Middle-earth, following the course of the War of the Ring through the eyes of its characters, not only the hobbits Frodo Baggins, Samwise "Sam" Gamgee, Meriadoc "Merry" Brandybuck and Peregrin "Pippin" Took, but also the hobbits' chief allies and travelling companions: View all 4 comments.

I will write three separate reviews and combine them here as I think all three books cover so much that I need to put my thoughts down. So here is my review-within-a-review for The Fellowship of the Ring: I read this the first time as a young teen but really didn't appreciate it much. I came to know about Hobbits through school mates who kept talking abpout the then upcoming first movie by Peter Jackson.

I went to watch it but was unimpressed, almost bored even until the last quarter at least. I loved the mythology but little else. Nevertheless, I got the book and went to the trouble of finding and buying a special edition which was not easy back then. I read it but most went over my head. Today I want to spank myself and not in a good way for ever thinking like that.

Because if you know the book, and maybe The Hobbit as well, you can see just how much of a fan Peter Jackson is. Sooo many details only insiders will recognize. And the book is a thing to behold. But I'm getting ahead of myself. This first part introduces us to the world of Middle-Earth Arda.

There, elves, trolls, hobbits, goblins, orks, giant eagles and wolves, but also more sinister things dwell. And wizards, though I think that name is misleading here. Great evil has this world seen in the past and while it was defeated, it is on the rise again as these things are wont to do.

Sauron is the name of the great evil here and a long time ago he forged a ring of power to bind all other rings as well as people of Middle-Earth.

And just like a certain dark wizard of a more modern tale, he poured his soul into this master ring so it didn't matter when his body got destroyed thousands of years before the events of this first book. But this ring has been found now - by one of the most innocent creatures in this world, of all things. The alliance that failed to vanquish evil from the world thousands of years ago is now represented in the titular fellowship comprising of a dwarf, an elf, two men, a wizard and four hobbits.

And they march to destroy the ring - and thus evil - before Sauron can restore himself to his full power again. Their quest leads them through forests, over mountains, on streams and through mines. But that is not the most important part, actually.

Most important is the fact that Tolkien was a wordsmith. He was not only a scholar at one of THE most famous universities in the world; he was not only fluent in several languages; he was not only keen on any mythology you can think of.

He combined all of that in his writing. Apparently, he didn't write it to get published, thinking nobody would be interested, and thus wrote to his heart's content. He included songs and poems, stating more than once that true magic lies in both as is represented by the elves for example.

His nature descriptions are not only sweeping and vivid, but also utterly beautiful. His dialogues, while being quite wordy, are fluent and artistic. Linguists have marvelled over Tolkien's affinity and mastery for generations and I feel the same.

Many authors use made-up languages but not a single one of them actually sat down and drew up one as whole as Tolkien did. Thus, Tolkien has truly created an entire world, complete with art, history, mythology, geography look at those gorgeous maps , politics, different peoples, languages The only thing he didn't manage to convey as wonderfully as Peter Jackson with his films was the action. At least not here in the first book. It is suspenseful, but the impact of the encounter with the Balrog for example was much more touching and shocking in the movie at least to me.

The same goes for Arwen and Frodo being chased by the Black Riders until they cross the stream around Rivendell. Maybe it's because he was fed up with war he fought in WW1 or maybe he wanted to hold back and then hit the reader with full force in the end battle.

Or he just didn't have the same concept of action as most of us do nowadays. I'm not quite sure. Nevertheless, one feels the pathos look up the original word and its meaning , one believes the characters when they act out of integrity and honour and never once thinks it's pretentious of them again, the Boromir-scene in the movie makes me cry, the one in the book didn't.

I've re-watched the extended version of the first movie and I've noticed sooo many details I had missed before, it was astonishing. Here is my review-within-a-review for The Two Towers: This second book had fewer songs and poems and yes, I missed them. In this second part of the trilogy, the fellowship has broken up. Aragorn, Gimli and Legolas are persuing the Uruk'hai and orks that have taken Merry and Pippin while Frodo and Sam are trying to find their way to Mordor.

Whether or not that is a good idea remains to be seen. Moreover, Saruman is showing his true multi colours and thus sends an army to destroy Rohan and its inhabitants. But he didn't count on Merry and Pippin making some new friends in Fangorn forest and then there are also the Rohirrim, the formidable cavalry of the horse lords.

This second volume certainly saw more action. However, much like in the first book, many of those scenes were handled slightly better in the movie I shall re-watch the second one tomorrow or the day after. What the book has that the movie simply couldn't have, is a certain depth.The title of the novel refers to the story's main antagonist, the Dark Lord Sauron, who had in an earlier age created the One Ring to rule the other Rings of Power as the ultimate weapon in his campaign to conquer and rule all of Middle-earth.

There, elves, trolls, hobbits, goblins, orks, giant eagles and wolves, but also more sinister things dwell. I found some typos though, hahha. Showing I simply ask that when reading this work, keep in mind all that has gone into it, as well what has yet to come.

All authors knows how important names are, and use them to suggest character; though when you think about what is going on, it is rather surprising how much can be conveyed just by a name. View all 4 comments. Whether to reconcile to the work, or to reconcile the work to myself.

Tolkien sets out his stall early on in Book One with detailed descriptions, dense prose, background histories,poetry and a whole new language.