'The Lord of the Rings" - book review part 2

The Lord of the Rings

by

J R R Tolkien

A book review - part 2

Welcome to part 2 of my review of the Lord of the Rings (LOTR). We established that LOTR is, without doubt, one of the best books of this genre - in fact, of any genre - ever written and now on to the book review proper.

The LOTR was written by J. R. R. Tolkien (1892 - 1972), an Englishman, who was an expert on Anglo-Saxon literature and also worked on the Oxford English Dictionary. Tolkien loved inventing languages as a hobby 😮 and LOTR supposedly grew out of that habit. Certainly, I don't know of any other fiction author who has invented multiple languages for his/her books complete with grammar, syntax and everything! There are online courses in Quenya (which was the language of the High Elves). Another reason for the creation of the book was that Tolkien felt that England deserved a heroic mythology of its own, similar to the Germanic tradition. From this desire grew the "Silmarillion", which was a sort of magnum opus of Tolkien. He started working on a rudimentary form from the 1920s which was finally published posthumously by his son. Probably, the LOTR was just a minor side project (still took 10 years - this gives me hope that I may achieve something great too!!)

As far as the story goes, it is not very complicated. It takes off about 60 odd years after the events of  'The Hobbit' - to which this book is a direct sequel. The reader gets a long and informative prologue, just to lay out matters concerning Hobbits and the geography of the Shire i.e. where the hobbits live. The story then starts off nice and slow, with the hundred and eleventh (or eleventy-first, in Tolkien's words!) birthday of Bilbo Baggins, who is of course the protagonist of the aforementioned 'The Hobbit'.

Bilbo passes on his ring and other effects to his nephew and heir Frodo and sort of retires. The ring of course turns out to be the ultimate lost weapon and possession of the titular Lord of the Rings, Sauron. Sauron, like magicians in an Arabian Nights tale, who store their soul in parrots for safekeeping, has poured out most of his power into  the ring. He can be destroyed only when the ring is. The crux of the story revolves around the journey of Frodo and his companions to take the ring to only place where it can be destroyed, which also happens to be Sauron's stronghold.

I especially like the pacing of the story - it's like one is going on a long journey, with the start slow and sedate and gradually picking up speed. Later on the speed picks up significantly, with multiple story lines taking place simultaneously. Nowadays, especially in fantasy fiction, the fashion is to drop the reader in the middle of the action, without any explanation or build up, the so called exposition. I prefer the prior approach, with lots of details and backstories. It's the approach that most Indian epics have. The narrative architecture of the Ramayana, the Mahabharata or even the Panchtantra, consists basically of a story within a story within a story, like a Russian Doll or the structure of an atom. Being brought up the great epics, I absolutely relish the similar approach of the LOTR.

One gets a sense of immense history in the LOTR. The author's skill is such that every hill and valley, every mountain and every building resonates with a life of its own. Indeed, it is rightly said that the landscape is also character in the book! The best example of this would be the characterisation of  the ruined dwarf stronghold of Moria. The sense of lost grandeur, of immense space and of simultaneous claustrophobia, of courage and terror, of the terror of the unknown and of the ancient world is almost palpable. The prose flows like water and the reader is carried along on the flow. When the chapter ends and the other one starts, it feels like getting off a boat ride over river rapids. Two other segments in the book fit in the same description - the battle of Helm's deep and that of the Pelennor fields.

A striking point in the book is the absolute lack of magical powers in any of the main characters, except to a limited extent in Gandalf and maybe Legolas. The protagonists are absolutely, even blandly, normal. The hobbits are small, can't fight, are well mannered gentlemen. In fact, they are just like what most of us are but don't want to be. Frodo is picked to carry the Ring, a huge burden. The Ring corrupts anyone who dares to carry it. The temptations and dilemnas Frodo faces are remniscent and representative of what one faces in life. The student who has to study, the poor man who considers theft, the bureaucrat who refuses a bribe, are all part of the same struggle. The Ring in this sense is a metaphor for unchecked desire and greed. 

The LOTR is not as simple and easy a book as it first appears. It is not a childs' tale of dragons and swords. There are no happy endings, only bittersweet ones, to put it in Tolkien's words. All great tales pose questions to the reader and LOTR is no different. 

All good things must come to an end, so here I rest my pen and my keyboard, and conclude my two part review of 'The Lord of the Rings'.