 |
|
|
|
Next: gandolf the white and melkor
|
| Author |
Message |
External
Since: Jun 26, 2003
Posts: 2
|
(Msg. 1) Posted: Mon Oct 20, 2003 1:16 am
Post subject: LotR and the BBC "Big Read"
Archived from groups: rec>arts>books>tolkien (more info?)
|
|
|
Hi,
Many of you probaby don't know that UK TV recently held a poll to
discover the best 100 books ever, voted for by the public. They picked
the top 21 off the list and are currently have a "re-vote" on those
alone to discover the best book of all. LotR was, of course, in that
top 21.
My partner, not unreasonably given the volumes of HoME on my
bookshelf, presumed that I'd be voting for LotR. But I thought about
it and decided no, I couldn't really vote it as the greatest book
ever. I'm not sure what I would give that honour to but from the list
of 21, it'd have to be Ninteen Eighty Four or To Kill a Mockingbird.
If I had to pick a Tolkien book it'd probably be the Silmarillion
anyway. And then of course, I had to think why that'd be, hence this
post.
There's obviously a lot to admire in LotR otherwise I wouldn't bother
being here making this post. Tolkien achieved three things with LotR,
two of which are (I suspect) pretty unique in literature. First, he
set a pattern for a genera which defined fantasy literature for
several decades and which is still (to a lesser extent) being followed
today. Other authors have done this. Second he created something which
reads and feels like genuine mythology. This is because of his
unrivalled understanding of the mythic archetypes that he re-creates
so brilliantly in LotR. Thirdly he is the only fantasy/sci-fi author
I've ever come across to have an (almost) entirely consistant and
fulfilling universe in which to set his stories. This is something
which hasn't even been re-created by entire teams of designers working
on RPG products.
So then, why can't I recommend it for the "big read"? There are some
commonly pointed flaws of course: some people think parts of it are
boring, but I always find the themes of Frodo's struggle with the
ring, and Sam/Frodo/Gollums evolving relationship more than enough to
keep me going through these supposedly dull bits. Some people say all
his major female characters are too masculine, which is true but
hardly enough it itself to damn a book. So what is it? Well, simply
put, I believe that great literature should teach the reader something
about life, the human condition, themselves. And on this, LotR fails.
It's allegroical themes are thinly veiled, not deeply explored and
hardly original. For that alone, I'd have to give my vote to another
book. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 | |
External
Since: Feb 17, 2004
Posts: 50
|
(Msg. 2) Posted: Mon Oct 20, 2003 10:44 am
Post subject: Re: LotR and the BBC "Big Read" [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
On 20 Oct 2003 01:16:58 -0700, matthew.thrower.RemoveThis@cramersystems.com (Matt
Thrower) wrote:
>Hi,
>
>Many of you probaby don't know that UK TV recently held a poll to
>discover the best 100 books ever, voted for by the public. They picked
>the top 21 off the list and are currently have a "re-vote" on those
>alone to discover the best book of all. LotR was, of course, in that
>top 21.
>
>My partner, not unreasonably given the volumes of HoME on my
>bookshelf, presumed that I'd be voting for LotR. But I thought about
>it and decided no, I couldn't really vote it as the greatest book
>ever.
The vote is not for "the greatest book ever". It's for the
"best-loved" book. Does that change your vote? 1984 is a great book,
but is it really the book you love the most?
My best-loved isn't LotR either, by the way, it's Pride and Prejudice.
--
Alison |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Nov 06, 2003
Posts: 55
|
(Msg. 3) Posted: Mon Oct 20, 2003 3:51 pm
Post subject: Re: LotR and the BBC "Big Read" [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
On 20 Oct 2003 01:16:58 -0700,
Matt Thrower <matthew.thrower.RemoveThis@cramersystems.com> wrote:
>
> So then, why can't I recommend it for the "big read"? There are some
> commonly pointed flaws of course: some people think parts of it are
> boring, but I always find the themes of Frodo's struggle with the
> ring, and Sam/Frodo/Gollums evolving relationship more than enough to
> keep me going through these supposedly dull bits. Some people say all
> his major female characters are too masculine, which is true but
> hardly enough it itself to damn a book. So what is it? Well, simply
> put, I believe that great literature should teach the reader something
> about life, the human condition, themselves. And on this, LotR fails.
> It's allegroical themes are thinly veiled, not deeply explored and
> hardly original. For that alone, I'd have to give my vote to another
> book.
Let's see. Friendship. Perserverence. Faith. All messages from LotR. As
to the "allegorical themes", have you ever pondered that perhaps it is what
you are reading into it, and not necessarily any content in the book.
But this sounds alot like trollbait I've read here before. Let me ask you.
Do you think Homer has any literary value?
--
Aaron Clausen
taocow.RemoveThis@alberni.net >> Stay informed about: LotR and the BBC "Big Read" |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Feb 02, 2004
Posts: 85
|
(Msg. 4) Posted: Mon Oct 20, 2003 3:59 pm
Post subject: Re: LotR and the BBC "Big Read" [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Matt Thrower wrote:
> put, I believe that great literature should teach the reader something
> about life, the human condition, themselves. And on this, LotR fails.
> It's allegroical themes are thinly veiled, not deeply explored and
> hardly original.
The way I'd put it is, it isn't provocative enough. It doesn't _demand_
analysis. Yes, you can analyze it if you want, and it stands the
exercise pretty well, but you can also just have a nice, satisfying read
and be done with it. >> Stay informed about: LotR and the BBC "Big Read" |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Jan 31, 2004
Posts: 651
|
(Msg. 5) Posted: Mon Oct 20, 2003 3:59 pm
Post subject: Re: LotR and the BBC "Big Read" [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
On Mon, 20 Oct 2003 15:59:10 -0400, Chelsea Christenson
<Chelsea.Christenson DeleteThis @nospam.com> wrote:
>Matt Thrower wrote:
>
>> put, I believe that great literature should teach the reader something
>> about life, the human condition, themselves. And on this, LotR fails.
>> It's allegroical themes are thinly veiled, not deeply explored and
>> hardly original.
>
>The way I'd put it is, it isn't provocative enough. It doesn't _demand_
>analysis. Yes, you can analyze it if you want, and it stands the
>exercise pretty well, but you can also just have a nice, satisfying read
>and be done with it.
You mean: Real Life is Hard and Ugly so Real Literature should be Hard
and Ugly too?
Pooey!
the softrat ==> Careful!
I have a hug and I know how to use it!
mailto:softrat@pobox.com
--
Not the brightest crayon in the box, now, are we? >> Stay informed about: LotR and the BBC "Big Read" |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Feb 05, 2004
Posts: 14
|
(Msg. 6) Posted: Mon Oct 20, 2003 8:42 pm
Post subject: Re: LotR and the BBC "Big Read" [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Stan Brown <the_stan_brown DeleteThis @fastmail.fm> wrote in
news:MPG.19fe03d469f43e8a98b5e3@news.odyssey.net:
> In article <60e5979a.0310200016.61b7f6a4 DeleteThis @posting.google.com> in
>
> Good for you, Matt. You echo my sentiments.
>
> LotR is very very good (for some of the reasons you cite), but "best
> book ever"? I think not.
>
> And if it were just on "best loved", I would vote (with you) for
> /Silm/ before LotR. But much as I like it, I don't think even /Silm/
> is my favorite book.
>
Not that you care, but I find myself in the unusual position of actually
agreeing with you.
Bob >> Stay informed about: LotR and the BBC "Big Read" |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Feb 02, 2004
Posts: 85
|
(Msg. 7) Posted: Mon Oct 20, 2003 9:41 pm
Post subject: Re: LotR and the BBC "Big Read" [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
the softrat wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Oct 2003 15:59:10 -0400, Chelsea Christenson
> <Chelsea.Christenson.TakeThisOut@nospam.com> wrote:
>
>>The way I'd put it is, it isn't provocative enough. It doesn't _demand_
>>analysis. Yes, you can analyze it if you want, and it stands the
>>exercise pretty well, but you can also just have a nice, satisfying read
>>and be done with it.
>
>
> You mean: Real Life is Hard and Ugly so Real Literature should be Hard
> and Ugly too?
No. I mean "Real Literature" should make you think -- about what you
value, what you believe, what you hope for, what you fear. That is the
most that literature (or any art form) can aspire to.
> Pooey!
Got left with a bit of straw man in your mouth, I see. >> Stay informed about: LotR and the BBC "Big Read" |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
|
coyotes morgan mair fheal
|
External
Since: Nov 06, 2003
Posts: 31
|
(Msg. 8) Posted: Mon Oct 20, 2003 9:41 pm
Post subject: Re: LotR and the BBC "Big Read" [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
In article <3F948EB2.50600 RemoveThis @nospam.com>, Chelsea Christenson
<Chelsea.Christenson RemoveThis @nospam.com> wrote:
> the softrat wrote:
> > On Mon, 20 Oct 2003 15:59:10 -0400, Chelsea Christenson
> > <Chelsea.Christenson RemoveThis @nospam.com> wrote:
> >
> >>The way I'd put it is, it isn't provocative enough. It doesn't _demand_
> >>analysis. Yes, you can analyze it if you want, and it stands the
> >>exercise pretty well, but you can also just have a nice, satisfying read
> >>and be done with it.
> >
> >
> > You mean: Real Life is Hard and Ugly so Real Literature should be Hard
> > and Ugly too?
>
> No. I mean "Real Literature" should make you think -- about what you
> value, what you believe, what you hope for, what you fear. That is the
> most that literature (or any art form) can aspire to.
depends what you mean by -literature-
alot of whats produced nowadays under that label
is incestuous work produced and critiqued by academics
for the benefit of academics to prove their needs for grants chairs
amd the adulation of the hoi polloi
if by literature you mean books that elict an emotional response
you would have to consider romance novels in that
as for art
there are two reasons to do art
one is to communicate some idea
in which case it the artist who is initiating the communication
and must take responsibility for the protocols
rather than sneering at people they cannot communicate with
second and far more prevalent reason
is the artist wants to make a concrete expression of something from within
for the artists own satisdfaction
regardless of what others think
(though a little lucre for the paint and canvas would be nice) >> Stay informed about: LotR and the BBC "Big Read" |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Nov 06, 2003
Posts: 55
|
(Msg. 9) Posted: Mon Oct 20, 2003 10:09 pm
Post subject: Re: LotR and the BBC "Big Read" [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
On Mon, 20 Oct 2003 15:01:58 -0700,
the softrat <softrat DeleteThis @pobox.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Oct 2003 15:59:10 -0400, Chelsea Christenson
><Chelsea.Christenson DeleteThis @nospam.com> wrote:
>
>>Matt Thrower wrote:
>>
>>> put, I believe that great literature should teach the reader something
>>> about life, the human condition, themselves. And on this, LotR fails.
>>> It's allegroical themes are thinly veiled, not deeply explored and
>>> hardly original.
>>
>>The way I'd put it is, it isn't provocative enough. It doesn't _demand_
>>analysis. Yes, you can analyze it if you want, and it stands the
>>exercise pretty well, but you can also just have a nice, satisfying read
>>and be done with it.
>
> You mean: Real Life is Hard and Ugly so Real Literature should be Hard
> and Ugly too?
>
> Pooey!
Indeed. If you aren't weeping or completely confused by the end of the
book, it can't be great literature. Come on, Softie, this is what
Literature with a capital "L" is. If it's the least bit enjoyable, or
doesn't beat you over the head with heady morals and deep themes, then it's
just mass-consumption tripe. That's why I advocate removing Homer's Illiad
and the Gilgamesh epic from school and university libraries. No more silly
stories about Greek and Sumerian gods. That drivel just doesn't make you
think the way some long-winded Margaret Atwood novel does.
--
Aaron Clausen
taocow DeleteThis @alberni.net >> Stay informed about: LotR and the BBC "Big Read" |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Jan 31, 2004
Posts: 651
|
(Msg. 10) Posted: Mon Oct 20, 2003 10:09 pm
Post subject: Re: LotR and the BBC "Big Read" [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
On 20 Oct 2003 22:09:58 GMT, AC <taocow.RemoveThis@alberni.net> wrote:
>On Mon, 20 Oct 2003 15:01:58 -0700,
>the softrat <softrat.RemoveThis@pobox.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, 20 Oct 2003 15:59:10 -0400, Chelsea Christenson
>><Chelsea.Christenson.RemoveThis@nospam.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Matt Thrower wrote:
>>>
>>>> put, I believe that great literature should teach the reader something
>>>> about life, the human condition, themselves. And on this, LotR fails.
>>>> It's allegroical themes are thinly veiled, not deeply explored and
>>>> hardly original.
>>>
>>>The way I'd put it is, it isn't provocative enough. It doesn't _demand_
>>>analysis. Yes, you can analyze it if you want, and it stands the
>>>exercise pretty well, but you can also just have a nice, satisfying read
>>>and be done with it.
>>
>> You mean: Real Life is Hard and Ugly so Real Literature should be Hard
>> and Ugly too?
>>
>> Pooey!
>
>Indeed. If you aren't weeping or completely confused by the end of the
>book, it can't be great literature. Come on, Softie, this is what
>Literature with a capital "L" is. If it's the least bit enjoyable, or
>doesn't beat you over the head with heady morals and deep themes, then it's
>just mass-consumption tripe. That's why I advocate removing Homer's Illiad
>and the Gilgamesh epic from school and university libraries. No more silly
>stories about Greek and Sumerian gods. That drivel just doesn't make you
>think the way some long-winded Margaret Atwood novel does.
Yeah! And pull Shakespeare too. After all he's DIRTY! And Goethe and
Dante and ...
(Are Russian novels as difficult in Russian as they are in
translation?)
the softrat ==> Careful!
I have a hug and I know how to use it!
mailto:softrat@pobox.com
--
When I'm not in my right mind, my left mind gets pretty crowded. >> Stay informed about: LotR and the BBC "Big Read" |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Feb 05, 2004
Posts: 14
|
(Msg. 11) Posted: Tue Oct 21, 2003 12:13 am
Post subject: Re: LotR and the BBC "Big Read" [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
AC <taocow.RemoveThis@alberni.net> wrote in
news:slrnbp8n9l.6ip.taocow@clausen.alberni.net:
>
> Indeed. If you aren't weeping or completely confused by the end of
> the book, it can't be great literature. Come on, Softie, this is what
> Literature with a capital "L" is. If it's the least bit enjoyable, or
> doesn't beat you over the head with heady morals and deep themes, then
> it's just mass-consumption tripe. That's why I advocate removing
> Homer's Illiad and the Gilgamesh epic from school and university
> libraries. No more silly stories about Greek and Sumerian gods. That
> drivel just doesn't make you think the way some long-winded Margaret
> Atwood novel does.
>
Of course your blanket dismissal of capital "L" literature has about as
much merit as any blanket dismissal of Tolkien. This kind of us versus
them thing always baffles me. Why dismiss someone for attempting to tackle
"heady" moral themes? Is it because someone else slighted Tolkien as light
weight for what we consider tale well told? I applaud anyone who attempts
to take on big themes, or try stylistic acts of magic; but of course I
reserve the right to point out when they fail. >> Stay informed about: LotR and the BBC "Big Read" |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Jun 26, 2003
Posts: 2
|
(Msg. 12) Posted: Tue Oct 21, 2003 1:26 am
Post subject: Re: LotR and the BBC "Big Read" [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
AC <taocow.DeleteThis@alberni.net> wrote in message news:<slrnbp814t.5pp.taocow.DeleteThis@clausen.alberni.net>...
> On 20 Oct 2003 01:16:58 -0700,
> Matt Thrower <matthew.thrower.DeleteThis@cramersystems.com> wrote:
> >
> > So then, why can't I recommend it for the "big read"? There are some
> > commonly pointed flaws of course: some people think parts of it are
> > boring, but I always find the themes of Frodo's struggle with the
> > ring, and Sam/Frodo/Gollums evolving relationship more than enough to
> > keep me going through these supposedly dull bits. Some people say all
> > his major female characters are too masculine, which is true but
> > hardly enough it itself to damn a book. So what is it? Well, simply
> > put, I believe that great literature should teach the reader something
> > about life, the human condition, themselves. And on this, LotR fails.
> > It's allegroical themes are thinly veiled, not deeply explored and
> > hardly original. For that alone, I'd have to give my vote to another
> > book.
>
> Let's see. Friendship. Perserverence. Faith. All messages from LotR. As
> to the "allegorical themes", have you ever pondered that perhaps it is what
> you are reading into it, and not necessarily any content in the book.
You're right about the "allegorical themes" especially since the
author denied there weren't any! I find it difficult to believe that
at the very least though, it subconciously reflects some of his
opinions and prejudices. However, that's my opinion. And while you're
right about there being messages in the book, they tend to be the
sorts of things that we take for granted in life, rather than the true
complexities that we encounter in the world.
> But this sounds alot like trollbait I've read here before. Let me ask you.
> Do you think Homer has any literary value?
It's not trollbait: I was slightly shocked to discover that when I
actually had to think about the question LotR didn't come out on top.
I wanted to know how other people felt. It doesn't detract from my
opinion of LotR as a great book, or as great literature. As I said
originally I think it (or at least, Tolkiens univese) is unique which
*isn't* something you could say about most "great" books. I've never
read Homer. I've read Chaucer, Beowulf and the Táin Bó Cúalnge though
and no, I'd not say any of that was great literature: it's interesting
primarily for it's historical and cultural value. >> Stay informed about: LotR and the BBC "Big Read" |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Nov 06, 2003
Posts: 55
|
(Msg. 13) Posted: Tue Oct 21, 2003 2:51 am
Post subject: Re: LotR and the BBC "Big Read" [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
On Mon, 20 Oct 2003 21:41:06 -0400,
Chelsea Christenson <Chelsea.Christenson DeleteThis @nospam.com> wrote:
> the softrat wrote:
>> On Mon, 20 Oct 2003 15:59:10 -0400, Chelsea Christenson
>> <Chelsea.Christenson DeleteThis @nospam.com> wrote:
>>
>>>The way I'd put it is, it isn't provocative enough. It doesn't _demand_
>>>analysis. Yes, you can analyze it if you want, and it stands the
>>>exercise pretty well, but you can also just have a nice, satisfying read
>>>and be done with it.
>>
>>
>> You mean: Real Life is Hard and Ugly so Real Literature should be Hard
>> and Ugly too?
>
> No. I mean "Real Literature" should make you think -- about what you
> value, what you believe, what you hope for, what you fear. That is the
> most that literature (or any art form) can aspire to.
LotR did that for me. But perhaps I'm just a low class Joe with mongrel
tastes and too little wit to perceive that lofty pinnacle called "Real
Literature". I'll leave the great intellects like yourself to decide who
gets to wear the precious "Real Literature" badge.
>
>> Pooey!
>
> Got left with a bit of straw man in your mouth, I see.
I think he had an overdose of arrogance.
--
Aaron Clausen
taocow DeleteThis @alberni.net >> Stay informed about: LotR and the BBC "Big Read" |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Feb 11, 2004
Posts: 537
|
(Msg. 14) Posted: Tue Oct 21, 2003 3:08 am
Post subject: Re: LotR and the BBC "Big Read" [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
AC <taocow.TakeThisOut@alberni.net> wrote:
: On Mon, 20 Oct 2003 21:41:06 -0400,
: Chelsea Christenson <Chelsea.Christenson.TakeThisOut@nospam.com> wrote:
:>
:> No. I mean "Real Literature" should make you think -- about what you
:> value, what you believe, what you hope for, what you fear. That is the
:> most that literature (or any art form) can aspire to.
: LotR did that for me. But perhaps I'm just a low class Joe with mongrel
: tastes and too little wit to perceive that lofty pinnacle called "Real
: Literature". I'll leave the great intellects like yourself to decide who
: gets to wear the precious "Real Literature" badge.
:>
:>> Pooey!
:>
:> Got left with a bit of straw man in your mouth, I see.
: I think he had an overdose of arrogance.
: --
: Aaron Clausen
What is arrogant about saying that LotR does not demand analysis?
Are others not entitled to an opinion? I have not seen anyone
other than yourself dismiss the opinions of others in this thread.
Lots of people do not think LotR is great literature, and many
of them have perfectly valid reasons for their opinion. You
do not have to agree, but your sarcastic dismissal of their
opinions is a poor response.
Stephen >> Stay informed about: LotR and the BBC "Big Read" |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Oct 21, 2003
Posts: 1
|
(Msg. 15) Posted: Tue Oct 21, 2003 4:53 am
Post subject: Re: LotR and the BBC "Big Read" [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
You guys! Why not argue that red is better than blue? Too often people
confuse "best" and "best-loved", the ensuing arguments whilst
entertaining, are utterly pointless. Tolkien is my best-loved author
and as such LOTR will be getting my vote. This doesn't mean I think
it's the best book ever written (how would I know ? I have only read
about 400 books in my life!). Another example - my Ford Focus is
obviously "better" then my first mini 850cc but the mini still stands
as the favourite.
stephen DeleteThis @nomail.com wrote in message news:<bn27vn$134c$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu>...
> AC <taocow DeleteThis @alberni.net> wrote:
> : On Mon, 20 Oct 2003 21:41:06 -0400,
> : Chelsea Christenson <Chelsea.Christenson DeleteThis @nospam.com> wrote:
> :>
> :> No. I mean "Real Literature" should make you think -- about what you
> :> value, what you believe, what you hope for, what you fear. That is the
> :> most that literature (or any art form) can aspire to.
>
> : LotR did that for me. But perhaps I'm just a low class Joe with mongrel
> : tastes and too little wit to perceive that lofty pinnacle called "Real
> : Literature". I'll leave the great intellects like yourself to decide who
> : gets to wear the precious "Real Literature" badge.
>
> :>
> :>> Pooey!
> :>
> :> Got left with a bit of straw man in your mouth, I see.
>
> : I think he had an overdose of arrogance.
>
> : --
> : Aaron Clausen
>
> What is arrogant about saying that LotR does not demand analysis?
> Are others not entitled to an opinion? I have not seen anyone
> other than yourself dismiss the opinions of others in this thread.
>
> Lots of people do not think LotR is great literature, and many
> of them have perfectly valid reasons for their opinion. You
> do not have to agree, but your sarcastic dismissal of their
> opinions is a poor response.
>
> Stephen >> Stay informed about: LotR and the BBC "Big Read" |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
| Related Topics: | as I read LOTR ? - would it be a good idea for me to post a discussion of each chapter after I have read it ? I have just taken the sacred text out of the carrier bag from the shop, and I can't wait to finish Of Mice and Men, so I can "Get the Party Started" - t...
Any other good LOTR type books to read out there? - Hi I'll be finished reading LOTR soon (in about 2 weeks time :-P). Any other good LOTR/fantasy type books to read out there by other authors? Lee
What is LotR *really* about? - Seemingly an easy question to answer: "it's about Frodo's quest to destroy the One Ring and, as a backdrop, about the war in Middle- earth". But it's not that simple, is it. So what *is* it about?
name of that Orc in LOTR - What is the name of that Orc who says that line that goes like "The era of the human has ended" (something like that)
3-in-1 LotR edition - I bought the recent Houghton 3-in-1 but many text lines were smeared and some pages were printed crooked. Also the page with the ring writing had the wrong font in the wrong places. They don't make things like they used to, huh. |
|
You can post new topics in this forum
You can reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Profile
Private Messages
Log in
