/lit/ - Literature

>>8427989
>Okay, so I've done some thinking and I think you guys are right. Tolkien could kick my ass when it comes to linguistics. He's a linguistic major, first and foremost, and where that is concerned, he'd definitely have it out for me.
It's not just language, it's also about story. Almost everything in Middle Earth parallels or alludes to some other great work. The tale of Turin for example mirrors both the Finnish myth of Kalevala which while not very recognizable in the English world itself mirrors Oedipus. The very nature and structure of the tale has literary merit.


>BUT, I'm an anthropology major with an emphasis on politics. When it comes to believable empires with functioning systems, livable cities with functioning roads and buildings, relatable tales of the common man, and believable metalworking, stone masonry, animal husbandry, and tons of other shit Tolkien did not explicitly get into, then I would whole-heartedly whoop his fucking butt.
This is honestly something a 10 year old thinks. "My world is realistic, that makes it good, people die and poop and everything". Only an idiot think Tolkien failed to incorporate what you describe as an asset and didn't intentionally focus on other things, precisely because TLotR is styled as a classicial fairy tale, it wouldn't be appropriate to dwell on politics and the minutia of life.