Reading Silmarillion

[Bowman]

I read The Hobbit and the LotR series some 15-20 years ago, and I hated them. Sauron was a chump who never actually did anything, the protagonists felt like they were all thoroughly coated in plot armor, too much Tom Bombadil, etc. But playing Angband piqued my interest in that lore again, so I decided to take a chance on reading The Silmarillion. So far, I've gotten through the first major part (from "Ainulindale" to "Of the Voyage of Earendil and the War of Wrath"), and I've actually enjoyed it. I mean, sure, there are still annoying parts (like the chapter dedicated to describing the then-current geography), but it's still been leaps and bounds better than the big 4.

Way-to-short reactions to the most notable characters thus far: Eol was a total badass and by far the coolest character thus far, though I've got to give some props to Ungoliant, Gothmog, Arien, Fingolfin, Huan, Glaurung, and Turin. Feanor and Thingol were massive tools, and despite the text's claim that he was "no weakling or craven", Maeglin acted more like a beta-Wormtongue than the defiant figure of strength that was his father. Disappointed in how little Ancalagon was involved (I'd think that the greatest of the dragons, powerful enough to hold back the army of the Valar, would get more than an introduction and a death in a page's span ), but alas. Oh, and I was surprised that Thuringwethil was an actual character.

Just wondering if playing Angband got anyone else to try reading Tolkien.

[PowerWyrm]

Just wondering if playing Angband got anyone else to try reading Tolkien.

Usually it's the opposite

[fizzix]

I reread the Silmarillion because of Angband. I read it when I was much younger and I couldn't really follow anything. It was a lot easier when I had references to a lot of the characters from Angband.

I also felt that some creatures (like Ancalagon) could have gotten more "screen-time" but Tolkien was very good in making the world seem bigger than the text portrays. So there are lots of things that he obliquely refers to but never describes fully, and you're left to fill in the gaps yourself. That's really what makes LoTR's world so much better than many other fantasy worlds.

In a way it's kind of like roguelikes.

[Nick]

I found Turin unbelievably frustrating - just when you thought he was going to get his life in order, he'd go and do another dumb thing. Which was kind of the point, but still.

Once you're done with the Silmarillion, I'd recommend Unfinished Tales, and if you're still interested there's a bunch of additional material spread through Christopher Tolkien's History of Middle Earth series.

[taptap]

Just wondering if playing Angband got anyone else to try reading Tolkien.

Sil made me read the Silmarillion.

[Bowman]

I reread the Silmarillion because of Angband. I read it when I was much younger and I couldn't really follow anything. It was a lot easier when I had references to a lot of the characters from Angband.

Knowing about the characters from Angband has definitely been helpful, even if some of the information doesn't quite match up (e.g. the Angband description for Gorlim says he fell to the forces of Morgoth, which is technically true, but it's misleading since he really fell to Sauron). Also, I won't deny getting amped up whenever I come across a name that I recognize from Angband, even if it's just something like the passing references to Thuringwethil. Really looking forward to reading about Ar-Pharazon in the next parts, since he's easily my favorite of the Saruman/Ar-Pharazon/Mouth of Sauron trio of 50-60ish p caster uniques.

I also felt that some creatures (like Ancalagon) could have gotten more "screen-time" but Tolkien was very good in making the world seem bigger than the text portrays. So there are lots of things that he obliquely refers to but never describes fully, and you're left to fill in the gaps yourself. That's really what makes LoTR's world so much better than many other fantasy worlds.

In a way it's kind of like roguelikes.

It does give it a sense of being part of a bigger world, though I personally prefer the way that Lovecraft does that. I'm probably too harsh on Tolkien's works in general, but I just always found LotR to feel really hollow and formulaic, even before falling in love with the works of Lovecraft and Poe (both of whom also more or less started their own genres, so I'm not going to cut Tolkien any slack on that behalf). The Silmarillion has been worthy of the high praise that it gets, though.

I found Turin unbelievably frustrating - just when you thought he was going to get his life in order, he'd go and do another dumb thing. Which was kind of the point, but still.

Turin was hot-headed and easy to manipulate, sure, but I felt like most of his "bad" choices were more the result of being exposed to the awesomeness of Eol's sword (still wrecking fools from beyond the grave, too awesome ) and Glaurung. Even looking just at the dumb choices that he made for himself, they still felt more reasonable than some of the actions of Feanor/his sons (especially how Celegorm and Curufin acted in "Of Beren and Luthien") and Thingol (again, especially how he acted in "Of Beren and Luthien").

Once you're done with the Silmarillion, I'd recommend Unfinished Tales, and if you're still interested there's a bunch of additional material spread through Christopher Tolkien's History of Middle Earth series.

Thanks for the tips! The Silmarillion is so much better than LotR, I really don't understand why is doesn't get more publicity.

[Rowan]

I read The Hobbit and the LotR series some 15-20 years ago, and I hated them. (etc)

I love LOTR and Silmarillion both, though I prefer LOTR because it was written with much greater focus time-wise. LOTR lets us see more into characters' lives and minds, and gives us a feel for the world, while the Silmarillion is really a distilled history of the entire universe, and doesn't have time for such detail.

I'm surprised you felt the LOTR characters had too much "plot armor" since most of them don't return home safe and sound to live happily ever after. Some die, many are wounded or changed to the point that they can't be happy ever again. They kinda go through hell.

Given that your favorite characters seem to be the villains, your complaints about villains not getting enough "screen time" or not being badass enough, and your expressed interest in Lovecraft and Poe, I get the feeling you prefer stories where evil overwhelms and destroys the good. I don't suppose there's anything wrong with enjoying those kinds of themes, but yeah, that's definitely not Tolkien.

Another work you might enjoy would be "The Children of Hurin." Sort of an expanded novel taken from Turin's life. It was written by his son, but so is a whole lot of the Silmarillion.

At any rate, I can completely agree with the books adding to the enjoyment of Angband, and vice-versa!

[Nick]

It's probably worth mentioning here that both FAangband and Sil are particularly appropriate to play for Silmarillion fans.

Another work you might enjoy would be "The Children of Hurin." Sort of an expanded novel taken from Turin's life. It was written by his son, but so is a whole lot of the Silmarillion.

I'd say more compiled and edited than written. As I understand it the only it Christopher really wrote was part of the Ruin of Doriath chapter in the Silmarillion, and he had serious misgivings about even that.

[Bowman]

I'm surprised you felt the LOTR characters had too much "plot armor" since most of them don't return home safe and sound to live happily ever after. Some die, many are wounded or changed to the point that they can't be happy ever again. They kinda go through hell.

It could be faulty memory because I haven't read LotR in a long time, but of the major protagonists, I think only Boromir dies, Frodo loses a finger, and the other three hobbits have to recover from almost getting eaten by orcs and/or Shelob. Considering that the story was about a more or less global war, that's pretty light (though honestly, I feel like I'm forgetting one of Gimli or Legolas dying, but I'm not sure if I'm getting that confused with the Crimson Shadow series, which also had a similar "elf and short humanoid friendly murder competition as a coping mechanism" thing). Sure, Gandalf "died" against the Balrog of Moria, but then that was wiped out later on. They have struggles along the journey, yes, and there was the Reality Ensues moment when they come back to the Shire after Saruman and Wormtongue have had their way there, but in the overall scope of things, compared to what happened in Gondor or Moria or the R-country of horseman (Rohan, or Rohim, or something like that ), spending maybe a few months under some asshole's oppressive rule isn't much.

Also, I'm going to be very biased against anything with crap like Tom Bombadil and Smeagol's joke version of MPD/DID. The former was a complete waste of time, and the latter was just offensive to me personally.

Given that your favorite characters seem to be the villains, your complaints about villains not getting enough "screen time" or not being badass enough, and your expressed interest in Lovecraft and Poe, I get the feeling you prefer stories where evil overwhelms and destroys the good. I don't suppose there's anything wrong with enjoying those kinds of themes, but yeah, that's definitely not Tolkien.

The only villain that I felt got noticeably shortchanged on screen time (so far) was Ancalagon. He was in the vanguard of the forces that managed to hold back the combined armies of the Valar and the Children of Iluvatar during their assault on Angband, for crying out loud! Yet, he got less attention than Uinen (who does basically nothing aside from helping Ulmo convince Osse to not join Melkor's rebellion), or Draugluin (who does basically nothing aside from telling Sauron that Huan just kicked his ass), or Haleth's family (who do basically nothing aside from get killed by orcs to show off how great Haleth is to rally her people afterwards). If the story is written in the frame of being a retelling of ancient legends, it's not unreasonable to expect that the greatest obstacle to the forces of good in the climactic battle should get more than just one sentence to introduce him and another sentence to kill him.

I have no problems with badass heroes. I thought Fingolfin and Huan were great, as well as Turin (who is admittedly more of an anti-hero, but still, he's got to get some credit for making swaths of the countryside safer and for eventually killing Glaurung). I think Beren got off too easy for someone who was treated as the second or third greatest human hero, behind Hurin (who was way oversold, in my opinion) and arguably Earendil (who does deserve his respect, I'll admit, and would've been on my list of liked characters except that sailing through space on a magical sea-faring ship is just too dumb)...compare his brief captivity by Sauron and losing a hand to what Turin went through, and then compare how much everyone aside from King "Get Off My Lawn, Boy!" Thingol praises the hell out of Beren while treating Turin like just another dude who had the misfortune of drawing Morgoth's ire (aside from that one elf that Turin killed on accident, who actually recognized that Turin is awesome and so had to die to increase the angst).

Likewise, I have no problems with stories where good triumphs. Some of my favorite books are the Kushiel's Legacy series by Jacqueline Carey (though I lost interest after Imriel became the protagonist in Kushiel's Scion, the first three are pretty much a self-contained trilogy of excellent quality), the Wheel of Time series (which did a much better job of having the forces of good feel the cost of their war with The Dark One despite the three main men all canonically being able to force plot contrivances to work in their favor, although I won't deny that books 5-9 or so are individually pretty awful), the Joanna Archer books by Vicki Pettersson, and the Wicked City trilogy by Hideyuki Kikuchi. All of those have rather happy endings. The big difference as I see it between them and LotR is that those books all had the protagonists go through significant enough struggles and failures along the way that they felt like they EARNED their happy endings. Frodo just does a whole lot of walking, runs away a few times, complains about having nothing good to eat, and loses a finger when he's too weak to finish the job for himself. Sorry, but when it feels like my personal struggles are worse than your fantasy protagonist's, they haven't earned their happiness.

On the whole, hero or villain, I like characters who get things done. I'm someone who places a very high value on doing the work to get the glory (in my personal life as well, though I won't rant off examples of that). That's part of why I hated LotR-Sauron but enjoyed Morgoth and Silmarillion-Sauron. Villains who don't do stuff or heroes who don't suffer enough compared to what they gain tend to just piss me off, unless it's a character who's written so well that I can't help liking him (like Eol, who stood up to Turgon's racism and chose death over captivity).

Another work you might enjoy would be "The Children of Hurin." Sort of an expanded novel taken from Turin's life. It was written by his son, but so is a whole lot of the Silmarillion.

At any rate, I can completely agree with the books adding to the enjoyment of Angband, and vice-versa!

More Turin is more awesome. Thanks!

It's probably worth mentioning here that both FAangband and Sil are particularly appropriate to play for Silmarillion fans.

I tried Sil and didn't like it. I'm planning on watching some of debo's videos to see if maybe I'm just missing the point of how to play it, but it feels too much like it added a whole lot of frills and whistles to the simple and elegant design of Angband without actually making it more fun. It's pretty much the same complaint that I have about 3rd edition D&D compared to 2nd.

[Avenger]

At one point or another I've read nearly everything by Tolkien, including much of his poetry, non-MiddleEarth related works like Farmer Giles of Ham and Leaf by Niggle, and the compilations by his son.

I very much like LoTR and the Silmarillion, having read both multiple times, but I probably prefer the Silmarillion, simply because it's more abstract. I've also read Lovecraft, and something about his style of hinting at things, rather then fully describing them, appeals to me, and I've found alot of that in Tolkien as well.

[Rowan]

I think only Boromir dies, Frodo loses a finger, and the other three hobbits have to recover from almost getting eaten by orcs and/or Shelob. ... I feel like I'm forgetting one of Gimli or Legolas dying, but ... Sure, Gandalf "died" against the Balrog of Moria, but then that was wiped out later on.

I guess it just depends on how you define a good ending
-Aragorn lived a long life, but eventually died (most likely with Arwen still looking about 30 when he was elderly) and then Arwen went out and lived in abandoned Lothlorien all alone until she finally died of grief.
-Boromir died, yep.
-Frodo lost a finger and was forever poisoned by the witch-king's knife wound, and his addiction to the Ring was never broken. He kept getting sick and couldn't stay in the Shire anymore, so he had to go to Valinor.
-Gandalf died, yeah. He came back which is semi-cheap I guess, but he was after all a Maia, and had a mission to accomplish, so being sent back in a new body isn't so cheap perhaps.
-Gimli didn't have it so bad. He got to rule over the most beautiful caves he'd ever seen, and eventually went to Valinor with his BFF Legolas.
-Legolas was predicted/cursed to love the sea and leave his old life behind when he heard gulls. He heard gulls during LOTR and never was happy at home again. He did have that bromance with Gimli though, so I think he was happy anyway. Eventually they both went to Valinor- bittersweet.
-Merry was an honored leader in the Shire and a loremaster, and world-traveller. Happy ending- check!
-Pippin, similar to Merry. Happy ending number 2!
-Sam was crushed when Frodo left, but had a wife and kids so he stayed. He was a ring-bearer, though, so he aged much more slowly and outlived his wife. When she died he left everything to try to go to Valinor himself. Maybe....he made it? Maybe he drowned. Semi-happy ending, possibly.

The only villain that I felt got noticeably shortchanged on screen time (so far) was Ancalagon. (etc)

Your argument for Ancalagon is hilarious and spot-on. Perfectly justified!

I have no problems with badass heroes. I thought Fingolfin and Huan were great, as well as Turin (who is admittedly more of an anti-hero, but still, he's got to get some credit for making swaths of the countryside safer and for eventually killing Glaurung). I think Beren got off too easy

I agree here too. It's probably the function of just having little summary-lives in the history-book Silmarillion. If only Tolkien had been an Elf, and then could have written 100 novels about all of these deserving heroes!

Also, completely agree about Beren and Hurin being oversold. After reading about everyone else I'm always thinking "Ok remind me why they're better?"

the Wheel of Time series (which did a much better job of having the forces of good feel the cost of their war with The Dark One despite the three main men all canonically being able to force plot contrivances to work in their favor, although I won't deny that books 5-9 or so are individually pretty awful)

Man, I'm giving W.o.T. a try... I really am... but... man these people STUPID. The first three books would have run so much smoother if people would freaking COMMUNICATE, and if the men would stop blaming Aes Sedai for everything bad while ignoring everything good. I swear it's like watching partisan politics. But I'm still gonna try it out- on book 4 now. You say it gets worse? XD

I've also read Lovecraft, and something about his style of hinting at things, rather then fully describing them, appeals to me, and I've found alot of that in Tolkien as well.

This more than anything I've heard makes me interested to try Lovecraft. So far my only exposure has been internet research and gamer-geeks who love playing Call of Cthulhu because it's "badass and fatal." Glad to know there's some skill and art to his writing.

[Mondkalb]

This more than anything I've heard makes me interested to try Lovecraft. So far my only exposure has been internet research and gamer-geeks who love playing Call of Cthulhu because it's "badass and fatal." Glad to know there's some skill and art to his writing.

Lovecraft and Tolkien are arguable the most influential writers in the phantastic literature of the 20th century.

Lovecraft's work is quite diverse considering both genre and themes. Today he is largely known for his mythological novels about Elder Ones and Cthulhu and other entities. He has also written some appealing classical horror stories and a considerable amount of his novels are some extraordinary tales of dream walkers.

I discovered both Tolkien and Lovecraft a long time ago, when I was in my early teens and have treasured them ever since.

[Bowman]

I guess it just depends on how you define a good ending
(details snipped)

The whole "immortal falling in love with a mortal"/Mayfly December Romance trope feels cliche to me by now, but perhaps it was fresher back when LotR was written. Legolas and Gimli getting to go to Valinor seems like a happy ending to me, since there's really nobody else who Gimli is attached to and I think there was a thing about all elves feeling a yearning to go to Valinor eventually (though I could be mistaken on that). Frodo and Sam were more ambiguous than I'd acted like before.

Man, I'm giving W.o.T. a try... I really am... but... man these people STUPID. The first three books would have run so much smoother if people would freaking COMMUNICATE, and if the men would stop blaming Aes Sedai for everything bad while ignoring everything good. I swear it's like watching partisan politics. But I'm still gonna try it out- on book 4 now. You say it gets worse? XD

Oh, yes, communication problems are a very pronounced trend in Wheel of Time. For me, it tended to feel pretty funny and realistic, but maybe that's because I work at a large company where lack of communication is a recurring issue. Comparing the men/women general dynamic to partisan politics is fairly accurate, although it goes get a little bit better over time as characters get exposed to more cultures, but it's really not until after Brandon Sanderson took over (following Robert Jordan's death) that that aspect of things gets more or less phased out.

The problem with books "The Fires of Heaven" through "Winter's Heart"/"Crossroads of Twilight" is that very little happens that advances the plot until the second half of "Crossroads". There's a lot of focus on character development and inter-factional politics. It's a very dramatic shift from the more action-dense pace of the first four books. It's not necessarily bad in an absolute sense, if you enjoy that, but as I mentioned, I like it when characters are actually doing things, so it really did not go well with me (with the exception of Rand's story arc, because his character progression from "Lord of Chaos" through "The Gathering Storm" was very well done, and everything involving Mat after forming the Band is great because Mat is the best). On the plus side, things do pick up again for the last third of the series, and I found the conclusion of "A Memory of Light" to be one of the best endings that I've ever read.

This more than anything I've heard makes me interested to try Lovecraft. So far my only exposure has been internet research and gamer-geeks who love playing Call of Cthulhu because it's "badass and fatal." Glad to know there's some skill and art to his writing.

Dagon Bytes has a collection of Lovecraft's work. My personal favorites, in no particular order, are The Rats in the Walls, The Color Out of Space, The Shadow Out of Time, The Shadow Over Innsmouth, The Call of Cthulu, The Dunwich Horror, The Whisperer in Darkness, At the Mountains of Madness, and The Dream Quest of Unknown Kadath.

[Mondkalb]

--snip--
The problem with books "The Fires of Heaven" through "Winter's Heart"/"Crossroads of Twilight" is that very little happens that advances the plot until the second half of "Crossroads". There's a lot of focus on character development and inter-factional politics. It's a very dramatic shift from the more action-dense pace of the first four books. It's not necessarily bad in an absolute sense, if you enjoy that, but as I mentioned, I like it when characters are actually doing things, so it really did not go well with me (with the exception of Rand's story arc, because his character progression from "Lord of Chaos" through "The Gathering Storm" was very well done, and everything involving Mat after forming the Band is great because Mat is the best). On the plus side, things do pick up again for the last third of the series, and I found the conclusion of "A Memory of Light" to be one of the best endings that I've ever read.
--snip--

I really like the first four or five books, but the quality goes considerably down after that. I think Jordan lost himself in his own world, constantly adding more and more story arcs and personnel and he probably didn't know anymore how to bring all that to an end. Maybe it was due to the tremendous success of the series that he had to deliver more novels or whatever.
It really comes to a point where it is sometimes unbearable. There are chapters where nothing happens, except Egwene taking a bath or some such. And Jordan fills page after page with descriptions of absolutely irrelevant things. The reader struggles through heaps of Aes Sedai, all introduced with names and origins and depictions of their garments down to the tiniest embroidery. Of course they are never heard of and will never show up again, but who cares if the pages are filled and the books are sold.

Every time I reread the series, I always get stuck in book 9 and 10 and have to force myself to go on.

[Rowan]

The whole "immortal falling in love with a mortal"/Mayfly December Romance trope feels cliche to me by now, but perhaps it was fresher back when LotR was written.

Yeah, I get that. It's also hard to believe it ONLY happened those two or three times in all of history.

Frodo and Sam were more ambiguous than I'd acted like before.

Heh. I think these days, F&S are a hell of a lot more ambiguous in a lot of ways than Tolkien intended. But such is storytelling- the same stories mean different things, generations later.

(Wheel of Time.) For me, it tended to feel pretty funny and realistic, but maybe that's because I work at a large company where lack of communication is a recurring issue. Comparing the men/women general dynamic to partisan politics is fairly accurate

Yeah... without opening an enormous can of worms (and I really hope this doesn't), a lot of 1980s-and-earlier fantasy seems to rely on very strict separation/misunderstanding between the genders (Dune also comes to mind). Especially Wheel of Time though. With the unassailable division between male/female sides of magic, a gay or especially a trans character would kind of break the whole system. Just a comment! Again, seen from outside the times in which it was written.

Glad to hear Brandon Sanderson fixed things- I have heard it gets really good near the end. Looking forward to it!

Dagon Bytes has a collection of Lovecraft's work.

Thank you very much for the resource and recommendations! I will explore his work after Wheel of Time.