WORDS WITH MR.KAUMANS- KEVIN KAUMANS
When a new face comes across the fantasy genre, they usually find themselves overwhelmed with all the recommendations on where to start by long-time fans. Some recommend C.S. Lewis, whose writing style tended toward children makes him easy to read for newcomers. Others suggest George R.R. Martin due to the mature and dark elements he’s brought to the genre. But one of the most common recommendations of fantasy veterans is John Ronald Reuel Tolkien, who is considered by many hardcore readers as “the father of the modern fantasy genre” (though that statement is heavily debated within the fantasy community).
Now, I am by no means a newbie when it comes to fantasy books. Since I was 11, the books I read were those where the protagonist was mostly awkward, Caucasian male teenagers who become entranced by the first girl they see who was not their sister or mother. And they act so dumb that it’s a miracle their friends aren’t slamming their faces, teeth first, into concrete whenever they went to speak. Well, not so often, that it’s a common trope.
But the thought of reading Tolkien’s books never crossed my mind till I was 17. This was mostly because I heard how hard they were to read, and when I finally got around to reading his “Lord of the Rings” series after finishing “The Hobbit,” I finally realized just what the people who said it meant by that.
You see, as much as Tolkien fanboys want to paint him as this godly writer with no flaws, the author has a bit of an info dumping problem. For those who do not know, info dumping is where a writer throws multiple pages worth of information about the world that does not really matter in the grand scheme of things.
Before I could even begin the first chapter, I was forced to read a college-level thesis on what hobbits were, where they came from, how the Shire was founded, their culture, and the different breeds of them. Most of this information that was force-fed to me was never once brought up in the story of “Lords of the Rings.”
And honestly, that is what I believe to be my main criticism of Tolkien. He spent 90% of his life thinking of ways to explain why the trees of Middle-Earth have branches and why the sky is blue while spending the other 10% on actually making the story.
About 50% of the first book, “The Fellowship of the Ring,” is just our main cast of characters walking while Tolkien describes the land around them like a middle-school science teacher on a field trip who makes you walk at a slow pace in a single-file line when all you and your friends want to do is run over to the snack bar and see who can eat the most warheads before your tongue starts bleeding.
Now, I understand what Mr. J.R.R. was trying to do. He was trying to make the readers actually feel like they were walking alongside Frodo and his friends, exploring the world of Middle-Earth in real time. But the info dumping is not the biggest issue. Most of the characters in the books are one-dimensional, lawful good paladins who could never think of doing so much as throwing a candy wrapper on the ground without feeling like the worst being in the world. The book always tries to make it look like Legolas and Gimli overcome their hatred of each other’s species. The most aggressive they ever get toward each other is when the two have an extremely short banter before entering the Black Gate with Frodo and Company.
At least the movies actually show more than just one small scene of the two being in disagreement with each other.
One more thing I want to criticize Tolkien on is the fact that in order to fully understand the world of Middle-Earth you have to read like 500 different books that were published posthumously after Tolkien’s death.
“Oh, come on, Kevin. Now you’re just being dramatic for the sake of comedic purpose because you think having your own column in a small-town newspaper nobody reads makes you the next Yahtzee Crashaw of media journalism.”
Okay, fair. But my point still stands. Imagine when “Harry Potter” first came out if Rowling barely explained how the world of magic system worked., and the only way you can understand how things came to be in the world was to wait decades after the series was published for her to die just so you can read an 800 million-word encyclopedia just to not feel lost. Now imagine the first 200 pages explaining trivial stuff like why Dumbledore’s favorite meal is oatmeal and how many times Voldemort went to the loo in his life before the book actually starts explaining the stuff that actually matters.
I’m not by any means saying Tolkien is overrated. He was still far ahead of his time and is one of the main reasons the fantasy genre is as big as it is. His books are filled with more ideas and lore than most authors today barely consider.
All I’m saying is I’m sick of his groupies acting like anyone who doesn’t consider his books to be their all-time favorites are paint-drinking Dollard’s who just “don’t get it.”
It’s perfectly fine to admit your favorite writer isn’t perfect. It doesn’t make people think you’re dumb or less of a person to enjoy something flawed. What does make them think of you as a loser is when you verbally support a person like your life depends on it and treat any criticism toward them like an attack on your honor.
Trust me, I speak for most people when I say I would rather be friends with someone who can love different things than me versus someone who has all the charm and personality of a box of low-quality pipe-weed.
My name is Kevin A. Kaumans, and I want to thank you for tuning into this week’s column. Make sure to pick up a new newspaper from Northwestern News every week, and until next time friends:
Stay Educated
