Donaldson, Moorcock etc

The Urth list — 2 messages, 2 voices, 07 Aug 2011
https://urth.darkrealm.vip/thread/urth/6046

Sergei SOLOVIEV07 Aug 2011, 12:20
Dear Jeff, I didn' t write that the heroes (or anti-heroes) - Covenant and Elric - were repulsive to me. I wrote that the books were (their authors writing style). I don't remember to be shocked by the "rape scene" from Donaldson (I was not a teen), but I remember an intense dislike of how the book was written. I glanced at the "Elric". I have to admit that this time (after many years) my dislike was much less, I was just bored. I'll try to explain. There is no doubt that Moorcock is quite an erudite. But I don't like how he uses his erudition. To me it is like a badly done theatric background - the pieces of this and that squeezed into some rough picture. It is told that Elrik is in some way antagonist to the heroes of Tolkien. To Conan, that you mention, as well. But Tolkien used his knowledge of history, folklore, languages to create depth, what is most impressive in his "Lord of the Rings" is more than 10000 years of history subtly influencing the present
Dan'l Danehy-Oakes08 Aug 2011, 16:40

↳ in reply to Sergei SOLOVIEV

2 quoted lines
Sergei SOLOVIEV wrote: But Tolkien used his knowledge of history, folklore, languages to create depth, what is most impressive in his "Lord of the Rings" is more than 10000 years of history subtly influencing the present
If you like that aspect of JRRT, you should definitely check out Steven Erikson. He is an anthropologist/archaeologist rather than a linguist, but he uses his own areas of expertise, much as Tolkien did, to create a huge sense of the abysmal past and how it continues to influence the story's present.
Dan'l Danehy-Oakes

Exported from an unofficial mirror of a public mailing list. Copyright in each message remains with the person who wrote it. Email addresses are obscured as `user at host`, the form the original archive published. This file was rebuilt from parsed fields rather than retained headers, so it is faithful in content but not byte-exact.