The Lord of the Rings trilogy is now considered a classic. Written by J.R.R Tolkien, the books tackled the destruction of an evil ring that gave life to men’s weaknesses in their quest for power. Sometimes power corrupts and converts into hidden, flaws and character defects. When observing the world system, evidence of this covers the globe epidemically.
Lord of the Rings thrilled its readers as it gives life to science fantasy characters such as elves, dwarves, wizards and creatures such as the orcs and hobbits. The book is written in what I would call limited omniscient, (others may have a difference of opinion, but that is mine) where the reader knows the main character’s point-of-views because we have the privilege of knowing the expression of characters thoughts.
I liked how Legolas, Grimli, and Aragorn were portrayed. Children and adults are drawn to the simplicity of ordinary people becoming superheroes.
For me, Lord of The Rings was not the easiest book to read. To me, it was written in a sense where the reader is expected to hold and remember events from one scene while other scenes are revealed. I would think that added to the difficulty young readers had with the book. I also found that while the movie was enjoyable, I had to follow it closely to keep from getting lost.
But … is that not true of Dickens’ David Copperfield? Is that the key to how a classic is written? No? Maybe not.
J.R.R Tolkien wrote a novel so intricate, tapping into deeply into the jaws of fantasy and science fiction–purely from his creativity and powerful imagination. Enhanced by an A-caliber, well written movie version, the book won justice for the entire trilogy. It gives people a new world and it opens many wonders for people. Though it is rather hard to read, the book is worth giving a try because of the fantastic story it has to tell. Maybe that is what makes a classic.