Activity

Wow. This thread evolved while I was gone. XD I’m afraid I don’t have time to read up on the discussion, (though I’m kinda interested. :D) so I will just reply to the LOTR people. 🙂

@wordsmith I agree that the darkness that took over the Shire let the evil hobbits that already existed come out. That was something I never noticed before. 🙂

I wasn’t complaining about the LOTRs ending because I don’t support showing the consequences of war. Not showing the damage wars wreak would be unrealistic. I simply think there are other ways of letting those consequences show. 🙂 A second climax isn’t always necessary. Even without the Shire conflict, the book is clear that Frodo was never the same (which hurt my heart).

@ericawordsmith *Hides from elvish blade* I love how you guys rush to defend LOTR. It’s great. 😀

I was thinking of the ending of the Hobbit, too! I believe Tolkien did a good job of showing the consequences of Bilbo’s quest on a small scale without using a second climax. Most of my issue with the end of LOTR was with the second climax, not the showing the scars left by war. 🙂

@daeus-lamb I see what you’re saying about making the aftermath into another plot. I don’t think Tolkien could have done it with LOTR, but Sanderson did a good job with the end of The Well of Ascension (though I felt like it was too abrupt. Probably because I wanted to know what happened next 😉 ).

@sarah-inkdragon I think that allegory is pretty cool. 😀 Though I don’t agree that it was what Tolkien was going for, I see how it relates.

@anne-of-lothlorien I love that poem so much 😀 And I agree that just because a story ends doesn’t mean it really ends. Trauma and consequences and such still exist.