rainycraze's review against another edition
informative
lighthearted
reflective
slow-paced
5.0
Fun comparison/contrast essays of Tolkien’s world with our hard sciences (and a bit of social sciences)
andie_elizabeth13's review
adventurous
informative
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? It's complicated
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
4.5
mermaidonion's review
informative
reflective
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? N/A
- Strong character development? N/A
- Loveable characters? N/A
- Diverse cast of characters? N/A
- Flaws of characters a main focus? N/A
4.0
aggiejedimaster's review
2.0
As a huge Tolkien fan, this book caught my eye because of its title and the blurb from Steve Brusatte on the back, whose work I find invigorating.
This book itself is just... okay. It's a collection of "essays" that are ostensibly grouped together into chapters based on subject matter. Some are informative, either from a literary or mythological perspective, or from a scientific perspective. Others are so speculative or written with such a shallow understanding of Tolkien's legendarium that they're almost unreadable (there are numerous factual and grammatical mistakes when referencing Tolkien's work). One is basically a scientific paper that seems out of place.
For what it's worth, this book appears to have been written in French and then translated into English, so it's possible that some of the errors were made by the translator, and not the original authors.
Still, there's something to be gained here. The essays are short, some have interesting conclusions or premises and I learned a few things. If you're a massive Tolkien fan, there are things to be gained. But casual fans and the more scientifically minded among us should avoid.
This book itself is just... okay. It's a collection of "essays" that are ostensibly grouped together into chapters based on subject matter. Some are informative, either from a literary or mythological perspective, or from a scientific perspective. Others are so speculative or written with such a shallow understanding of Tolkien's legendarium that they're almost unreadable (there are numerous factual and grammatical mistakes when referencing Tolkien's work). One is basically a scientific paper that seems out of place.
For what it's worth, this book appears to have been written in French and then translated into English, so it's possible that some of the errors were made by the translator, and not the original authors.
Still, there's something to be gained here. The essays are short, some have interesting conclusions or premises and I learned a few things. If you're a massive Tolkien fan, there are things to be gained. But casual fans and the more scientifically minded among us should avoid.
bmoskun's review
1.0
The reason I have given this book such a low rating is that the authors continually get things wrong about Tolkien's world and writings. If you are going to do a book about the science of Middle-Earth you have to have a solid grounding in the source material. And if you don't have that solid foundation how can you apply the science accurately to the work?
Some things the book gets wrong: Tolkien's birth year (pg 4.), mention of non-existent geographical features (pg. 147), placing a character at an event 2,000 years after they had been killed (pg. 171), claiming Gandalf is immune to The Ring (pg. 191), conflating and confusing the characters of Sauron and Saruman (pg. 208), claiming all humans came from Númenor and that in turn hobbits have the blood of Númenor (pg. 273). This is just a small selection of inaccuracies that plague almost every single chapter of this book. What is particularly confusing is that they did not have the book edited or proof-read by a Tolkien scholar or expert. Further the introduction of this book (which is an edited volume) does not explain the rational behind the making of this text (particularly important since there is already a book with the exact same title from 2004) nor the organizational logic of the volume and its chapters, neither do they explain what gives these authors the authority to write about middle-earth or how they were chosen. I will say the book itself is beautiful and has great artwork by Arnaud Rafaelian scattered throughout the text. Finally some of the chapters are quite good, but they are few and far between and weighed down by the other chapters riddled with mistakes, misinterpretations, and misunderstandings.
Fundamentally I think this book was sloppily written and fails to understand its target audience. The text is too detailed for a fan of just the movies, making constant references to the Silmarillion, as well as Unfinished Tales, and the 12 part History of Middle-Earth, but given that almost every chapter has mistakes that any fan of Tolkien's texts would have caught it's hard to understand how this book came to print.
Honestly don't waste your time on this book. If you can get your hands on Henry Gee's The Science of Middle-Earth (2004/2014) that book is much better as it's written by an actual fan of Tolkien's texts and uses the books as a fun way to talk about various scientific findings and approaches.
Some things the book gets wrong: Tolkien's birth year (pg 4.), mention of non-existent geographical features (pg. 147), placing a character at an event 2,000 years after they had been killed (pg. 171), claiming Gandalf is immune to The Ring (pg. 191), conflating and confusing the characters of Sauron and Saruman (pg. 208), claiming all humans came from Númenor and that in turn hobbits have the blood of Númenor (pg. 273). This is just a small selection of inaccuracies that plague almost every single chapter of this book. What is particularly confusing is that they did not have the book edited or proof-read by a Tolkien scholar or expert. Further the introduction of this book (which is an edited volume) does not explain the rational behind the making of this text (particularly important since there is already a book with the exact same title from 2004) nor the organizational logic of the volume and its chapters, neither do they explain what gives these authors the authority to write about middle-earth or how they were chosen. I will say the book itself is beautiful and has great artwork by Arnaud Rafaelian scattered throughout the text. Finally some of the chapters are quite good, but they are few and far between and weighed down by the other chapters riddled with mistakes, misinterpretations, and misunderstandings.
Fundamentally I think this book was sloppily written and fails to understand its target audience. The text is too detailed for a fan of just the movies, making constant references to the Silmarillion, as well as Unfinished Tales, and the 12 part History of Middle-Earth, but given that almost every chapter has mistakes that any fan of Tolkien's texts would have caught it's hard to understand how this book came to print.
Honestly don't waste your time on this book. If you can get your hands on Henry Gee's The Science of Middle-Earth (2004/2014) that book is much better as it's written by an actual fan of Tolkien's texts and uses the books as a fun way to talk about various scientific findings and approaches.
skylacine's review
informative
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? N/A
- Strong character development? N/A
- Loveable characters? N/A
- Diverse cast of characters? N/A
- Flaws of characters a main focus? N/A
3.5
Not perfect, but definitely a fun thought exercise to apply Earth science to Tolkien's world.
Full review at: https://skybookcorner.blogspot.com/2023/04/book-review-science-of-middle-earth-by.html
ercamcll's review against another edition
informative
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? N/A
- Strong character development? N/A
- Loveable characters? N/A
- Diverse cast of characters? N/A
- Flaws of characters a main focus? N/A
3.5