Scan barcode
A review by klosterphobia
The Fellowship of the Ring by J.R.R. Tolkien
adventurous
challenging
inspiring
reflective
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
3.5
TLDR: read it for the significance but know it has its problems.
After many attempts, I finally finished the first installment in The Lord of the Rings trilogy. Despite my lack of initial engagement, I prioritized this book because it is an iconic work of high fantasy. Published in the 50s, this book is challenging for a modern reader, and is ultimately less engaging than either The Hobbit or the films.
Nevertheless, I recommend it because it is foundational to the genre.
I’m writing this long post because I want to be able to articulate (mainly to my fandom friends) why I appreciate butt don’t connect with LOTR.
Nature Writing
Tolkien’s commitment to describing every inch of Middle-earth comes at a cost—momentum.
Tolkien excels at constructing a vivid, mythic universe filled with deep lore and a sense of timelessness. His love for nature shines through in his long, (sometimes gratuitous) detailed descriptions of landscapes, forests, and mountains. Every leaf, every winding path is given weight. The juxtaposition of the scenes is immense - Tolkien takes us on a journey from the bucolic peace of the Shire to the dangerous and foreboding mines of Moria, and then to the ethereal beauty of Lothlórien.
However, Tolkien’s descriptive prose often verges on the excessive, slowing the narrative’s pace considerably. This nature-heavy focus is where I begin to struggle. While the landscapes and settings are undeniably beautiful, they can become overwhelming in their length and repetition, causing my mind to drift.
Unlike the lighter, brisker adventure of The Hobbit (which I adore) where the focus is squarely on Bilbo’s growth and the events that propel him forward, The Fellowship of the Ring feels weighed down by its own grandeur, and the action often takes a backseat to elaborate depictions of hills, rivers, and forests.
Lack of Psychological Depth
Tolkien keeps his characters at arm’s length, more interested in their roles and archetypes within the mythic story than in their individual, nuanced motivations.
Tolkien introduces a wide array of characters who represent the different races of Middle-earth. While this diversity enriches the story’s scope, the actual character development suffers.
Tolkien’s characters are often archetypal: Frodo is the reluctant hero, Aragorn the noble unwilling king, Sam the loyal companion, and Gandalf the wise mentor. Their growth is minimal, and their inner worlds are barely explored. There is very little psychological complexity. Frodo bears the Ring with an increasing sense of weariness, but the internal struggle of this burden isn’t explored—it’s more about his physical decline and a vague sense of looming despair.
Where a character like Boromir is concerned, we do see a hint of complexity: his desire to use the Ring to save his people. But even here, Tolkien chooses not to delve deeply into his motivations or moral struggles.
The temptation of the Ring is presented in almost simple biblical terms—good versus evil. This is the biggest barrier to connecting with the story on an emotional level.
In contrast, authors like Dostoyevsky (one of my favorites) who also often writes from a third-person and detached narrative style, immerse readers in the minds of their characters. The exploration of fear, guilt, pride, and moral conflict is central. This is what I want to read - work that creates an intimate portrait of flawed human beings.
Male-Dominated Narratives and Limited Female Representation
Women’s roles are secondary and mostly passive, leaving much to be desired for readers, especially women, who look for strong, active female protagonists.
There is an overwhelming male presence in the story. The Fellowship itself is composed entirely of men, and the few female characters present in the story—such as Galadriel and Arwen—are primarily defined by their beauty, grace, or ethereal wisdom. The movies attempted to address this by expanding Arwen’s role, giving her more action and agency, but the book remains firmly within a male-dominated perspective.
Religion, Allegory, and the Subtle Christian Influence
Many readers interpret The Lord of the Rings as a Christian fantasy novel, given Tolkien’s strong Catholic faith. While Christian themes are certainly present—self-sacrifice, redemption, and the struggle against evil and temptation—the book lacks the direct allegory one might expect if you are for instance familiar with Tolkien’s friend CS Lewis. Tolkien clearly prefers christian themes. Although Frodo’s journey can be seen as a Christ-like burden - carrying the sins of the world at great personal cost. There is a sense of providence throughout the story, suggesting a guiding hand akin to divine will - interestingly there seems to be both divine and evil will something I ponder on frequently.
This subtlety of reference is good in my mind, but it may leave some readers searching for a deeper meaning. It also is incredibly annoying to listen to theories of a deeper meaning that just isn’t there.
Backstory: The Challenges of The Silmarillion and Inaccessible Mythology
One of the more frustrating aspects of The Fellowship of the Ring is how much of the crucial backstory is left unexplained, relegated to The Silmarillion.
The cosmic creation story of Middle-earth is arguably more engaging than the relatively straightforward “good versus evil” struggle presented in The Fellowship of the Ring. The fact that this information is often missing from The Fellowship of the Ring itself can leave readers feeling like they are missing a vital piece of the puzzle or can lead them down a google rabbit hole.
Frodo and Sam- Master and Servant
The relationship between Frodo and Sam makes me uneasy - which at times resembles a master-servant dynamic. Sam is deeply loyal to Frodo, but his loyalty is often portrayed through subservience that can feel uncomfortably imbalanced. He consistently refers to Frodo as "Master," which he was as his precious employer and his unwavering devotion borders on self-erasure, with Sam’s identity and sense of purpose almost entirely defined by his service.
Sam’s loyalty is presented as noble and endearing, this dynamic can feel well not very friendly in modern terms.
This dynamic brings to mind a relationship like that in Driving Miss Daisy, where the bond between the two characters is genuine but fundamentally shaped by a hierarchical imbalance of power.
Comparisons with Other Moder Fantasy Works
Compared to modern fantasy works, The Fellowship feels archaic in its lack of character complexity and representation. Authors like George R.R. Martin have taken the foundation that Tolkien laid and expanded upon it with a greater focus on character psychology, moral ambiguity, and political intrigue. Martin’s characters are full of conflicting motivations, flaws, and unpredictable choices, making them feel far more real and human.
Final Thoughts
Tolkien’s ability to create an entire world, complete with languages, cultures, and a profound sense of history, is unmatched. This deserves its status as a cornerstone of modern fantasy.
This book is not for readers who seek intimate character exploration, a faster-paced narrative, or diverse representation.
The films by Peter Jackson, in many ways, address some of these limitations - richer character dynamics, and an emotional resonance that Tolkien’s text lacks. They condense the sprawling journey and imbue it with a level of immediacy and action that the book’s more measured pace doesn’t quite achieve.
After many attempts, I finally finished the first installment in The Lord of the Rings trilogy. Despite my lack of initial engagement, I prioritized this book because it is an iconic work of high fantasy. Published in the 50s, this book is challenging for a modern reader, and is ultimately less engaging than either The Hobbit or the films.
Nevertheless, I recommend it because it is foundational to the genre.
I’m writing this long post because I want to be able to articulate (mainly to my fandom friends) why I appreciate butt don’t connect with LOTR.
Nature Writing
Tolkien’s commitment to describing every inch of Middle-earth comes at a cost—momentum.
Tolkien excels at constructing a vivid, mythic universe filled with deep lore and a sense of timelessness. His love for nature shines through in his long, (sometimes gratuitous) detailed descriptions of landscapes, forests, and mountains. Every leaf, every winding path is given weight. The juxtaposition of the scenes is immense - Tolkien takes us on a journey from the bucolic peace of the Shire to the dangerous and foreboding mines of Moria, and then to the ethereal beauty of Lothlórien.
However, Tolkien’s descriptive prose often verges on the excessive, slowing the narrative’s pace considerably. This nature-heavy focus is where I begin to struggle. While the landscapes and settings are undeniably beautiful, they can become overwhelming in their length and repetition, causing my mind to drift.
Unlike the lighter, brisker adventure of The Hobbit (which I adore) where the focus is squarely on Bilbo’s growth and the events that propel him forward, The Fellowship of the Ring feels weighed down by its own grandeur, and the action often takes a backseat to elaborate depictions of hills, rivers, and forests.
Lack of Psychological Depth
Tolkien keeps his characters at arm’s length, more interested in their roles and archetypes within the mythic story than in their individual, nuanced motivations.
Tolkien introduces a wide array of characters who represent the different races of Middle-earth. While this diversity enriches the story’s scope, the actual character development suffers.
Tolkien’s characters are often archetypal: Frodo is the reluctant hero, Aragorn the noble unwilling king, Sam the loyal companion, and Gandalf the wise mentor. Their growth is minimal, and their inner worlds are barely explored. There is very little psychological complexity. Frodo bears the Ring with an increasing sense of weariness, but the internal struggle of this burden isn’t explored—it’s more about his physical decline and a vague sense of looming despair.
Where a character like Boromir is concerned, we do see a hint of complexity: his desire to use the Ring to save his people. But even here, Tolkien chooses not to delve deeply into his motivations or moral struggles.
The temptation of the Ring is presented in almost simple biblical terms—good versus evil. This is the biggest barrier to connecting with the story on an emotional level.
In contrast, authors like Dostoyevsky (one of my favorites) who also often writes from a third-person and detached narrative style, immerse readers in the minds of their characters. The exploration of fear, guilt, pride, and moral conflict is central. This is what I want to read - work that creates an intimate portrait of flawed human beings.
Male-Dominated Narratives and Limited Female Representation
Women’s roles are secondary and mostly passive, leaving much to be desired for readers, especially women, who look for strong, active female protagonists.
There is an overwhelming male presence in the story. The Fellowship itself is composed entirely of men, and the few female characters present in the story—such as Galadriel and Arwen—are primarily defined by their beauty, grace, or ethereal wisdom. The movies attempted to address this by expanding Arwen’s role, giving her more action and agency, but the book remains firmly within a male-dominated perspective.
Religion, Allegory, and the Subtle Christian Influence
Many readers interpret The Lord of the Rings as a Christian fantasy novel, given Tolkien’s strong Catholic faith. While Christian themes are certainly present—self-sacrifice, redemption, and the struggle against evil and temptation—the book lacks the direct allegory one might expect if you are for instance familiar with Tolkien’s friend CS Lewis. Tolkien clearly prefers christian themes. Although Frodo’s journey can be seen as a Christ-like burden - carrying the sins of the world at great personal cost. There is a sense of providence throughout the story, suggesting a guiding hand akin to divine will - interestingly there seems to be both divine and evil will something I ponder on frequently.
This subtlety of reference is good in my mind, but it may leave some readers searching for a deeper meaning. It also is incredibly annoying to listen to theories of a deeper meaning that just isn’t there.
Backstory: The Challenges of The Silmarillion and Inaccessible Mythology
One of the more frustrating aspects of The Fellowship of the Ring is how much of the crucial backstory is left unexplained, relegated to The Silmarillion.
The cosmic creation story of Middle-earth is arguably more engaging than the relatively straightforward “good versus evil” struggle presented in The Fellowship of the Ring. The fact that this information is often missing from The Fellowship of the Ring itself can leave readers feeling like they are missing a vital piece of the puzzle or can lead them down a google rabbit hole.
Frodo and Sam- Master and Servant
The relationship between Frodo and Sam makes me uneasy - which at times resembles a master-servant dynamic. Sam is deeply loyal to Frodo, but his loyalty is often portrayed through subservience that can feel uncomfortably imbalanced. He consistently refers to Frodo as "Master," which he was as his precious employer and his unwavering devotion borders on self-erasure, with Sam’s identity and sense of purpose almost entirely defined by his service.
Sam’s loyalty is presented as noble and endearing, this dynamic can feel well not very friendly in modern terms.
This dynamic brings to mind a relationship like that in Driving Miss Daisy, where the bond between the two characters is genuine but fundamentally shaped by a hierarchical imbalance of power.
Comparisons with Other Moder Fantasy Works
Compared to modern fantasy works, The Fellowship feels archaic in its lack of character complexity and representation. Authors like George R.R. Martin have taken the foundation that Tolkien laid and expanded upon it with a greater focus on character psychology, moral ambiguity, and political intrigue. Martin’s characters are full of conflicting motivations, flaws, and unpredictable choices, making them feel far more real and human.
Final Thoughts
Tolkien’s ability to create an entire world, complete with languages, cultures, and a profound sense of history, is unmatched. This deserves its status as a cornerstone of modern fantasy.
This book is not for readers who seek intimate character exploration, a faster-paced narrative, or diverse representation.
The films by Peter Jackson, in many ways, address some of these limitations - richer character dynamics, and an emotional resonance that Tolkien’s text lacks. They condense the sprawling journey and imbue it with a level of immediacy and action that the book’s more measured pace doesn’t quite achieve.