Here's the deal. After gaining inspiration from the Loremaster's Book about the Loremaster as Narrator, I decided to begin writing a guide that would help other Loremasters sharpen their skills in storytelling. I know I could use it--especially when it comes to Tolkien-style narration.

So, I wrote an introduction in an attempt to lure any other writers that may be interested in joining me in writing this book. You don't have to be a professional writer (I'm certainly NOT one, although I am used to writing 2-3 sermons per week). You just have to be willing to do the studying and hard work it will take to complete the project. I would be thrilled beyond words if someone with a degree in literature, English, or writing would join me. Or perhaps someone who is published in roleplaying games.

Here's a link to my introduction as well as the study notes I have taken from The Hobbit so far. Please give me feedback.

Loremaster's Guide: Narrating Tolkien-style INTRO

Damn! That is one ambitious project. I wish you the best of luck.

Go get them!

And now to round it off, I feel like I have to tip my hand a little... come out of the closet as it were... and admit that I can't stand Tolkien's descriptive narrative.

Granted I have never read the English original but only a crappy Swedish translation and I admit that usually translations reek with ... translator inspired stuff and probably says more about their skills than about that of the original author. But.... my GOD it was boring as ... as a very very boring book. Endless tedious descriptions of repeating landscapes using the same words and phrases over and over again without really conveying much of anything besides the fact that; yes, they are still in a forest... or swamp... or river bank.

So with that in mind, I hope I never start to sound like the Professor when I LM my players... or at least not as the translator trying to emulate him. (I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt since I have not read his own words.)

/wolf

I suspect a lot of that comes from the translation, as when switching languages you lose the subtleties of the original.

I love Tolkien's descriptions, they helped create places in my minds eye so clearly that i could see them!

I'm sure that Swedish works, when translated into English, lose a lot too.

This is a great project. While I have yet to peruse your introduction, just from the description I like the idea. There is a wonderful little book that might help you if you have the chance to pick it up:

Hobbits, Elves and Wizards: The Wonders and Worlds of J.R.R. Tolkien's "Lord of the Rings" by Michael Stanton. Amazon has one of those sneak peaks (click to LOOK INSIDE), I would suggest taking a look if the notion piques your interest. When I started my Tolkien studies, I unfortunately began with the weightier stuff (both in page count and style). Then, I stumbled on this tiny book at a used book store. And, in some very important ways, it unlocked much of the mystery around Tolkien's dialogue and character development.

As to storytelling in a Tolkien style? Here is one thought you might add to your guide. Choice and Free Will are the cornerstones of Tolkien's storytelling. It is with a very specific meaning that Tolkien so names the "Free Peoples" such. And, it is no coincidence that the central machination of the Shadow is the domination and subjugation of Free Will. To illustrate (and, at the same time make a suggestion for your guide), Tolkien expressed in three of his letters to various associates and admirers that Frodo was a failure! Insofar as the completion of his great quest and heroic journey were concerned (in Letter 181 he bluntly states this fact, and in Letter 246 he gives a context for understanding it in the larger scope of the narrative). Here's the thing, by conventional definitions Frodo failed as a hero if being a hero is defined by the completion or success of great deeds.

However, as Tolkien goes onto to explain, it was a seemingly insignificant choice made before his Final Test on Mount Doom that redeemed his failure and "sanctified" his action: The choice to spare Gollum! Frodo's greatness is in the initial choice to bear the Ring in a seemingly impossible task. His nobility is realized through the pity he showed Gollum.

I won't belabor (which I tend to do all too easily) any more, but to suggest this. A narrative style in fashion after Tolkien might want to play the small choices made throughout the campaign to greater significance than the epic moments of confrontation. There needs to be plenty of climatic drama, but surprise the player-heroes with the (unexpected at times) consequences of the choices they make.

The above mentioned book describes it like this. "Choices are limited [in Tolkien's characters] by external circumstances and also by the nature of the characters. The first limitation always seems to make the choices harder and more dangerous; the second limitation brings out character and moral and intellectual stature in the face of that danger and hardship."

Ii game mechanics, it is hard to capture the impact of choice as a central theme; and a very specific type of choice at that!. All the more reason to bring this to life through LM narrative-style.

Just a thought to share in the wee hours of the morning...

True, bit it also can be argued that, in spite of Tolkien's narrative description of scenery (that some may find tedious*), his description of character is absolutely wonderful. It seems to me that Tolkien very rarely gives a physical description of his characters, but instead relies upon showing us a character by telling us what he is doing and what he says.

I'm not sure I explained that properly, but what I mean is: we aren't subjected to paragraph upon paragraph explaining every minute detail of what a new character looks like. Instead, Tolkien informs us of the characters' appearances while describing their actions and through their dialogue.

I also love the fact that Tolkien avoids latin cognates in his text as if they were the plague.

I started to trawl the interweb recently for articles on Tolkien's writing style. I'm at work now, and I booked marked what I have found so far on my PC at home, but when I get home tonight I'll post links in this thread.

*But not me! I take great delight in discerning the subtle differences in Tolkien's narrative description that occur depending on the mood. It was only recently, during my 9th reading of LotR, that I noticed that the scenic descriptions of Rivendell and Lorien is written in a style that is almost reminiscent of iambic pentameter. I found a greater appreciation of the poetic beauty of the places that Tolkien was trying to describe here.

Yupp. Don't get me wrong. There's tons of things I absolutely love about the books. If not I wouldn't be here, would I? ... or maybe I would since I'm a sucker for a good RPG.

But... you know... this is the internet... it's always easier to nag about the things you hate.

A little OOT perhaps but here is what I love about the Professor:

First and foremost, I'm in complete and utter Awe of his endurance and skill when it comes to creating this imaginary world. Everything, from cultures, language, songs, poems history etc. The level of detail, the resilience it must have taken. He is in this sense unyielding, uncompromising and pure genius.

Second, the stories he tells. The themes, the weave of characters and their conflicts, both within and without.

The list can go on, we all have our darlings I guess...

... but what I hate is the Narrative description of the terrain and environment around them. I hate it purely because it is repetitive, too long-winded, dull and ... did I mention repetitive?

/wolf

It should probably be mentioned also that Tolkien himself had a minor argument with the Translator for the Swedish version. And fans in Sweden have always been sceptical towards this version because they think the Translator added and changed a little too much in the text...

... and of course there was a big fallout between the translator and the Tolkien society... and a couple of months later he published a lampoon called "Tolkien and the black magic" in which he accused all Tolkien fans of being satanic diabolists and Tolkien of being Satan himself... more or less.

So yeah... might not be the best translation ever...

There is a new Translation now though, the publishers owning the rights to the work in Swedish saw fit to make a new stab at it when the films came out... (I guess they couldn't resist all the dollar signs?) and from what I hear this new one is better.

/wolf

Funnily enough, with me it's almost the opposite. I first read LoTR in Finnish when I was young, and the translation by Kersti Juva is simply marvelous. Even today I would say in places it's almost better than the original. She's a true professional translator of the old school, and really has the way with words. The way she's translated the names of places and people, for example, is so rich and imaginative that it's right there with the Master himself. She's done a great service to Finnish Tolkien fans.

Another thing that influenced me when reading the translated LoTR for the first time were the covers of the books, they were really eary, bordering on the grotesque and creepy. So they kinda coloured my expectations in very dark colours, and there was this undercurrent of menace in the books. I tended to imagine things more grimy that I would have otherwise, I expect. So covers do matter.

And I'd like to add that it's very easy to do a horrible job with translating fantasy into Finnish, as evidenced by some truly atrocious Drizzt novels. Not that they were great literature to begin with...

Thanks for the book recommend.

Your commentary is very interesting. I've always had the thought that Samwise was a greater hero for choosing to be such a committed friend. But, surely Frodo was brave and merciful and things would certainly have turned out differently if he had not been the ringbearer. Frodo did what many of us fail to do in this world--he demonstrated pity. We always seek it for ourselves, but rarely do we give it.

This is a great project, and I wish you luck.

I think getting the descriptions right is important to increase the mood and feel that makes Tolkien's books special. I really like the way he described the world around the characters.
If you think his descriptions are too much, try George RR Martin's Song of Ice and Fire series. Excellent stuff, but the descriptions of the clothes and armour is, in my opinion, a bit too much. Almost everyone is described by what they wear, down to the details.
But they're excellent books.

Some of the best described scenes in books, in my opinions, are from Tolkien's descriptions of the Hobbits' journey to Rivendell and of Rohan.

-Eirik

Tolkien tended to use English words of Anglo-Saxon/Old English origin over words that had been 'borrowed' into the language from French, Latin, Greek, etc.

If a TOR Loremaster did likewise, s/he would go a long way towards achieving a Tolkienesque style.

For example, instead of saying that a town was abandoned ('abandon' being a loanword from Old French), you could say that it was forsaken or downfallen.

Or rather than describing something as rancid (a loanword from Latin), you could describe it as rotting, reeking, dank, foul, etc.

All good solid Anglo-Saxon words, those.

The Anglish Moot Wordlist is probably the best place to start, followed by the Online Etymology Dictionary:

http://anglish.wikia.com/wiki/English_Wordbook

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php

It’s been awhile, but I thought of chiming in with a few more thoughts. First, I have to say that using Anglo-Saxon words over imports is absolutely brilliant. Not knowing the niceties of Anglo-Saxon, I would love it if someone started a list of words that fit the gaming context… (Hint…hint )

Another interesting Tolkien narrative device involves character traits. Tolkien more often describes traits not so much to describe a character or what a character is capable of though this may certainly be inferred, but to provide a real sense of his or her stature and lineage, the place the character has in the history of Middle-earth and how they fit into that history.

TOR game mechanics help with this precisely in the traits detailed and the way they often tie to culture. As a LM narrates encounters, the descriptions provided for LM characters could suggest traits that give player-heroes a sense of stature and character, or lack thereof. For example, the way a character speaks is a moral reference for Tolkien. As a simplification think the elven speech brought out of the West for example, it is mellifluous and beautiful; its speakers are good. Harsh and guttural languages are indicative of corruption (here think of Orcs). Moreover for Tolkien, quality of speech isn’t necessarily related to intellectual or cultural sophistication. Think here of the Rohirrim who are unlettered yet have a lovely melodious speech.

In other places of the LotR narrative for example, elves compliment Frodo on the fairness of his speech. Hidden in that is a moral reference that Tolkien plays out to great affect in Frodo’s actions.

One of the great weapons of the Enemy is twisting this cardinal truth with glamour (Tolkien would formally call it “goetia” while “glamour” provided a more functional-narrative word). Annatar’s ability to deceive the elven-smiths of Eregion, mask and hide his tainted designs is a powerful narrative device for Tolkien, and can be for a LM as well.

Leaving the notion of a LM’s use of language, Faramir presents another exemplar of Tolkien’s narrative technique. In short, the seemingly magical sight and vision possessed by Faramir serves less as a character attribute (something Faramir uses to affect the narrative), and more a means of describing how in him the blood of Numenor runs true—again, lineage and stature.

Just a few ideas for a particular way of using language and character description to create a Tolkien-style narrative…

That's quite a request, and not one I can do much about at the moment, I'm afraid (eight week old baby at home, with a touch of colic; time online is at a premium; more importantly, sleep is at premium... ).

Again, I'd refer you to the Anglish word lists or to a good etymological dictionary, but, off the top of my head, a core list of Tolkienesque words derived from Anglo-Saxon roots should probably include the following, at least:

wend
fare (in the sense of, 'to travel')
wander

blithe
doughty
fair
comely

foul
nasty
hateful
bitter

wane/waning
reek/reeking
hallowed (and unhallowed)
hope (and hopeless)
dearth
deep
folk
reckoning
bygone
gear
oath
wreck/wreckage
wild/wilderness

spellcraft
dwimmercraft
spelllore
witchery/witchcraft

I wouldn't be too rigid or prescriptive, though; Tolkien certainly didn't exorcise all 'borrowings' from his prose. For example, 'ranger', 'fey', 'sorcery', and 'wizard' all derive from Old French, 'eagle' came into English from Latin via Old Provencal (the Old English word is 'erne' and I think we can all agree that 'the Great Ernes' just doesn't have the same ring to it as 'the Great Eagles'), while 'Necromancer' is ultimately of Greek origin (a strict OE version would be along the lines of 'the Witch King' or 'the Lich Lord', etc.).

Hope that helps.

- Seán

BTW, this site is a great resource for coming up with authentic names for your TOR PCs and NPCs:

http://realelvish.net/namelists.php

Really? I didn't know that. There must be a latin / old provencal influence in the nordic languages too then. The Danish word for eagle is "ørn" - which is pronounced very similar to the English word "earn".