Scan barcode
bdamokos's review against another edition
4.0
The Fall of Arthur is a beautiful alliterative poem, that shows how beautiful and expressive the English language can be (especially if it is not constrained by a fixed word order and modern word). The poem itself is unfortunately unfinished after the first five cantos (~50 pages), the rest of the book is notes by Christopher Tolkien, at times a bit boring, but personal and scholarly - it must be strange for Christopher to spend his life analyzing every scrap of paper his father left behind trying to make sense of it.
merethebookgal's review against another edition
3.0
The poem itself was good (but unfinished) and really the majority of the book were essays from Christopher Tolkien, which wasn't was I expecting, nor do I feel that was how the book was marketed. For that reason I'd like to give it 2 stars, but the poem was enjoyable, and, probably only because it's Tolkien I'm feeling nice and will give it 3 stars. Not really worth the price, unless you want to dive into the essays.
_bookmoth's review against another edition
3.0
Skim before savouring
With The Fall of Arthur we have a new Tolkien book in store. At first it seems a decent read, at second, a rip-off. Yet, I don't regret having bought the book. [Review can be found here.]
With The Fall of Arthur we have a new Tolkien book in store. At first it seems a decent read, at second, a rip-off. Yet, I don't regret having bought the book. [Review can be found here.]
firefisterin's review against another edition
adventurous
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? N/A
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? N/A
- Flaws of characters a main focus? N/A
3.75
kel_pru's review against another edition
4.0
Beautiful telling of the end of Arthur. Wish there had been more JRR Tolkien prose and less of his son's.
soraia_silva's review against another edition
3.0
A parte realmente escrita por J.R.R. Tolkien é interessante.
É pena mais de metade do livro serem apontamentos do seu filho. Gostava que o livro tivesse sido mais focado no pai.
É pena mais de metade do livro serem apontamentos do seu filho. Gostava que o livro tivesse sido mais focado no pai.
cazaam's review against another edition
3.0
Wish it was complete. I am in awe of the skill it takes to write an epic poem. It was fun to read parts of it aloud, and the alliteration was really great. Not annoying at all.
gittav's review against another edition
3.0
I
Where I discuss the poem
Verse that is alliterative // aloud is best read.
Thus the rhymes // are rendered superior
to when invoked // by our inward voice.
Imagery and metaphors // inspire dreams and
imagination. Pictures vivid // the prose conjures.
Turneresque stormy seas // travellers they threaten
and wicked Mordred // makes lustful advances
to the "cold" Guinever. // Crept me out.
However, in this poem // Happens little.
Naturally this is because // abandoned it was
by Tolkien in favour of // other texts and works.
Difficult it therefore is // to determine a rating
because the poem does not // provide an ending,
let alone, perhaps, // a lengthy and satisfactory
middle. Christopher thus tried // to cramp in more
information to provide // a purchase decent enough
to proudly be // a book, not a fragment.
II
Where I discuss the paratexts
About alliterative verse // the appendix consulted
I first to find // forgotten knowledge
and forlorn. // Two typos found
at twho-hundred thirty-one. // Though surely
becone meant 'become', // 'with' became wth.
Spell-check would solve // this sloppy editing.
Confused: Christopher's editing // where ends it?
Tolkien's lecture // when launched is it?
Father's words and son's // wrought into one.
The appendix's aim // ambiguous remains.
Explaining it tries not, // for time and space lack,
exposition fractional // no further contributes
to Old English verse's valuation // its virtue is thus
by laity overlooked.
// Less concerned
with what it is // than what not.
English not Anglo-Saxon, // nor alliteration,
but head-rhyme. // Hearing sounds repeated,
same letters, symbols // insignificant is.
Changing spelling causes // confusion certainly.
But search in dictionary // to discovery it leads.
Alliteration is repetition // assonance of sounds
but not limited to // the letter that comes first.
As such certain and uncertain // surely do alliterate,
yet latter is undesirable diction // in drafting Old English metre.
Old English alliterative verse // accurately is head-rhyme.
Should change: 'same letters, symbols // insignificant are'
to: 'same letters, symbols // are significant not'.
Christopher tells when // written the poem was
and says The Fall // never finished was.
A friend of Tolkien wished // and wrote that:
'You simply must finish it.' // But no more did
Tolkien add // to Arthur's song.
III
Where the rating is explained
I have this book // bestowed three stars.
The language and rhyme // rewarded were four,
but Christopher's input // to the imagination
left something. Typos // truly unnecessary are.
Endnotes, I found, // should footnotes have been.
The paratext explaining // the poem's context
was written not for the lay // let alone scholars
or students of Old English poetry // and offered none
of the critical analyses // any reader would want
to find when bothering // to bring oneself
to read them. Christopher's // critical approach,
or rather the lack thereof, // reflected should not
be in the rating. // But reading a poem
that is unfinished requires // regular footnotes.
No reader wants to read // a rant of all Arthurian
Legends after finishing // the fleeting rhymes.
Only four lines are needed // to love Tolkien's poetry
and to recognise the potential // of the poetry's grandeur.
Nonetheless, it is uneventful // and unexplained, at times, by
both father and son, equally. // Even though plenty
information is given afterwards.
Where I discuss the poem
Verse that is alliterative // aloud is best read.
Thus the rhymes // are rendered superior
to when invoked // by our inward voice.
Imagery and metaphors // inspire dreams and
imagination. Pictures vivid // the prose conjures.
Turneresque stormy seas // travellers they threaten
and wicked Mordred // makes lustful advances
to the "cold" Guinever. // Crept me out.
However, in this poem // Happens little.
Naturally this is because // abandoned it was
by Tolkien in favour of // other texts and works.
Difficult it therefore is // to determine a rating
because the poem does not // provide an ending,
let alone, perhaps, // a lengthy and satisfactory
middle. Christopher thus tried // to cramp in more
information to provide // a purchase decent enough
to proudly be // a book, not a fragment.
II
Where I discuss the paratexts
About alliterative verse // the appendix consulted
I first to find // forgotten knowledge
and forlorn. // Two typos found
at twho-hundred thirty-one. // Though surely
becone meant 'become', // 'with' became wth.
Spell-check would solve // this sloppy editing.
Confused: Christopher's editing // where ends it?
Tolkien's lecture // when launched is it?
Father's words and son's // wrought into one.
The appendix's aim // ambiguous remains.
Explaining it tries not, // for time and space lack,
exposition fractional // no further contributes
to Old English verse's valuation // its virtue is thus
by laity overlooked.
// Less concerned
with what it is // than what not.
English not Anglo-Saxon, // nor alliteration,
but head-rhyme. // Hearing sounds repeated,
same letters, symbols // insignificant is.
Changing spelling causes // confusion certainly.
But search in dictionary // to discovery it leads.
Alliteration is repetition // assonance of sounds
but not limited to // the letter that comes first.
As such certain and uncertain // surely do alliterate,
yet latter is undesirable diction // in drafting Old English metre.
Old English alliterative verse // accurately is head-rhyme.
Should change: 'same letters, symbols // insignificant are'
to: 'same letters, symbols // are significant not'.
Christopher tells when // written the poem was
and says The Fall // never finished was.
A friend of Tolkien wished // and wrote that:
'You simply must finish it.' // But no more did
Tolkien add // to Arthur's song.
III
Where the rating is explained
I have this book // bestowed three stars.
The language and rhyme // rewarded were four,
but Christopher's input // to the imagination
left something. Typos // truly unnecessary are.
Endnotes, I found, // should footnotes have been.
The paratext explaining // the poem's context
was written not for the lay // let alone scholars
or students of Old English poetry // and offered none
of the critical analyses // any reader would want
to find when bothering // to bring oneself
to read them. Christopher's // critical approach,
or rather the lack thereof, // reflected should not
be in the rating. // But reading a poem
that is unfinished requires // regular footnotes.
No reader wants to read // a rant of all Arthurian
Legends after finishing // the fleeting rhymes.
Only four lines are needed // to love Tolkien's poetry
and to recognise the potential // of the poetry's grandeur.
Nonetheless, it is uneventful // and unexplained, at times, by
both father and son, equally. // Even though plenty
information is given afterwards.
barschuft's review against another edition
3.0
The poem fragment itself gets 5 out of 5. The various explanations drag down the rating. However, the summary of Arthur's death in different traditions was interesting and made Tolkien's fragment even more impressive.