History YMMV / TheLordOfTheRings

* VindicatedByHistory: While some praised the work on release, the books generally received middling reviews when first published. Pretty much all the criticisms you hear today were the same criticisms made back in the 1950s and '60s: that it's too long and boring; that its BlackAndWhiteMorality and EverybodyLives ending makes it intellectually immature; that it lacks sex and romance; that it's a vehicle for right-wing, conservative values; and that it's sexist and Eurocentric. While the reception from the general public and book reviewers was mixed, professional literary critics could be visceral and outright contemptuous. One called it "juvenile trash." Another disparaged the books as about "a silly, furry little hobbit who makes his dreams come true." British magazine ''Private Eye'' sneered that Tolkien appeals to those "with the mental age of a child and Americans." The books didn't start to gain respectability until the early 1970s, and didn't ''really'' become popular until the turn of the 21st century. Today the books are widely regarded as genius, with dissenting views in the minority, and are considered some of the most influential in the western canon and laid the foundation for all modern western fantasy.

* MoralEventHorizon: With all the evil that Saruman does, it's instructing his orcs to start denuding Fangorn forest in order to fuel his forges that causes him to cross it. As Treebeard says, ''A wizard should know better!" Ultimately, it's also what brings about Saruman's downfall.

* EndingFatigue: The climax of the story takes place little over the halfway point of ''Return Of The King'', with the return journeys home being just as important as the journey ''to'' Mordor in the first place, practically making it read like a PostScriptSeason. Partly {{justified|Trope}}: Tolkien didn't want a cliche "happy-ever-after" ending, and included the Scouring of the Shire to show [[CharacterDevelopment how the small hobbits of the Fellowship had grown into true heroes in and of themselves]]. It also shows how most of the hobbit race (except for some bad eggs) are [[CrouchingMoronHiddenBadass Crouching Moron Hidden Badasses]] when [[GodzillaThreshold push truly comes to shove]], and that they absolutely abhor killing their own kind, which was one of the [[DividedWeFall MAJOR failings of]] [[Literature/TheSilmarillion the Elves of the First Age]].

** Gollum: A nasty sort of character to begin with, he killed his friend for the Ring and escaped with it (so far this is canon), but resisted the Ring's attempts to completely subjugate him even as he was driven insane by it and actually trapped it away from Sauron's attempts to retrieve it, [[ByronicHero fighting its influence and his twisted impulses the whole time while aware that he was doomed to fail due to his]] {{envy}}.

* StockParodyJokes:
** Tolkien will spend whole pages describing forests, but can't tell us whether or not balrogs have wings.
** The elves are stodgy and racist against humans. This is a bit of CommonKnowledge; the book consistently depicts them as kind, jolly folk.

** The book is popular with white supremacists due to its narrative of a good, pure coalition of western nations being threatened by insidious barbarians from the east. This ignores the fact that the Southrons, Easterlings, and Haradrim are explicitly established to not be inherently evil and had been indoctrinated and lied to by Sauron, that they in some cases had legitimate grievances over the Colonialist actions of Númenor, and that the book does not hesitate to point out that the Men under Sauron's sway always fought with valor (as opposed to the Orcs, who were unreliable and prone to routing if things started to look bad). Not to mention that Tolkien (who wrote a ''vicious'' letter to the Nazis when they asked about his blood status when the Hobbit was set to be published in Germany) would absolutely not have approved of white supremacy.

* VindicatedByHistory: While some praised the work on release, the books generally received middling reviews when first published. Pretty much all the criticisms you hear today were the same criticisms made back in the 1950s and '60s: that it's too long and boring; that its BlackAndWhiteMorality and EverybodyLives ending makes it intellectually immature; that it lacks sex and romance; that it's a vehicle for right-wing, conservative values; and that it's sexist and Eurocentric. While the reception from the general public and book reviewers was mixed, professional literary critics could be visceral and outright contemptuous. One called it "juvenile trash." Another disparaged the books as about "a silly, furry little hobbit who makes his dreams come true." British magazine ''Private Eye'' sneered that Tolkien appeals to those "with the mental age of a child and Americans." The books didn't start to gain respectability until the Vietnam War, and didn't ''really'' become popular until the turn of the 21st century. Today the books are widely regarded as genius, with dissenting views in the minority, and are considered some of the most influential in the western canon and laid the foundation for all modern western fantasy.

* VindicatedByHistory: While some praised the work on release, the books generally received middling reviews when first published. Pretty much all the criticisms you hear today were the same criticisms made back in the 1950s and '60s: that it's too long and boring; that its BlackAndWhiteMorality and EverybodyLives ending makes it intellectually immature; that it lacks sex and romance; that it's a vehicle for right-wing, conservative values; and that it's sexist and Eurocentric. While the reception from the general public and book reviewers was mixed, professional literary critics could be visceral and outright contemptuous. One called it "juvenile trash." Another disparaged the books as about "a silly, furry little hobbit who makes his dreams come true." British magazine ''Private Eye'' sneered that Tolkien appeals to those "with the mental age of a child, and Americans." The books didn't start to gain respectability until the Vietnam War, and didn't ''really'' become popular until the turn of the 21st century. Today the books are widely regarded as genius, with dissenting views in the minority, and are considered some of the most influential in the western canon and laid the foundation for all modern western fantasy.

* VindicatedByHistory: While some praised the work on release, the books generally received middling reviews when first published. Pretty much all the criticisms you hear today were the same criticisms made back in the 1950s and '60s: that it's too long and boring; that its BlackAndWhiteMorality and EverybodyLives ending makes it intellectually immature; that it lacks sex and romance; that it's a vehicle for right-wing, conservative values; and that it's sexist and Eurocentric. While the reception from the general public and book reviewers was mixed, professional literary critics could be visceral and outright contemptuous. One called it "juvenile trash." Another disparaged the books as about "a silly, furry little hobbit [who makes] his dreams come true." British magazine ''Private Eye'' sneered that Tolkien appeals to those "with the mental age of a child, and Americans." The books didn't start to gain respectability until the Vietnam War, and didn't ''really'' become popular until the turn of the 21st century. Today the books are widely regarded as genius, with dissenting views in the minority, and are considered some of the most influential in the western canon and laid the foundation for all modern western fantasy.

* VindicatedByHistory: While some praised the work on release, the books generally received middling reviews when first published. Pretty much all the criticisms you hear today were the same criticisms made back in the 1950s and '60s: that it's too long and boring; that its BlackAndWhiteMorality and EverybodyLives, as well as its lack of sex and romance, makes it intellectually immature; that it's a vehicle for right-wing, conservative values; and that it's sexist and Eurocentric. While the reception from the general public and book reviewers was mixed, professional literary critics could be visceral and outright contemptuous. One called it "juvenile trash." Another disparaged the books as about "a silly, furry little hobbit [who makes] his dreams come true." British magazine ''Private Eye'' sneered that Tolkien appeals to those "with the mental age of a child, and Americans." The books didn't start to gain respectability until the Vietnam War, and didn't ''really'' become popular until the turn of the 21st century. Today the books are widely regarded as genius, with dissenting views in the minority, and are considered some of the most influential in the western canon and laid the foundation for all modern western fantasy.

** At first glance the Shire seems like it's being held up as a paragon of {{Arcadia}}, but there's also a fair bit of criticism of the Shire: the Hobbits living there are quite small minded, ignorant, and provincial, which makes them easy marks for Saruman when he chooses to set up a tin pot dictatorship there. (With the most small minded, ignorant and provincial hobbits generally being the ones most likely to turn into Saruman's lackeys, ala Ted Sandyman.) When the Shire needs to be saved from Saruman, it's not the good old hobbits who are uncorrupted by foreign influences and the outside world who do the saving (or at least lead the charge) it's the ones who have experience in the outside world and have forever been changed by its influences and their experiences in it. When the Shire needs to be rebuilt after Saruman is defeated, it isn't made more beautiful and wonderful than it was before by going back to the way it was, ([[Administrivia/TheSameButMore or by trying to reject outside influence and become more Shirish or properly hobbitish]]) but because Sam uses the gift of Lady Galadriel to introduce new trees and plants that had never been present in the Shire before. The story even goes so far as to have Gildor, [[CantArgueWithElves an elf noble]], rebuke the isolationism of the Hobbits, pointing out that however much hobbits try to isolate themselves in the Shire they are still part of a larger world that affects them regardless of how much they try to ignore it or remain separate from it. In the divided and increasingly xenophobic and isolationist days of the early 21st century, there is certainly some food for thought and resonance there.

** It was ''never'' an option to simply have the Great Eagles of Manwë simply fly the One Ring to Mount Doom ([[AdaptationExplanationExtrication a misconception enhanced by the films]], but which wasn't directly explained in the original novel trilogy either). The Eagles are not a general-purpose taxi service to begin with (Gwaihir [[IOweYouMyLife was paying back a debt]] when he rescued Gandalf from Orthanc), they would have been too obvious to successfully get into Mordor and would have been intercepted and killed by Sauron's forces, and ''nobody'' on Middle-earth was mentally strong enough to ''intentionally'' destroy the One Ring anyway, Eagles included: in the end it was destroyed ''by accident'' when Gollum put a foot wrong and fell in.

** The book is popular with white supremacists due to its narrative of a good, pure coalition of western nations being threatened by insidious barbarians from the east. This ignores the fact that the Southrons, Easterlings, and Haradrim are explicitly established to not be inherently evil and had been indoctrinated and lied to by Sauron, that they in some cases had legitimate grievances over the Colonialist actions of Númenor, and that the book does not hesitate to point out that the Men under Sauron's sway always fought with valor (as opposed to the Orcs, who were unreliable and prone to routing if things started to look bad).

** Did you know that if we had the internet in the 1950s, people would probably be describing this in the same way they do popular 21st century whipping boys like ''[[Literature/TheTwilightSaga Twilight]]'' and the ''Literature/InheritanceCycle''? ''The Lord of the Rings'' didn't catch on until the 1960s.

** Did you know that if we had the internet in the 1950s, people would probably be describing this in the same way they do popular 21st century whipping boys like ''{{Literature/Twilight}}'' and the ''Literature/InheritanceCycle''? ''The Lord of the Rings'' didn't catch on until the 1960s.

** The general picture of the fundamental worldbuilding throughout the setting's fictional history is of "the West", analogues of European peoples (including the mythological-derived creatures like elves and dwarves), facing the invading forces of "the East" and "the South" which are analogues of Asian and African peoples (plus orcs and trolls which are also derived from European mythlore) which, coupled with the [[ColorCodedForYourConvenience broad strokes symbolism]] of "white" and "light" standing for "good" and "black" and "darkness" standing for "evil", leads to accusations of racism or at least Eurocentrism. Critics digging deeper acknowledge that the book (and his other writings) is more nuanced and not as simplistic as the movies make it look, like "the West" has plenty of villains who are "white" too like Saruman and the Dunlendings, and the "Eastern" and "Southern" men who are not "white" are not so differently treated from the Dunlendings, ultimately being exploited pawns. For his part Tolkien was averse to being associated with racism and discrimination, but also was upfront about his inspirations mainly revolving around European culture and history vis-a-vis the rest of the world.

-->"...if you want to write a tale of this sort you must consult your roots, and a man of the North-west of the Old World will set his heart and the action of his tale in an imaginary world of that air, and that situation: with the Shoreless Sea of his innumerable ancestors to the West, and the endless lands (out of which mostly enemies come) to the East."

* VindicatedByHistory: While some praised the work on release, the books generally received middling reviews when first published. Pretty much all the criticisms you hear today were the same criticisms made back in the 1950s and '60s: that it's too long and boring; that its BlackAndWhiteMorality and EverybodyLives, as well as its lack of sex and romance, makes it intellectually immature; that it's a vehicle for right-wing, conservative values; and that it's sexist and Eurocentric. While the reception from the general public and book reviewers was mixed, professional literary critics could be visceral and outright contemptuous. One called it "juvenile trash." Another disparaged the books as about "a silly, furry little hobbit [who makes] his dreams come true." British magazine ''Private Eye'' sneered that Tolkien appeals to those "with the mental age of a child, and Americans." The books didn't start to gain respectability until the Vietnam War, and didn't ''really'' become popular until the turn of the 21st century. Today the books are widely regarded as genius, with dissenting views in the minority, and are considered one of the most influential in the western canon and laid the foundation for all modern western fantasy.

* VindicatedByHistory: While some praised the work on release, the books generally received middling reviews when first published. Pretty much all the criticisms you hear today were the same criticisms made back in the 1950s and '60s: that it's too long and too boring; that its BlackAndWhiteMorality and EverybodyLives, as well as its lack of sex and romance, makes it intellectually immature; that it's a vehicle for right-wing, conservative values; and that it's sexist and Eurocentric. While the reception from the general public and book reviewers was mixed, professional literary critics could be visceral and outright contemptuous. One called it "juvenile trash." Another disparaged the books as about "a silly, furry little hobbit [who makes] his dreams come true." British magazine ''Private Eye'' sneered that Tolkien appeals to those "with the mental age of a child, and Americans." The books didn't start to gain respectability until the Vietnam War, and didn't ''really'' become popular until the turn of the 21st century. Today the books are widely regarded as genius, with dissenting views in the minority, and are considered one of the most influential in the western canon and laid the foundation for all modern western fantasy.

* VindicatedByHistory: While some praised the work on release, the books generally received middling reviews when first published. Pretty much all the same criticisms you hear today were the same criticisms made back in the 1950s: that it's too long and too boring; that its BlackAndWhiteMorality and EverybodyLives, as well as its lack of sex and romance, makes it intellectually immature; that it's a vehicle for right-wing, conservative values; and that it's sexist and Eurocentric. While the reception from the general public and book reviewers was mixed, professional literary critics could be visceral and outright contemptuous. One called it "juvenile trash." Another disparaged the books as about "a silly, furry little hobbit [who makes] his dreams come true." British magazine ''Private Eye'' sneered that Tolkien appeals to those "with the mental age of a child, and Americans." The books didn't start to gain respectability until the Vietnam War, and didn't ''really'' become popular until the turn of the 21st century. Today the books are widely regarded as genius, with dissenting views in the minority, and are considered one of the most influential in the western canon and laid the foundation for all modern western fantasy.

* VindicatedByHistory: While some praised the work on release, the books generally received middling reviews when first published. Pretty much all the same criticisms you hear today were the same criticisms made back in the 1950s: that it's too long, too boring; that its BlackAndWhiteMorality and EverybodyLives, as well as its lack of sex and romance, makes it intellectually immature; that it's a vehicle for right-wing, conservative values; and that it's sexist and Eurocentric. While the reception from the general public and book reviewers was mixed, professional literary critics could be visceral and outright contemptuous. One called it "juvenile trash." Another disparaged the books as about "a silly, furry little hobbit [who makes] his dreams come true." British magazine ''Private Eye'' sneered that Tolkien appeals to those "with the mental age of a child, and Americans." The books didn't start to gain respectability until the Vietnam War, and didn't ''really'' become popular until the turn of the 21st century. Today the books are widely regarded as genius, with dissenting views in the minority, and are considered one of the most influential in the western canon and laid the foundation for all modern western fantasy.

* VindicatedByHistory: While some praised the work on release, the books generally received middling reviews when first published. Pretty much all the same criticisms you hear today were the same criticisms made back in the 1950s: that it's too long, too boring; that its BlackAndWhiteMorality and EverybodyLives, as well as its lack of sex and romance, makes it intellectually immature and childish; that it's a vehicle for right-wing, conservative values; and that it's sexist and Eurocentric. While the reception from the general public and book reviewers was mixed, professional literary critics could be visceral and outright contemptuous. One called it "juvenile trash." Another disparaged the books as about "a silly, furry little hobbit [who makes] his dreams come true." British magazine ''Private Eye'' sneered that Tolkien appeals to those "with the mental age of a child, and Americans." The books didn't start to gain respectability until the Vietnam War, and didn't ''really'' become popular until the turn of the 21st century. Today the books are widely regarded as genius, with dissenting views in the minority, and are considered one of the most influential in the western canon and laid the foundation for all modern western fantasy.

* VindicatedByHistory: While some praised the work on release, the books generally received middling reviews when first published. Pretty much all the same criticisms you hear today were the same criticisms made back in the 1950s: that it's too long, too boring; that its BlackAndWhiteMorality and EverybodyLives, as well as its lack of sex and romance, makes it intellectually immature and childish; that it's a vehicle for right-wing, conservative values; and that it's sexist and Eurocentric. While the reception from the general public and book reviewers was mixed, professional literary critics could be visceral and outright contemptuous. One called it "juvenile trash." Another disparaged the books as about "a silly, furry little hobbit [who makes] his dreams come true." Such critics were horrified when ''The Lord of the Rings'' consistently topped polls for "Most Popular" English literature. The books didn't start to gain respectability until the Vietnam War, and didn't ''really'' become popular until the turn of the 21st century. Today the books are widely regarded as genius, with dissenting views in the minority, and are considered one of the most influential in the western canon and laid the foundation for all modern western fantasy.

* VindicatedByHistory: While some praised the work on release, the books generally received middling reviews when first published. Pretty much all the same criticisms you hear today were the same criticisms made back in the 1950s: that it's too long, too boring, that its BlackAndWhiteMorality and EverybodyLives, as well as its lack of sex and romance, makes it intellectually immature and childish, that it's a vehicle for right-wing, conservative values, and that it's sexist and Eurocentric. While the reception from the general public and book reviewers was mixed, professional literary critics could be visceral and outright contemptuous. One called it "juvenile trash." Another disparaged the books as about "a silly, furry little hobbit [who makes] his dreams come true." Such critics were horrified when ''The Lord of the Rings'' consistently topped polls for "Most Popular" English literature. The books didn't start to gain respectability until the Vietnam War, and didn't ''really'' become popular until the turn of the 21st century. Today the books are widely regarded as genius, with dissenting views in the minority, and are considered one of the most influential in the western canon and laid the foundation for all modern western fantasy.

* VindicatedByHistory: While some praised the work on release, the books generally received middling reviews when first published. Pretty much all the same criticisms you hear today were the same criticisms made back in the 1950s: that it's too long, too boring, that its BlackAndWhiteMorality and EverybodyLives, as well as its lack of sex and romance, makes it intellectually immature and childish, and that it's sexist and Eurocentric. While the reception from the general public and book reviewers was mixed, professional literary critics could be visceral and outright contemptuous. One called it "juvenile trash." Another disparaged the books as about "a silly, furry little hobbit [who makes] his dreams come true." Such critics were horrified when ''The Lord of the Rings'' consistently topped polls for "Most Popular" English literature. The books didn't start to gain respectability until the Vietnam War, and didn't ''really'' become popular until the turn of the 21st century. Today the books are widely regarded as genius, with dissenting views in the minority, and are considered one of the most influential in the western canon and laid the foundation for all modern western fantasy.

* VindicatedByHistory: While some praised the work on release, the books generally received middling reviews when first published. Pretty much all the same criticisms you hear today were the same criticisms made back in the 1950s: that it's too long, too boring, that its BlackAndWhiteMorality and EverybodyLives, as well as its lack of sex and romance, makes it intellectually immature and childish, and that it's sexist and Eurocentric. While the reception from the general public and book reviewers was mixed, professional literary critics could be visceral and outright contemptuous. One called it "juvenile trash." Another disparaged the books as about "a silly, furry little hobbit [who makes] his dreams come true." The books didn't start to gain popularity until the Vietnam War, and didn't ''really'' become popular until the turn of the 21st century. Today the books are widely regarded as genius, with dissenting views in the minority, and are considered one of the most influential in the western canon and laid the foundation for all modern western fantasy.

* VindicatedByHistory: While some praised the work on release, the books generally received middling reviews when first published. Pretty much all the same criticisms you hear today were the same criticisms made back in the 1950s: that it's too long, too boring, that its BlackAndWhiteMorality and EverybodyLives, as well as its lack of sex and romance, makes it intellectually immature and childish, and that it's sexist and Eurocentric. While the reception from the general public and book reviewers was mixed, professional literary critics could be visceral and outright contemptuous. One called it "juvenile trash." Another disparaged the books as about "a silly, furry little hobbit [who makes] his dreams come true." Partly this was due to the fact that the "Fantasy" genre did not yet exist. "Fantasy" was either ye olde myths from Greek or Norse mythology, or fairy tales for children. It was not considered a "respectable" or "serious" genre for adults. The books didn't start to gain popularity until the Vietnam War, and didn't ''really'' become popular until the turn of the 21st century. Today the books are widely regarded as genius, with dissenting views in the minority, and are considered one of the most influential in the western canon and laid the foundation for all modern western fantasy.

* VindicatedByHistory: While some praised the work on release, the books generally received middling reviews when first published. Pretty much all the same criticisms you hear today were the same criticisms made back in the 1950s: that it's too long, too boring, that its BlackAndWhiteMorality and EverybodyLives makes it childish, that it's sexist and Eurocentric, and that there's a lack of sex and romance. While the reception from the general public and book reviewers was mixed, professional literary critics could be visceral and outright contemptuous. One called it "juvenile trash." Another disparaged the books as about "a silly, furry little hobbit [who makes] his dreams come true." Partly this was due to the fact that the "Fantasy" genre did not yet exist. "Fantasy" was either ye olde myths from Greek or Norse mythology, or fairy tales for children. It was not considered a "respectable" or "serious" genre for adults. The books didn't start to gain popularity until the Vietnam War, and didn't ''really'' become popular until the turn of the 21st century. Today the books are widely regarded as genius, with dissenting views in the minority, and are considered one of the most influential in the western canon and laid the foundation for all modern western fantasy.