And that means his actual prose, too. \u00a0One of the trademarks of the Internet generation is a certain contempt for that which came before. \u00a0Oh, we might celebrate it, adore it, be fans of it, even venerate it, but we can\u2019t help be add some form of \u2018of course [fill in the blank] is a little this or that, not great, purply, whatever.\u2019 \u00a0Even Thomas McDonald\u2019s nod to Bram Stoker yesterday had an obligatory \u2018his writing could be a bit Victorian.\u2019 <\/p>\n
It\u2019s not just books either. \u00a0Movies. \u00a0Songs. \u00a0You name it. \u00a0I can\u2019t tell you how many times I\u2019ve seen an article celebrating the original 1933 King Kong<\/i>, only to pause to lament, or apologize, for the crude special effects. \u00a0Really? \u00a0Crude? \u00a0It was 19 freaking 33. \u00a0At the time, they towered over anything ever attempted. \u00a0Compared to Kong 33, Avatar <\/i>was a moving comic book. \u00a0You should celebrate them for their\u00a0time\u00a0and place, not expect them to stand up to our own ever changing standards.<\/p>\n
Yet for some reason, more than I remember growing up, we seem to almost apologize for liking anything that didn\u2019t just come out in iPad app form or with the latest CGI. \u00a0Tolkien is no exception. \u00a0I\u2019ve lost track of the number of fans who appear to apologize for his prose, his style, his form. \u00a0Oh, they love the book. \u00a0They celebrate it as the masterpiece that it is. \u00a0But there\u2019s that tendency that seems to increase every year across the Internet to celebrate it apologetically. <\/p>\n