The Lord Of The Rings VS The Wheel Of Time

I've read lotr multiple times and never finished wot

I think readability matters if the author is making a mistake or doing something which causes the pages to be harder to read. The reason people find it less "readable" is probably due to vocabulary rather than blocky writing or poor prose. I don't think its fair to say the Lord of the Rings is less readable just because it uses beautiful language that people aren't accustomed to today. Especially because I feel it makes it more relevant as a piece of literary art. It's not just the story and character that is there to be admired but also the poetic nature of the writing in general. I agree with your other points so I guess for me it would just be two ties instead of one and a tied 3-3 final score lol.

For the magic system, I think both series should have gotten points. Because both are great systems in different ways. Even though the point was given a little more out of personal opinion and I completely respect that, but with the reasoning for both, it would also be fair to give the point to both series.

I think it should of been a draw. World building has to go to lotr. I 100 percent agree with everything you said but on the basis that Tolkiens level of detail. I'm 7 books in to wot but it seems Jordan has a great interest in anthropology whereas Tolkien was a linguist. Both are the usps of each world but on the basis Tolkien was the inspiration it has to be the first. The very modern language is weird on audiobook especially when Elaine curses blood and bloody ashes

I loved the Hobbit as a kid, it was a book and movie my new Step-Brother introduced me to when i was 10. I read it again and again. That said, i don't think either of us ever got into the Lord of the Rings until the movies came out, some ten years later. So years ago, I tried reading LotR on a 6 hour flight, and just could not get into his style anymore, like 30 minutes and was just, nope!. I recently went back and listened to the on audiobook and it was far more palatable. Also the voice acting was absolutely amazing which helped.

My first fantasy series was LOTR. My favorite is the Wheel of Time

World building should go to Middle Earth, the mythos, lore, and world were written and developed before the story of the Lord of The Rings. We keep getting more and more released posthumously, which builds more appreciation.

Lord of the Rings remains undefeated. Everything else is thin soup in comparison.

I prefer WoT’s world because there’s no one who is immortal so there’s a lot of misinformation about what happened in the past vs LoTR where we know what happened for sure bc people were there to see it

This is bait

I read the lord of the rings too many years ago, and I really want to read it again because I remenber not enjoying it back then but I still read the 3 main books.... also, I haven't watched the lord of the rings movies but I heard Tom Bombadil wasn't in them, i just want to say that if he was in it, it would be a musical, or a series of musicals xD

I’ve read Lotr multiple times in my life but haven’t started WoT yet it’s on my Tbr I don’t like the show but I think my main issue is the cast tbh they may fit the characters in the series they may not I don’t know but the show isn’t selling me however as I have learned shows/movies are not always a great representations

I read first Lord of the rings as teenager and as I'm not native English speaker, it was translated to my language (russian) and was absolutely modern and readable maybe also because literature russian language hasn't changed so much as English did, which leads ironically to second point that now I have started reading Wheel of time in the beginning of the year 2022 and stuck now on 5th book fires of heaven. A d for the person who learnt english pretty recently I had to adapt to the wheel of time language a lot as a lot of words used in series has no use at all in modern English. Just a point that readability point goes to WOT only in case it's English native readers )()

the point of best selling is a bit unfair since LotR has been around way longer than WoT
though a category you can add to that is adaptation: with the win going to LotR. Those movies are awesome. The Hobbit less so. Wheel of Time's adaptation was... an adaptation

I think it's obvious who Id pick by my channel name lol but I honestly haven't read The wheel of times yet I plan to someday

Plot? Plot? I have no issue with giving character or magic system to WOT, but plot? LOTR's plot is tight and perfectly planned. WOT's plot is a complete mess with starts and stops and a multiple book "slog".

To be honest it look me three attempts to get through the lord of the rings just because of the Language in the books

Are those the original covers for Lord of the rings? Holy smokes I've never seen those and they actually make me smile. I love it. That's the whole don't judge a book by its cover meaning

A bit late to this but I think Jordan is one of, if not the, best world builders I have ever read or seen. Every character, faction and society feels real and fully realized. Tolkien on the other hand, did not create a world. He created a MYTHOLOGY all of his own that can stand on its own next to any real world example. It’s not as easy to digest, but once you go digging the amount of lore and history behind every person, place or action is unbelievable and will probably never be achieved again.

It is impossible to compare the artist to a craftsman.

Disagree with readability. A LOT of people would back away from FOURTEEN books of the same story. I'm a prolific reader and I consider that too much. (That said, I am reading the Wheel of Time). AND there is the slog to consider. Not 1, not 2, but 4 books that makes many people drop the series entirely. LOTR doesn't have that. You pretty much like fantasy epics or you don't read it. Hahahaha

This is a very hard comparison. But only you could do it Justice mr Greene

How saddening the education system is off young native speakers are turned off by the style of "The Lord of the Rings". I am Italian and read it in English with no problem whatsoever... Well except for Tom bombadil's ramblings, that is.

I love reading the dictionary so LoR's readability is moderate, but WoT for me feels like a Dr Suess book, LoR wins in terms of pros

I agree on the readability but it's not the language for me with Tolkien. For example the hobbits' trip to the Inn. That was one of the most painful sections of fantasy I've ever read. I felt it was too drawn out. I have never understood why a certain singing character was introduced there and no one seems to know to this day exactly who and what he is. I feel TWoT's pacing is better and Jordan doesn't dwell on things that aren't relevant later in some way. Other than over-describing things in places Jordan doesn't spend a lot of time on things that aren't important to the story. I struggled through LoTR. I devoured EoTW. I Love Tolkien and adore the overall story but he's not an easy read. I also feel you get to know the characters better in WoT. Of course, you do so many books to get to know them.

It is LOTR!! Hands down!! End of story. I know these are your "opinions" but after watching your videos I knew who you were gonna pick because you have a bias when it comes to wheel of time. But you are wrong....opinion or not. Just the way it is as LOTR is the king👑 of the fantasy genre and that is just an immutable law of nature and an objective truth of reality. Sorry just the way things are Daniel. No hard feelings! Cheers mate!!! 🍻🍻🍻🤘
Smooches!!! 😘💋💞

In my opinion you can’t call a story trope a trope if the book or character made that a trope but I do love the idea that wheel of time is just more modern lord of the rings with a different idea

I love both of these series so much. It’s almost an impossibility for me to decide between them. I know on many of the points, I agreed. I agree that the characters in WoT are better, if only slightly. I also prefer WoT’s magic system, because I like the magic system to be more tangible (although I don’t mind a mythos-based magic system).

However, LOTR, in my mind, has better world building. Yeah, there are great points either way, but I tend to prefer a lore-based world. And also, Tolkien constructed an entire language for his book. (And, yes, I do consider LOTR to be one book, just three volumes. It was written as one book, but the publishing company split it into three books.) Who constructs an entire, functioning language for their book? Someone who is deeply invested in their world as not just some fantasy land, but as a real place. Listen to how Tolkien talks about his world. He speaks almost as if it’s a real place with a real history. He was invested in his story beyond it just being a story, which is why he developed so much lore. He wrote the backstory to every tree branch. And that’s why I think that LOTR’s world building is not only better than WoT, I think it is the best world building that has ever been seen in literature. Period. Yes, I think it is undoubtedly better than the likes of WoT and Malazan, regardless of preference. One need only look at the influence of LOTR’s world and lore to realize that this point CLEARLY goes to LOTR. And it’s not even close.

The other point that I would contest is the point of readability. I think the point should go to LOTR. I get it, there is some adjustment. But I’ve found that people fear the adjustment far more than they should. I grew up in the 70’s and 80’s, and my parents used to read me LOTR as a bedtime story. Granted. I know I’m more used to that language, so I’ll do my best to put my personal bias aside. I’ve found that many readers 30 and under prefer the style of writing in WoT, at least initially.

Just recently, there was a new hire at my job, he’s 24 y/o. Like me, he loves reading, and like me, he’s a huge Tolkien nut. So, naturally, we’ve become good friends, as far as work friends go, I mean. He was telling me about a friend of his from a couple years back who loved the fantasy genre, but hadn’t dared touch LOTR yet, because he feared the style of writing. New hire says he convinced his friend to give it a shot. Told his friend to immerse himself in the style of writing and see what he thought about the readability after that. Apparently, the adjustment was easy for him, and once he was able to get past that, he was able to really appreciate the book.

Now, I get that anecdotal evidence isn’t exactly proof, but I think you get my point. Take some time to adjust; I promise it’s very readable one you do. But also, readability does include length. Now, length may vary slightly depending on the set, but I have 4 full sets of LOTR, each of which total in (approximately) as follows:

The Fellowship of the Ring - 400 pages

The Two Towers - 350 pages

The Return of the King - 300 pages + Appendixes, which I do recommend going through, but certainly not necessary

Now, my 3 full WoT sets total in as follows:

The Eye of the World - 800 pages

The Great Hunt - 700 pages

The Dragon Reborn - 650 pages

The Shadow Rising - 1000 pages

The Fires of Heaven - 1000 pages

Lord of Chaos - 1000 pages

A Crown of Swords - 850 pages

The Path of Daggers - 650 pages

Winter’s Heart - 600 pages

Crossroads of Twilight (heart of “the slog”)- 650 pages

Knife of Dreams - 800 pages

The Gathering Storm - 1050 pages

Towers of Midnight - 1200 pages

A Memory of Light - 1150 pages

+ New Spring - 350 pages

So, yeah. It’s daunting. Regardless of writing style, by sheer quantity, WoT dwarfs that of LOTR. It’s 1050 total pages vs 12,100 pages. 12,450 if you include New Spring. LOTR is 1/12 the size of WoT. This should put readability into perspective. In my mind, there’s nothing that can convince me that WoT is more readable. I know many people who stopped after the first four of five books due to the length alone.

So, for me, LOTR ultimately comes out on top, with a final score of 5-3, but I CAN see it going either way, depending on preference. Either way, LOTR has wider influence and has not only withstood the rest of time up to this point, but I think it will almost certainly continue to do so. It’s characters are unforgettable, if not better developed than WoT characters. Who doesn’t know of Gandalf or Frodo or Legolas, even if they haven’t read the books? Can you say the same about even someone like Mat Cauthon or Nynaeve? It’s themes are explored in a deep and very real way. And it’s a book that not only can be reread, it encourages rereading. Every time you go back to it, you get something new from it. And it fathered an entire genre, and was wholly original. That was the book that set many of the fantasy tropes we see today, many of which are explored in WoT. Without LOTR, WoT wouldn’t even exist. Ultimately, I think it should be hailed as one of the great classics of literature. In any case, it is certainly the better of the two books.

The only problem with the readability of Tolkien's work is that he uses the word ere instead of before.

World goes to LOTR obviously. other than this, I agree.

About readability:
I read the Lord of the Rings before the wheel of time, probably when I was about 10. It was definitely a bit of a struggle to get through. I did not have the same issue with the wheel of time when I read it a couple years later, though 14 books was definitely a lot.

Going g to have to disagree about the characters. Especially the women, there are very few that I actually liked. Mat is amazing, love him. Loved Min. But most of the rest did nothing for me, or irritated me. LotR wins that category for me

I tried so hard to read lord of the rings. I got half way when my brain just gave up. It was exhausting. I’m finishing up Mistborn and I’m debating on either beginning Stormlight or Wheel of Time. Daniel what would you suggest??

I've read both series and wOt is better by far

I feel the readability issue comes down to if you include the Silmarillion or not.

Lann should have died, after giving Nynaeve a baby. There could have peen a epilogue showing her telling her kid about his dad.

LOTR is hard to read, its like a super dense pudding your grandparents made.

The Belgariad & The Malloreon by David and Leigh Eddings would be good to make a comparison with WoT, especially with having trying to get multiple diverse cultures to work together for a single goal of thier continued survival.

In my opinion the brilliance of LOTR is its conciseness. All three books combined add up to only a bit more than something like LOC from WOT. The story is fully realised, with character arcs, an established setting, and brilliant themes, in such a small word count. Its hard to find any fantasy world even remotely close to the level of immersion in LOTR without word counts well of twice as high. Take Harry Potter. The world of LOTR feels way more realised, and I would say the character work is similar. The story of LOTR feels longer and more impactful, yet LOTR is told in about half the words. I don't debate the WOT has better chatacter development and plot, because it is almost 10x longer than LOTR. The fact that you can even compare the plot and character growth is a testament to the brilliance of JRR Tolkien. Every word has a purpose in the grand scheme of the story, which is why I have to say LOTR is better for me. You just don't find anything nowadays quite the same.
Many modern authors match the plot of LOTR, but to do so, they write far longer books and series. I have yet to find anything so impactful yet so consise.

I am 13 and Lord of the rings is much more readable

LOTR 100%.
It was written by a brilliant Christian

I mast to say bcuse i lornd bible (hibrow) and took hibrow i dont have a problem too read the lotr and slimrsion

Personally I always say what tolkien started Jordan perfected

I would have to give the magic systems a draw myself. Tolkiens magic is based in the character and will of the user. Sauron exercises his will to dominate and control through terror, deception, and force. Caradhras is malicious, not necessarily evil, but not friendly. Denethor is strong enough to contend (for a time) with sauron directly. Aragorn has the presence and will to command kings. Etc ad infinitum. WOT on the other hand is arguably the most complex and consistent magic system ever spelled out (see what I did there). It's a draw to me.

The wheel of time might have more focus on character development but there are more poorly done characters (basically all the women and Rand) than great characters.

Nice job, Greene! I think I can summarize my own analysis... "WoT is better at this, and this, and this. LotR is ... well, it's Lord of the Rings. LotR takes it by kingly right of precedence, and has raised its crown prince WoT very well!"

WOT is basic LotR for dumbs. There are so many plagiarized things there that is wild 😅

Rand has the best character development of any fantasy character, ever.

What VS video should I do next??