[x]

To address that, should be noted that Martin is merely building in a genre Tolkien created, which I’m sure Martin would be the first to admit.

I always thought that R.R. in his name had to be a direct homage to Tolkien.

GoT is inarguably more “realistic” in its portrayal of human character than LOTR, but I got tired of the unrelieved anti-heroism.

LOTR is epic or as a poster said, biblical. Somehow, though, that heroic saga quality doesn't convey a more rounded view of life, which GOT in a way does. LOTR seems a bit more one-note. I got a bit tired of the epic-heroic quality, while the hobbit world that might have added variety really didn't work for me -- a little too much English sentimentalism.

Arguably, though that very concentrated or unified Wagnerian character of the stories may mean that LOTR will last longer than GOT, in the same way that generations did feel the need to pass down and record their epics and sagas while they let stories and anecdotes that conveyed other sides of life pass away into oblivion.

I only know the video, though, not the actual books.

[Nepeta]

Somehow, though, that heroic saga quality doesn't convey a more rounded view of life, which GOT in a way does. LOTR seems a bit more one-note. I got a bit tired of the epic-heroic quality, while the hobbit world that might have added variety really didn't work for me -- a little too much English sentimentalism.

Go read the chapter "The Scouring of the Shire" at the end of Return of the King. This part was left out of the movie. In the book, the Shire has not escaped unscathed while the four hobbits were off in the world. They've got work to do when they come home to clean up the place and chase out the scum, but even when they are done, some things will never be as they were.

Tolkien was a veteran of WW1, and was deeply affected by the experience. A lot of people think the book is an allegory of WW2, but it is not.