User blog comment:Gott wisst/Hypothesis about why B. J. is wrong about J. R. R. Tolkien/@comment-991678-20090423040731

It's a very poor rule, I must say, if you break stories down to each element; all of Tolkien's stories are absolutely authentic, he simply put fore-existing ideas to good use, and he could do it better than most people could do. He simply used ideas, styles, creatures, etc, from that source (that is, Germanic mythology), hoping that it would help make up for what has been drained away in English mythology. Even B.J. cannot claim to have many original things; only things as a whole (e.g. "Redwall Abbey was thought of by B.J., but B.J. did not come up with red walls or abbeys, mice, rats, or anything of the sort"). If you are to apply the fore-said (by you) rule to the level that J.R.R.T is not to be considered an "author" by reason of him not having come up with elves, the idea that the earth is in the "middle" of the universe, trolls, magical items, wizards, and even various places, etc., then how many authors can truly be called original? As can be clearly seen, it is really just a matter of personal opinion. (And they all said: "Amen to that, brother!")