A great good

Last Tuesday we watched all the extended Lord of the Rings films consecutively.

I would like to think that this film (it is one film: the temptation to add “to rule them all” is well nigh overwhelming) will be regarded as one of the first truly great events of the twenty-first century. The magnitude of the achievement of Peter Jackson and his cast and crew staggers the imagination. There are those who do not like it: nothing pleases everybody. And some of these people do that peculiarly human trick of imagining that because they do not like a thing, it therefore should not have been done. I’ve seen ranting and railing to this effect on the web. I don’t understand these people. I don’t want to.

But it was done. It exists. It is a real thing. And I have lived to see it. That's a great good.

I don’t believe there will, or necessarily should, ever be another cinematic production of Lord of the Rings. We don’t need one. This is the definitive film version, and any attempt to do it again would either fall short, or be regarded as simply an imitation. This, flaws and all, is the best film that could be made of…well, how can one describe the book? I personally feel it is the greatest work of literature this century has produced, but if I said that I would be deluged with comments about Tolkien’s alleged lack of storytelling skills and stylistic polish, the book’s lack of plot(!) and strong female characters (or female characters at all), the reactionary tendencies, the simplistic view of good and evil, the talkiness, the this, the that and doubtless the other as well, and I’d end up getting into arguments with people who know more than I do about everything except my heart, which will not change its opinion. It has been said to be the most read book in the world after the Bible, which might be taken as an index of some kind of success. It was, I think, directly responsible for the success of fantasy as a genre, and thus for the publication of many other books I have loved (some more than LotR, if I’m honest), and some I have laughed at. Would there be a Discworld if not for Tolkien?

Maybe I should stick to personal opinions. This is the best film I have ever seen. Based on the greatest book I have ever read. I wish I could thank everyone involved, personally, face to face, one after the other, for the gift they have given all of us: a labour of love, a tour de force, for which, however much money they make from theatrical releases and DVDs and merchandise and so on, we will owe them for ever.

(no subject)

vampirdaddy said in a comment to allisona that the word "hamburger" did not mean "from Hamburg," but was an American burger containing ham. I promptly added this:

Okay, boggle. I have been convinced for most of my adult life that (since as far as I know burgers don't contain ham, but have always been ground beef, or "mince" as we call it over here) the word "Hamburger" *did* mean "from Hamburg" and thus our word "Beefburger" was a vile neologism.

So where did the "burger" part come from?

Next you'll be telling me "Frankfurter" means a furter made from parts of a dead American singer...

I've copied it from there, since I actually want a reply from someone who can confirm or refute this. Hamburger to the best of my knowledge has never had ham in it, and "burger" seems a strange word to apply to a round meat patty without some good reason. There's a mystery here, people, and I want it solved!