Just Finished Reading: Death and the Penguin by Andrey Kurkov (FP: 1996) [228pp] 

Post-Soviet Kiev, Ukraine. Viktor Zolotaryov always wanted to be an author, but earning a living especially now wasn’t exactly easy. But he was determined to try and spent his days dropping off short stories to local newspapers in the capital. He was both pleased, if somewhat surprised, to receive a call back from an editor who liked his style. The pleasure soon turned to confusion once Viktor learned about the job offer. His task was to write obituaries for the still living. Initially reluctant to undertake this rather bizarre assignment he relented once he discovered his rather generous salary offer. Anyway, he had another mouth to feed apart from his own. He’d picked up Misha, an Emperor penguin, from the local zoo after they advertised for those willing to take on looking after some of their collection due to lack of resources. Suffering from depression and a heart condition it was the least Viktor could do to feed Misha as well and as often as he could. When an obituary was published some weeks later Viktor was both pleased and saddened that this was his first time in print. When another followed weeks later Viktor began to worry. But when his editor started to direct who he should write about and how swiftly their deaths followed the worry began to morph into something darker. Was Viktor involved in something much bigger than simply extoling the virtues of the dead? Dare he even ask the question? Or would HIS name appear in a future copy of the newspaper... 

I picked this book up some months ago because it looked ‘quirky’. It was most certainly that! Pitched as a ‘dark comedy’ I found the first half of the book frankly hilarious – probably because of the level of absurdity that none of the characters seemed to notice or comment on. One thing that made me chuckle throughout – amongst many things – was the fact that a member of the local mafia shared the penguin's name and was referred throughout as ‘Misha - non penguin’. I’m smiling now just thinking about it. I found the second half less funny mostly, I think, because I had become used to the absurdity and had simply accepted the bizarre goings on as ‘normal’. This did not, in the least, reduce my enjoyment though. This remains one of the highlights of the year (so far) and I intend to read far more from this author (or at least as much has been translated into English). The atmosphere of post-Soviet Ukraine was very palpable, and it was fascinating just to ‘be there’ in the aftermath of the soviet collapse. The many characters throughout were excellent from Viktor, the gangster Misha non-penguin, his young daughter Sophie, Sergey the local policeman and, of course, the brilliant if silent Misha (the penguin).  

This was certainly a strange read – not least of which because of the cultural divide. But one of the many things I liked about it was the ability of the author to get the reader to identify with people that, if handled badly, could feel rather strange and ‘other’. At the end of the final page not only did it feel like you got to know the characters and like them (even most of the ‘baddies’) but you missed them once you’d finished. Definitely recommended for a ‘different’ and often very funny reading experience. More to come! 

Translated from the Russian by George Bird.  

Happy Winnie the Pooh Day....!

Reading Through Trump 2.0 in 2025. 

Those who are semi-regulars here will be aware that one of my major reading themes (or ‘steams’ as I’ve labelled them) is the attempt to understand the weirdness that is the USA. I have entitled this USA: WTF which seems more than appropriate. With the most recent political ‘events’ over there – most especially the re-election of Trump despite knowing what he did last time, knowing what he is capable of and knowing what he had planned. So, as a ‘side quest’ or maybe a tributary to my original knowledge stream, I’ll going to be exploring why such a thing could happen there and just why so many people still support it. Here’s what I read about that in 2025 (a few books were reviewed in 2024 but after the election results had been announced so I’m going to count them). 

Our Own Worst Enemy – The Assault From Within on Modern Democracy by Tom Nichols 

The American Revolution – A Very Short Introduction by Robert J Allison 

Nineteen Eighty-Four by George Orwell 

Surveillance – A Very Short Introduction by David Lyon 

The Shortest History of Democracy by John Kean 

How Civil Wars Start and How to Stop Them by Barbara F Walter 

The Hundred Years’ War on Palestine – A History of Settler Colonial Conquest and Resistance by Rashid Khalidi 

How the Right Lost Its Mind by Charles J Sykes 

1923 – The Crisis that Led to Hitler’s Coup by Mark Jones 

Whilst somewhat ‘unfocused’ at this point I don’t think this was a terrible start. I’m hoping/expecting my reading within this ‘side-quest’ to be a little more on point once I’ve finished with my present 20th century history read. With luck I’ll even start to clue into just WTF is going on over there!  

Happy Birthday: Nevil Shute Norway (17 January 1899 – 12 January 1960) was an English novelist and aeronautical engineer who spent his later years in Australia. He used his full name in his engineering career and Nevil Shute as his pen name to protect his engineering career from inferences by his employers (Vickers) or from fellow engineers that he was "not a serious person" or from potentially adverse publicity in connection with his novels, which included On the Beach and A Town Like Alice.

An aeronautical engineer as well as a pilot, Shute began his engineering career with the de Havilland Aircraft Company. Dissatisfied with the lack of opportunities for advancement, he took a position in 1924 with Vickers Ltd., where he was involved with the development of airships, working as Chief Calculator (stress engineer) on the R100 airship project for the Vickers subsidiary Airship Guarantee Company. In 1929, he was promoted to deputy chief engineer of the R100 project under Barnes Wallis. When Wallis left the project, Shute became the chief engineer.

Twenty-four of his novels and novellas have been published. Many of his books have been adapted for the screen, including Lonely Road in 1936; Landfall: A Channel Story in 1949; Pied Piper in 1942 and again in 1959, and also as Crossing to Freedom, a CBS made-for-television movie, in 1990; On the Beach in 1959 and again in 2000 as a two-part miniseries; and No Highway in 1951. A Town Like Alice was adapted into a film in 1956, serialised for Australian television in 1981, and also broadcast on BBC Radio 2 in 1997 starring Jason Connery, Becky Hindley, Bernard Hepton and Virginia McKenna. Shute's 1952 novel The Far Country was filmed for television as six one-hour episodes in 1972, and as a two-part miniseries in 1987. Vintage Books reprinted all 23 of his books in 2009.

The public library in Alice Springs, Northern Territory is the Nevil Shute Memorial Library.

[I've only read two of his books (so far) and enjoyed both of them. I'm definitely intending to read more - if not them all.]

Just Finished Reading: 1941 – Armageddon by Richard Collier (FP: 1981) [316pp] 

1941 was a bad year for the Allies. Despite success in the Battle of Britain, England was still being regularly bombed. In North Africa Rommel was recovering land given up by the Italians and gaining more by the day. Allied forces had been ejected from Greece and Crete (which was the graveyard of the German airborne forces) that couldn’t help but be compared to Dunkirk. In America President Roosevelt still struggled against isolationist forces in his desire to become the arsenal of Democracy. Meanwhile, in the East, the Japanese began moving against the European outposts taking one after another with apparent ease. There was, briefly, some good news – or at least good mixed in with the bad. Despite losing HMS Hood the Royal Navy had struck both a tactical and propaganda victory with the sinking of Germany’s flagship Bismarck. It was little enough to celebrate but it was something in those dark times. In the summer of that year things changed. In June of 1941 Germany attacked Russia in Operation Barbarossa. It was a HUGE gamble which turned out to be a huge mistake (actually Axis forces made at least 3 fundamental errors in 1941 which would, ultimately, loose them the war – but more on that later). Despite a constant stream of warnings, the Russians were taken completely by surprise and thrown back in disarray. It would take them months to recover. Finally, as the year approached its end, the Japanese navy launched its sneak attack on the US navy base at Pearl Harbor (again despite significant warnings that it was about to happen - more later on that too). America was now fully in the conflict. 

I found this to be somewhat better that the authors previous work on 1940. Partially it might be that I had become used to his ‘style’ but I think he did actually improve his writing in the intervening years. There was a great deal of doom & gloom here and rightly so. It was THE bad year for the Allies and it's easy to imagine, as many did, that the Axis powers were going to be triumphant. Only in hindsight could many see the seeds of Axis defeat (Churchill was one of them who was delighted in the German attack on Russia and equally convinced that the war was now effectively won – by the Allies – once the US was fully committed to the cause). But 1942 was the year when the dynamic changed and the Axis lost the initiative and never regained it after the battles of Midway (4–7 June 1942), El Alamein (23 October – 11 November 1942) and Stalingrad (17 July 1942 – 2 February 1943). 

This was a reasonable overview of a very difficult and deadly year. As before we had the rather annoying and honestly clunky change of gears from big events to small ones. Again, I can see why he chose to do this, but I don’t think it was handled particularly well. I’m certain that there are better books out there on this year (one coming up actually!) so if you have limited time or limited interest, I might suggest that you pass on this one.  

Just Finished Reading: The Dead of Jericho by Colin Dexter (FP: 1981) [302pp] 

Morse thought it was his lucky day. The most attractive woman at a boring party wanted to spend her time with him. Not only was she attractive but smart too, well read, well educated. But then he saw her wedding ring and she said yes, she was in fact married. Morse considered his options and decided that a relationship with a married woman was just too much work, even if his rather prickly conscience would let him even try. Weeks later he saw her again in very different circumstances – in the morgue. Detective Inspector Morse was informed that she had committed suicide and that she was pregnant. Saddened in more ways than one he decided to investigate further despite it not being his case and having occurred outside a strict interpretation of his jurisdiction. It wasn’t long before the list of questions started to outpace the answers and it wasn’t much longer before the Assistant Commissioner called him in for a ‘chat’. Morse didn’t know what surprised him more, the fact that his private investigation was known about or that it was about to become official. But now he could start answering the big questions: who was the father and did she really kill herself... 

I was (and still am) a HUGE fan of the long running TV series (33 episodes) starring John Thaw as Morse and Kevin Whatley as his long-suffering side kick Detective Sergeant Lewis. Despite that, this is my first Morse novel which is the 5th in the series. Morse is mostly the same here – irascible, short tempered, fond of his beer and classical music. In the book he also smoked (I can’t remember him smoking in the TV adaptation) and drove a Lancier rather than his iconic Jag.  

The story here is nicely complex without being TOO complicated. As usual with these things there are a number of possible suspects (and indeed crimes) with a scattering of red herrings. Both Morse and the readers are led done a garden path and I was totally suckered in, so it was quite fun when that particular rug was pulled from under my feet (honestly the smell of fish should have given it away). I won’t give anything away by laying out too much detail here, but this is a clever tale revolving around infidelity, blackmail, teenage obsession, and independent publishing. I don’t have any other Morse books (having picked this up with a bunch of other books with ‘dead’ in the title) and, despite enjoying it, don’t intend to actively look out for any more of them. It’s not that I don’t want to dig more into the original works, it’s that I have SO much more to read that I don’t really want to start yet another series. A fun read and recommended to all Morse fans who have yet to enjoy him in print. 

Reading Plans for 2026 and Beyond   

It shouldn’t surprise anyone that the majority of my ‘plans’ for 2026 are the same as my ‘plans’ for previous years. I’ll still mention them though as there are often rethinks, wrinkles and lessons from previous years. As always (how could it be otherwise) I’ve also got a few new ideas I want to play with. So... 

Following the Labels   

As usual there are FAR too many labels over on the right that are just not getting the love and attention they deserve. I’m going to see what I can do about that especially focusing on countries that I know FAR too little about. 

The ‘Knowledge Streams’    

I certainly haven’t lost interest in what I call ‘knowledge streams’ (being “Britain Alone”, “World War to Cold War” and “USA:WTF”. My existing planned History reads will be covering those topics over the next few months. Oh, and I have a new ‘sub-stream’ coming online... A ‘tributary’....? More about that soon. 

Rolling the Dice   

I’m still rolling the dice (literally not figuratively) every time I finish a book. So far I’ve added two additional books to my reading schedule. Hopefully more to come. A smidge of randomness pleases me... 

Finishing/Progressing Series   

This is something else I need to re-focus on. I want to at least finish reading the Foundation and Dune books this year – or next. I’ll see if I can at least progress a few others. Wish me luck! 

Classics and Re-Reads   

I’m pleased that I’m making my way through the Penguin Classics boxsets I bought last year for my birthday. Both sets (a 50 & an 80 set) will be taking me multiple years to work through, but I am (slowly) getting there. I’m planning on a few SF re-reads – mostly Cyberpunk I expect – and a few other things might drop into that category too. 

Deep Dives 

I’ve really been enjoying my ‘deep dives’ where I concentrate on a subject for 3, 4 or more books. The two that will almost definitely be happening this year are on the events surround the Dunkirk evacuation and the LONG history of the interaction between cats and humans. No doubt there will be a few more too. 

Ukraine and the Middle East 

Like many people I’d hoped that the war in Ukraine would be LONG over by now. I was hoping to read about it in retrospect and have accumulated around 10-12 books on the subject. Rather than waiting any longer (though I REALLY hope that this particularly pointless conflict ends THIS year) I’ll be starting on that pile soon. Likewise, I’ll be digging into the history of the Middle East to get a better handle on that region. 

BIG Project   

I’m ‘confidently’ scheduling in my BIG project (which should run for 5-6 weeks) for the 2nd half of the year. I’m quite proud of the idea and am pleased with the variety of the books it contains. The overall theme should be VERY quickly apparent, but I still think it's a fun one. 

Coupling and more 

As I have a ridiculously large TBR it’s always a challenge what exactly to read next. But with SO many books to choose from it does allow me to match books together based on subject, title or more quirky links. I call these ‘couples’ and you’ll be seeing a fair few of those this year (once my 20th century history pile ends in 1983). Another idea I came up with recently was ‘sandwiches’. This is where I put a novel between two non-fiction or vice-versa where they’re connected by subject – for example two history books on the Borgia’s with a novel based in that period in the middle. Sounds like FUN. 

Philosophy & Sci-Fi 

Lastly (for now) I’m feeling the absence, real or imagined, of both Philosophy and Science Fiction from my reading. I’ve always enjoyed reading about and officially studying Philosophy, so you’ll definitely see more of that this year. In particular I’ll be working through my collection of Philosophy & Pop Culture books. You’ll also see a noticeable increase in Sci-Fi books this year, both re-reads and new stuff. That in particular I’m really looking forward to. 

As usual if I actually achieve 50% of my plans (or even start them) I’ll be impressed, but what’s a plan for RIGHT? We’ll see. Onwards!   

Happy Birthday: George Alec Effinger (January 10, 1947 – April 27, 2002) was an American science fiction author, born in Cleveland, Ohio. His first novel, What Entropy Means to Me (1972), was nominated for the Nebula Award. He achieved his greatest success with the trilogy of Marîd Audran novels set in the Middle East in the 22nd century, with cybernetic implants and modules allowing individuals to change their personalities or bodies. The novels are in fact set in a thinly veiled version of the French Quarter of New Orleans. The three published Audran novels were When Gravity Fails (1987), A Fire in the Sun (1989), and The Exile Kiss (1991); Effinger also contributed to the computer game Circuit's Edge (1990), based on When Gravity Fails. He began a fourth Budayeen novel, Word of Night, but completed only the first two chapters. Those two chapters were reprinted in the anthology Budayeen Nights (2003) which has all of Effinger's short material from the Marîd Audran setting.

[I was a BIG fan of his work in the late 80's and loved his Middle East version of Cyberpunk. I must get around to re-reading him.]

"Nationalism is not to be confused with patriotism. Both words are normally used in so vague a way that any definition is liable to be challenged, but one must draw a distinction between them, since two different and even opposing ideas are involved. By 'patriotism' I mean devotion to a particular place and a particular way of life, which one believes to be the best in the world but has no wish to force on other people. Patriotism is of its nature defensive, both militarily and culturally. Nationalism, on the other hand, is inseparable from the desire for power. The abiding purpose of every nationalist is to secure more power and more prestige, not for himself but for the nation or other unit in which he has chosen to sink his own individuality."

Notes on Nationalism, George Orwell.    

Just Finished Reading: 1940 – The World in Flames by Richard Collier (FP: 1979) [323pp] 

Covering the first full year of the Second World War is quite the challenge and the author makes quite a good go at it. From the Phony War, the Norway Campaign, the Fall of France, Dunkirk, the Battle of Britain, the invasion fears, the Blitz and so much more we are presented with a world, with a way of life, being ripped apart. Apart from the actual battles we are also presented with the political aspects of the great conflict – from Vichy France, the arguments and upheavals in the UK parliament and often heated debates in the US between isolationists and those who wanted to get more involved (directly or indirectly) in the conflict. 

Unfortunately, despite covering the ground well, I’m going to spend the rest of this review criticising the book in ways large and small. I’ll start with the small to get it out of the way. Now, I’m not generally a stickler for footnotes. If something needs to be said, then say it in the main text. There are times when footnotes are useful, but I don’t generally demand them. Here, however, their lack irked me many times. The problem was when the author was quoting people – especially those who disagreed with each other – without sufficient (or any!) context. What would have been useful would to know exactly when and where the people involved said such things – in letters to others or in dairies written soon after the event? Or in minutes of meetings? Or in autobiographies written years (or decades) later complete with faulty memory? It’s IMPORTANT.  

Then we have the generally laudable idea of contrasting the world events and political decisions made in lofty smoke-filled rooms in the world’s capitals besides the experiences of the men and women on the ground. So far so good. Unfortunately, I found that the authors use of this ‘plot device’ kept slowing the narrative down resulting in a jerky overall feel to things. The micro-narratives where also generally too long and contained too many irrelevant details. I was tempted more than once to skim read those bits! 

My final (and most major) problem I had with the text was the general tone of things. I think anyone with even a cursory knowledge of the war understands that the Allies at the start of things were unprepared for the conflict to say the least! Of course, the Axis Powers were also unprepared for a LONG war, but that’s a whole other issue. The author, much to my annoyance, constantly harped on about the lack of modern Allied equipment, hidebound leaders, poor communications, and so on. Yet, the British still managed to save around 400,000 troops at Dunkirk, prevent any possible invasion of the UK and roundly beat the Luftwaffe over the South of England. Whilst it's true that the British took around 2 years (admittedly MUCH longer than it should have) to finally figure out exactly how to beat the Germans on land, both the Royal Navy and the RAF already had their measure very early on.  

The iconic Battle of Britain is a case in point. Both the Spitfire and Hurricane were comparable to the standard German fighters of the time and, gradually, in the next 4-5 years became much better than their German rivals. The reason the Luftwaffe failed to win air superiority over Southern England are numerous, but it is largely due to the fact that they had never encountered a modern integrated air defence system before – because such a thing had not existed before the British invented it during WW1 and perfected it in WW2. Such innovations cannot simply be dismissed with the usual ‘last minute’ and ‘thrown together’ platitudes as it was anything but. The truth of the matter is that the RAF actually INCREASED in size during the battle. Each day the RAF received or recovered more fighters than they lost. There was NEVER a shortage of airframes only the worry of a shortage of qualified pilots. The reason for the nighttime bombing raids during the Blitz was that it was FAR too dangerous for the Luftwaffe to attack in the daylight! 

Likewise talk of invasion. Op Sealion (of which more later!) was unlikely to go ahead and even more unlikely to succeed. Although it couldn’t really be dismissed out of hand and was certainly a concern at the time any careful analysis of the idea would’ve shown just how unlikely it was. The RAF was never really in danger of being swept from the skies in 1940 and without that the proposed invasion – with tugs pulling flat bottomed barges for God’s sake! - would have been a massacre. Likewise, without much of a navy of their own, the German forces attempting a crossing would have been cut to pieces by the Royal Navy. If you compare the proposed German invasion force in 1940 to the actual Allied invasion force in 1944 it's really obvious that the German operation would have failed spectacularly. The supposed incompetence and inadequacies of the British forces, even at this early stage of a STEEP learning curve, were all too often overplayed by the author which really didn’t help my enjoyment of the book. 

Anyway, I’ll get off my soapbox now and take a DEEP breath. Generally, this wasn’t a bad book (or at least not a terrible one). It’s readily apparent that the author was a journalist rather than a historian which explains a great deal. The ground he covered – factually at least – was competently done and has prompted me to investigate some areas further (which is good). But it was the tone of the writing more than anything else which soured me to this work. Reasonable. 

Just Finished Reading: Wailing Ghosts by Pu Songling [56pp] 

I’m not a great lover of the Horror genre (except for Vampires which I don’t really regard as horror to be honest) but, despite the micro-blurb on the back referencing macabre hauntings, monsters and magic, there was little in the way of the horrific to be had here. Despite its size we are presented with FOURTEEN tales, although one was a single page, and we are even presented with several examples of classical Chinese woodcarving artwork! There’s a LOT packed in here. 

So, what exactly are we presented with? The tales are essentially fables and morality stories in order to teach things like good manners and as explanations of luck (both good and bad). There are several tales of encounters with strangers who turn out to be spirits, gods, demons and so on. How these people are treated – in ignorance – results in good or bad things happening. In other words, treat strangers kindly because you never know who they might be. I couldn’t help drawing the parallel with similar Greek tales. Another theme – involving actual ghosts this time – again looked at the appropriate behaviours around ancestors and the unexpected rewards that occurred, such as staying overnight in a suspected haunted house and being invited to a ghostly wedding ceremony and receiving a silver cup as a gift. This cup turns out to be a long-lost family treasure of the local big wig. 

These are more interesting for their cultural differences than anything else. There’s no great character development or involved storytelling. They are, mostly, about a person having a strange experience, telling other people about it, and everyone learning a life lesson by it. So, parables. Interesting stuff especially as the author died in 1715 so there’s a historical aspect interwoven with the cultural one. 

Translated from the Chinese by John Minford. 

Quite beyond brilliant..............

The Best Books of 2025.   

It's THAT time of year again when we all look backwards to the highs and lows of the previous year's reads. As usual I’ll be splitting things into Fiction & Non-Fiction categories with the best of the best in BOLD. I reviewed a total of 102 books along with 2 DNF’s. 

Fiction:  

Poe’s Cat by Brenda Walker 

Nineteen Eighty-Four by George Orwell 

Fifteen Hours by Mitchel Scanlon 

Desert Raiders by Lucien Soulban 

The Little Sister by Raymond Chandler 

News From Berlin by Otto De Kat 

By the Pricking of Her Thumb by Adam Roberts 

First Person Singular by Haruki Murakami 

Count Zero by William Gibson 

The Excursion Train by Edward Marston 

The Killing Ground by Elleston Trevor 

The Pull of the Stars by Emma Donoghue 

An Englishman in Madrid by Eduardo Mendoza 

Keane’s Company by Iain Gale 

Four Seasons in Japan by Nick Bradley 

Lessons in Chemistry by Bonnie Garmus 

Sherlock Holmes & The Twelve Thefts of Christmas by Tim Major 

Non-Fiction: 

Divine Might – Goddesses in Greek Myth by Natalie Haynes 

The Possibility of Life – Searching for Kinship in the Cosmos by Jaime Green 

Hardboiled America – Lurid Paperbacks and the Masters of Noir by Geoffrey O’Brien 

First Steps – How Walking Upright Made Us Human by Jeremy Desilva 

Footmarks – A Journey into Our Restless Past by Jim Leary 

Nomads – The Wanderers Who Shaped Our World by Anthony Sattin   

How Markets Fail – The Logic of Economic Calamities by John Cassidy 

How Civil Wars Start and How to Stop Them by Barbara F Walter 

The Scout Mindset – Why Some People See Things Clearly and Others Don’t by Julia Galef   

The Norman Conquest – William the Conqueror’s Subjugation of England by Teresa Cole 

The Shortest History of The Soviet Union by Sheila Fitzpatrick 

A Thing of Beauty – Travels in Mythical and Modern Greece by Peter Fiennes 

A Brief History of The Hundred Years War – The English in France, 1337-1453 by Desmond Seward 

The Hundred Years’ War on Palestine – A History of Settler Colonial Conquest and Resistance by Rashid Khalidi 

That’s All Folks! - The Art of Warner Bros. Animation by Steve Schneider 

Prisoners of Geography – Ten Maps That Tell You Everything You Need to Know About Global Politics by Tim Marshall 

By Tank into Normandy by Stuart Hills 

Churchill & Orwell – The Fight for Freedom by Thomas E Ricks 

Brolliology – A History of the Umbrella in Life and Literature by Marion Rankine 

Red Moon Rising – Sputnik and the Rivalries that Ignited the Space Age by Matthew Brzezinski 

Foreign Devils on the Silk Road – The Search for the Lost Treasures of Central Asia by Peter Hopkirk 

1914 – Fight the Good Fight: Britain, the Army & the Coming of the First World War by Allan Mallinson 

1923 – The Crisis that Led to Hitler’s Coup by Mark Jones 

As you can no doubt tell, I had a very good & very varied year of reading in 2025. I’m a bit disappointed that only around 20% of my reads had female authors and I’ll see if I can address that a bit this year. I am impressed, however, at how many of that 20% showed up in my best list though! As is often the case I was slightly non-fiction heavy in 2025 with a little over 55% being in that category but its near enough a 50-50 split that I won’t worry about it! I was pleased with the age range last year: from 2024-1827 which is 197 years. Pretty good. So, onwards to 2026...

Happy Birthday: John Ronald Reuel Tolkien (3 January 1892 – 2 September 1973) was an English writer and philologist. He was the author of the high fantasy works The Hobbit (1937) and The Lord of the Rings (1954–55).

From 1925 to 1945 Tolkien was the Rawlinson and Bosworth Professor of Anglo-Saxon and a Fellow of Pembroke College, both at the University of Oxford. He then moved within the same university to become the Merton Professor of English Language and Literature and Fellow of Merton College, and held these positions from 1945 until his retirement in 1959. Tolkien was a close friend of C. S. Lewis, a co-member of the Inklings, an informal literary discussion group. He was appointed a Commander of the Order of the British Empire by Queen Elizabeth II on 28 March 1972.

After Tolkien's death his son Christopher published a series of works based on his father's extensive notes and unpublished manuscripts, including The Silmarillion. These, together with The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings, form a connected body of tales, poems, fictional histories, invented languages, and literary essays about a fantasy world called Arda and, within it, Middle-earth. Between 1951 and 1955 Tolkien applied the term legendarium to the larger part of these writings.

While many other authors had published works of fantasy before Tolkien, the tremendous success of The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings ignited a profound interest in the fantasy genre and ultimately precipitated an avalanche of new fantasy books and authors. This has led to his popular identification as the "father" of modern fantasy literature. He is widely regarded as one of the most influential authors of all time.