I think Tolkien is the best, because he not only dedicated his whole life to it, (such as the dialects of Elvish, and the other languages) he wrote it from his own experiences. Tolkien wanted to write something that could easily be the history of this world, but different enough so that we would know that it was not. Besides that I have learned more from Tolkien's books than from any other fantasy books!

I have been looking forward to posting my views on this topic, but I made sure I read each post first rather than just duplicate other peoples opinions.
I thought it was going to be "a nice place to express your opinions" as Sauron plainly stated from the start.
Somewhere that you could post and read others views and not trash or be trashed.
However, true to his namesake, Sauron was lurking in his dark, slimy lair somewhere in Mordor, waiting to pounce and spread his own particular brand of cruelty and oppression.
Everyone is entitled to there opinions and everyone is entitled to object.
But Sauron, you have done exactly what you specifically instructed everyone not to do.
On any other forum I could understand your criticism, but SF is predominantly CP fans, so you are here only to antagonise and crush these young peoples heroes and dreams. Bravo!!
Oh, one more thing, before you try and humiliate anyone else about there typos or spelling,or take your Critic career beyond amateur, maybe you should use spell check.
Eg. equivelent?? execelent?? surgury??traites??reqrote??faced paced???
Anyway because I liked the topic, here are my opinions.
Tolkien imho is The Master of modern high fantasy, for most of the reasons stated in previous posts on this topic. Also he was a writer at a time when Fantasy was not a popular genre so he was up against it to even get some of his works published. Silmarillion was declined in the late 30's and only published after his son re-edited it, in the 70's. Even though Tolkien was a respected literature professor and speaker, his Fantasy books were widely criticised untill the 60's. Tolkien definitely paved the way for modern fantasy writers.
His characters have a depth that can only come from his own experiences. CP or JR cannot even come close, it is not fair to compare them really. Tolkien has been through 2 world wars. He has watched his friends die and suffer terribly. He has killed, lived, and survived evil. The bond of comradeship that is a common theme throughout Fantasy epics, he hasn't just imagined or made up. He has actually been there in the trenches at the Somme and no mans land, fighting to be free. And reading his books, knowing that, gives me personally, an entirely different perspective.
I also acknowledge, as does Tolkien, that he was influenced by many writers. His characters were based or developed on other writers ideas, as were there's on writers before them. I dont think that CP conciously stole ideas from other authors. Hopefully he would admit, like Tolkien did, after the fact, that yes, I read this book and that poem, and that is where this idea or that plot came from. It's just that CP is from a more prolific fantasy time.
Tolkien's The Children of Hurin has a distinct air of the greek trajedy Oedipus(Homer) about it. If you look in wikipedia under Tolkien Influences, you will see just how many of his characters were derived from other peoples ideas and plots. Critics dont call Tolkien a thief.

Rowling- I have read all her books and found them well written and entertaining, but no more than any other average writer. Her one distinction imho is her appeal to such a diverse audience. I was in hospital with my daughter when her last book came out. In the canteen at lunch time, there was a kid of about 12 reading it, a Doctor, a pensioner, a porter and myself. JR re-introduced our kids to reading, and we should be forever grateful. Maybe CP's books would not have been as well received by his publisher if not for this renewed interest.

Finally CP- I have enjoyed his books but in some ways I have to agree reluctantly with Sauron. CP has a long way to go to reach Tolkiens level, if ever. But he is very young and has his whole life ahead of him. What he has accomplished up to now is remarkable though. He might yet regret being published so easily and early while he is still developing. But youth is not neccessarily a disadvantage where Fantasy is concerned, after all when is our imagination at its most active?
I can see CP has inspired a lot of people to read and write Fantasy. Who knows, one day someone from SF could be the next Tolkien?

Well... LOL. That was a long post. But well thought and very opinionated. Which is good.

I don't understand why the question is even being asked, nor do I fully trust the motives of the asker (waiting for some young fan to give a ranking besides Tolkien>Rowling>Paolini so he can beat up on them)

Tolkien is a better writer than both on several levels. The themes and ideas running through his writing are deeper, and better integrated than both of his competitors. This is a combination of inherit ability, and knowledge (An academic of Tolkien's background is bound to know something about symbolism and allegory) and a long life full of experience. Tolkien knows war, and the forces surrounding it. He knows about pain, and suffering, and therefore can more efficiently put his feelings into his work. Tolkien created the greatest world depth and internal logic of the three, and far outstrips his competitors in this category, no one beats Middle Earth.

Tolkien built languages, using his lingual background, and unlike most authors created a unique LANGUAGE, instead of simply combining sounds and words from one language, and the grammar from another, or some other shortcut. Tolkien built SEVERAL LANGUAGES!!!

His primary weaknesses are on the bare writing level. I remember wanting to pull my hair out in The Twin Towers, when I got to listen to the ents talking for a VERY long time. However, that is a subjective feeling, and I will avoid it in the final analysis.

Rowling and Tolkien are completely different types of writers, both in style and genre, so comparison is difficult. Rolwlings worlds don't have nearly the sense of history that Tolkiens do, but hers have a vital spark that some would accuse Tolkien's of lacking. This is probably it's colorful, vibrant, and sometimes childish nature against the history and world written by an academic, full of historical, and mythical allusions. They have two different world building styles, and Rowling used the real world as a base.

As far as symbolism goes, Rowling isn't fundamentally an "ideas" writer, like Tolkien. She has symbolism, and these ideas are woven in, but I always felt LOTR was more idea focused than character and plot focused, like Rowling. Her characters are funny, strange, colorful (A universal trait of her work) and I will say again, ALIVE!!! Hogwarts has a FEELING to it, you can sense it in her words, in the prose, in the plot, in the moods of the characters, everything has personality.

Rowling on the level of actual words isn't perfect, but she doesn't need to be, she can cultivate her stories and settings without grand and epic metaphors and allusions. It's just not her style. I loved both authors dearly.

Now to Paolini. Christopher was fifteen when he started Eragon, and around eighteen when he finished. This age problem means that Paolini lacks experience, criticism, and has not fully developed a voice as an author. This creates many problems in his writing, which would have been better helped with more time, and age.

Everyone harps on Paolini's originality, that his plots are stolen and or twisted forms of other works gone before. Some who ascribe point to such a wide variety of literature, that it is impossible for Paolini to have read all of it, or for that matter, integrated so many borrowed elements without careful, deliberate effort. This being said, it is perfectly responsible to say that Paolini was strongly influenced by LOTR and Star Wars, and that these elements were borrowed in such a way, that it went beyond the usual level of borrowing that occurs in any genre (Fantasy being one of the worst). This goes beyond Elves and Dwarves and men, but much of the setup, the natures of all races (Note that Paolini isn't the only one guilty of this, nor is he perhaps the worst, but it is certainly true to a degree.)

The theme of an organization of order keepers being thrown down is really old, so ramming Paolini for this would be pointless, the cliche far predates starwars. Just look at the Arthurian ledgend that underlies most fantasy. This is the Knights of the Round Table, the noble guardians of peace and justice, betrayed by one of their own.

Simply put, Paolini does "steal" elements of plot and world from other authors, some of these are valid cases of unoriginality, and others are nitpicking. Now to the actual writer himself. I will not spare Paolini because of his age, a published work deserves the same level of criticism as any other, the blame lies with not only, or for that matter mostly Paolini, but the publishing company, and his editors. Paolini is guilty often of a literary sin known as purple prose in his physical writing, in which inappropriate description, usually exaggerated in detail or emotion, is applied in writing. An example would be "The azure orbs of the dragons scales rustled like sighing leaves in a cool autumn morning." (Note that this is perhaps a rather extreme or exaggerate example) This isn't an uncommon mistake for a young writer, however, it is still bad, and it breaks the flow of the writing, and also distrupts the mental images that a writer is trying to create.

Another problem is a weakness in dialogue. This is present from the first conversations in Carvahall. Eragon speaks in a very stilted "overly logical" manner that isn't ever heard in normal conversation. This is probably due to the inexperience of the author. Paolini has some difficulty with behavioral logic, as shown in Eragon's encounter with Sloan. Trade is a voluntary act, and one usually doesn't exchange an item of known value "meat" for an item of unkown value, especially when said value can only be known after a period of time, this is called "Time Preference" in economics. We want things sooner rather than later.

Paolini also tries to be Tolkien, by inserting poems and songs to give a sense of culture. The problem with this is Paolini doesn't, at least at this point, have Tolkien's poetic power, or even really much strength in the area at all. Also, Brom's methods of instruction are rather irrational, and confusing. Beating a student severely will not enhance his combat ability in the long term, and even if it did, the short term dangers, such as severe injury, are great. Allied with this is the fact that Eragon needs to defend himself, and cannot due so if lifting his sword-arm is painful.

Paolini has few true ideas mended into his book, this is also due to his age, and lack of apparent time spent thinking on such matters. Philosophy isn't to be taken lightly, it is a serious discipline. Delving into it on a literal "He said that existence has no meaning, she replied that although existence had no meaning, we could create it" or symbolic "This character believes X, and lives a negative existence because of it." level is something that needs to have some forethought and preparation.

Note that a fantasy or science fiction novel doesn't need depth to be enjoyable. Paolini's greatest strength was raw enthusiasm, and his ability to use this force to push himself further.

Thesaurus abuse is another flaw of Paolini's writing. I don't mind big words in literature, so long as the sound and feel right, and are used correctly. Paolini has difficulty correctly integrating his expansive vocabulary into his story, and should instead focus on learning the "feel" of words before using the "higher" vocabulary.

In conclusion

Tolkien>Rowling>Paolini (if the three can be compared)

Wow, now that was a long post, the longest I've seen so far, but I think that what they are asking is which of the three do you like better?
Personally, I agree with you and think that it is pretty much impossible to compare them but I would place Paolini last (sorry but he just isn't that good compared to the rest)

Do I get a "longest post" cookie?

Well...interesting...
Id go:
Tolkien
Paolini
Rowling
Only cause i dont like HP
MWAHAHAHA!!!
(really im not joking)

Lol, I don't know! We should start a compitition on SF for stuff like this!
And ROD have you actually read HP?

Yea once upon a time...not my style
O dear...im surrounded by HP fans...hehe...time to go!

Not really, I think that JK Rowling writes well but I'm not that great fan of HP

Yay! I live another day...try to convert me if you want...

it's like this

Rowling
Tolkien
Paolini( sorry)

Oh i dont mind...people have their likes and dislikes...so i wont try to kill you for having rowling above tolkien...*toys with a loaded gun*
(jking)

and i won't hit you for saying that
(shakes a large bamboo stick in my hand) lol
jking, jking

... i dont want to die ...but seriously why do you think rowling is better than tolkien?

His writing was a bit dry, some people have a strong moisture preference.

I found HP annoying...(sorry)...and Im opposite with you Matty

Yea...that is true...my mind was totally blanck at those parts...

Well, if you're going to complain about description, the Twilight books are horrible about that. I know Stephanie Meyer's not one of the choices, but she really did lack description. Her books were unique in the sense that the majority of the writing was just Bella's thoughts, opinions, and emotions. Her characters drove the story, not the description.

I dont read those...ive heard enough about them that i dont need to lol.

All of the girls at school are completely hooked on them! It's really kind of funny cause they will spend the entire class in Computer Applications looking up pictures of all the Twilight cast and stuff. It is a bit annoying. LOL.

Twilight is the worlds curse...oh man! Did I say that!?

Yeah, I can just see a mob of girls stampeding over you and beating you up for saying that. There are probably some girls at school who'd do stuff like that. LOL.

I'm not one of the girls who would beat you up, I agree with you!!!

Don't worry ROD, when Gleadia grows up, we will defend you from the hordes of fangirls.

(Imagines a combination of Reign of Fire and Dawn of the Dead, fangirls replacing zombies)

Thanks guys...I was afraid for a moment.
Yay Firetongue likes Tolkien the best as well!!

CYBER SMACK!!!

No, your fine. I would recommend it, but not everyone enjoys Tolkien. Not because the're stupid, he's just not a writer everyone will enjoy.

CYBER SMACK!
I cannot believe you have not read Tolkien!! That is amazing!!

...ok...good for you...hmm...I'm gonna reread LotR...