# Lord of the Rings?



## RhondaRN (Dec 27, 2009)

After having just read, and thoroughly enjoyed ,the very long book Shogun (and am currently watching the mini-series), I've taken a great departure and reading the totally different, and much shorter Wuthering Heights.  After I'm done with that, I want to delve into fantasy and adventure and read The Lord of the Rings.  My youngest daughter, who is now 20 and in college, has read the trilogy years ago and thought that the movies were the best she'd seen and watched them over and over and over again when she was younger.  Funny though, somehow I always came in somewhere in the middle of the movies and have only watched bits and pieces of all of them.  Now I would love to read the books.  Which do you think I ought to get, the Trilogy which contains all 3, or just start with one?  (I'll save money in the long run with the trilogy).  Also, does the Hobbit come with the trilogy, and if so, should I read it first?  (I'm talking Kindle versions).

Just wondering.

My daughter was in awe of the author as well.  Any advice welcome.  Thanks!


----------



## Greenkeeper (Mar 16, 2010)

I suggest reading the Hobbit first, as it sort of sets up the trilogy. It's written more as a children's story and isn't quite as serious in tone as the trilogy but is still a wonderful book and one of my favorites. After you read the trilogy be sure to read the Silmarillion, which is a detailed history of Middle Earth from before the beginning of time until about the time the of the Hobbit.


----------



## mom133d (aka Liz) (Nov 25, 2008)

The Hobbit does not come with the Trilogy. It doesn't hurt to just buy the trilogy, its better than lugging around the DT versions.


----------



## Taborcarn (Dec 15, 2009)

Even years ago when I read the DTB versions I read them as one anthology, so that is a fine way to go.  I would also recommend reading The Hobbit first.  It fills in some knowledge that the main LOTR story assumes you know (the first encounters of Bilbo and Gollum, and with the Ring).


----------



## David &#039;Half-Orc&#039; Dalglish (Feb 1, 2010)

While you can skip the Hobbit, I would strongly recommend reading it first. Besides setting up the story, the ring, and introducing a few of the characters, it also plays as a solid introduction to Tolkien's writing style. Simply put, he is not everyone's cup of tea. Some people loved the movies but couldn't bear the books. They're slow, filled with songs, fables, descriptions, and traveling. The Hobbit is a smaller time investment and is a bit easier since he wrote it with children in mind. I've also heard from many who considered it their favorite book if all of Tolkien's work.

If you end up reading them all, and still crave more, take a gander at the Silmarillian. If you look at the LotR as the New Testament of the Bible, then the Silmarillian would be the Old Testament.

David Dalglish


----------



## Archer (Apr 25, 2009)

The Silmarillion is my favorite of all of them. (I know...that qualifies me as 'strange'.)

Get them all together.  They weren't written as separate books--they're one story told in three parts.


----------



## NogDog (May 1, 2009)

When ready to try the LotR, whether jumping right into it or after reading the Hobbit, I'd suggest downloading the sample of the trilogy, and if you like it then buy the trilogy, since as far as Mr. Tolkien was concerned, it was just one book which the publisher chose to break up into three volumes. Reading just one of the "books" would be like reading just one third of any large adventure novel.


----------



## Andra (Nov 19, 2008)

I'll also add that if you can't get into Tolkien's writing style, the unabridged audiobooks are excellent.  I found it much easier to read the books on my own after I listened to them.


----------



## Rasputina (May 6, 2009)

I agree with reading The Hobbit first. I'd just get the trilogy as one, since it is one story broken up into multiple parts. It's not really three books, even if they were printed that way. Tolkien didn't intend for them to be 3 books, that was the publishers insistence. Personally I found the middle of Two Towers to really really drag the first time I read it.


----------



## cheerio (May 16, 2009)

3 in 1


----------



## farrellclaire (Mar 5, 2010)

I'd get the three in one.  I haven't read The Hobbit but it didn't stop me from enjoying LotR - I own it, I just can't get into it for some reason.  Love the LotR book, a million times better than the films imo.


----------



## Neo (Mar 30, 2009)

farrellclaire said:


> I'd get the three in one. I haven't read The Hobbit but it didn't stop me from enjoying LotR - I own it, I just can't get into it for some reason. Love the LotR book, a million times better than the films imo.


OMG! I could have written this word for word, lol!


----------



## kcrady (Dec 17, 2009)

Definitely buy the trilogy, you'll want to read them all and it's less expensive this way - and as noted before, it's really 1 long book split up into 3 parts.

As for the Hobbit - it does give some background for LoTR but it isn't necessary to read it first.  Besides, they don't read the same - The Hobbit is a much lighter read - a children's tale - where LoTR is a saga.  

I'd say read them in whatever order you prefer, you'll enjoy it either way.  I'm a bit envious of you, getting to discover the tale for the first time!  I can't count how many times I've read the trilogy over the years - and while it's always a good story, there's nothing like the first time through!

Have fun!


----------



## DYB (Aug 8, 2009)

I enjoyed "The Hobbit" a lot.  The trilogy proper - not so much.  Although I've been meaning to give it another try.


----------



## planet_janet (Feb 23, 2010)

Half-Orc said:


> While you can skip the Hobbit, I would strongly recommend reading it first. Besides setting up the story, the ring, and introducing a few of the characters, it also plays as a solid introduction to Tolkien's writing style. Simply put, he is not everyone's cup of tea. Some people loved the movies but couldn't bear the books. They're slow, filled with songs, fables, descriptions, and traveling. The Hobbit is a smaller time investment and is a bit easier since he wrote it with children in mind.


I agree with this. I read The Hobbit as a child, re-read it again about ten years ago, and then jumped into the LOTR "trilogy" right before the first LOTR movie came out. The LOTR books were tougher for me to get through. I found myself skipping some of the slower parts (and I am not a "skipper"!), but I finished them all and did enjoy them.


----------



## ak rain (Nov 15, 2008)

I reread LOTR for years, sometimes hobbit and still enjoy both. I met a guy who did the same thing, 18 years ago and married him


Sylvia


----------



## geoffthomas (Feb 27, 2009)

I agree with what has been said and would summarize this way:
Just jump in.


If you don't like Tolkien's writing style or you don't like Middlearth, then you just won't like it.
Don't judge the book by the movies. While I liked the movies, they really are two different experiences. And in the movies a lot is left out - like all of Tom Bombidil.
The Hobbit is slow. More than I really want to read about Gollum and the dwarves.  But still fun.

Just sayin.....


----------



## kcrady (Dec 17, 2009)

I second geoff's comments - especially what he said about parts left out.  The whole Tom Bombadil section of Fellowship of the Ring was always one of my favorites.  I understood why they chose to leave it out of the movie but I still missed it...


----------



## Anne (Oct 29, 2008)

RhondaRN said:


> After having just read, and thoroughly enjoyed ,the very long book Shogun (and am currently watching the mini-series), I've taken a great departure and reading the totally different, and much shorter Wuthering Heights. After I'm done with that, I want to delve into fantasy and adventure and read The Lord of the Rings. My youngest daughter, who is now 20 and in college, has read the trilogy years ago and thought that the movies were the best she'd seen and watched them over and over and over again when she was younger. Funny though, somehow I always came in somewhere in the middle of the movies and have only watched bits and pieces of all of them. Now I would love to read the books. Which do you think I ought to get, the Trilogy which contains all 3, or just start with one? (I'll save money in the long run with the trilogy). Also, does the Hobbit come with the trilogy, and if so, should I read it first? (I'm talking Kindle versions).
> 
> Just wondering.
> 
> My daughter was in awe of the author as well. Any advice welcome. Thanks!


You decided to read Wuthering Heights and not The Last of the Mohicans?


----------



## RhondaRN (Dec 27, 2009)

Anne said:


> You decided to read Wuthering Heights and not The Last of the Mohicans?


Yes, I was torn between the two. I'll read the latter after book one of the Lord of the Rings I believe.


----------



## Anne (Oct 29, 2008)

RhondaRN said:


> Yes, I was torn between the two. I'll read the latter after book one of the Lord of the Rings I believe.


You read both Wuthering Heights and The Last of Mohicans? Did you like them?


----------



## RhondaRN (Dec 27, 2009)

Anne said:


> You read both Wuthering Heights and The Last of Mohicans? Did you like them?


No, I'm still reading Wuthering Heights, then I will read book one of Lord Of The Rings, then maybe The Last of the Mohicans.


----------



## Anne (Oct 29, 2008)

RhondaRN said:


> No, I'm still reading Wuthering Heights, then I will read book one of Lord Of The Rings, then maybe The Last of the Mohicans.


Thanks I was not sure which book you had read.  Let me know how you like Wuthering Heights  I am almost finsihed reading The Women in White. I have not had a lot of time to read lately. I should be able to finish it soon.


----------



## RhondaRN (Dec 27, 2009)

Well, for better or worse, I just bought Lord of the Rings Trilogy last night.  It's a real bargain too.  Won't be able to start it til I finish my current book.  Can't wait to start!!


----------



## geoffthomas (Feb 27, 2009)

One MUST read The Last of the Mohicans.

With characters like:
Hawkeye or "La Longue Carabine" 
Chingachgook
Uncas, Cora, Alice and the evil Mungo.
Wow.


Just sayin......


----------



## Anne (Oct 29, 2008)

geoffthomas said:


> One MUST read The Last of the Mohicans.
> 
> With characters like:
> Hawkeye or "La Longue Carabine"
> ...


Thanks geof I have The Last of the Mochicans. I plan to read it soon.


----------



## RhondaRN (Dec 27, 2009)

geoffthomas said:


> One MUST read The Last of the Mohicans.
> 
> With characters like:
> Hawkeye or "La Longue Carabine"
> ...


I will definitely get to that, ooooh, so many books, so little time. How wonderful it is to have different worlds and lands and adventures just waiting for you at your fingertips.


----------



## Anne (Oct 29, 2008)

RhondaRN said:


> I will definitely get to that, ooooh, so many books, so little time. How wonderful it is to have different worlds and lands and adventures just waiting for you at your fingertips.


Rhonda: You are right about that. So many books,so little time. Which reminds me. I need to get back to finishing The Women in White.


----------



## Herc- The Reluctant Geek (Feb 10, 2010)

Reading _The Hobbit_ and _Lord of the Rings_ is something that everyone who loves the English language should do. Tolkien was Professor of English Language and Literature at Oxford so he knew a little about the art of writing. When reading LoTR, take note of how the style changes from chapter to chapter. That's because the premise behind the book is that it is a history of an event written by those who participated. Fantastic writing by a master storyteller...*blush* in case you can't tell, I like the fellow's work and highly recommend you read it *blush*


----------



## Merlilu (Feb 23, 2010)

I received the Hobbit as a gift when I was 10 (many, many moons ago...) I've since read it at least 4 times.  I've read LOTR twice (the whole trilogy).  I would definitely recommend the Hobbit first, then buy the whole LOTR trilogy cause you'll want to read them one after the other!! Enjoy!!


----------



## geniebeanie (Apr 23, 2009)

Also after reading the Hobbit and the Triology, you can enjoy The History of Middle Earth 1 and 2.  It is a lot easy to read than the Simariallion.  I first read the Hobbit at age eight.  Read the triology at ten.  It should come with a addiction warning.


----------



## geoffthomas (Feb 27, 2009)

There was a great animation made that had some music in it.
hard to forget the good songs:
"Where there's a whip there's a way" - marching song for the orcs.
Anyone else see it?

And the terrible combined animation/live action "movie"?


----------



## Archer (Apr 25, 2009)

Ohhh, Geoff...you had to go there!
That was a Ralph Bakshi fiasco, as I recall.

I was present at that premiere in Carbondale, Illinois (huge Uni town...I was in grad school). Theatre packed floor-to-ceiling with Tolkien zealots (including myself). Movie started, and we were twitching in anticipation--then the reality hit after a few minutes. We tried to keep open minds, really we did, but to no avail. Dead silence in the theatre as we all sat, stunned and revulsed, as the travesty unfolded before our horrified eyes. When 'Galadriel' introduces herself and her 'Lord SELL-a-born', about twenty viewers shouted in unison: 'That's KELL-a-born, idiot!' We cracked up. From that moment on, it was a heckle-fest. 

Brrrrr!


----------



## Taborcarn (Dec 15, 2009)

Here's a humorous comparison of the animated LOTR vs the newer LOTR movies. Be forewarned though, the reviewer may use some foul language (I don't remember if he does specifically in these videos, but he usually does).


----------



## jonconnington (Mar 20, 2010)

I'd start with the Silmarillion first...Tolkien had a whole legendarium created before wore the Hobbit and the Lord of the Rings and makes frequent references t it, especially in the latter. Don't get me wrong, LOTR is a fine series by itself, but the Silmarillion really clarify a lot of the more obscure parts...

Of course, if you're a real glutton for punishment, you could take a gander at The History of Middle Earth...all 12 books of them. Not sure if they're out for the Kindle though....


----------



## Archer (Apr 25, 2009)

Ooh, Jon, I hate to disagree, but I would not recommend that any Tolkien neophyte begin with 'The Silmarillion'. It's my favorite, but it reads like a history book (which it is). I love Tolkien's style, too, but it's not what today's fantasy readers are accustomed to. If one is already invested in Middle-earth, then the Silmarillion is a wondrous read (though even I had to take several stabs at it). Too many characters with similar sounding names--bound to confuse new Tolkien readers. 
(lemme see...was that Tuor, Turgon, Turin--which one was the Elf, again?)


----------



## HappyGuy (Nov 3, 2008)

Anne said:


> Thanks geof I have The Last of the Mochicans. I plan to read it soon.


Whoa - hold on there. Before reading the Last of the Mohicans ya gotta read the first Leatherstocking book The Deerslayer. And then, of course, set aside some time for the other three Leatherstocking books that come after last of the Mohicans (The Pathfinder, The Pioneers and The Prarie). AND - whatever you do, don't expect the book, Last of the Mohicans, to be much like the movie; it's not.


----------



## Anne (Oct 29, 2008)

FearNot said:


> Whoa - hold on there. Before reading the Last of the Mohicans ya gotta read the first Leatherstocking book The Deerslayer. And then, of course, set aside some time for the other three Leatherstocking books that come after last of the Mohicans (The Pathfinder, The Pioneers and The Prarie). AND - whatever you do, don't expect the book, Last of the Mohicans, to be much like the movie; it's not.


Thanks I hope all these books are on kindle


----------



## geoffthomas (Feb 27, 2009)

Actually the book is not like either version of the movie.
And yet the basics are there in both.
I must admit that I liked David Day Lewis as Hawkeye in the re-make.
And using the Smokies was wonderful.  Just a beautiful vista - one after another.
Had to do it - the original setting had too many planes flying over all the time (or so I read).

Just sayin.....


----------



## jonconnington (Mar 20, 2010)

archer said:


> Ooh, Jon, I hate to disagree, but I would not recommend that any Tolkien neophyte begin with 'The Silmarillion'. It's my favorite, but it reads like a history book (which it is). I love Tolkien's style, too, but it's not what today's fantasy readers are accustomed to. If one is already invested in Middle-earth, then the Silmarillion is a wondrous read (though even I had to take several stabs at it). Too many characters with similar sounding names--bound to confuse new Tolkien readers.
> (lemme see...was that Tuor, Turgon, Turin--which one was the Elf, again?)


Yeah Archer...on second thought, you're probably right. Might seem a bit daunting for a newbie...better of starting with the Hobbit.


----------

