Hi all,
I’m considering reading The Lord of The Ring and I have two questions: How many books are in the series and which book comes first? Did I phrase that last question right?
Imagine peace,
Sara
Hi all,
I’m considering reading The Lord of The Ring and I have two questions: How many books are in the series and which book comes first? Did I phrase that last question right?
Imagine peace,
Sara
There are three books in the Lord of the Rings but one book comes before them. Read in this order:
The Hobbit
Fellowship of the Ring (the movie is based on this one)
The Two Towers
Return of the King
Thanks! I’m going to read them - are the LoTR books sort of like Harry Potter?
Imagine peace,
Sara
[ This Message was edited by: Sara on 2002-01-13 12:10 ]
The Hobbit was ment for kids so it is written for a younger audience, the Lord of the Rings is every bit Classic Literature as far as I’m concerned and is very different from Harry Potter and the only similarity is that it’s Fantasy.
The recent release of the first real attempt (I don’t consider that animated drivvle a real attempt)to translate the books into movie seems to have set off a series of strongly felt responses to both the books and the movie. I too am in one of those camps. Whether read as an allegory of pre-WWII, overall good vs. evil or just as a fantasy adventure, I loved the books! I finally saw the movie yesterday and thought it was about as good as could be both in its own right and as true to the book. Beautiful sets, some good music good casting and effects. I acknowledge what some on the Board have said is a lot of violent content, but I did not consider it gratuitous - any battle between good and evil is apt to have its fair share of violence and then some necessitating on the part of good as well. That said, my 13-year old daughter saw it with me for the second time (she took us to see it as she had gone with her class previously), loved it even more, and noted that parts of it scared her. More the evilness and darkness of the Nazgul’s horses and the sudden transitions of the good characters tempted by the ring (esp Bilbo)than by the outright violence of the swordplay. The beauty and grandeur and tranquility of both the Hobbit shire and the Elven lands are a joy to behold. Hope you like the books!
It sounds like an interesting series. If the Hobbit is meant for kids, I wonder if I should skip it and go right to “Fellowship of the Ring”… hhmm.
Peace,
Sara
PhilO -
By your description of it, I’m definitly going to read the books and hopefully see the movie!
Sara
The Hobbit really is worth reading.
Oh, good. We’re back on my favorite topic. I just want to reinforce the advice to read The Hobbit. It’s a great kid’s book, but it’s also a great book for people who refuse to grow old at heart. (Now you got me thinking about rereading it.) It’s full of great poems, too. My favorite is at the beginning when the dwarves are singing while cleaning up Bilbo’s dishes after eating most of the food in his house.
Tony
I’ll also add to the recommendation to first read “The Hobbit”. Although aimed at a lower common denominator for readers it gives you a good sense of what hobbits are all about by getting to know the charachter of Bilbo Baggins. One factor missing in the movie that is a delight in the books is that there is far more unabashed spouting of poetry and song (and not just from hobbits).
Cheers,
David
[ This Message was edited by: Feadan on 2002-01-13 14:21 ]
Sara - I recommend you not skip the Hobbit; it serves as intro and gives insight into the real heroes of the tale (and perhaps the world). Philo
Are you supposed to read all the books before you see the movie? Or just the Fellowship of the Ring? I’d appreciate it if soembody could clear this up for me…
Brent
Well I’m just going to reinforce what all the others said
There are 3 books in the series, 4 if you count the Hobbit too. It really is advisable to read the Hobbit first because then you’ll understand the other three books much better. Also the Hobbit is, hmm how should I phrase this, more readable?
The Lord of the Rings books do have a tendency to, at times, seem a bit slow and go on and on.
Especially the first book, almost everybody I know agrees that the first 100 pages or so are a bit hard to get through, but once you get through that you won’t want to stop reading
So don’t give up, it’s a very rewarding experience when you turn the last page of the final book of this wonderful story.
hugs
Arnout
Okay, I’m definitely going to read The Hobbit - it sounds too wizard not too. Some books will do that - sort of start out slow -
I just consider that as a preparation for the exciting parts! I’m going to buy the Hobbit today! Thanks for all the replies - I didn’t expect to get so many! There sure is a lot of LoTR fans on this board - wonder if there’s some connection between whistles and LoTR…
Imagine peace,
Sara
I was very sad when I turned the last page of the last book. Felt like a part of my life was over.
Sara, look at it this way. If you ever go to paint something, you would be advised to prime it first, so the foundation is stable and the paint sticks better.
The Hobbit is the primer for the lord of the rings. It tells how the ring was found. Plus one of the most important characters in the intire story of the ring is introduced, and I’m not talking of Bilbo or Gandolf.
Take the time and do it right.
Jack “me precious” Orion
Brent,
you could just read the fellowship of the ring (preceded of course by the hobbit). The filming was done for all three books of the trilogy, but this years release is only the first book. The film versions of the other two books will supposedly be released over the next two years. I loved the books and read them many times.
I’m reading ‘The Two Towers’ at the moment What a strangely signficant title that is - particularly for a novel concerned primarily with the struggle of Good over Evil!
This is the overall title of, to be pedantic, books 3 and 4 of the six-book series ‘The Lord of the Rings’. The series is published in three volumes (not three books, as many would have it) with two ‘books’ in each volume.
It’s not the easiest text I’ve ever read, with a style of writing (if not content) more akin to Charles Dickens, Jane Austen or Henry James than say, a modern fantasy writer like Terry Pratchet or Michael Moorcock.
I started these books when I was in my early twenties and gave up, as I didn’t have the wherewithall required to think at the same time as I read. It’s a bit easier now, but not much.
What astounds me, is that with all my world-weariness, I still find it hard not to believe, albeit briefly, that I am reading an historical true-life novel, rather than a work of fantasy-fiction.
It’s powerful stuff and worth the effort.
Steve
[ This Message was edited by: StevePower on 2002-01-13 18:12 ]
On 2002-01-13 12:26, Sara wrote:
It sounds like an interesting series. If the Hobbit is meant for kids, I wonder if I should skip it and go right to “Fellowship of the Ring”… hhmm. >Peace,
Sara
Back up, just a bit. I don’t know how anybody could consider The Hobbit a childrens’ book. I can’t imagin reading this book before I was 14 (I read it in my early 20’s), although I knew a kid that read the Hobbit and LR before they were 11 (He also went to MIT for engineering). The Hobbit is more readable and has a plot that is less complex than LR. Both (meaning all 4 books) are significanly easier than say Fyodor Dostoyevski’s Crime & Punishment.
Reading the Hobbit first makes reading the Fellowship much richer. Some characters start with a history which makes that first 106 pages of Fellowship go much easier. Other characters have mearly a cameo appearance in LR, but it is wonderful to have that history from The Hobbit as you read the Fellowship.
Editing to add, not change content
Craig & Nick,
Fair enough. I couldn’t find a forward in my edition of The Hobbit and I got none of that from the forward of the Silmarilion and Book of Lost Tales 1 forwards. The children’s book label should come after fantasy and novel in my eyes. Oh, Well.
By the way, in Book of Lost Tales, Christopher Tolkien states that he regrets publishing The Silmarilion. Also, large numbers of the chapters from the Silmarilion appear to be covered somewhere within the 12 volumes of History of Middle Earth. My question is ‘if you intend to read the History of Middle Earth series, does that make the Silmarilion a redundant reading?’
Cheers
[ This Message was edited by: Mark_J on 2002-01-14 09:09 ]
Sara, if you’re done with all that and feel tenacious, you can progress onwards to The Silmarillion. Its a history of Middle Earth, long before the Ring.
Tolkien loves describing landscapes, this very apparent in LoTR especially. When I read it years ago I felt it was draggy because of this (esp Return of the King and a half of 2 Towers) relative to other fantasy books. I just browsed those parts without thinking.
However, it occurred to me that he doesn’t spend so much effort on it for nothing. I soon realised that if you give yourself a visual image of the geography he spends paragraphs describing, it makes for a more engaging read. So if you ever have the same experience as me for a first-time LoTR read that might help.
I am currently reading the Hobbit to my kids and really liking it. I will even add that not only does the movie comprise the three books but I noticed recently that it also includes many refrences to the Hobbit.
In particular the movie scene where Bilbo and Gandolf are smoking together, in the the book The Hobbit Bilbo nervously asks Gandolf if he would like to smoke after insulting Gandolf by trying to move Gandolf on his way and Gandolf refuses his offer. It was nice that the movie made a point of showing them as friends relaxing and smoking together.