[Hammerhand]

I think it is quite integral to define roughly what age a "child" or "kid" is. Also, it is important to note that children mature, or take an interest in certain things at different ages. I was 10 when i first read the Hobbit, at the time it was pure escapism, i loved it. Lord of the Rings i read at 11-12, and it was difficult to consume it all due to the vastness of the plot and the lexis, i still understood it.

Though i'm only 17 now i feel my interpretations of the book havn't changed dramatically - I am fully aware this may not always be the case! Obviously you think on certain scenarios or metaphors differently, maybe even challenge certain ethics, but that is something both children and adults do, i believe.

The mind alters perspective and the depth of the story, i think this is something every person with a love of literature does - and this is where "child" and "adult" divert in Tolkien's work - i think that a competant child will read the book, absorb and draw little sense of overview, the inability to compare or relate to much of the character's actions and i think children simply do not always fully understand what they read, maybe portions, but in a complicated book some things may be lacking. Basically, i think children can handle reading a book and absorbing the text, drawing a limited but valid conclusion of their own.

I'm all for Tolkien's literature being introduced to children from a relatively young age, it will only attract those children that want to read it don't forget, and though not everything my be understood; it will in time - that is what i have experienced personally. Contemplation , for adults and children alike, (on different levels obviously) often sends home a pang of understanding. Why would we allow Tolkien's work to subject only to the elder? it would die with that generation if that was the case.