Can children appreciate The Lord of the Rings?

[Thingol]

I was thinking about this while I was reading Lindil's post about how he read The Hobbit to his daughter when she was 3 and later 4, and is now reading the Fellowship of the Ring to her (Located in Why do you read Tolkien). As someone who re-reads almost everything at least once, I believe that the first time you read something is always the most fun. When I first read The Hobbit I was 12, and immediately went out and read The Lord of the Rings trilogy. About 6 months later I read The Unfinished Tails and then The Silm. I distinctly remember the first time reading the Trilogy thinking that Saruman and Sauron were one in the same until the end of book 5. I have regretted not waiting another few years to read the books all my short life. While I am sure that Lindil's daughter is far more intelligent and perceptive at 4 than I was at 12, can a child really take away the same feeling from the first reading that an adult could? One day I hope to have children of my own, what age do you think is appropriate for someone to begin reading the books? Just to be clear, I'm not passing judgement on anyone and am not trying to demean the intelligence of anyone’s children. I am sure that whatever age seems appropriate to me before I have kids will go out the window in my anxiousness to share Tolkien with them. [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img]

[ January 24, 2002: Message edited by: Thingol ]

[Nuinrog]

I read The Hobbit at 8, and the trilogy at 12 AND Silmarillion at 12. Dont push your kids too far though, or they'll end up like me. Smart and charismatic. Oh wait...

[Gwaihir the Windlord]

reading Lindil's post about how she (he?)

Scratch 'she' there. Lindil means something in Elvish, although you'd have to look it up to see what. Or ask him.

I read the Hobbit at age ten I think, and Lord of the Rings at thirteen. I s'pose thirteen isn't really still a child though. Ten is, but the Hobbit is less complex. The first time I read LotR I didn't understand it, I'm afraid, and the second time; but the third time I'd read the appendixes and sil so I knew all about Gondor and Sauron and the Elves and Numenor. Without that background, Lord of the Rings is half the book it is with it, and I don't think sil would appeal much to children, nor would they understand it. The appendixes are not so bad though.
I think that smart, older children could read LotR well enough with the appendixes. For the full enlightenment sil provides they'd have to wait.

Well, I read the books when I was 14 years old and although it was hard to start with, I dunt think you can consider LotR series hard to understand. It was easy to continue after starting it. So I dunt think you can say the children cant understand LotR.

I read the Hobbit at age 6,and LotR at age 10.they made a huge impact,so much so that I'm probably the staunchest Tolkien purist there is,and I decided not to go and see the movie despite all the hype(I'm 16 now)

[The Mirrorball Man]

[img]smilies/biggrin.gif[/img]

If reading The Lord of the Rings at an early age prevents people to enjoy movies for the rest of their life, I'd say that it would be better to read it later.

[Sindalómiel]

Originally posted by Thingol:
<STRONG> As someone who re-reads almost everything at least once, I believe that the first time you read something is always the most fun[ January 23, 2002: Message edited by: Thingol ]</STRONG>

Not always. The first TWO times I read LOTR (well, only FOTR) I hated it. The first time I was 9, and the oldish language threw me a bit, not to mention not liking fantasy at the time. The next time I was older and I understood it better but still didn't like it. So, third time lucky, this is the most fun reading of all.

[Hama]

I find that LOTR improves with re-reading, you always manage to notice something new. I can still re-read my favourite scenes and get a shiver down the spine, and I never fail to blubber when reading Grey Havens.

[Carannillion]

I think it's the same with good books as with good music; the first time is either overwhelmingly fantastic, or too much. Then, the more you read (or listen) the more you find out about the work, and each time you appreciate it a bit more.

[Araen]

It depends on the child. I am and have always been a prolific reader. My dad read The Hobbit to me when I was around 6 or 7 I've been reading it ever since. Now that I am 13 (and the movie came out) my mom decieded I was old enough to read LotR, I think that 13 is a godd age to read LotR since then you can ceatch the hidden plots inside themian one more, but it depends on the child. [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img]

[Mithadan]

I first read The Hobbit at age 11 and LoTR a year or two later (I did not know LoTR was a sequel to The Hobbit) and understood it all fine. My daughter read The Hobbit at age 7 and enjoyed it but I am holding off introducing LoTR to her, not because she would not appreciate it but rather out of slight concern about the battle scenes and scariness (I am probably being over-cautious). When a child can first read the books is a highly individual matter. The child must, first, have good reading skills and, second, be able to tolerate the goblins/orcs, Gollum, the dragon and the Battle of Five Armies for the Hobbit. Probably age 6-10 for most kids. LoTR, due to its length, writing style and complexity, should be held back a bit, in my opinion, until perhaps 8-12 or even later. The last thing you want is to have a kid start it and put it down as "too boring" or unpleasant -- he or she may not pick it back up again.

[ January 24, 2002: Message edited by: Mithadan ]

[ January 24, 2002: Message edited by: Mithadan ]

[Orald]

I would liken LotR to Huck Finn. To the child Huck Finn is a wonderful adventure story, but to the adult it is a story tinged with satire and other meanings. Like this LotR is, wait, LotR is an adventure story to the adult too. Heheh [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img]

If they can hold an intelligible conversation with someone then I think they are already beyond the age that a book like LotR would be enjoyable and understandable to them.

[Fenrir]

I was brought up on a diet of Lloyd Alexander, I have been read to for as long as I can remember. I loved the hobbit when I was around six but enjoyed the Lord of the Rings so much when I was ten that it instantly became my favourite book and remains so to this day. My childhood would have been a lot less interesting without it.

[zifnab]

Originally posted by Thingol:
<STRONG> She (he?) read The Hobbit to her (his?) daughter when she was 3 and later 4, and is now reading the Fellowship of the Ring to her
[ January 23, 2002: Message edited by: Thingol ]</STRONG>

Well, personally I have no problem with this. It is not what I would do, but every child grows up a bit different and matures at a different age/time. My daughter is 3 and will soon be 4. I dont think the Hobbit, is a good book for her. Even though I love Tolkien, to her it would be boring, she would not understand the plot(she doesnt even know what the word is), she would prefer if I continued the wonderfully animted Clifford or Arthur books she has. I cant wait to get her into reading some of the books that I love(which is quite alot). But the time will come, and I will not rush it. When she is old enough and is curious about them, then we will read them together.

[Maeglin]

Hmm... It variates from child to child ofcours. Myself I read Bilbo at the age of 10 (sadly enough [img]smilies/frown.gif[/img]). LOTR; 12 and Silmarillion; 14. And I have re-read all the books (except Silmarillion) and i'v also read some swedish-edition of different Tolkien-books in 3 volumes (Tales from Middle-Earth, The lost Legends 1 and 2). And I'm now 16.

Hmmm, I dont really konw about children reading it but it's apparently highly possible for them to enjoy it. [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img]

[Aiwendil]

I was brought up on a diet of Lloyd Alexander, I have been read to for as long as I can remember. I loved the hobbit when I was around six but enjoyed the Lord of the Rings so much when I was ten that it instantly became my favourite book and remains so to this day. My childhood would have been a lot less interesting without it.

Just about the same for me. I was brought up on Lloyd Alexander, C.S. Lewis, and Tolkien. The Lord of the Rings has been my favorite book for as long as I can remember; I've read it countless times, and I only like it more each time. I think that children are generally far more intelligent and perceptive than they are given credit for. For a long time my family had the habit of gathering near bedtime and being read too, usually by my mother. As soon as I heard of the existence of the Silmarillion, I requested it as bedtime material. That was probably when I was in 3rd grade. Though I realize now that I had only the most superficial understanding of the plot then, I absolutely loved it from the beginning.

So read Tolkien to your children!

[ January 24, 2002: Message edited by: Aiwendil ]

[Marileangorifurnimaluim]

I actually saw the cartoon version of "The Hobbit" first! But it didn't encourage me to read the Hobbit. I ran across the LotR scrounging in my Dad's library. He noticed I'd devoured Lloyd Alexander and had finished the Narnia Chronicles and said "dear, you might be interested in this.." He regretted it. He barely got two sentences out of me for the rest of the visit.

I was 12-13, but at the time was reading the 'Scarlet Letter' and 'House of the Seven Gables' so the reading comprehension was there.

I think it depends most on what your kids are reading now. A child who's just finished the 800-page 'Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire' is ripe for Tolkien. In fact I view Harry Potter as Tolkien training wheels. [img]smilies/biggrin.gif[/img]

[Lindolirian]

Originally posted by The Mirrorball Man:
<STRONG> [img]smilies/biggrin.gif[/img]

If reading The Lord of the Rings at an early age prevents people to enjoy movies for the rest of their life, I'd say that it would be better to read it later.</STRONG>

I think i agree with that i mean the movie was good and every Tolkien fan should see it.

[SlinkerStinker]

I was 12-13, but at the time was reading the 'Scarlet Letter' and 'House of the Seven Gables' so the reading comprehension was there.

Maybe at 25, my reading comprehension is still not there, but the Scarlet Letter has to be the worst book ever catogorized as a classic. Absolutely horrible writing style and while a somewhat interesting plot, very poor characterization. IMO this book is trash and only serves as a somewhat poor catagoration of early American culture.

[Sindalómiel]

My cousin just had a new baby, do you think 13 hours old is too young to be introduced to Tolkien? [img]smilies/tongue.gif[/img]

[ January 25, 2002: Message edited by: Sindalómiel ]

[Eowyn of Ithilien]

I haven't read the Scarlet Letter for a few years, but remember thinking it was alright...lol well all the child will really notice is the tone of your voice, so why not?? [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img]
I'm trying to remember when I first read the Hobbit and LOTR-I'm fairly sure the hobbit was over six years ago. I've always been mad about books-or a "prolific reader".
My cousin is thirteen and just started LOTR-I think she'll understand the plot but some of the themes and undertones may be lost

[Carannillion]

The thing about having a child start a book just to find out that he/she doesn't like it and then put it down, never to pick it up again is a bit pessimistic, I think. If the parent considers his/her child ready for LotR, then give it a shot. If the child doesn't like it, throw a lot of other good books at it. Later on, when your kid is more mature, he/she will probably be 'grown-up' enough to try the book once more (and hopefully like it this time.

I learned how to read at about 4. This made the library at school a bit thin the first three years (already read most of the books), and I was 'allowed' to use the library for the older kids. A lot of these books never really made any sense to me (especially the scientific ones), but later on, at about 10-12, I took them up again. Devoured them all, but I still didn't have that complete understanding of plot, message, characterization and stuff like that. School from the age of 13 (at least that's how it is in Norway) focus more and more on understanding the contents, and analyzing the text. This is quite healthy, I think, and in most cases, analyzing a book and writing a paper on it (simply writing it for yourself, not for any hand-ins at school) can be very fun.

[Sindalómiel]

Originally posted by Carannillion:
<STRONG>This is quite healthy, I think, and in most cases, analyzing a book and writing a paper on it (simply writing it for yourself, not for any hand-ins at school) can be very fun.</STRONG>

You never went to my school did you? I hated analyzing books, they'd rip them apart to find some hidden meaning and it would ruin the book forever. I don't like a single book I had to read in school, even if I quite enjoyed it before it was utterly destroyed by the English curriculum.

[Carannillion]

Well, ripping it apart to find some hidden meaning - which in a lot of cases the writer didn't even intend for! - is another thing. I'm talking about diving into the plot, to learn more about what's going on, and familiarize oneself with the characters even more than the initial identifying process.

Of course, writing a paper on it might be a little much sometimes, but simply being conscious of it while you read and doing a 'light' analysis in your head is - IMHO - a great way to read books. But not the first time, mind you! That takes away the innocence and mysteries like peeking into your presents before Christmas... [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img]

[Fenrir]

I know what you mean. One of the most annoying things about the Curriculum is their attitude to characters. They like to have set definitions with little flexibility, especially when dealing with not particularly nice people in fiction. I'd hate to have to analyse one of my favourite series of books "The Raj Quartet" by Paul Scott. It has some very interesting people in it and I couldn't bear to watch them being picked apart, piece by piece, until all we are left with is a one dimensional mockery of a person.

[ January 25, 2002: Message edited by: Fenrir ]

[Carannillion]

And that's not what I want either. I'mtalking light, positive analyzation to - as I said - get to know the plot and the characters even more. Sometimes even adding another dimension to it. Of course, all books are different, and they all need to be approached differently. I wouldn't analyze Tolkien's books as 'hard' as those of a modern, contemporary writer.

Please don't misunderstand, I want the magic to be preserved, but I also like to look a bit closer at things. Isn't that sort of what we do here? Delve deep into the stories and try to find out more about them.

[Sindalómiel]

Originally posted by Carannillion:
<STRONG>And that's not what I want either. I'mtalking light, positive analyzation to - as I said - get to know the plot and the characters even more. Sometimes even adding another dimension to it. Of course, all books are different, and they all need to be approached differently. I wouldn't analyze Tolkien's books as 'hard' as those of a modern, contemporary writer.

Please don't misunderstand, I want the magic to be preserved, but I also like to look a bit closer at things. Isn't that sort of what we do here? Delve deep into the stories and try to find out more about them.</STRONG>

Ok, I agree that can be very good and really helps to make a book better. Now why couldn't we do THAT at school?

[Fenrir]

Agreed

[The Mirrorball Man]

I don't agree with most of you. I enjoy ripping a novel apart till you see its bare bones, analyzing every nuance and every detail, finding out about the author's intentions and what s-he put in the novel without even intending it. I don't think that books are fragile creatures that lose their magic when you look at them too intensively.

[Carannillion]

I bet Superman could look at a book too intensely, using his laservision... [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img]

Well, If you can rip a book apart, and still keep the magic of the first-time reading of it in your head, good for you. I prefer not to do it too hard. Of course, some books are written eith the author intending people to tear it apart, word by word. These are ok do do so with, but I won't do it to Tolkien's books. He intended these books to be 'magical' entertainment.

[Rosie Posie Burrows]

I read The Hobbit when I was seven, and loved it. I can't really believe a child of four could understand it though…
I read Lord of the Rings when I was nine. That was okay, I liked it, but I did find it really heavy going and I probably should have waited a couple of years. I've read The Fellowship again now (at 15), and I got much more enjoyment out of it the second time around. So I think LOTR is better for ages 12 and up really… [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img]

[Rosie Posie Burrows]

I don't like it either when we analyse literature too much in school- especially when we're reading it for the first time. Shakespeare's the worst. I'm just trying to enjoy the play and see the deeper meaning of it at the same time, but we're made to analyse every little phrase, underline words we don't know the exact meaning of, blah blah blah. What does it matter, as long as we get the basic gist of the sentence? That's not seeing a deeper meaning, that's picking it apart bit by bit until the enjoyment is lost.
Depends which English teacher really… the one I've got at the moment only does it occasionally so she's alright.
Actually what I really find annoying is poetry work. Being asked to find the meaning of the symbolism in such and such line. I rarely have a clue! Why can't poets just tell it like it is, instead of giving us all this hard work? [img]smilies/frown.gif[/img]

[The Mirrorball Man]

Originally posted by Rosie Posie Burrows:
Shakespeare's the worst. I'm just trying to enjoy the play and see the deeper meaning of it at the same time, but we're made to analyse every little phrase, underline words we don't know the exact meaning of, blah blah blah. What does it matter, as long as we get the basic gist of the sentence?

If your teacher were intelligent and sensitive, she would bring you to the theater first (or at least show you a movie version of the play), to show you how entertaining Shakespeare can be. And then, you would dig deeper into the language. Shakespeare was a master of language, and there are treasures of hidden meaning, puns, double entendre and other subtle twists in his play that you wouldn't be able to enjoy just by getting the basic gist of the sentence. Tolkien can be like that too, sometimes.

Why can't poets just tell it like it is, instead of giving us all this hard work? [img]smilies/frown.gif[/img]

I sympathize, I really do. [img]smilies/biggrin.gif[/img] But the "hard work" is called poetry. And if you work hard enough, you might even enjoy it. [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img]

[Elvenglass]

Well I enjoy analysing literature, but not too much. Sometimes it can take away from the spirit of the book. However that is just my opinion I read the Hobbit when I was 8 and I loved it.. I think it would be ok for some young children to read..but I don't think that children under the age of maybe 10 could fully appreciate LotR. I read them when I was about 11, and I've read them 3 more times since then. They are really fantastic books that people of all ages can enjoy!

[Thingol]

How did all of you wait years after reading The Hobbit to read The Lord of the Rings? As soon as I saw the note at the end of The Hobbit that you could learn more about Hobbits in The Lord of the Rings I went out to my library and took out The Fellowship of the Ring.

[Elvenglass]

Well I actually started reading LotR right after the Hobbit..But I didn't finish it for a while..but I'm reading the Silm right now and I love it!

[Eldar14]

Well, I owe a debt of thanks to my 6th grade teacher for handing me a copy of Hobbit and telling me I would probably enjoy it (at the time I was thinking, "what the hell is she giving me a book for, I just wanna stick to my star wars books") However, I had finished it in about a week. Then, in seventh grade, I read the Trilogy and "read" Silmarillion ("read" in quotes 'cause I did not understand it at all) In my eighth grade English class, we had to read the Hobbit in class and I was amazed as to how my classmates didn't understand it (and it was a honors class) (at the time I was reading Les Mis.) In 8th grade I also truly read Sil. for the first time, and also started in on HoME, which I'm still delving through as a ninth grader (I also started posting here when i was reading the Hobbit for english class)

Also, I would like to say that the main reason that I my favorite teacher ever is my 8th grade English teacher is, not only that we read about ten books as a class, but she was also my only teacher I've had who wouldn't tear the books apart looking for a deeper meaning. However, my English teacher this year on the other hand...

[zifnab]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Eldar14:
<STRONG>In my eighth grade English class, we had to read the Hobbit in class and I was amazed as to how my classmates didn't understand it (and it was a honors class) </STRONG>


I guess I missed out, When I was in school we were stuck reading books like "Where the Red Fern Grows" and "The Last day of the World", and junk like that(Them nasty coons killed my ol' hound dog). I did have a "Reading" class when I was a Freshman, and I always loved that. The teacher was a waste of time, I never knew her name, I dont think she talked, and it was always suspected that there was more Kahalua in her coffee then cream. But it was a great class because you could read any book you want, and then write an essay on it.

[Eldar14]

Must talk school district into forming reading class . . .

I was in the 9th grade when I read lord of the rings (in german, for i am german). A few months later, I started reading it in english. At the moment (i am in the 10th. grade now) I am reading the hobbit, in english. But I doubt that we will ever read one of these books in school, though I would really like to do so!