The Annoying Hobbit

[Lalwendë]

Time for me to get serious and defend The Hobbit (beyond the fact that it has a dragon in it)

Firstly, The Hobbit was written as a children's book, so will necessarily have a different style to LotR. It will be simpler in tone, less complex and have more vivid imagery. These kind of things work in children's books, and are possibly essential to appeal to the younger mind. Having more vivid images can go a long way in explaining why the Dwarf characters are often comic, and why Gandalf is more humorous and tricksy.

The Hobbit is also something of a classic fairy tale. We are introduced to a new character, a little person, who lives in an exaggerated version of our world at its best, and one day he's swept away on a journey. And on this journey he encounters all kinds of weird and wonderful creatures and people. There are pixies in the form of the Elves, monsters in the form of Smaug and the orcs, and horror in the form of Gollum. But at the end of it all, Bilbo lives happily ever after, just as he should.

I think it does help if The Hobbit is the first of the books any new reader approaches, purely because LotR is such a monster of a book that it would overshadow anything. And The Hobbit doesn't deserve that. It's wonderful in its own right.

The style is possibly a little old fashioned to many brought up on the 'realistic' tales that are nowadays seemingly deemed more appropriate for children than fairy tales, but it is no different to that found in books by Enid Blyton or Arthur Ransome. And I wouldn't say its altogether far from JK Rowling's style, episodic and quite vivid.

And anyway, it has my favourite character in it, Bilbo.

[Mithalwen]

I think there is something in the best read aloud theory. As I mentioned, I was enchanted when Bernard Cribbins read it on Jackanory when I was about 8.

I found a littel quote in UT today which may be helpful to those who are antagonistic or ambivalent, when Gandalf says that the story would have been a bit different if he had written it.... now that is something to conjure with

[Imladris]

My post will be short as Child and Sophia the Thunder Mistress has said most of what needs to be said.

I love the Hobbit...sometimes I love it even more than LotR and the Sil (well...it doesn't take much for something to make me like it more than the Sil...but heh). The Hobbit is realer to me, in a certain aspect, than LotR ever was. In the Hobbit I know Bilbo...I can relate to him and the dwarves. In LotR it is different. Though still real the characters are untouchable. Far off. Who could ever hope of relating to Aragorn or Frodo, or even Sam? Tolkien made them to be figures afar off, figures that were unrelatable. In part, that is why I like the Hobbit better sometimes than LotR.

And as for the laughing elves who sang silly songs....I love that. Combined with the somber elves of LotR the elves are instantly changed from just being silly (or somber) to a complex race.

I love the Hobbit. As Lalwende said, there's a big dragon in it. That talks in riddles.

Bloody brilliant.

[Ruoutorin]

I am grateful for everyone's response! Maybe it's just a matter of taste. I like the Sil more for it's tragic nature (the tales of Turin and Hurin, et al, appeal to me more then the tale of Beren & Luthien) and I appreciated the view into what the races of ME endured to get them to the point where they are in the LotR. The Hobbit, to me at least, doesn't really fit into that scheme. Yes, there is a dragon, but I never could vision Smaug to be in the same league as Glaurung. For me, there is just something missing in The Hobbit.

[Kuruharan]

Yes, there is a dragon, but I never could vision Smaug to be in the same league as Glaurung.

In a sense he wasn't. However, I always thought that the two characters were fairly similar.

[Eruanna]

The Hobbit is a wonderful book in its own right and although it seems much lighter in tone than the LotR, I do not believe it should be dismissed as a children's book.
The story of Bilbo's journey 'There and Back Again' is told in a fairy tale style, but has at its heart a deeper, darker meaning. Bilbo meets all manner of cruel and twisted 'monsters', even some of the elves are a threat and we are in no doubt that in his riddling contest with Gollum, his very life is at stake.
It could be argued that many children's tales have a 'dark heart'; those of the Brothers Grimm come to mind.
However, Bilbo's journey is one he experiences both externally and internally. He is a much changed hobbit at the end of his adventure than the quite complacent little person we met at the beginning.

Lalwendë said:

I think it does help if The Hobbit is the first of the books any new reader approaches, purely because LotR is such a monster of a book that it would overshadow anything.

This is true. However, reading 'The Hobbit' first also prepares us for the world and the story of 'The Lord of the Rings' just as Bilbo's adventure prepares Frodo for his adventures to follow.

[Ophelia]

One fine day a writer drew a circle and wrote underneath , "Once there lived a hobbit..." That is where it starts .

As you all know Tolkien wrote the book for his children . But , as he said , children grew and so the story had to aswell . Ofcourse it got more complicated .

I grew up still at the Soviet system which provided a lot of corrections in books . I was 4 when I first became aware of the book . As a child I saw the pictures on the covers which indicated that it indeed is a children's book . I began to read but stoped doing that for whatwas written there was too complicated for a 4 year old so I started to look over the illustrations . After that day I was panically afraid of the book , I even had nightmares . Can you imagine what had they done ? All of the pictures were dim , dark , horrifying , full of monsters . Actually the pictures were mostly only of monsters as the person who drew them had seen them . Needless to saythat I never touched the book again .

Long years passed and after FotR came out in the theaters I remembered that once there was a book about hobbits somewhere in my shelves . Indeed . I found it but what I saw there was a true disaster . The dwarves in the illustrations were really ... more like garden gnomes , Bilbo was ...red-haired and withall the hair up in the air not to mention the nude elves . Thranduil was green with branches in his hair . It took me a while to get over all of that and I finally began to read . Most of the book was translated wrong or simply ridiculous . But no matter , I read it and found it to be no children's book at all . Even though the language was as simple as it could be , the story was quite hard and full of horror that you could sence . And besidesall that the ending is not quite the 'hapily ever after' one . There are losses . Many die , which is not a characteristic feature for fairy tales . Also the beginning of the journey is very depressive for Bilbo for noone wishes to talk to him , think him useless .That also I found hard to take . And it didn't end like that . He was an outcast with the dwarves untill he finally got their respect but when he finally did , the journey had ended and he went back home where he became an outcast for not being one by the dwarves anymore . From the series of 'you can't get something if you do not lose another thing' . Psycologically hard to take . Though for one thing it is a children's book indeed - if you read it to children . For they tend to see the good and the funny in it even if only because they know nought of psycology . So it only depends on what age are you at when you read it first .

And still , The Hobbit is one of my favorite books , with all its dragons , wood Elves , spiders , Gandalf's pine cones and undeveloped Gollum .


Ophelia