The Annoying 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

[Sophia the Thunder Mistress]

Ruoutorin said:

The Hobbit, to me at least, doesn't really fit into that [tragic] scheme.

It's interesting that you mention this.

The Hobbit certainly isn't told in a tragic style, but it definitely could have. The story of Thorin at least is a tragic tale. Driven out of his home by a dragon, years of exile, finally a quest to get it back, ending with a battle where the newly crowned king dies.

Another tragic bit is the death of Thror in the Necromancer's dungeons.

There are elements of it there, it's just masked by the style.

Sophia

[Kuruharan]

*cough*KiliandFili*cough*

[Lalaith]

My feelings for the Hobbit are mixed. On the one hand, I have a great deal of affection for it, my first taste of Tolkien when I read it at the age of seven.

But even at seven, I remember wanting something more. Particularly intriguing, I found, was the paragraph about woodelves who 'never went to Faerie in the west, unlike the Deep Elves, the Fair Elves and the Sea Elves'. (Sorry, I'm quoting from memory here). Who were these other elves? What was Faerie?

The storytelling is excellent, the visuals perhaps even more immediate than in LotR. I can close my eyes right now and see poor Bilbo plodding along in the rain on his horse, water dripping off his hood. What I find somewhat lacking in the Hobbit is the grandeur and nobility of the heroic epic. We do get a taste of it with the death of Thorin, (and of course his gallant nephews) and the arrival of Beorn at the Battle of the Five Armies.
It all depends on your literary tastes, I suppose. I know so many people who liked and enjoyed the Hobbit but then couldn't get past the Fellowship in LotR.

[davem]

Originally Posted by Ophelia

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

Having just looked through my copy of The Annotated Hobbit & seen the illustrations from various editions of TH from across the globe, I have to say I was struck by how 'dark' & disturbing some of the ones in the eastern European editions are, in contrast to some of the western European editions, many of which are quite cute & cartoon like. Can't help wondering what the reason for this difference is.

[narfforc]

Although Tolkien created a lot of The Silmarillion by the time The Hobbit was released, I try to treat it as one might look upon The Lesser Rings, a mere essay in the craft of writing, by the time he forged The One Book, he was a Master Wordsmith. His attempts to put the story (The Hobbit) into context with his later writings ie:- Of the finding of The Ring(LotR) and The Quest of Erebor(UT) I find quite fascinating. When first reading The Hobbit (If you read it first), you cannot fully understand the vastness of what you are reading, in fact Middle-Earth is not mentioned at all. Elements of greater things are touched on ie:- Elronds ancestry, Durin, The Necromancer and Gondolin. The problem is if you read The Hobbit after LotR, you may well find it less than what it is. If you look at some of the names I have mentioned, you will notice how ancient they are in Middle-Earth, my own view is that The Hobbit was Tolkiens first attempt to show us his Sub-Creation. I treat The Hobbit as neither a childrens nor an adult book, the way I see it, is this is how you may try to teach a younger person of greater things, a small glimpse at The Marvelous.

[Glirdan]

The Hobbit was the first book I read of the whole Tolkien collection, and I'd have to agree with Lal and Bëth, there's BIG spiders, and treasure, and a great, big, flying, fire breathing dragon!!!!! Who doesn't like dragons, seriously. Again I'll say, sadly I watched the first twomovies before I read the books. But when I saw them, I had to read them, and I got the three books and The Hobbit, so I obviously read the Hobbit first and I have no complaints about it because it explained a lot for me seeing as I watched the Fellowship and The Two Towers movies. Anyway, I really don't see how anyone could not like the Hobbit, but your all entitled to your own opinions.

Glirdy

[the phantom]

Just in case someone wanted to see the words right from Tolkien's pen (letter 131)-

The generally different tone and style of The Hobbit is due, in point of genesis, to it being taken by me as a matter from the great cycle susceptible of treatment as a 'fairy-story', for children.