Social books: the Hobbit v Lord of Rings

PBAC

Brown Belt
@Brown
Joined
May 15, 2022
Messages
3,986
Reaction score
3,044
I was brought up with LotR and it was one of the first books I read at a very young age. The Hobbit I read later and I don't know why this is but I just enjoyed it more. It was simple and to the point. I guess since I had the lore indoctrinated in me from a young age it was always beaten into me that Bilbo was the real protagonist and the whole thing was really his story. It was also stand alone and it was a bit annoying how LotR bent parts of the plot to squeeze in the new story. It was also fairly basic fantasy story
 
Hobbit is one of my top ten , desert island books.

The LoTR books took me 40 years of trying to read them and I have no intention of repeating it .
 
LOTR is definitely a slow burn but an enjoyable kind of slow burn.

I read them both a long time ago so its hard to compare. But i think LOTR was more enjoyable.
 
The trilogy is some of the finest writing ever put down on paper. Tolkien was an artist with language and some of phraseology in those books has never been duplicated.

"North amid their noisome pits lay the first of the great heaps and hills of slag and broken rock and blasted earth, the vomit of the maggot-folk of Mordor; but south and now near loomed the great rampart of Cirith Gorgor, and the Black Gate amidmost, and the two Towers of the Teeth tall and dark upon either side."

Hobbit is well written. The trilogy is literature.
 
Cliff Notes or listening to the audiobooks on long drives at least 1.5X speed.
 
The Hobbit is literally a children's tale. The Lord Of The Rings is vastly superior in every way. And I've read both at least 15 times over the last ~37 or so years.
 
It is funny that people who’ve read LOTR and 3 other books like to pretend it’s some kind of high art, and they literary critics.

I skipped through Metropolis once, so I know film!
 
Back
Top