# What advice would you give a first time reader of LotR?



## Ealdwyn (Aug 19, 2020)

Apart from 'Forget everything PJ told you' 😂

If you were recommending LotR to someone, what would you tell them to encourage them to read it?
Assuming they'd seen the movies, I'd tell them that the book and movies are two separate experiences. The movies emphasise action. The book immerses you in another world of mystery, menace and hope. I'd tell them how the films didn't capture the magic and poetry of the books. I'd explain about the immense scope of the story, about the scale of the history and mythology, of which LotR is only a part.

And I'd probably tell them to have patience through book one, because it is comparatively slow and the style is very different to modern fantasy. Things really pick up in book two after the Council of Elrond.

But would that persuade a modern reader? What would you tell them?


----------



## Hisoka Morrow (Aug 19, 2020)

Film or video games +1, for elements like books involve too much settings. To 1st time readers, stuff mostly contain fewer settings are preferred.


----------



## Alcuin (Aug 19, 2020)

Too bad you saw the movies before you read the books. Same characters, different story.
Read _The Hobbit_ before _LotR_. It’s amusing and light-hearted, and a fairly easy read. Then _LotR_ will make more sense and be much more fun!
Don’t expect to understand what’s actually going on until you’re half-way through _Fellowship_. All the clues are there, but you’d have to be Hercule Poirot or Sherlock Holmes or Solomon to grasp the strands of hints and foreshadowing: don’t worry about them. _(added later: )_ Frodo and his friends don’t know why these things are happening, either, and you know basically everything Frodo knows.
Like all stories, there seem to be some dry parts. Slog through them; on later reflection, if you bother to read the story again (and again and again and again…), you’ll realize there are complex interactions between the characters taking place that later have tremendous impact on them and on the course of the tale.
Have fun! It’s too bad you can only read it for the first time one time.


----------



## Olorgando (Aug 19, 2020)

Never mind PJ's fanfics.
I might say "Forget any other book of fiction, including anything else you may have read in fantasy. While you might believe you recognize some things from your other fantasy reading, it's almost certainly a copy. This is the Original, and still a one-of-a-kind book."


----------



## frodolives7601 (Aug 19, 2020)

Ealdwyn said:


> Apart from 'Forget everything PJ told you' 😂
> 
> If you were recommending LotR to someone, what would you tell them to encourage them to read it?
> Assuming they'd seen the movies, I'd tell them that the book and movies are two separate experiences. The movies emphasise action. The book immerses you in another world of mystery, menace and hope. I'd tell them how the films didn't capture the magic and poetry of the books. I'd explain about the immense scope of the story, about the scale of the history and mythology, of which LotR is only a part.
> ...


This is a terrific question! Like you, I would probably tell them to consider the books and movies as two separate experiences, although for me, the movies emphasize the characters as well as the action and do capture the books' magic and poetry, just translated into cinematic form. So perhaps I would encourage the reader to allow some time to elapse between their last viewing of the movies and their reading of the books so they could separate the two in their mind more easily. 

I do think a modern reader might tend to get impatient with some of the slower sections of the books, and so I might encourage them, in those sections, to stop and think, "Why might Tolkien have written it this way? What is it that I, as a reader, get from this section as is that I might not have gotten if Tolkien had styled it another way?" And, as you say, I'd encourage them to have patience and above all, keep going!



Alcuin said:


> Too bad you saw the movies before you read the books. Same characters, different story.
> Read _The Hobbit_ before _LotR_. It’s amusing and light-hearted, and a fairly easy read. Then _LotR_ will make more sense and be much more fun!
> Don’t expect to understand what’s actually going on until you’re half-way through _Fellowship_. All the clues are there, but you’d have to be Hercule Poirot or Sherlock Holmes or Solomon to grasp the strands of hints and foreshadowing: don’t worry about them. _(added later: )_ Frodo and his friends don’t know why these things are happening, either, and you know basically everything Frodo knows.
> Like all stories, there seem to be some dry parts. Slog through them; on later reflection, if you bother to read the story again (and again and again and again…), you’ll realize there are complex interactions between the characters taking place that later have tremendous impact on them and on the course of the tale.
> Have fun! It’s too bad you can only read it for the first time one time.


I agree about reading _The Hobbit_ first. I think a modern reader might find it a slightly more "user-friendly" introduction to Tolkien's world and good preparation for _LotR_.


----------



## Hisoka Morrow (Aug 20, 2020)

frodolives7601 said:


> I agree about reading _The Hobbit_ first. I think a modern reader might find it a slightly more "user-friendly" introduction to Tolkien's world and good preparation for _LotR_.





Alcuin said:


> Read _The Hobbit_ before _LotR_. It’s amusing and light-hearted, and a fairly easy read. Then _LotR_ will make more sense and be much more fun!


Ahhh yes, I forgot that Hobbit series also provide very 1st time-reader friendly settings, so few enough that you only have to follow Bilbo's angle.


----------



## Quennar i Onotimo (Aug 20, 2020)

Personally, when I first read LotR, I was already used to Tolkien's style because I had read before Lotr, the Silmarillion and the Hobbit (lighter to read), so I would recommend reading something light like the Hobbit first and then recommend highly recommend reading LotR as there are many things in the film that have been cut or edited, like the awesome Tom Bombadil.


----------



## Squint-eyed Southerner (Aug 20, 2020)

The only caveat I'd give to someone in recommending The Hobbit first, would be to keep in mind that it's a children's story, and very different in overall tone from LOTR.

And welcome to the forum, Quennar i Onotimo! If you'd like to, you can introduce yourself, and say something about your interests, in the New Members forum:









New Members


Meet and greet the newest TTF members. -- [ One thread per new member only! ] --




www.thetolkienforum.com


----------



## Olorgando (Aug 21, 2020)

Shouldn't the advice include something like a health warning about possible addictiveness?


----------



## Shadow (Mar 10, 2021)

Read about three or four chapters a day and reflect fully on them before moving on.


----------



## m4r35n357 (Mar 10, 2021)

Hisoka Morrow said:


> Film or video games +1, for elements like books involve too much settings. To 1st time readers, stuff mostly contain fewer settings are preferred.


Huh?


----------



## 1stvermont (Mar 10, 2021)

Ealdwyn said:


> Apart from 'Forget everything PJ told you' 😂
> 
> If you were recommending LotR to someone, what would you tell them to encourage them to read it?
> Assuming they'd seen the movies, I'd tell them that the book and movies are two separate experiences. The movies emphasise action. The book immerses you in another world of mystery, menace and hope. I'd tell them how the films didn't capture the magic and poetry of the books. I'd explain about the immense scope of the story, about the scale of the history and mythology, of which LotR is only a part.
> ...



I would tell them to enjoy it.


----------



## Olorgando (Mar 10, 2021)

Shadow said:


> Read about three or four chapters a day and reflect fully on them before moving on.


Well, I certainly did not take advice like yours when I got my English paperback edition in the mid-80's (after having read the German translation in 1983).
I went on a 19-hour binge of reading from about 6 AM Saturday morning (when I'm normally still deep in sleep) to about 1 AM Sunday morning.
I'm certain I had started Friday evening, and that I also continued after waking up that Sunday.
I would like to think that I managed the entire "trilogy" (entire book) on that weekend, but I certainly haven't come close to that in the numerous re-readings. But then I was 29 when I got that paperback edition, so more than a bit outside the scope of the original post's question (and I can read compulsively, anyway).


----------



## Ealdwyn (Mar 10, 2021)

Olorgando said:


> Well, I certainly did not take advice like yours when I got my English paperback edition in the mid-80's (after having read the German translation in 1983).
> I went on a 19-hour binge of reading from about 6 AM Saturday morning (when I'm normally still deep in sleep) to about 1 AM Sunday morning.
> I'm certain I had started Friday evening, and that I also continued after waking up that Sunday.
> I would like to think that I managed the entire "trilogy" (entire book) on that weekend, but I certainly haven't come close to that in the numerous re-readings. But then I was 29 when I got that paperback edition, so more than a bit outside the scope of the original post's question (and I can read compulsively, anyway).


I remember doing something similar in my 20s, reading the whole thing over a weekend.
These days I prefer to take my time: reading one or two chapters at a time, reading passsages more than once, reading the related parts of HoME, and so on.


----------



## Shadow (Mar 10, 2021)

Olorgando said:


> Well, I certainly did not take advice like yours when I got my English paperback edition in the mid-80's (after having read the German translation in 1983).
> I went on a 19-hour binge of reading from about 6 AM Saturday morning (when I'm normally still deep in sleep) to about 1 AM Sunday morning.
> I'm certain I had started Friday evening, and that I also continued after waking up that Sunday.
> I would like to think that I managed the entire "trilogy" (entire book) on that weekend, but I certainly haven't come close to that in the numerous re-readings. But then I was 29 when I got that paperback edition, so more than a bit outside the scope of the original post's question (and I can read compulsively, anyway).


My approach to new readers is to understand what is being written, as some may struggle with the prose. And to pace themselves if they’re daunted by the size of the tome.


----------



## Erestor Arcamen (Mar 10, 2021)

Shadow said:


> My approach to new readers is to understand what is being written, as some may struggle with the prose. And to pace themselves if they’re daunted by the size of the tome.


Exactly, this is how I read Brandon Sanderson's Stormlight Archive (an excellent fantasy series) books. They're huge and I need to read them a little at a time.


----------



## Olorgando (Mar 10, 2021)

Shadow said:


> My approach to new readers is to understand what is being written, as some may struggle with the prose. And to pace themselves if they’re daunted by the size of the tome.


Well, what was new to me in that 1985 (I think) reading was reading JRRT's spellbinding prose in the original.
I had read the German translation two years earlier, and had seen Ralph Bakshi's 1978 animated and rotoscoped film (which only went as far as Helm's Deep) shortly before that first reading.
So I was familiar with the story - up to a point. But then I have re-read it more than a dozen times since then for good reasons (and got myself a good hardback version at about the time that the films hit the cinemas, the 2002 edition illustrated by Alan Lee).


----------



## Halasían (Mar 10, 2021)

Alcuin said:
_
Too bad you saw the movies before you read the books. Same characters, different story.
Read The Hobbit before LotR. It’s amusing and light-hearted, and a fairly easy read. Then LotR will make more sense and be much more fun!
Don’t expect to understand what’s actually going on until you’re half-way through Fellowship. All the clues are there, but you’d have to be Hercule Poirot or Sherlock Holmes or Solomon to grasp the strands of hints and foreshadowing: don’t worry about them. (added later: ) Frodo and his friends don’t know why these things are happening, either, and you know basically everything Frodo knows.
Like all stories, there seem to be some dry parts. Slog through them; on later reflection, if you bother to read the story again (and again and again and again…), you’ll realize there are complex interactions between the characters taking place that later have tremendous impact on them and on the course of the tale.
Have fun! It’s too bad you can only read it for the first time one time.
_
This is very well said. I agree 99.8%!
The key is whether the 1st time reader has seen the PJ Fanfix or not. Yes, the post-movie kids have not all seen the movies, so there is still hope that fresh minds will experience the story as tolk by Tolkien vs the story as told by PJ.

What I will add is to read the prologues. There is a lot there to help give understanding, especially of Hobbits.


----------



## Shadow (Mar 16, 2021)

Halasían said:


> _Like all stories, there seem to be some dry parts. Slog through them; on later reflection, if you bother to read the story again (and again and again and again…), you’ll realize there are complex interactions between the characters taking place that later have tremendous impact on them and on the course of the tale._


The Minas Tirith chapter was something of a slog for me, pacing wise. But even then it establishes the remainder of the story and describes the city and its day to day life well. Tolkien's sequencing really is genius. People cite Tom Bombadil, but there's nothing superfluous about the plot itself. It all connects neatly and comes together in a satisfying package. By the end you feel at peace.


----------



## Ealdwyn (Mar 17, 2021)

Shadow said:


> The Minas Tirith chapter was something of a slog for me, pacing wise. But even then it establishes the remainder of the story and describes the city and its day to day life well. Tolkien's sequencing really is genius. People cite Tom Bombadil, but there's nothing superfluous about the plot itself. It all connects neatly and comes together in a satisfying package. By the end you feel at peace.


It's interesting which chapters are 'something of a slog' for different people. Perhaps we need a poll on least favourite chapters? 
I get really bored with The Land of Shadow, which is basically a whole chapter of Sam and Frodo clambering over rocks and getting thirsty, with a brief interlude pretending to be orcs. I know it serves the story in other ways, but it slows down the action at a critical point and I'm always tempted to skim it. 
YMMV, of course.


----------



## Olorgando (Mar 17, 2021)

Ealdwyn said:


> It's interesting which chapters are 'something of a slog' for different people. Perhaps we need a poll on least favourite chapters?
> I get really bored with The Land of Shadow, which is basically a whole chapter of Sam and Frodo clambering over rocks and getting thirsty, with a brief interlude pretending to be orcs. I know it serves the story in other ways, but it slows down the action at a critical point and I'm always tempted to skim it.
> YMMV, of course.


Grumble.

LoTR is not wall-to-wall hyperventilating action. Which may be something current film audiences expect these days - or more likely H'wood suits (a notoriously dim bunch, as suits are in all media markets) have been told audiences expect.

No, this (anti-) quest has lots of dreary slogging (here specifically it is very short-legged Hobbits on foot - no eagles yet (I just couldn't resist that dig 😈 )).
One point that many may miss is when Frodo and Sam climb up to the ridge separating them on their path from the plain they would need to cross to reach Mount Doom. And see that it is filled with masses of armed camps. Well, yes, these camps won't empty before the forces led by Aragorn to the gates of Mordor have gotten enough of Sauron's attention. Which diversion of attention empties the plain to give Frodo and Sam a practically unimpeded (if very much a detour) path to Mount Doom.

I don't question that opinions can vary about how much of the several boring long slogs in LoTR needs to be presented in detail; Rivendell to the pass on Caradhras (and then Moria), and the boat journey down the Anduin from Lothlórien to the falls of Rauros come to mind, or Aragorn, Legolas, Gimli & Co. through the Paths of the Dead via Pelargir to Minas Tirith. The first two are early, both in "Fellowship", and the last not the direct action leading to the destruction of the One Ring; critical *supporting* action, yes, but those three Hobbits (including Gollum) are decisive.

I don't mean to implicate that you are a hyperventilation addict probably only existing in the dim brains of suits, Ealdwyn. But the relentless cookie-cutting perpetrated by H'wood can still affect even the most skeptical - if only even the skeptics accept the highly skewed, and mostly unstated, assumptions. In LoTR terms, they always want to be Saurons to (our?) Istari. A hard cold look at their assumptions reveals them to be Wizards of Oz ... 🤑


----------



## Ealdwyn (Mar 17, 2021)

Olorgando said:


> I don't mean to implicate that you are a hyperventilation addict probably only existing in the dim brains of suits, Ealdwyn.


I hope not! 😂 😂😂

I think it's specifically that chapter, coming at that point in the story. There are several chapters in FotR that are much slower, but the pace in FotR as a whole is much slower, and the mission is less urgent. By RotK the pace has picked up considerably and we're building up for the final challenge of Mount Doom. It's exciting! Then after Frodo's rescue from Cirith Ungol it feels (for me anyway) that everything grinds to a halt for that one chapter.

It's a personal thing. Shadow said that they found Minas Tirith a slog, for example, but I really enjoy that chapter. And Minas Tirith is certainly not "wall-to-wall hyperventilating action"!


----------



## Olorgando (Mar 17, 2021)

Ealdwyn said:


> ... And Minas Tirith is certainly not "wall-to-wall hyperventilating action"!


No chapter or part of LoTR is wall-to-wall hyperventilating action. Nor are all (at least older) H'wood films.
I own a boxed set of the first four "Alien" films, all starring Sigourney Weaver. The first one was from 1979.
That title critter is more reticent here than Sauron in LoTR, almost an entirely unseen menace.
That is what suspense is about.
A word, is my impression, that no one in H'wood can define by now. Making them illiterate morons in my book ... 👿


----------



## Shadow (Mar 17, 2021)

Along with The Scouring of the Shire, The Tower of Cirith Ungol is one of my favourite chapters in the book. It’s full of courage, suspense and humour in how the orcs deal with one another. The Land of Shadow is what the book had been leading to, and I didn’t find it boring. I was soaking up the Mordor atmosphere.

I think I felt that way about the Minas Tirith chapter because Pippin‘s service to Denethor, which is the calm before the storm, doesn’t excite me as much as prior plot points. I understand why Tolkien did things this way though (to also show what Aragorn would inherit and improve, and to show the heroism of Pippin), but was looking for the storm to arrive so the rest of the story could begin.


----------



## Aramarien (Mar 17, 2021)

As others have mentioned, it depends on whether the new reader had seen the movies as to what to advise. 
I have always recommended that a new reader start with The Hobbit, stressing that it is a children's book and to read it for fun. Enjoying Bilbo's tale, and the character himself will be the hook to get the reader to want to know more and read LOTR. 
Those new readers that have seen the movies might be interested in the Prologue to start, otherwise, I might even tell them to start right off with the first chapter and to stick with it and don't give up.


----------

