I've just finished reading "The Hobbit"...

[Clansman]

To jump on this bandwagon (the oral tradition of Tolkien), I am a case in point. I read The Silmarillion first, then The Hobbit, LOTR, etc. and so on. Recently, I read The Hobbit aloud to my children, which is, I believe, the way that JRRT himself intended it to be enjoyed. It is a perfect way to present the story, as the punctuation supports breathing, intonation and the cadence of oral tradition.

My kids loved it, hanging on my every word, and it had the opposite effect that I intended (I wanted them to get sleepy, but they got excited instead). I adopted different voices very early on in the story (deep, Oxford English for Gandalf, a high tenor Victorian middle-class for Bilbo, and Scottish brogues of varying tones for the dwarves). The singing was fun, as was the verse, and I completely agree with PM, that Tolkien's prose is at its best when read aloud. One must remember, that the "era" (for lack of a better term) of which Tolkien is writing was an almost entirely oral tradition (think of Aragorn's recitation of Tinuviel to the hobbits at Weathertop). His style simply increases the depth of his creation.

I am currently reading my kids The Fellowship of the Ring. It has just begun to grip them (we just finished "A Knife in the Dark").

Apparently, Martin Shaw (Judge John Deed, etc.) has done The Silmarillion audio book with great success. I will pick it up as soon as I finally get my IPhone.

 

[Boaz]

pyan, I once heard an interview with Professor Tolkien. Either his accent (or mine) is so heavy, my hearing is terrible, or else my experience is extemely limited, but I only understood about one word in five. I was devastated that my hero spoke a separate language from me.

Clanny, Martin Shaw's version is stupendous! I recommend it for any travel over an hour.

 

[j d worthington]

pyan, I once heard an interview with Professor Tolkien. Either his accent (or mine) is so heavy, my hearing is terrible, or else my experience is extemely limited, but I only understood about one word in five. I was devastated that my hero spoke a separate language from me.

Clanny, Martin Shaw's version is stupendous! I recommend it for any travel over an hour.

Odd. I used to have recordings of Prof. Tolkien reading/singing (read: chanting) selections from LotR, and while he certainly had an accent, I didn't find it at all difficult; quite the opposite, in fact... I found his delivery and enunciation often quite musical. (This was especially true of his rendition of "Namárië" and the chant of the Rohirrim.)

As for reading The Silmarillion... many, many years ago, when my mother was suffering with cataracts, I made casettes of me reading The Silmarillion, The Hobbit, and Lord of the Rings and sent them to her. (I'd have read them to her in person, but we lived in different parts of the state.) Even today, when it comes to The Silmarillion, I tend to read that one aloud when just reading it for myself. The music of the language, the cadences, differing tones, etc., all greatly enhance the power of the tale itself. Which is fitting, as these are indeed supposed, in many ways, to represent the translation of oral tales recorded for posterity; tales which were part of a dying age....

 

[Boaz]

Odd. I used to have recordings of Prof. Tolkien reading/singing (read: chanting) selections from LotR, and while he certainly had an accent, I didn't find it at all difficult; quite the opposite, in fact... I found his delivery and enunciation often quite musical.

Soooo it is just me. Excellent.

I also have read Tolkien's works aloud, but for different reasons. Long before the films were planned, I began to prepare voices for all the characters so I could read to my unborn nieces and nephews and (still as of yet) unborn children and grandchildren. Anyway, it's intriguing how certain phrases and passages, that never impressed me as important, seemed to leap off the page.

I also have one caveat for those purchasing audio versions... Make sure it's the actual book and not a radio or stage adaptation. I made this mistake the first time I bought The Lord of the Rings on cd... and I still rue it.

 

[The Imp]

Soooo it is just me. Excellent.

I also have read Tolkien's works aloud, but for different reasons. Long before the films were planned, I began to prepare voices for all the characters so I could read to my unborn nieces and nephews and (still as of yet) unborn children and grandchildren. Anyway, it's intriguing how certain phrases and passages, that never impressed me as important, seemed to leap off the page.

I also have one caveat for those purchasing audio versions... Make sure it's the actual book and not a radio or stage adaptation. I made this mistake the first time I bought The Lord of the Rings on cd... and I still rue it.

I almost made that mistake as well Boaz. Fortunately, I had bought it at a local border's and noticed my mistake before i broke the seal on the shrinkwrap. i was able to return it.

I own the audio versions of the Hobbit and LOTR. Rob inglis narrates them and does a wonderful job. Almost at the level of Roy Dotrice's ASOIAF. WWW.recordedbooks.com appears to be the url, and their phone number is800.638.1304. I just checked Amazon, and they appear to no longer sell the set that i have.

 

[Eulalia]

Well, the only leather and gilt volume that I have on my bookshelf is JRRT. (and in my youth I invented a script and a rudimentary language, inspired by him) I don't think I will get such a special edition for GRRM, but I wil probably reread it more and the Storm of Swords is in two halves.

JRRT is great to read aloud. I haven't heard Dotrice, yet. But, I was reading a book on writing poetry at the same time as rereading ASOIAF. He pays a LOT of attention to the sounds and combinations of words. I was admiring his word choices.

Also, GRRM has done a lot of scriptwriting. It is plain that he can "hear" characters expertly and has wonderful dialogue. He is fabulous at conveying character with their speech.

 

[Young stormlord]

Well, all those are good things, of course, but are just problems to me. *sour smile*


I have learned how to read on songs of my people, epic poetry, some of the songs going around for more than 200 years before getting written down in 19th century, so you can be sure that when it comes to epic, I KNOW epic! I can appreciate symbolism of fantastic elements (for example, hero’s wife burning the wings of his winged horse to betray him; hero’s sword hands losing strength when he cuts through his enemies and realises that he’s all alone on the battlefield, that he’s brothers and cousins have died there and only their horses remain, riderless) . I can appreciate oral tradition, because, historically speaking, very small part of general population knew how to read and write.... But there’s my problem with it.

When I’m reading a book, I’m reading a book. I’m not singing a two hundred pages long epic (which I did once), I’m not reading it to anyone else but me (or even reading it aloud), I’m not listening to anyone reading it to me. No, I’m reading a book.
Line on the page, eyes, brain.
There’s no throat or tongue involved (at least not after I was about eight or nine) and there certainly aren’t any ears. It’s not a movie, it’s not a theatre, it’s not a reading/song on mp3. It’s a book. And you (or at least me ) expect certain things from the book, things other mediums do not have. Things Hobbit and Silmarilion almost completely lacked and LOTR had very little of, just a few handfuls.

Somehow, I’ve found epicness sorely lacking in Hobbit, and sort of epicness oversaturation in Silmarilion.
In “The Hobbit”, good guys find two (supposedly) badass swords. Swords are given badass sounding names, and we are told that thousands and thousands of Orcs were slain by each sword and that the swords themselves were worn by many elven heroes (no names given for one of them). And I know I should be in awe on that information and party certainly is, yet I am not. I feel as if certain convention of epicness wasn’t respected, wasn’t completely followed to its natural conclusion.
Why? ‘Cause I don’t know what makes those swords awesome. Do they have magical gems in their hilts? Were they made from thunderbolt iron? Do they have magic runs/painted eyes on their blades? What do those runes do in battle, except for looking cool? Were those swords made by Aratemly, son of ancient dwarf King Glodan, who also made Galadriel’s battle armour, Lohiel’s sword and helm and also iron chains from which Great Horn of Minas Tyrith hangs? Hell, that description alone would have made them badass and epic. Too bad it doesn’t show up in the books, though. :-|.

I also like word plays, written puns even, and partial medium of Pratchett ( to wit: “He could think in italics and such people need watching out, for they can do just about anything.” or “It was gilt by association.”), I like the books not taking ‘themselves’ seriously...
And when I read a book that IS taking itself seriously, I actually expect it to show something for it... or at least turns around at the end and say “Ah, all of this was just a joke all along.” When it doesn’t, I feel vaguely disappointed.

As I said before, I think I know epic when I see it. When the writer/singer describes hero as:
“He has a sword with eyes on the blade, blade that never sleeps or misses, no enemy can stand it or sneak behind him, he is not afraid of anyone but gods themselves.” that’s sort of epic.
Especially when you add that he has a flying horse that can jump/fly over walls of HIS city and castle, all of it said in sing-song ‘bardish’ voice... Well, it’s definitely right in the middle of epic expectations. And, when he takes a quarter of enemy army even without aforementioned sword... well, then we have a proverbial fantasy hero.

The Hobbit lacks it. Silmarilion goes to the other side, passes epicness horizon and never stops going. I won’t write much about it, I’ll just say its all epic and myth, with a little story in between. As it should be, since it IS mythology book about creation of world and start of evil.

I personally think it is medium evolution, just the same as with film. First movies were simple, of people driving bicycles, jumping up and down, trains getting into station, etc. For someone who had never seen one in their whole life, they produced a sense of wonder and awe. Then that sense of wonder passed and you needed a (simple) story in the movie, a reason to watch it. Then the sound came and the colour afterwards, giving more tools to tell the (now more complicated) story. Then came special effects and they were used to advance the story further. Finally, CGI animation came along and then 3D animation and Hollywood studios forgot about the story and are still trying to ride awe and wonder 3D creates (for now).

I know this might sound harsh to most people on this thread, but Hobbit (and LOTR and Silmarilion) was like a black and white soundless movie (and sixties colour movie, and forties western, respectively) to me. And I can’t shake a feeling that most people here are not objective (btw, I know I’m not, for the reasons explained in this and my previous posts), for one simple reason: it was the first fantasy book you’ve ever read.
You went to the movie theatre for the first time, saw the black and white train getting into station and it produced real feelings, real wonder and awe (or maybe saw original King Kong, as an example. It makes no differences, since the comparison still stands.) And then comes me that has seen metaphorical “Blown with the wind” as his first movie and “Terminator 2” as his second... and belittles your first experience, without knowing what he does wrong.
Or maybe tarnishes your childhood memories, I don’t know. I just know that no offence was meant or intended on my part and that this turns out to be very interesting discussion. Discussion about what could be considered classics and are certainly different tastes.


Sorry for another enormous post, by the way.