Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

mid-world_lanes t1_j5ngkji wrote

I’ve re-read The Lord of the Rings something like 20 times on paper or on a screen, and 4 or 5 more times as an audiobook.

I totally agree with you on the feeling; if I’m feeling overwhelmed by life it’s incredibly comforting to immerse myself in a familiar story.

11

chatbotte t1_j5sk9p5 wrote

The first time I got my hands on The Lord of the Rings I read it once in just a couple of days (very little sleep), then immediately read it through once again. Then I had to return it to the library.

Since then, I got my own copy (actually I think I have three now), and read it again a few times. For the last 20 years I've kind of settled to reading it once every summer, slowly, enjoying it.

4

missly_ t1_j5ob6ak wrote

I have trouble getting through it for the first time lol. It's a good book, but to me really boring at times

2

mid-world_lanes t1_j5piem8 wrote

It is written for a mid-20th century audience, so the pacing is definitely a bit different from what modern audiences expect.

Entertainment media today tends to be much faster paced (movies especially but books as well). But part of the reward of reading older books is getting a sense of what reading audiences of the past were into. After a bit of practice and immersion I think most people are able to shrug off the “present day bias” and enjoy the story for what it is.

If you press on to the end of chapter 10, book 1 the story picks up quite a bit and settles into the more exciting epic tone that characterizes the rest of the text.

4

missly_ t1_j5pnvfi wrote

It's not that. I've read some old books, quite a few from Agatha Christie, some stories from Poe, also S. Fitzgerald. They were a bit more fast paced.

I think for me it's the fact, that for over 100 pages they basically walk through the woods haha. I like their food breaks the most for now lol. I will keep reading, hopefully it will pick up that exciting tone you're talking about!

2

mid-world_lanes t1_j5po31l wrote

Get to chapter 10, it’s a pretty different story from there onwards.

3

ackthisisamess OP t1_j5oqqh8 wrote

I want to try lord of the rings but it seems a bit daunting. I'm planning to first try the hobbit and see how it goes. I was wondering, are the books confusing/involve many characters to remember?

2

mid-world_lanes t1_j5pgg5v wrote

I don’t think it’s especially confusing. I first read it when I was 13 and I did ok with it even then. It’s among the most popular works of fiction ever so I think it must have fairly broad appeal.

Definitely start with The Hobbit though, it gives very important background. The writing style in The Hobbit is much more aimed at children however. The LotR begins with a somewhat similar style and transitions through the first few chapters into a more mature and epic tone.

Some people struggle to stay interested through the first few chapters of the LotR, my advice if that happens to you is to just press on until the end of chapter 10, book 1 (“Strider”). That chapter is where the LotR really settles into the tone that characterizes the rest of the story.

There are quite a few mysterious references to things in the history of Middle Earth that you will not understand. Don’t worry about them; Tolkien intentionally scatters these “textual ruins” through the story. These are meant to make you feel like the story you are reading is set in a world with a real history, but you as the reader are not supposed to understand them. The mysteriousness of these references is the point. You can read The Silmarillion (and the wiki) afterwards to understand the what these textual ruins are about.

3

ackthisisamess OP t1_j5s138l wrote

Thank you so much for the detailed comment. I'm definitely interesting in reading it but I often struggle to step out of my comfort zone for books, as I have this funny rule of needing to finish a book once I start (even if I've lost interest). Hopefully I will muster the courage to try it out!

3