Navigate/Search

There and back again

So after 18+ months, we’ve finally finished The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings. Not too bad for something achieved largely in 15 – 20 minute chunks, with the occasional time out for less-intense stories. Also, The Return of the King took a lot longer than it otherwise might have – for the last few months, The Boy has been wanting to read on his own for bedtime, so he’d read his own stuff for a week or so and then come back for a couple of nights of being read to, then another week on his own, and so on…

So now that we’ve finished, what does he want to do? Why, he wants to start over again. With The Hobbit.

Oy.

At least this time it should go a lot faster… He’s reading The Hobbit on his own.

11 Responses to “There and back again”

  1. Doug Says:

    To this day, I’ve never managed to finish the full LotR. As an adult, I made it farther than I did as a kid. Tom Bombadil killed it for me this time around.

    The Hobbit, on the other hand, rocks.

  2. Balls and Walnuts - more than you ever wanted to know » Thirteen blasts from the past Says:

    […] static’s ring cycle thursday […]

  3. Doug Says:

    To this day, I've never managed to finish the full LotR. As an adult, I made it farther than I did as a kid. Tom Bombadil killed it for me this time around.

    The Hobbit, on the other hand, rocks.

  4. protected static Says:

    It’s definitely meant to be read aloud – there are definite rhythms to much of it. And for whatever reason, I found Bombadil much more compelling this go ’round.

    Reading it aloud also forces you to pay much more attention. Much as reading Harry Potter out loud *really* highlighted many of Rowling’s weaknesses, so to did reading LotR aloud show up some of Tolkien’s weaknesses. Some of them may be inherent limitations in English – for instance, there probably really are only a few discrete ways in which one can describe mountains off in one’s distance.

  5. protected static Says:

    It's definitely meant to be read aloud – there are definite rhythms to much of it. And for whatever reason, I found Bombadil much more compelling this go 'round.

    Reading it aloud also forces you to pay much more attention. Much as reading Harry Potter out loud *really* highlighted many of Rowling's weaknesses, so to did reading LotR aloud show up some of Tolkien's weaknesses. Some of them may be inherent limitations in English – for instance, there probably really are only a few discrete ways in which one can describe mountains off in one's distance.

  6. sxKitten Says:

    It took me 3 tries to get all the way through LOTR – I kept stalling in RofK. Which makes it kind of odd that I’ve only read The Hobbit once, in grade 2. Maybe I should consider a re-read.

  7. sxKitten Says:

    It took me 3 tries to get all the way through LOTR – I kept stalling in RofK. Which makes it kind of odd that I've only read The Hobbit once, in grade 2. Maybe I should consider a re-read.

  8. Doug Says:

    Hmm, maybe that’s why I took such a dislike to Rowling — I was reading HP out loud to Jake. Interesting.

  9. Doug Says:

    Hmm, maybe that's why I took such a dislike to Rowling — I was reading HP out loud to Jake. Interesting.

  10. protected static Says:

    Doug: I swear that you could turn “Harry, Ron, and Hermione” into a drinking game… And a potentially lethal one, at that.

    sxK: Eh. If it doesn’t work for you, it doesn’t work for you. Personally, even though I love LotR, I think I’d rather shove roofing spikes into my urethra than try to read The Silmarillion again. I’ve tried 5 or 6 times; it’s a decided no-go.

  11. protected static Says:

    Doug: I swear that you could turn "Harry, Ron, and Hermione" into a drinking game… And a potentially lethal one, at that.

    sxK: Eh. If it doesn't work for you, it doesn't work for you. Personally, even though I love LotR, I think I'd rather shove roofing spikes into my urethra than try to read <i>The Silmarillion</i> again. I've tried 5 or 6 times; it's a decided no-go.

Leave a Reply