the hobbit [reading]
what surprised me most of all about "the hobbit" was the ease of the reading itself. i thought that a tolkien book would be a difficult read as it would be complicated due to the many characters and places to keep track of, with lots of details and history inbetween. instead, it was rather simplistic most of the time. i suppose difficulty lies with "the lord of the rings" and "the hobbit" is simply a primer. now i don't feel so intimidated to read the ring trilogy, which is waiting for me back at home.
the other thing that surprised me was how sort of boring and uneventful the book was. there was nothing epic or grandiose about it. i definitely do not envision this one as a major motion picture. the cartoon version of it always bored me as a kid, (in fact i hated it), so growing up i was never excited over anything tolkien. the rings must be much better as it is the second most read book in the world.


Comments
The Hobbit is definitely the more "innocent" and yes, simplistic, in comparison to the Rings Trilogy. I suppose the Hobbit is nice in it's simplicity - a kind of introduction to Bilbo, who in sense starts out as a very "narrow" character and then grows and finds that he possesses inner strength and uses them to overcome various obstacles. In a sense, he becomes a traveler. Instead of spending his remaining days in Hobbiton. So, then we cut to Lord of the Rings...and here he is - traveled, wise, and knowing. A far cry from the spastic, paranoid Bilbo we first met. A perfect metaphor for life - as the Trilogy.
Posted by: April | March 19, 2005 4:25 AM