Half a Century of Reading Tolkien: Part One

Half a Century of Reading Tolkien: Part One

I’ve been trying to remember when I first read The Lord of the Rings and it must’ve been when I was ten or so, meaning in 1976 or early 1977. I say this because my dad bought me The Silmarillion for Christmas and it was published in September 1977. That means I read The Hobbit when I was nine or so. Coming up on 59 next year, it means I’ve been reading Prof. Tolkien’s work for nearly fifty years.

Rankin & Bass Bilbo and Gollum

I assume I came across The Hobbit on my dad’s shelf next to his living room chair. It’s where he kept the various books he was reading at any given time. His habit was to stay downstairs till midnight or one, reading and listening to WQXR, the New York Times’ old classical station. I’d definitely read it before November 1977 when the Rankin & Bass The Hobbit premiered. As a side note, my dad tried to get our first color TV before it aired, but he wasn’t able to.

I didn’t read LotR right away, but when I did, I found myself in competition with my dad to finish them. With only the single set of books in the house, we read them in tandem. I remember rushing home from church to see if I could grab The Fellowship of the Ring before my dad had finished reading The New York Times that morning. Even though some days I got the book before him, he read faster and more often and finished several days before me. Hey, I was only ten.

the Grimms’ devils & demons by Lucille Corcos

I grew up on fairy tales of all sorts, but particularly the unexpurgated Brothers Grimm stories. Lots of death, murder, cannibalism, witches, and demons were my standard fare. The editions we had were profusely and grotesquely illustrated. Those sorts of stories plus books like the D’aulaires Book of Norse Myths, meant by the time I read The Hobbit, I was ready and well-primed for it.

It remains a great read, and easily one of the most memorable fantasy stories I read early on. In Bilbo Baggins, Tolkien created the perfect stand-in for young readers. A bit naive, a bit scared of the dark, and, still, ready and waiting for adventure. Everything past the Shire’s boundaries was as new and enthralling for me as it was for him. The book is so vivid and so impressed on my mind from my very first read, if not word-for-word, I think I could do a pretty good job retelling the story from the very beginning. Fairy tales, I knew, were old stories, told and told again over the centuries. The Hobbit, even if it drew on that folklore tradition, was an original story and it whetted my appetite for more. It’s a straight line from that book to all my other fantasy reading over the following half-century. Before it pointed me to Moorcock, Wagner, and Howard, though, it pointed me to The Lord of the Rings. And in my case, that meant the editions with Barbara Remington’s phantasmagorical cover illustrations.

Covers by Barbara Remington

I spent some time puzzling over them trying to connect them to Tolkien’s prose. Sure, that’s Hobbiton to the left, Shelob’s lair and the Nazgul in the center, and Mount Doom and a battle on the right. They’re so stylized, though, that I wasn’t quite sure what to make of them. I mean, are those cassowaries on the cover of Fellowship? What’s that running through the woods? What is going on?

by Michael K. Firth

They, more than any of the covers since, are The Lord of the Rings covers for me, though. Those with Tolkien’s own paintings are fine, but the others are all too precise or realistic. Remington’s preserve the strangeness that the stories held me for me the first time I read them. My visions of Moria, Orthanc, and Minas Tirith were unburdened by decades of storytelling set in mock-medieval European settings. They rose off the page like the alien creations they were. The Hobbit and LotR were the first actual fantasy books I read. Fairy tales are set in fairy tale land, hazy and indistinct in their settings. Tolkien’s stories were the first I can recall that were set in lavishly described realistic landscapes with protagonists with some sort of characterization that went beyond stalwart prince or cunning soldier and mixed it with barrow wights, sword-wielding demons, and oathbreaking ghosts. That they’re also the basis for the original cover of the parodic Bored of the Rings only reinforces my love for them.

Tolkien and his books were just becoming commercialized when I first read them. The Brothers Hildebrandt produced several extremely well-selling calendars. Everyone and his brother wrote encyclopedias of Middle-earth or books explaining just what Tolkien meant. The extreme end of this trend was, I’d argue, the careful creation of The Sword of Shannara (read my review here), followed by stacks of books wherein doughty commoners trudged into some dark lord’s land accompanied by a small band comprised of elves, dwarves, and men.

Everyone I was friends with, by which I really mean everyone, read, or at least tried, to read Tolkien. We were all proto-fantasy nerds and it was great. The books were everywhere and I loved it. It felt like I was part of some special order that was privy to something extraordinary. Looking back, I think that was true.

When I told the luminous Mrs. V. how old I was when I read LotR, she asked me if I understood it. Without hesitation, I said yes. I did understand it, but mostly on a basic level, as an exciting tale of adventure filled with magic and monsters. What I missed at ten, came with later readings;  an overwhelming sense of a fading world which darkness threatens to overwhelm and endlessly eroding the strength of those arrayed against it.

All the ruins and tombs that littered the land around the Shire are the broken remains of realms lost to the darkness.  Vast swaths of Middle-earth are devoid of civilization and population having been devastated in past wars, barbarian invasions, and by plague. Some of the greatest powers that have stood against Sauron for thousands of years have decayed in the case of Gondor or succumbed to his temptations as has Saruman.

Covers by JRR Tolkien

Reading The Silmarillion the first time around was mind-boggling. It was not the book I was expecting at all. It was a collection more like the collections of Norse and Greek myths I read than Tolkien’s previous novels. I wanted more LotR and instead, I got the Old Testament of the Elves. Notwithstanding, I got my first sense that Middle-earth was a broken world — quite literally in The Silmarillion. It was a place where evil constantly lurked and sometimes even marched out of its strongholds and crushed everything. It was a place where pride and arrogance constantly led to downfall and self-destruction. I got my first hint of what I had missed that first time around in LotR.

Tolkien described the book as “fundamentally religious and Catholic.” With further readings, while I might not have gotten that explicitly, I did see the moments of grace and Christ-like sacrifice that were essential elements of The Lord of the Rings. That they were manifested in a fallen world made them only more powerful. It became clearer with each reading that LotR was more than an epic adventure story. I’ll explore these in future articles about the individual volumes over the next few months. You see, I’m in the midst of another read of LotR, inspired by a rewatch of Peter Jackson’s movies.

I put Jackson’s Fellowship of the Ring on a few weeks ago for background noise and was immediately reminded of how much I’ve come to dislike it and its sequels. Again, I’ll go into more detail in later pieces, but suffice it to say, my distaste was enough to inspire me to pull out the real thing, open the cover and read those first lines:

When Mr. Bilbo Baggins of Bag End announced that he would shortly be celebrating his eleventy-first birthday with a party of special magnificence, there was much talk and excitement in Hobbiton.

In future installments I’ll write about the individual books of The Lord of the Rings; The Fellowship of the Ring, The Two Towers, and The Return of the King (if you’re very good, I’ll write about Bored of the Rings, as well). This will involve derogatory opinions of the Jackson movies as well as less harsh ones about Ralph Bakshi’s strangely appealing animated movie and even Rankin and Bass’ song-filled cartoon. I’m not sure how much anyone needs to read about Prof. Tolkien’s books at this point, but I really do feel the need to write about them. I hope you’ll follow along and tell me all your opinions about the books and movies, as well.

The Bridge of Khazad-dûm by the Bros. Hildebrandt

Fletcher Vredenburgh writes a column the first Friday of the month at Black Gate, mostly about older books he hasn’t read before. He also posts at his own site, Stuff I Like when his muse hits him.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

25 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Thomas Parker

My first read of 2024 – just a year ago – was the Lord of the Rings. (I even took notes for a BG piece that I was obviously too slow off the mark with!) The last time I had read it was forty years ago, when I was stationed in Korea, and I had read it for the first time in the mid to late 70’s, in high school. I look forward to seeing how our experiences of the books (and their media interpretations) do and don’t match up!

Thomas Parker

One reaction was directly prompted by the four decades between my last reading and my most recent one (besides realizing just how much I had forgotten). It was prompted by a younger colleague (half my age, I guess) seeing me reading Fellowship while we were waiting for a staff meeting to begin. She loves the movies but has never managed to make it through the books. Why? “So much walking, walking, walking!” I had to concede that she’s right about that, but it made me realize – when the Jackson films (which I like more than you do – the first three anyway; I hate the Hobbit trilogy) came out, people were judging the films by the books. Now, however, for most people who read them, the books are being judged by the films. For younger people especially, I imagine that makes a big difference. Makes me glad to be an old codger…

Last edited 1 day ago by Thomas Parker
rrm

I’m looking forward to the upcoming articles. My impression of both the books and movies are practically identical to yours. I do admire the effort that went into the films; I just find the deviations from the books to be grating.

Eugene R.

A discussion of “Bored of the Rings”, you say? Perhaps pity will stay your hand, Mr. Vredenburgh. “It’s a pity I’ve run out of bullets,” thought Dildo.

Matthew

I read the Lord of the Rings for the first time when I was 13. I think I had trouble separating them from real life I was so in to them.

You read the original Grimm? I haven’t but I gathered that they were a lot darker than the Disney films. (Which I stopped liking sometime around 7 years old. I’d figured out the world was a broken place by then so they seemed childish.) I did read a book of original Greek Myths and one of Arthurian Mythology which I found in my church’s library. I was shocked at the story of Arthur trying to drown baby Morded.

Matthew

Yeah, I sometimes wonder if the way we seem to coddle children nowadays is a good thing. I was real sensitive when young so there were definitely things that scared me, but I’m not sure coddling is good in the long run.

Bob Byrne

I just finished Andy Serkins’
unabridged audiobook of ‘Fellowship.’

You know I love Tolkien. But I have so come to prefer the LotR movies to the books. The pace is SOOOO slow in the books. It actually drags.

I can spend hours reading History of Middle Earth volumes, lost in the minutia of world building, and the epic scope of the Elves’ saga. But hobbits walking, and being emotionally angst-ridden, can be like watching paint dry. The movies reduce that effect (though not enough, actually).

We disagree, I know. But I will probably stay in the movies, HoME, and The Silmarillion, the rest of my life, rather than re-read the trilogy again.

And if I could eradicate one character from fantasy history, it might well be Tom Bombadil.

But I will, of course, be reading your series!

Some day I need to finish my epic poem on the history of the Nauglamir and the silmarillion it contained. I’ve got like 55 verses so far.

Tolkien was amazing. But the LotR has become a slog for me to read.

Last edited 20 hours ago by Bob Byrne
Bob Byrne

And a tangential item – Any Tolkien fan who games, should give Lord of the Rings Online, a try.

It uses the old Turbine engine and graphically and play style, it’s not up to par with Elder Scrolls Online, Age of Conan, and likely the other big name ones I don’t play.

But it’s ABSOLUTELY soaked in Tolkien. The lore is wonderful. You feel like you’re in the Shire. Arnor is my favorite area so far, and it’s absolutely wonderful. It really does seem like the legacy of the world-building.

LotR takes some getting used to actually playing, but it’s a loving homage to Tolkien’s world and story-building.

Jim Pederson

Thanks for the article Fletcher. My journey into reading fantasy is a bit different from yours but touched on a couple common points. I watched the Rankin Bass “Hobbit” first and picked up the book when we had to find a book for independent reading in eighth grade (’78). I loved it and asked a friend who read the genre to suggest what to read next. He suggested “The Sword of Shannara” which I also enjoyed. My freshman year in high school I picked up “The Fellowship of the Ring” and couldn’t finish it. It was too slow. I eventually went back to it and read the trilogy (and the Simarillion) I am not a fast reader and I have a lot of books on my TBR shelf so I rarely reread a book. I did reread the trilogy before watching the movies which I thought were very well done ( to be honest, I don’t rewatch movies either, too many books to read).
Thanks also for your link to your review of “Sword of Shannara” I enjoyed the review and it led to your review of “Lord Foul’s Bane” a book that it seems you can’t have a tepid opinion of . Keep the articles coming, they are appreciated.

Joe H.

My first encounter with Tolkien would’ve been at age 10 in 1977 when the Rankin-Bass Hobbit aired. Within maybe a month or two at the most I had read both Hobbit and LotR for the first of I don’t even know how many times — probably something around 20. And sometime around 7th or 8th grade I’d added the Silmarillion into the mix. LotR remains my absolute favorite book of all time, bar none. One thing I’ve noticed more in my subsequent readings is the sense of PLACE that the text evokes — you get the feeling that the Fellowship is traversing actual landscapes, not just walking past painted theater backdrops.

Last time I read them was in 2020 — I had started a reread in February, I think, which by unhappy coincidence was EXACTLY the right time for me to be revisiting my most comforting of comfort reads.

Dale Nelson

A fourteenth reading of The Lord of the Rings (except for the appendices in RotK) was just finished last year. The latest I could have started reading Tolkien was the first half of 1967. An elderly friend read the “trilogy” first in the late 1950s. These are books for one’s life.

The “walking bits” are essential. I remember something the film-maker Werner Herzog wrote (note especially the final sentence):

“Humans are not made to sit at computer terminals or travel by aeroplane; destiny intended something different for us. For too long now we have been estranged from the essential, which is the nomadic life: travelling on foot. A distinction must be made between hiking and travelling on foot. In today’s society – though it would be ridiculous to advocate travelling on foot for everyone to every possible destination – I personally would rather do the existentially essential things in my life on foot. If you live in England and your girlfriend is in Sicily, and it is clear that you want to marry her, then you should walk to Sicily to propose. For these things travel by car or aeroplane is not the right thing.

“The volume and depth and intensity of the world is something that only those on foot will ever experience.”

DN

K. Jespersen

It will be fascinating to read what you write about Tolkien’s works and the creations that sprang from them. There’s a wistful sort of, “I don’t understand, but I want to know” in reading why people love certain books that don’t appeal to me.

My first brush with anything Tolkien-derivative was apparently when I was two, and my parents put on one of the animated movies. They said that I loved it. I don’t remember it at all, so I wonder if their delight at how well “Where There’s a Whip, There’s a Way” described the drudgery of their jobs at the time is coloring their memories.

My first reading of anything Tolkien was when I was twelve or thirteen. “Tales of the Pentamerone,” Grimm, Greek, Norse, Irish, and Native American mythologies, and the Silver Brumby series were all years in my past. It was an afternoon in summer, I was all caught up on Brian Jacques’ Redwall novels and John White’s Lightbringer series, and I’d just finished David Eddings’ Belgariad. I was jonesing, pacing the house in the full-on throes of reading addiction, unable to drive to the library and confronted by the cruel fact that the shopping village I was allowed to walk to held no book store. A candyshop, but no bookstore. A toy emporium, but no book store. A wonderland of rocks and science, but no bookstore. So, as I ground my teeth together, furiously scanning the shelves in my house for something– anything!– that I was allowed to read but hadn’t, yet, it was the perfect storm to guarantee that whatever I found would be adored. When I pushed a chair to the hutch so I could fetch down my mother’s old copy of “The Hobbit,” the thought on my mind was, “Everyone says this is good. Everyone. Let’s see what’s in it.”

I sat down to read. And I slogged. Surely, the predictable and sometimes very foolish actions of these characters were just the beginning, and they would get better. Surely the descriptions of landscapes and peoples’ habits would immerse me, soon. Surely the flavor of ashes that the book gave off would go away, because nobody could possibly like a story that tasted of ashes. (Naive? Yes, and twelve or thirteen.) Surely, surely. And then I ran out of pages. Somehow, the adventure ended without anything having gotten better. The book had given me my fix, but it had left me in the sort of troubled, disappointed malaise that made me want to go outside to kick tussocks of grass and wing sharp rocks at trees.

Weeks later, my mother asked me if I’d liked “The Hobbit.” She was quick to assure me that LOTR itself was much better, and that I should try it. So I did. More unimmersive scenery and cultures. Two genuinely good characters who were making sacrifices, only to be forced into sacrificing more and more. So much pointless suffering. So much sadness. So much tiredness. And everywhere, always, the flavor of ashes.

I couldn’t finish. For years. For years, I couldn’t read them, I couldn’t listen to them, and the less said about watching the movies (especially when surrounded by a gaggle of people holding a prurient interest in Gimli and Legolas interacting) the better. It wasn’t until I read Joseph Loconte’s “A Hobbit, A Wardrobe, and A Great War” a few years ago that I finally understood why I don’t like Tolkien’s books: I read World War I in them. And the War wins. Sure, in the stories, good triumphs over evil, mostly. But even then, the War remains. The War is roaring from the pages. It does not and will not heal.

…It’s saddening to feel this way about books loved by so many. So it is always both a puzzle and a pleasure to read what someone else enjoys and values about them, to learn what might just drown out the War, if only approached from just the right angle. I look forward to reading and learning your angle.

25
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x