First time visiting /lit in all of my years of browsing 4chan. I have mainly been lurking /b and have never posted any threads as I have felt no desire to do so, until now.
I can't tolerate the mass of cancer posted in /b and you guys honestly seem to know what you're talking about so I thought I'd come here in aid of advice.
Basically it has come to my attention that Peter Jackson is an asshole who poorly portrays the stories of middle-earth and in no way captures their full potential as masterpieces of the literary fantasy world.
I have come to the decision to purchase all of the necessary volumes of Tolkien's tales, money is not an issue and so what I'd like to know is what books to buy and in what order should I read them. If it's still unclear, I'm referring to The LOTR, The Hobbit, The Silmarillion, UT etc.
I am well aware of his other work but I will not be reading them soon so they need not be mentioned ITT.
Any advice is greatly appreciated, please don't let me down /lit.
Bumping with the prick that has basically already moulded my views of middle-earth. Save me /lit.
You may also want to read this:
No need to bump lad, this is a slow board.
Read the The Hobbit first. It's a less dense and more fun to read than the others, and comes before LotR anyway. Read the main series afterwards, followed by Silmarillian, his other fiction, etc.
Thanks friend, I'm not aware of the rules/customs/norms of this board so that's good to know.
Also, what about Unfinished Tales? I read on various sites such as Quora that these volumes are also relevant to the story, of course I could be wrong.
Peter Jackson's adaptation, while it cuts a lot of corners plot-wise, is actually on the mark with the tone of the original. Don't forget that Tolkien was writing the story as an excuse to use his little verse snippets and made up languages. He didn't give too much of a shit about the narrative or writing style, and it shows. Overwritten, inconsistent, cardboard-cut out mythology. It isn't very good.
No, the main influence he had was that everyone now makes up languages for their novels and species, and everyone has a "well there's elves--but they're not called elves--and orcs--uh, though they're called Aaeeiioouuiopes, a rare tribe from middle ea- I mean Center Mars yeah!" ... and the stories revolve around a not-ring of power that's wanted by not-sauron who is not-evil and a quest by two or more not-hobbits to end the evil
As usual you'll wanna lurk a while to learn the way of the board.
Things to be aware of:
We have board memes
We're fairly elitist, but in a good way
Starting with the Greeks is a good thing
Read UT after Silmarillion
I'm aware of the chronology of the events that took place, I'll be interested no matter how dense the books, I got forced to read Oedipus Rex and King Lear as part of my college course, the feels.. I just need to know the order in which I should read of all of his works that are relevant to middle-earth.
The Children of Hurin is a fucking great book, way better than Silmarillion, which I view as sort of a novelty that Tolkein did in his spare time.
In all honesty I'm not really interested in the literary aspects of the books, just the stories they tell. I don't know, maybe you're a lot harder to impress than me but the whole idea of Tolkien's writings really captured me and caught my interest as I am not usually as much of a reader as I am an academic.
I think that even from the "story" standpoint you could fun better stories in literature. Again, LotR isn't well written -- it's actually a pain to read, and it's not nearly as fun as the movies. Peter Jackson saved Tolkien from himself.
The Hobbit is a great children's book. And I mean great as in, one of the best there is. But the LotR's story is an afterthought. It's the usual "descent into hell" story. You could look almost anywhere for something better. Even within Genre Fiction.
Thanks for the input bud. Is this tale in any way related to the middle-earth volumes such as those I am already aware of or is it a separate tale completely?
Either way i'm quite interested, I have nobody IRL to discuss these matters with as I come from a very working-class area where people are quite stupid. Literally the input I get here is all I will ever get.
Since you seem like a beginning reader (ie, beginning to actually like it) I would recommend Illiad and Odyssey and other epic literature like the Song of Roland or Beowulf (which btw Tolkein has an annotated version of).
There is a condensed mention of Hurin in Silmarillion, but Children is a hugely expanded version and is a far from uplifting tragedy set before/during the fall of Morgoth written in rather high english. It was mostly done, and edited by his son, which I normally hate (like in Dune), but this was obviously a labor of love.
Thanks, I've read a version of Beowulf as a kid in a rather high level English class, seemed genuine but who knows it may have been shortened. It was definitely a great read though, yeah perhaps I should state that i'm only now beginning to like it habitually, rather than only now becoming familiar with it. Saying this for anybody else who may become confused, thanks for pointing it out.
>Peter Jackson is an asshole who poorly portrays the stories of middle-earth and in no way captures their full potential as masterpieces of the literary fantasy world
He actually did a feckin' good job of the LotR films (I've avoided the Hobbit ones). Doesn't have the same richness of setting as the books (which is the books' best feature), but then that was never going to happen in three films anyway.
How has nobody called out this reddit bullshit?
Anyway despite all the Spielbergian campiness, the films were really great adaptations. Didn't capture the oldness of the world and the scholasticism but it captured the scope and scenes far better, not to mention the pacing and characterization is flat out improved. Hobbit was complete shit though.
>passionately wants to have a better understanding of the LotR universe
i'm not surprised