I read the Lord of the Rings about 15 years ago and I've

>>8795432
The Hobbit is more important to the story of LoTR than the Silmarillion. Silmarillion is deep lore, and it's certainly not strictly necessary because it was published after JRR died.

That's a nice edition by the way, I have it.

>>8795456
It's likely not the one I have unfortunately. I'm getting it for a Christmas present from the in-laws but I'm planning to set aside some time in the New Year to read some more. Thanks Anon, I guess I can read my beat up Trilogy book knowing I'm not missing out on much.

>>8795432
It works very well regardless of the order you read them in, perhaps it would make your experience of LotR different if you read Silmarillion first though.

>>8795465
Just so you know, I'm not saying it would be a bad idea to read Sil first, just that you won't be lost in LoTR.

btw Silmarillion is a lot different and can be pretty dense/boring. imo that's OK, since it makes it feel like a real collection of myths like the bible or something.

>>8795480
Now I'm doubting myself, argh.

>>8795495
I'd been told as much. Though honestly, I read Lord of the Rings about a year or two before the films came out, I was about Eleven or so but I still found them fascinating.

>>8795465
The importance of The Silmarilion is the recapitulation of themes to get a sense of how tolkien perceives good and evil. There are alot of parallels that really highlight the things that are important to know

>>8795432
Don't give up on Silmarillion. It starts slow and tedious but gets better and better. I was thinking to myself: "What the fuck am I reading?"

But hundred pages later, you get Beren and Luthien and you may end up reading the book three times in a row to make sure you didn't miss anything.

Also don't read it before LotR or Hobbit. It's weird but knowing all the background takes away some excitement of it. Then again, you will notice incredible amount references and connections in LotR AFTER reading Silmarillion.


IMHO you should read Hobit>LotR>Silmarillion>Hobit>LotR


It's like fucking a virgin. Pop the hymen and fuck here again tomorrow.

>>8795432
I got half-way through the Silmarillion.

It's interesting stuff lore-wise, but I remember it being written in such a straight-forward way that I found my concentration drifting all the time. There were times where it reminded me of Old Testament shit, like X begat Y begat Z etc.

>>8795432
You should read Hobbit>LOTR>Silmarillion>Children of Hurin

>>8795432
>Will I see the LotR in a new light having read the Silmarillion first, or is it not strictly necessary?

You will get an occasional reference to the old days in LotR. For example, Gandalf tells Frodo that not even Ancalagon would melt the Ring. If you read The Silmarillion, you will know who Ancalagon was.

Heroes, warriors, battles. That kind of stuff.

Not required though.