I Need Help On Buying The LOTR Books

[BatKid]

Well, since the LOTR is already out in theaters and I'm going to see it this week, I want to read the books so I can finally read this magnificent novel.

If you can please go on AMAZON.COM (http://www.amazon.com) and search for lord of the rings in the books category, I would be thankful if you could find the best kind of package to buy since their are so many products. I like a package that's in hardcover so that should narrow it down a notch. Also, I want the books to be the original version or whatever, not edited or cut down like some books are. If you could find this product for me, I would really be thankful.

Also, can anyone please tell me if The Hobbit is a separate book in the LOTR Trilogy or it's the same book as "The Fellowshop Of The Rings". If someone knows the answer to this, please explain it to me in this thread.

Well, gotta go and open my presents now w/ my family, so....
MERRY CHRISTMAS AND HAPPY HUNNAKAH EVERYONE!!! :D

[Joe Tully]

Well, this is sort of a difficult request. I have only used my dad's old paperbacks, but I have seen this one big book containing LOTR in its entirety at the bookstore which I will point you towards. I've looked at this set a few times and it looks pretty cool, nice cover and everything.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0395193958/

The Hobbit is the prelude to LOTR and is not included in this box set; however, Amazon has a deal where you can buy LOTR and a copy of The Hobbit for a reduced price. There is a link for that on the page. If I were you, I would read The Hobbit first and then proceed through LOTR, since that's the order of the stories, and reading them in that order will probably make slightly more sense, though Hobbit is not necessary reading before LOTR. IMO you will appreciate the stories more if you read them in the intended order.

[killercroc]

Originally posted by Joe Tully
IMO you will appreciate the stories more if you read them in the intended order.

Definitely. There are quite a few cool things to notice if you read "The Hobbit" first.

[killercroc]

Then if you've got quite a bit of time and aren't afraid of being bored you can read "The Simarillion."

[BatKid]

That item you posted was one of the items I thought about to buy. But this item also came up that I thought was also great.

Click here to see the item (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0395489326/qid=1009263636/sr=1-2/ref=sr_1_79_2/102-6913823-5982558)

I juse wanted to know, since this is cheapeer and it has good cover art (which doesn't matter, really) should I consider this item or the one you originally posted with the all-in-one book.

Also, for the Hobbit book, I also found many other versions. If it wouldn't be a pain, I would be thankful if you could find me a hardcover edition that has the original story that Tolkien wrote. It would also help if it had a good cover (I always like looking and analyzing the covers before I read a book).

By the way, THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH FOR HELPING ME.... :)

[Joe Tully]

It's really hard to say, because everyone has different opinions on things, you know? I think that the big red book looks nicer, but this one is cheaper, so it's just a matter of which is more important to you. I would recommend going to a bookstore if you're worrying about it a lot, but if I was going to buy one of those sets, I'd get the red one, because I've seen it and I know that it is very nice. As for The Hobbit, I don't think that there have been any changes made to the story throughout the years, so just pick out whatever looks nice. If you're really worried about what it looks like, most book stores have lots of copies of LOTR since the books have been very popular this year, so you can go there and check them out. Here's a copy of Hobbit though

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0395177111/

[Maxie Zeus]

Originally posted by Joe Tully
As for The Hobbit, I don't think that there have been any changes made to the story throughout the years, so just pick out whatever looks nice.

Actually, there was a huge change in "The Hobbit" done by Tolkien himself.

Apparently, in the original edition Gollum reluctantly but willingly gives the Ring to Bilbo and even shows him the way out of the caverns. When Tolkien plunged into LotR he found that the this version did not make sense in the new book; he solved the difficulty by rewriting those sections of "The Hobbit" when it was reprinted.

Details of the changes and a fuller explanation can be found here (http://www.daimi.aau.dk/~bouvin/tolkien/changesofhobbit.html).

I've never come across a reprint of the first edition "Hobbit," and I doubt you could find it. The "new" version (the one consistent with LotR) is considered the canonical version anyway.

If you get both and read "The Hobbit" first, be aware that it is more consciously aimed at children, where LotR is altogether more "adult" in its treatment. It is perfectly possible to read LotR without reading "The Hobbit" first, as all the necessary plot points of the latter are recapitulated in the former.

[The Mad Hatter]

Cool, I hadn't heard about that. Thanks for the info!

[HellCat]

My mum got me a The Hobbit gift set for Christmas. It has the book, Bilbo's map, 8 postcards of Tolkien's drawings from the book and a CD of him reading the chapter where Bilbo meets Gollum. It's the latter version, which ends with him yelling "THIEF, THIEF, THIEF!" at Bilbo

[Samhaine]

I got the red leather box LotR for Christmas, and let me tell you it is worth every penny. It's a great edition. And at $20 cheaper than list price on Amazon, I'd definately go for it.

I also bought that version of the Hobbit (the green leather one JT mentioned earlier) for a friend, and it looked very cool.

[batboy2001]

I heard that Tolkien origanaly meant LOTR to represent WW2. Then, he changed it.

[Maxie Zeus]

Originally posted by batboy2001
I heard that Tolkien origanaly meant LOTR to represent WW2. Then, he changed it.

One of the rumors that Tolkien HATED and tried over and over to scotch. The basic mythology that LotR grew out of was well established long before the war, and the book was almost half-written when the war broke out. The "analogy" to WW2 is very superficial and from the author's POV entirely accidental.