The hobbit

[Dillan]

In my opnion, this was a really book to start the trology

[Justin]

it wasn't meant to

[Wayne]

I think the hobbit can stand on its own with out The Lord of he rings. However I love them all.

[Sparrowlicious]

Dillan wrote: "In my opnion, this was a really book to start the trology"

*hysterical laughter*

afölsdj
sorry

[Haidi]

@ Sparrowlicious....what the hell was your post meant to mean or accomplish?

If you were just being down right rude, then your showing your maturity...

[Michael]

Well, if you want, you can see the Silmarillion as the first book, however, both Silmarilion and the Hobbit can be read seperately, the Lord of the Rings can't be torn apart.

[Richard]

Michael wrote: "Well, if you want, you can see the Silmarillion as the first book, however, both Silmarilion and the Hobbit can be read seperately, the Lord of the Rings can't be torn apart."

Got to agree with you there, Michael.

[Beaird]

I loved the Hobbit-- it was one of the first books that really opened my imagination. I was pretty young at the time, and Lord of the Rings may have been a bit too advanced for me, but I couldn't get into the trilogy. I was really disappointed at the time. I also tried Silmarillion but couldn't get going with that either. So I think Hobbit stands on its own and is much more entertaining than the others.

[Wayne]

Silmarillion = ZZZzzzz

If that had been the first book then I may not have read the rest.

For all of the Tolkien books it was the least entertaining. Even Tom bombadil has for interest..