I always assumed that the original, childish feel of the Hobbit was because while the Narrator of The Lord of Rings is Tolkein's character, whereas the Narrator of the Hobbit is ostensibly Bilbo's voice, not Tolkiens
This was the vibe I got too; The Hobbit is supposed to be Tolkien's translation of the portion of the Red Book of Westmarch written by Bilbo as a memoir of his travels, There and Back Again. It totally fits with Bilbo's personality that he would write in a more whimsical storytelling way while the portion written by Frodo, LOTR, was darker and more serious. The prologue to LOTR is honestly one of the most brilliant framing devices I've ever seen in any form of media and it ties together two works with such different tones very well.
@@Enerdhil I don't believe Bilbo himself wrote "The Red Book" specifically. He wrote There and Back Again and the Silmarillion, which was then compiled along with the Lord of the Rings by Frodo into the Red Book of Westmarch by Sam's descendants. The Gardeners compiled the Red Book of Westmarch, Bilbo wrote the first two portions of it. The Appendices were added later by Elessar's Royal Scribe iirc.
@@etienneporras7252 I was only responding to your comment about Bilbo being the narrator of The Hobbit. He started The Red Book. Of course, Frodo and Sam came later and contributed to it.
Tolkien was Committed completely to continually refining, checking and harmonizing all his written works. His hard work is clearly evident in the final product, unmatched, to say the least. For instance, I love the clarifying adjustment when he later added in the counsel of Elrond regarding the change of plot from the hobbit during “riddles in the dark” when Bilbo said “and if some have heard me tell it otherwise, I ask them to forget it and forgive me”…
It was also because of Christopher's editorial input of his father's drafts in letters back and forth to and from his father that JRR Tolkien constantly refined and worked on stories and worldbuilding. Christopher was a stickler for detail and continuity and would catch issues and inconsistencies and provide feedback for his father who would then revise his drafts.
I'm sure that Tolkien also understood how old stories varied based on who wrote them, which is another reason why the difference in tone between The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings makes them seem more "authentic", not less. I've always found that difference to be one of the great things about the whole work. The Hobbit is clearly told by a modern man who put together an ancient tale from some long lost telling of it, but The Lord of the Rings is more like a primary source, written by an ancient character from the past. I always loved the contrasts in that.
I think he should have continued with it, but not to replace The Hobbit entirely. This could have been a companion book with a different title, perhaps the previously used The Quest of Erebor. Something to exist separately from The Hobbit book. It could even perhaps have shifted its perspective to Gandalf. Let it be more focussed on his actions - allowing the reader to see the attack on the Necromancer etc…
I grew up living on the streets from 13 to 19 years of age. I'd take honest work if it were offered, but trying to find a proper job wasn't happening for a scruffy punk rocker even though I toned it down. So it happened that from time to time that I would find myself incarcerated in juvenile halls and such places of ill repute. I found that the hobbit and the lord of the rings were some of the best books to take one out of whatever cell they've found themselves in and put into foreign lands amongst foreign people. Though I consider Tolkien to be a bit long winded, that's not such a bad thing when all you have is time. I appreciate that you fill out the characters and their back stories and their futures. You've A new sub. Cheers
Part of the appeal of The Lord of the Rings is that it is a darker, more complex evolution of the world and tone of The Hobbit. By retro-fitting The Hobbit to better match LOTR, Tolkien would have inadvertently minimized its overall legacy; The Hobbit is the accessible gateway to the greater work for generations of young people. I first read it at 14, and as I matured to 16 and 17, LOTR provided themes and dynamics that I was more emotionally & intellectually mature enough for. Not everyone had my same experience of Tolkien naturally guiding me through young adulthood, but I'm sure many have. I think it's all perfect as it is.
Exactly! I read The Hobbit when I was 13 and started reading The Lord Of The Rings for the first time when I was 15. Tolkien's works deeply impacted my view of the world. I first read one of the German translations of LOTR though, which has a much more colloquial and easy-going tone than the original. I didn't read it in English until I was in my 30s.
@@honeybadger4245 That's interesting about the German version, but for the time period, that makes sense. I feel like if The Hobbit had the same tones and esthetic of LotR, not only would many younger folks be a bit overwhelmed with either the horror or the vastness of the lore - it likely wouldn't have been assigned by school teachers. Which is really where it gained traction in the States over generations. A lot of 8th and 9th graders were assigned things like Animal Farm, Lord of the Flies, To Kill A Mockingbird and The Hobbit.
The Hobbit trilogy definitely shows why Tolkien abandoned this rewriting. You can't give the Hobbit The Lord of the rings' spirit without sacrificing what makes the Hobbit the Hobbit.
The Hobbit is simply another aspect or faucet of the larger Middle Earth world, part of the bigger and more magically diverse picture. It really baffles me how badly modern Hollywood fails to see something so obvious and simple.
@@teleportedbreadfor3days but once you put it next to Lotr, you definitely see how different they are. At the end of the day, the Hobbit is still a children's book, while Lotr is for teens and adults. It's honestly impossible to make a successful adaptation of the two that take place in the same world.
I first read the Hobbit and LOTR in 1977 and I have never really stopped reading them over and over again. I read the Silmarillion when newly published. That's all fine and good. But today is so much better. Having analyses like this available, giving the opportunity to ponder the stories and back-stories, with insight provided by others who apparently were able to devote more time to it than I was is very refreshing. And I'll agree with others here that Nerd of the Rings is very high quality stuff. I'm impressed by Girl Next Gondor as well. There are others more mediocre. They still have something to say. But the really good ones are gems.
I love these videos about how Tolkien wrote his stories. They are such interesting facts and I would love to see more. Maybe a series about his earlier mythology and later revisions of the Silmarilion. Keep up the great work 👍
I didn't know about Tolkien's abandoned rewrite and subsequent revisions. All I knew were the changes made in "Riddles in the Dark," Gandalf's version of the quest, and his addition of specific dates to the journey. His rewrite makes me appreciate what Peter Jackson did with The Hobbit Trilogy even more.🙂
I remember how the authorized paperback editions had a disclaimer on the back that the Ace books were not authorized and should not be purchased. An amazing time-it only added to the books' mystique.
The Hobbit is a book I will read to my Grandson, The (Return Of The King And The Downfall of) The Lord of The Rings is a book that he (they) will have to discover themselves.
I'm glad it didn't change further. Bilbo was never truly harmed by the Ring, and I'm glad his cheerful voice is still the narrator. He had no idea yet how serious things actually were when he finished it.
10:20 well the ring may have made bilbo feel the need to muddy the waters of how he got the ring. Influence felt immediately regardless if the reader knows it's origin or not. It's like it unfolded with Tolkien himself and he put it together as he gained new insights too.
Your last sentence is true about Tolkien’s creative process, according to the experts who’ve studied his life and work. It was a process of discovery for him, of things slowly revealing themselves, and old ideas gaining new and deeper meanings and expanding and intertwining almost on their own!
As much as I love the Hobbit as-is, I think we're missing out on a version that's more aligned with LotR both in lore and tone. I'd love to read that. Though the more childlike tone of the Hobbit is what drew me in initially as a 10-year-old. Wish we could have both!
The Hobbit trilogy definitely shows what the rewrite would look like: definitely something great, something powerful, something part of Lord of the Rings , but it wouldn't be the Hobbit.
I LOVE this style of video from you. As much as I love your lore videos and history of Middle Earth, it would be so cool if you became a kind of "Steward of History and Unfinished Tales" and documented the history of Tolkien's writings with your usual outstanding research and knowledge. Cheers for the great video!
This channel and Tolkiens work helped pick me up from Rock bottom a few years ago, I hope it continues to flourish and bring joy to the middle earth community. The common ordinary folks, Hobbits. Looking forward to seeing more content, best regards
The History of the Hobbit is next up on my reading list once I finish The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien. Personally, I wish he had finished that rewrite; I think it would have been a fascinating read.
This video has my mind spinning imagining the possibilities of what could have been! I personally wish he had completed the fully revised version! I believe it would have been amazing!
I’m always surprised when people say “need cleaned” instead of “need cleaning “ or “need to be cleaned”, but it seems to be a more widespread construction than I realized.
This is a great upload. I find today's subject matter particularly fascinating. It seems you did a lot of reading of lesser known works to put together the information for this video.
Wow. Just when I believed I knew everything! This video is so captivating. I think all of Tolkiens' Hobbit changes would have enhanced curiosity in the larger world of Middle Earth. Well done.
Given what is said here about the proposed changes to Thorin's character in the rewrite, I suspect that Peter Jackson may have been aware of the abandoned rewrite and decided to incorporate some of the Dwarves' personalities into his version of The Hobbit. Some of the proposed changes to the dwarves' personalities seem to fit what we see in the films.
2:18: There was also that bit about a curious fox in Fellowship's "Three is Company" chapter. 6:57: Shame that didn't work well in Moria later. 12:05: Wise choice indeed. Orcs and goblins being the same in Middle-earth is still confusing though. This brings into mind books like Star Wars Legends' Bantam novels starting from the Thrawn trilogy, video games like the original Resident Evil trilogy before the Remakes showed up, and TV shows like Batman: The Animated Series; they're also obvious examples of "Early Installment Weirdness", but to be fair, would one wanna rewrite them so to make sure of a more canonically faithful, yet more prosaically dry, version of the tale so to fit just right with what came afterwards? Meantime, the very first Hobbit editions really should stay reprinted. They're outdated, sure, but they're neatly still canon as in-universe texts made by Bilbo himself before the Council of Elrond happened. Oh, and I'm glad we still got the Quest to Erebor bits in Unfinished Tales. Quite a neat piece of POV side material that changes how one views an original work, that one.
Never knew Tolkien attempted a more considerable rewrite of the Hobbit, will have to check out that history of book. It's understandable why he would feel motivated to do so in order to bring the book more in line with his other works, but thank goodness he ultimately didn't as the Hobbit stands as a classic of children's literature that is special in it's own way.
Some what ifs for you, my firend: What if Smaug or Shelob got the ring? What if Thranduil got the ring? What if the Blue Wizards had been successful? What if Balin had been successful? What if Smaug had attacked KhazadDûm or Belegost instead of the Erebor? But most of all What if Eärendil had sail the Fellowship to Mount Doom xD
I never saw the elves being called 'gnomes' - that would have been confusing. I'm still trying to figure out if goblins are, in fact, just regular orcs.
it would be nice to live in a world where Tolkien would have re-written the hobbit and written and completed The Silmarillion. it's a pity that we don't live in that world, who knows what we could have learned more from the Middle Earth. Great Video !
I still think The Hobbit’s narrator fits in the framing device just fine, because we are reading Tolkien’s translations of the Red Book. Considering Bilbo’s story is more child-friendly than Frodo’s, it would make sense that Tolkien translated it with the addition of a bit of first-person commentary and modern references. Whereas Frodo’s story was so much richer and more sacred and significant to the history he was translating, that he didn’t dare add anything to it.
I think there is much that is very charming about The Hobbit, especially as it is written for children. It's a good way of introducing our children to this lore without throwing them in the deep end with Lord Of The Rings, which is considered rather dry for many adults, let alone our own little halflings. No, I think Tolkien did right to do things this way.
I'm patting myself on the back, I remembered ALL 13 Dwarves name's in Thorin's company without breaking a sweat! 🤣. My copy of The Hobbit is 1990 publication, so I haven't read the original, but I am aware of the changes Tolkien made. Thanks Matt 👍. 🖖😎🤘🇨🇦
The amazing with Tolkien's writings is that you can spent your whole life study them and its not even enough to cover even the half of them!!!!! A great thing to dedicate your life!!!!
@Nerd of the Rings: could we possibly get a video of how you would go about making the Hobbit films if it was under your control? How would you make it different? What are some things about the current films that you agree with? Personally I feel that the Hobbit trilogy gets a bit too much hate. For what Peter Jackson was forced to do by the studios he managed to do a pretty good job with what he had. Despite questionable filming choices and writing choices (*cough Tauriel (who alone I think is an alright character, just never should’ve been shipped with Kili)) he managed to fit it in pretty well with the Lotr books and films which seems pretty similar to what Tolkien himself was doing.
If only Tolkien had edited out the lines about the express train and the creation of golf, which is literally my least favourite sentence in all his writings. Show me on his maps where the trains and golf courses are…
I'm sure someone else has commented this, and I could be misinterpreting, but I think I caught an error in this video: the quotation "the dragon passed like an express train," was indeed in the fellowship of the Ring, not The Hobbit. However, were Tolkien to do another re-write of Fellowship, he certainly would've removed modern "anachronistic" expressions such as that as well.
A very impotant change: "The feasting people were Wood-elves, of course. These are not wicked folk. If they have a fault it is distrust of strangers. Though their magic was strong, even in those days they were wary. They differed from the High Elves of the West, and were more dangerous and less wise. For most of them (together with their scattered relations in the hills and mountains) were descended from the ancient tribes that never went to Faerie in the West. There the Light-elves and the Deep-elves and the Sea-elves went and lived for ages, and grew fairer and wiser and more learned, and invented their magic and their cunning craft, in the making of beautiful and marvellous things, *before some came back into the Wide World. In the Wide World the Wood-elves **_lingered in the twilight of our Sun and Moon_** but loved best the stars; and they wandered in the great forests that grew tall in lands that are now lost.* They dwelt most often by the edges of the woods, from which they could escape at times to hunt, or to ride and run over the open lands by moonlight or starlight; and after the coming of Men they took ever more and more to the gloaming and the dusk. Still elves they were and remain, and that is Good People." Flies and Spiders Originally: “before they came back into the Wide World. In the Wide World the Wood-elves _lingered in the twilight before the raising of the Sun and Moon;_ and afterwards they wandered in the forests that grew beneath the sunrise."
Tolkien had very few bad ideas... And this rewrite was one of them. Another was the sequel to LOTR titled "The New Shadow." To Tolkien's credit, he recognized these as bad ideas and abandoned them. What an incredible genius.
Hey NotR, what music are you using in your videos? It's so contemplative and I'd like to worldbuild (and smoke my pipe) to it. I think my brain would subconsciously recall your vids and help me out. You credit all the art so I feel like I'm missing something with what your music is.
I'm not familiar with the Ace edition. My copies of _The Hobbit_ and _The Lord of the Rings,_ which I bought way back in 1978, are published by Ballantine and carry the inscription, "This Is the Authorized Paperbound Edition," which implies it was blessed by Tolkien's estate. Alas, they were apparently not printed on acid free paper as there's significant foxing. I do like them, though, because the cover illustrations are paintings that were done by Tolkien, himself.
Sorry, but the linked cover art on the first Ballantine edition (I also have copies, a treasure received from my grandfather) were not done by Tolkien, but by Barbara Remington. You can easily find details and images of the original online.
@@johnopalko5223Ok, well my apologies then. It seems we have different covers after all. I was assuming it was the very dramatic and beautiful three-part paperback cover of the first edition I have. Come to think of it, I have seen that illustration before, but I was not aware it was done by him. Thank you.
I wish Tolkien had completed the 1960 version of The Hobbit to have something more in line with the epic pace of the Lord of the Rings. . I can understand why he decided to abandon his task. A simpler introduction helps the readers to understand that initially nobody - not even Gandalf - realized that Bilbo had started by chance a chain of events that may lead to either victory over the Dark Lord or catastrophe for the free peoples.
Gandalf didn't need elrond to read the elf runes. He needed elrond to find the dwarvish Moon-letters. A bigger plot hole given all the dwarves present.
@@xshayahyawzi3666 Now I'm confused. I thought you were referring to Bilbo being in Riverdale when Aragorn was there. I am pretty sure your math is correct and Aragorn would have been 27 years old, which means he was likely not living there anyway. He certainly wasn't ten years old.🙄 The other poster referred to Frodo being in Bag End for 20 years- wasn't it 17 years? Anyway, that is LotR and not The Hobbit.
@@Enerdhil Okay lets try to figure it out but in reverse order Aragorn was 87 years old when he met Frodo. Frodo left the Shire after 17 years of bilbo's 111th birthday. So by that reckoning Aragorn was was 70 years old at the time of Bilbo's 111th birthday. And bilbo was 50 years old at the time of his adventure. Leaves ys a gap of 60 years. So yes what Aragorn was 87-17-60=10 years old at the time of bilbo's adventure. It was my fault that I missed that Frodo stayed in the shire for 17 years even though I am mainly a book fan. :)
Could you make a video adressing Gandalf's relationship with the other races as in how they perceive him. He seems to have some sort of diplomatic immunity. I can't seem to find a video that clarifies this point Ty
This turned out to be a brilliant move: two books for different audiences. First, you read Hobbit as a child. As you get older, you read LOTR. Also, we kind of got the revised version in the PJ's movie.
I'm fine with Legolas being present in the Narrative of The Hobbit. Being an elven prince, almost certainly grown, and in high standing of a reclusive kingdom, it would've been pretty hard not to see him, even if he was never outright named. Obviously he wasn't in the original story because he hadn't been conceived yet. Not really judging the quality of those films, which are pretty universally considered inferior. Just saying I understand the logic of adding him in, as connective tissue. As for Aragorn... the only reason I can think of why he wouldn't be in Rivendell during the events, is if he was spending time with the Dunedain and maybe learning their ways. He'd have been, what, 10? Certainly old enough to start squiring and assisting with stuff. And in lieu of being king, the assumption would have been that he would become a ranger and need to be familiar with their ways and the realm of Eriador/Arnor, so being away at the time IS logical.
I wish that woman who had said the sample rewrite was not the Hobbit had not said so. I know people love the Hobbit as it is, but I for one would have liked it to have been less childish and more epic, although an even more suspicious Thorin was not an improvement over the original one.
Im sure its a mixed bag but as others would say. Im pretty sure theres a good three hour movie in the trilogy if you chop off a lot of the fat, a big less cgi/green screen and tone down the cartoon physics. But its not nearly ad egregious as amazons filth Rings of Power.
@@anni.68 it simply just disrespects the source material (i know they're in their own universe, version of middle earth whatever you wanna call it) while clearly requiring pieces of the source material to function narratively, while saying they're doing their own thing. Not to mention the main character is a rude generally mean person who goes as far as to threaten gynecide of a species while absolutely nobody but the bad guys acknowledge that behavior. I could literally go on for paragraphs about how this plot line is contrived and not really worth any Tolkien fans time, but i can also leave a link to a good 12 hour or so break down as to why the show is bad put far better than i can. But the author of this series put more work into his video series than the show runners did into the show ruclips.net/video/EAam2VRq6wM/видео.html
I have only watched The Hobbit movies once. There are a lot of things to like, but many more to hate. I suppose PJ and Philippa had to include a female character to get women and girls into the theaters, but Tauriel?! Nooo!😱
@@trissy8820 I generally agree with everything you posted, but I am not sure The Hobbit series was any better than TRoP. I think the one thing that makes it hard to figure out why the show runners made the storylines they did was they did not have hardly any rights to The Silmarillion or Unfinished Tales. That means that if they had made a lore-accurate series, they would have been sued by the Tolkien Estate. My hat is off to Bezos for coming up with this scheme.. What an ingenious way for him to get the intersectional series he wanted based on the skeletal entries in the LotR Appendix B. He is forced to present a lot of new characters and events in the series to "fill in" what's missing from the Appendix. Take Galadriel, for example. She did very little in the Second Age, so if Bezos has Galadriel featured in season one, he is not violating his contract with the Tolkien Estate. See what I mean?
I don't know if you read comments, but if you do, I would ask for your forthright opinion on Peter Jackson's three part treatment of Tolkien's classic work, the Hobbit.
I always assumed that the original, childish feel of the Hobbit was because while the Narrator of The Lord of Rings is Tolkein's character, whereas the Narrator of the Hobbit is ostensibly Bilbo's voice, not Tolkiens
This was the vibe I got too; The Hobbit is supposed to be Tolkien's translation of the portion of the Red Book of Westmarch written by Bilbo as a memoir of his travels, There and Back Again. It totally fits with Bilbo's personality that he would write in a more whimsical storytelling way while the portion written by Frodo, LOTR, was darker and more serious.
The prologue to LOTR is honestly one of the most brilliant framing devices I've ever seen in any form of media and it ties together two works with such different tones very well.
The Hobbit started as a literal bedtime story for Tolkien's children.
Bilbo is the original author of The Red Book, so it had to be his story from his viewpoint.
@@Enerdhil I don't believe Bilbo himself wrote "The Red Book" specifically. He wrote There and Back Again and the Silmarillion, which was then compiled along with the Lord of the Rings by Frodo into the Red Book of Westmarch by Sam's descendants. The Gardeners compiled the Red Book of Westmarch, Bilbo wrote the first two portions of it.
The Appendices were added later by Elessar's Royal Scribe iirc.
@@etienneporras7252
I was only responding to your comment about Bilbo being the narrator of The Hobbit. He started The Red Book. Of course, Frodo and Sam came later and contributed to it.
Tolkien was Committed completely to continually refining, checking and harmonizing all his written works. His hard work is clearly evident in the final product, unmatched, to say the least. For instance, I love the clarifying adjustment when he later added in the counsel of Elrond regarding the change of plot from the hobbit during “riddles in the dark” when Bilbo said “and if some have heard me tell it otherwise, I ask them to forget it and forgive me”…
It was also because of Christopher's editorial input of his father's drafts in letters back and forth to and from his father that JRR Tolkien constantly refined and worked on stories and worldbuilding. Christopher was a stickler for detail and continuity and would catch issues and inconsistencies and provide feedback for his father who would then revise his drafts.
@@swordmonkey6635 they were a great team!
@@swordmonkey6635”damn the boy!”
Christopher is the reason he ever wrote the hobbit down to begin with.
I'm sure that Tolkien also understood how old stories varied based on who wrote them, which is another reason why the difference in tone between The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings makes them seem more "authentic", not less. I've always found that difference to be one of the great things about the whole work. The Hobbit is clearly told by a modern man who put together an ancient tale from some long lost telling of it, but The Lord of the Rings is more like a primary source, written by an ancient character from the past. I always loved the contrasts in that.
I think he should have continued with it, but not to replace The Hobbit entirely. This could have been a companion book with a different title, perhaps the previously used The Quest of Erebor. Something to exist separately from The Hobbit book. It could even perhaps have shifted its perspective to Gandalf. Let it be more focussed on his actions - allowing the reader to see the attack on the Necromancer etc…
Yeah, that’s exactly what I was thinking! I would love to read the rewrite, but not as a replacement of the original, just in addition to it.
I grew up living on the streets from 13 to 19 years of age. I'd take honest work if it were offered, but trying to find a proper job wasn't happening for a scruffy punk rocker even though I toned it down. So it happened that from time to time that I would find myself incarcerated in juvenile halls and such places of ill repute.
I found that the hobbit and the lord of the rings were some of the best books to take one out of whatever cell they've found themselves in and put into foreign lands amongst foreign people. Though I consider Tolkien to be a bit long winded, that's not such a bad thing when all you have is time.
I appreciate that you fill out the characters and their back stories and their futures. You've A new sub. Cheers
I love this man's dedication. It keeps the Tolkien's universe alive for me...
On a re-read it occurred to me that “the Narrator” in The Hobbit reminded me of Peter Falk in “The Princess Bride”.
I see some influence from C.S. Lewis in that style as well. The wry little asides to the reader remind me of the Narnia books.
Inconceivable! ;-)
Part of the appeal of The Lord of the Rings is that it is a darker, more complex evolution of the world and tone of The Hobbit. By retro-fitting The Hobbit to better match LOTR, Tolkien would have inadvertently minimized its overall legacy; The Hobbit is the accessible gateway to the greater work for generations of young people. I first read it at 14, and as I matured to 16 and 17, LOTR provided themes and dynamics that I was more emotionally & intellectually mature enough for. Not everyone had my same experience of Tolkien naturally guiding me through young adulthood, but I'm sure many have.
I think it's all perfect as it is.
I concur, Your Excellency.
Exactly! I read The Hobbit when I was 13 and started reading The Lord Of The Rings for the first time when I was 15. Tolkien's works deeply impacted my view of the world.
I first read one of the German translations of LOTR though, which has a much more colloquial and easy-going tone than the original. I didn't read it in English until I was in my 30s.
@@honeybadger4245 That's interesting about the German version, but for the time period, that makes sense. I feel like if The Hobbit had the same tones and esthetic of LotR, not only would many younger folks be a bit overwhelmed with either the horror or the vastness of the lore - it likely wouldn't have been assigned by school teachers. Which is really where it gained traction in the States over generations. A lot of 8th and 9th graders were assigned things like Animal Farm, Lord of the Flies, To Kill A Mockingbird and The Hobbit.
I agree, I read them when a child with no knowledge of either story and it was an unrivalled experience.
The Hobbit trilogy definitely shows why Tolkien abandoned this rewriting. You can't give the Hobbit The Lord of the rings' spirit without sacrificing what makes the Hobbit the Hobbit.
That wasn't the issue with the Hobbit movies.
@@Hero_Of_Old It was one of the problems.
The Hobbit is simply another aspect or faucet of the larger Middle Earth world, part of the bigger and more magically diverse picture.
It really baffles me how badly modern Hollywood fails to see something so obvious and simple.
The idea in my opinion is the hobbit was written as a children’s book. LOTR was written as a more serious book for adults. Plus many other things
@@teleportedbreadfor3days but once you put it next to Lotr, you definitely see how different they are. At the end of the day, the Hobbit is still a children's book, while Lotr is for teens and adults. It's honestly impossible to make a successful adaptation of the two that take place in the same world.
I first read the Hobbit and LOTR in 1977 and I have never really stopped reading them over and over again. I read the Silmarillion when newly published. That's all fine and good.
But today is so much better. Having analyses like this available, giving the opportunity to ponder the stories and back-stories, with insight provided by others who apparently were able to devote more time to it than I was is very refreshing.
And I'll agree with others here that Nerd of the Rings is very high quality stuff. I'm impressed by Girl Next Gondor as well. There are others more mediocre. They still have something to say. But the really good ones are gems.
I love these videos about how Tolkien wrote his stories. They are such interesting facts and I would love to see more. Maybe a series about his earlier mythology and later revisions of the Silmarilion. Keep up the great work 👍
Agreed, learning about his writing process is fascinating. Learning about the creative processes involved in great works by the masters is inspiring!
I didn't know about Tolkien's abandoned rewrite and subsequent revisions. All I knew were the changes made in "Riddles in the Dark," Gandalf's version of the quest, and his addition of specific dates to the journey. His rewrite makes me appreciate what Peter Jackson did with The Hobbit Trilogy even more.🙂
The whimsicality of The Hobbit is what makes it my favorite book
I remember how the authorized paperback editions had a disclaimer on the back that the Ace books were not authorized and should not be purchased. An amazing time-it only added to the books' mystique.
I love how the Hobbit is more whimsical. Glad that it wasn't changed
The Hobbit is a book I will read to my Grandson, The (Return Of The King And The Downfall of) The Lord of The Rings is a book that he (they) will have to discover themselves.
@@IlSqueakthis is such a weird comment
I'm glad it didn't change further. Bilbo was never truly harmed by the Ring, and I'm glad his cheerful voice is still the narrator. He had no idea yet how serious things actually were when he finished it.
Hell yea dude this is awesone and im glad i listen to ur advice lost tales was awesome
Now we know why Jackson had Thorin act the way he acted to BIlbo in the first movie.
If that's the case it explains Tauriel as well.
@@mbryson2899 how?
@@hudsonball4702 It is just as accurate to the apocrypha. The constant orc ambushes were another of PJ's inclusions that fits the bill.
@@mbryson2899Tauriel didn't appear in the rewrites though, they reached only Rivendell
10:20 well the ring may have made bilbo feel the need to muddy the waters of how he got the ring. Influence felt immediately regardless if the reader knows it's origin or not.
It's like it unfolded with Tolkien himself and he put it together as he gained new insights too.
Your last sentence is true about Tolkien’s creative process, according to the experts who’ve studied his life and work. It was a process of discovery for him, of things slowly revealing themselves, and old ideas gaining new and deeper meanings and expanding and intertwining almost on their own!
As much as I love the Hobbit as-is, I think we're missing out on a version that's more aligned with LotR both in lore and tone. I'd love to read that. Though the more childlike tone of the Hobbit is what drew me in initially as a 10-year-old. Wish we could have both!
The Hobbit trilogy definitely shows what the rewrite would look like: definitely something great, something powerful, something part of Lord of the Rings , but it wouldn't be the Hobbit.
I actually think the trilogy was not something great. They made it stressful and more like a video game. It was awful.
@@woody5476 I'm in the minority of really enjoying those films.
"great" and the Hobbit movies in the same sentence. This is a weird timeline.
@@jonatanrullman True. The Hobbit movies are more in line with "amazing" than with simply "great".
You are the most quality lotr channel. Every video is relaxing and enjoyable.
I LOVE this style of video from you. As much as I love your lore videos and history of Middle Earth, it would be so cool if you became a kind of "Steward of History and Unfinished Tales" and documented the history of Tolkien's writings with your usual outstanding research and knowledge. Cheers for the great video!
This channel and Tolkiens work helped pick me up from Rock bottom a few years ago, I hope it continues to flourish and bring joy to the middle earth community. The common ordinary folks, Hobbits. Looking forward to seeing more content, best regards
The History of the Hobbit is next up on my reading list once I finish The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien. Personally, I wish he had finished that rewrite; I think it would have been a fascinating read.
Right on the heels of a Tolkien Road Podcast episode. Happy Easter weekend!!!
This video has my mind spinning imagining the possibilities of what could have been! I personally wish he had completed the fully revised version! I believe it would have been amazing!
I’m always surprised when people say “need cleaned” instead of “need cleaning “ or “need to be cleaned”, but it seems to be a more widespread construction than I realized.
Reminds me of Walt Whitman's inability to move forward after Leaves of Grass and how he spent all of his productive years rewriting and rewriting it.
This is a great upload. I find today's subject matter particularly fascinating. It seems you did a lot of reading of lesser known works to put together the information for this video.
Wow. Just when I believed I knew everything! This video is so captivating. I think all of Tolkiens' Hobbit changes would have enhanced curiosity in the larger world of Middle Earth. Well done.
Given what is said here about the proposed changes to Thorin's character in the rewrite, I suspect that Peter Jackson may have been aware of the abandoned rewrite and decided to incorporate some of the Dwarves' personalities into his version of The Hobbit. Some of the proposed changes to the dwarves' personalities seem to fit what we see in the films.
Have you yet done a video on the full history of the writing of the silmarillion? Would be a great watch.
I suppose thats why the Forsaken Inn is on maps, but not referred anywhere I could find it
2:18: There was also that bit about a curious fox in Fellowship's "Three is Company" chapter.
6:57: Shame that didn't work well in Moria later.
12:05: Wise choice indeed. Orcs and goblins being the same in Middle-earth is still confusing though.
This brings into mind books like Star Wars Legends' Bantam novels starting from the Thrawn trilogy, video games like the original Resident Evil trilogy before the Remakes showed up, and TV shows like Batman: The Animated Series; they're also obvious examples of "Early Installment Weirdness", but to be fair, would one wanna rewrite them so to make sure of a more canonically faithful, yet more prosaically dry, version of the tale so to fit just right with what came afterwards?
Meantime, the very first Hobbit editions really should stay reprinted. They're outdated, sure, but they're neatly still canon as in-universe texts made by Bilbo himself before the Council of Elrond happened.
Oh, and I'm glad we still got the Quest to Erebor bits in Unfinished Tales. Quite a neat piece of POV side material that changes how one views an original work, that one.
Never knew Tolkien attempted a more considerable rewrite of the Hobbit, will have to check out that history of book. It's understandable why he would feel motivated to do so in order to bring the book more in line with his other works, but thank goodness he ultimately didn't as the Hobbit stands as a classic of children's literature that is special in it's own way.
I'm glad he abandoned it. The whimsical charm of the Hobbit is what makes the book so special.
"The dragon passed like an express train" is a description of Gandalf's fireworks - in the first chapter of Lord of the Rings!
Great insights, as always! Thank you for sharing 🍷
George Lucas: Star Wars Ultra Spacial Edition.
Tolkien: Hold my beer.
Bravo Nerd. That's really usefull. God bless your work. ❤
Fascinating video. Thanks for your awesome work.
Would have written in a character like Tauriel and shoehorn in a love story between her and Keely? LMAO
Some what ifs for you, my firend:
What if Smaug or Shelob got the ring?
What if Thranduil got the ring?
What if the Blue Wizards had been successful?
What if Balin had been successful?
What if Smaug had attacked KhazadDûm or Belegost instead of the Erebor?
But most of all
What if Eärendil had sail the Fellowship to Mount Doom xD
Thank you for another great upload!
Thank you so much - I had no idea that Tolkien had undertaken such revisions! 😊❤
I've always wondered! Thanks for this video!
When I need to get away I click on this channel and dive into the Tolkien world. I am currently rereading The Fellowship of the Ring
I never saw the elves being called 'gnomes' - that would have been confusing. I'm still trying to figure out if goblins are, in fact, just regular orcs.
it would be nice to live in a world where Tolkien would have re-written the hobbit and written and completed The Silmarillion.
it's a pity that we don't live in that world, who knows what we could have learned more from the Middle Earth. Great Video !
It would have been so cool if he had made a lord of the rings epic out of the Hobbit. It would be nice to have had both Hobbits in my cupboard.
It would likely have helped Jackson and company make a better trilogy without all the nonsense and manufactured story lines
Great video !
I still think The Hobbit’s narrator fits in the framing device just fine, because we are reading Tolkien’s translations of the Red Book. Considering Bilbo’s story is more child-friendly than Frodo’s, it would make sense that Tolkien translated it with the addition of a bit of first-person commentary and modern references. Whereas Frodo’s story was so much richer and more sacred and significant to the history he was translating, that he didn’t dare add anything to it.
Thanks a lot for this addon info 🙂👍
Nice work dude thanks
I think there is much that is very charming about The Hobbit, especially as it is written for children. It's a good way of introducing our children to this lore without throwing them in the deep end with Lord Of The Rings, which is considered rather dry for many adults, let alone our own little halflings.
No, I think Tolkien did right to do things this way.
I'm patting myself on the back, I remembered ALL 13 Dwarves name's in Thorin's company without breaking a sweat! 🤣. My copy of The Hobbit is 1990 publication, so I haven't read the original, but I am aware of the changes Tolkien made. Thanks Matt 👍. 🖖😎🤘🇨🇦
The amazing with Tolkien's writings is that you can spent your whole life study them and its not even enough to cover even the half of them!!!!! A great thing to dedicate your life!!!!
@Nerd of the Rings: could we possibly get a video of how you would go about making the Hobbit films if it was under your control? How would you make it different? What are some things about the current films that you agree with?
Personally I feel that the Hobbit trilogy gets a bit too much hate. For what Peter Jackson was forced to do by the studios he managed to do a pretty good job with what he had. Despite questionable filming choices and writing choices (*cough Tauriel (who alone I think is an alright character, just never should’ve been shipped with Kili)) he managed to fit it in pretty well with the Lotr books and films which seems pretty similar to what Tolkien himself was doing.
I wonder what the legendarium would look like if Tolkien had been given enough time to complete and perfect it.
I prefer to think The Forsaken Inn is still a going concern on the frontier of civilization. Like in LOTRO.
Yeah, LOTRO seems to pick up a lot of those threads
If only Tolkien had edited out the lines about the express train and the creation of golf, which is literally my least favourite sentence in all his writings. Show me on his maps where the trains and golf courses are…
Can you imagine Hobbits hitting a golf ball with those short arms? "next hole Par 19 🤪😂
Middle earth is our earth in the past. The narrator in the hobbit is basically a modern person, so you don’t need to worry about the trains.
I'm sure someone else has commented this, and I could be misinterpreting, but I think I caught an error in this video: the quotation "the dragon passed like an express train," was indeed in the fellowship of the Ring, not The Hobbit. However, were Tolkien to do another re-write of Fellowship, he certainly would've removed modern "anachronistic" expressions such as that as well.
This video blew my mind!!!! I had no idea Tolkien started a rewrite of The Hobbit 😱
I would have loved to read this re-write. I love the original Hobbit, but this sounds very interesting.
Theory vid idea: If Bilbo kept the ring in LOTR? Also, I'm looking forward to your New Zealand vid!(Please reply, it would be amazing!)
That was my exact request in Nerd of the rings previous video! I agree. What if Bilbo had kept the ring…
At 00:04 my brain saw a blue muppet figure-skating on a yellow lake... lol
I would listen to your narration of the books :)
This explains why Peter Jackson made so many changes to the movies. He actually used many different sources for the trilogy!
A very impotant change:
"The feasting people were Wood-elves, of course. These are not wicked folk. If they have a fault it is distrust of strangers. Though their magic was strong, even in those days they were wary. They differed from the High Elves of the West, and were more dangerous and less wise. For most of them (together with their scattered relations in the hills and mountains) were descended from the ancient tribes that never went to Faerie in the West. There the Light-elves and the Deep-elves and the Sea-elves went and lived for ages, and grew fairer and wiser and more learned, and invented their magic and their cunning craft, in the making of beautiful and marvellous things, *before some came back into the Wide World. In the Wide World the Wood-elves **_lingered in the twilight of our Sun and Moon_** but loved best the stars; and they wandered in the great forests that grew tall in lands that are now lost.* They dwelt most often by the edges of the woods, from which they could escape at times to hunt, or to ride and run over the open lands by moonlight or starlight; and after the coming of Men they took ever more and more to the gloaming and the dusk. Still elves they were and remain, and that is Good People."
Flies and Spiders
Originally:
“before they came back into the Wide World. In the Wide World the Wood-elves _lingered in the twilight before the raising of the Sun and Moon;_ and afterwards they wandered in the forests that grew beneath the sunrise."
Tolkien had very few bad ideas... And this rewrite was one of them. Another was the sequel to LOTR titled "The New Shadow." To Tolkien's credit, he recognized these as bad ideas and abandoned them. What an incredible genius.
Hey NotR, what music are you using in your videos? It's so contemplative and I'd like to worldbuild (and smoke my pipe) to it. I think my brain would subconsciously recall your vids and help me out. You credit all the art so I feel like I'm missing something with what your music is.
Yes.... Contemplative.😴
Im glad it stayed as is. I always loved hobbit better than lotr, i really wouldn't have liked those changes
I'm not familiar with the Ace edition. My copies of _The Hobbit_ and _The Lord of the Rings,_ which I bought way back in 1978, are published by Ballantine and carry the inscription, "This Is the Authorized Paperbound Edition," which implies it was blessed by Tolkien's estate.
Alas, they were apparently not printed on acid free paper as there's significant foxing. I do like them, though, because the cover illustrations are paintings that were done by Tolkien, himself.
Sorry, but the linked cover art on the first Ballantine edition (I also have copies, a treasure received from my grandfather) were not done by Tolkien, but by Barbara Remington. You can easily find details and images of the original online.
@@davidh.4944 I'm just going by what it says on the copyright page. Mine says, "The cover painting, Bilbo comes to the Huts of the Raftelves, is by J. R. R. Tolkien. © George Allen & Unwin Ltd., 1937, 1951, 1966."
The cover paintings of the Trilogy, also by Tolkien, are The Hills: Hobbiton-across-the-Water, Fangorm (sic), and Barad-Dûr, respectively.
What I have is the seventy-first printing, of November, 1978. Earlier printings may have had different cover art.
@@johnopalko5223Ok, well my apologies then. It seems we have different covers after all. I was assuming it was the very dramatic and beautiful three-part paperback cover of the first edition I have.
Come to think of it, I have seen that illustration before, but I was not aware it was done by him. Thank you.
@@davidh.4944 No worries. After scores of printings, it makes sense that there would be changes. I envy you your edition. Cherish it.
What song musical do you use in the background music. They use it in a world war 2 documentary
I wish Tolkien had completed the 1960 version of The Hobbit to have something more in line with the epic pace of the Lord of the Rings. . I can understand why he decided to abandon his task. A simpler introduction helps the readers to understand that initially nobody - not even Gandalf - realized that Bilbo had started by chance a chain of events that may lead to either victory over the Dark Lord or catastrophe for the free peoples.
Gandalf didn't need elrond to read the elf runes. He needed elrond to find the dwarvish Moon-letters. A bigger plot hole given all the dwarves present.
God bless you and your work sir 😇😇😇
I think a rewrite of The Hobbit would have been a good thing. To match the theme Tolkien worked out over the years in LOTR.
How would Aragorn be 10 years old then? He was 87 years old in Lotr which was set 60 years after The Hobbit. This implies he was 27 years old then.
Frodo spends 20 years in bag end before departing with the ring
@@mysondice ah yes, thanks for correcting me
@@xshayahyawzi3666
Now I'm confused. I thought you were referring to Bilbo being in Riverdale when Aragorn was there. I am pretty sure your math is correct and Aragorn would have been 27 years old, which means he was likely not living there anyway. He certainly wasn't ten years old.🙄
The other poster referred to Frodo being in Bag End for 20 years- wasn't it 17 years? Anyway, that is LotR and not The Hobbit.
@@Enerdhil Okay lets try to figure it out but in reverse order
Aragorn was 87 years old when he met Frodo.
Frodo left the Shire after 17 years of bilbo's 111th birthday. So by that reckoning Aragorn was was 70 years old at the time of Bilbo's 111th birthday.
And bilbo was 50 years old at the time of his adventure.
Leaves ys a gap of 60 years.
So yes what Aragorn was 87-17-60=10 years old at the time of bilbo's adventure.
It was my fault that I missed that Frodo stayed in the shire for 17 years even though I am mainly a book fan. :)
@@Enerdhil It was 17 years as frodo was 33 years old at bilbo's birthday and when he left the shire he was 50 years old. You are correct. :)
great video sir, i did not know he did that.
Could you make a video adressing Gandalf's relationship with the other races as in how they perceive him. He seems to have some sort of diplomatic immunity.
I can't seem to find a video that clarifies this point
Ty
This turned out to be a brilliant move: two books for different audiences. First, you read Hobbit as a child. As you get older, you read LOTR.
Also, we kind of got the revised version in the PJ's movie.
I'm fine with Legolas being present in the Narrative of The Hobbit. Being an elven prince, almost certainly grown, and in high standing of a reclusive kingdom, it would've been pretty hard not to see him, even if he was never outright named. Obviously he wasn't in the original story because he hadn't been conceived yet.
Not really judging the quality of those films, which are pretty universally considered inferior. Just saying I understand the logic of adding him in, as connective tissue.
As for Aragorn... the only reason I can think of why he wouldn't be in Rivendell during the events, is if he was spending time with the Dunedain and maybe learning their ways. He'd have been, what, 10? Certainly old enough to start squiring and assisting with stuff. And in lieu of being king, the assumption would have been that he would become a ranger and need to be familiar with their ways and the realm of Eriador/Arnor, so being away at the time IS logical.
Have you done a video on "The silent watchers" In chirit ungol?
10:28 to 11:08
12:04 to 12:11 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻🤨🤨🤨🤨🤨🤨🤨🤨🤨🤨🤨🤨🤨🤨🤨🤨👌🏻👌🏻👌🏻👌🏻👌🏻👌🏻👌🏻👌🏻👌🏻👌🏻👌🏻👌🏻👌🏻👌🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻
"In a hobbit in the ground ,there lived a hole"
voice over🔥🔥🔥🔥
Wonderful stuff
maps of valinor next please
does anyone know the name of the musice nerd of rings uses in this video? just curious
Fanfiction is underrated.
What if Saruman was right and the ring was lost to the sea?
"The Sea is always right." 🤪
Weird how much of this ended up in the Hobbit movies. Or in the purist fan edits that are the only versions I can stand to watch.
I wish that woman who had said the sample rewrite was not the Hobbit had not said so. I know people love the Hobbit as it is, but I for one would have liked it to have been less childish and more epic, although an even more suspicious Thorin was not an improvement over the original one.
Do you own a copy of the original 1937 Hobbit? I've heard that it's one of those books which is now only sold online for exorbitant prices.
Do Tolkien fans like the hobbit movies? or is it just me.
Im sure its a mixed bag but as others would say. Im pretty sure theres a good three hour movie in the trilogy if you chop off a lot of the fat, a big less cgi/green screen and tone down the cartoon physics. But its not nearly ad egregious as amazons filth Rings of Power.
@@anni.68 it simply just disrespects the source material (i know they're in their own universe, version of middle earth whatever you wanna call it) while clearly requiring pieces of the source material to function narratively, while saying they're doing their own thing. Not to mention the main character is a rude generally mean person who goes as far as to threaten gynecide of a species while absolutely nobody but the bad guys acknowledge that behavior. I could literally go on for paragraphs about how this plot line is contrived and not really worth any Tolkien fans time, but i can also leave a link to a good 12 hour or so break down as to why the show is bad put far better than i can. But the author of this series put more work into his video series than the show runners did into the show
ruclips.net/video/EAam2VRq6wM/видео.html
I have only watched The Hobbit movies once. There are a lot of things to like, but many more to hate. I suppose PJ and Philippa had to include a female character to get women and girls into the theaters, but Tauriel?! Nooo!😱
@@trissy8820
I generally agree with everything you posted, but I am not sure The Hobbit series was any better than TRoP.
I think the one thing that makes it hard to figure out why the show runners made the storylines they did was they did not have hardly any rights to The Silmarillion or Unfinished Tales. That means that if they had made a lore-accurate series, they would have been sued by the Tolkien Estate. My hat is off to Bezos for coming up with this scheme.. What an ingenious way for him to get the intersectional series he wanted based on the skeletal entries in the LotR Appendix B. He is forced to present a lot of new characters and events in the series to "fill in" what's missing from the Appendix.
Take Galadriel, for example. She did very little in the Second Age, so if Bezos has Galadriel featured in season one, he is not violating his contract with the Tolkien Estate. See what I mean?
@@Enerdhil I think Galadriel would not be happy to hear that she did very little in the Second Age 😄
I don't know if you read comments, but if you do, I would ask for your forthright opinion on Peter Jackson's three part treatment of Tolkien's classic work, the Hobbit.
It sucked.🤪
I was slightly miffed at the changes made in the LOTR films .. but what was done to The Hobbit was akin to blasphemy.
Can you make a new "what if video"? I would like to know "what if bilbo joined the fellowship"
He would have tried to get the ring probably, they would have went way to slow as he was old