Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Recently bought The Silmarillion and found my dad's really old copies of LOTR and The Hobbit from his childhood he passed on to me when I was a young 'un. I remember getting pretty far in the Hobbit, but stopping for some reason. Been getting back into actually reading in my free time, and figured I might try these books again in future. If Silmarillion is a creation myth, should I start there, or should I read something like Beren and Luthien, for example? I'm not trying to get massively into the lore, just want to experience it in the best way possible. What order is recommended?

1. The Hobbit

2. The Lord of the Rings trilogy

3. that's it you're done.

The Silmarilion and all the rest are more supplementary materials that you can take or leave IMO.

The Silmarilion is like reading a RPG Sourcebook. It's interesting if you want a deep dive of everything - but not something I recommend to a casual reader.

I'd start with the LOTR. The Hobbit lacks so much in comparison. It would be a shame if being disappointed with the Hobbit put you off reading the LOTR.

If you like it so much that after finishing you read various appendices and find them interesting, you may try Silmarillion. Skim the first era part, though.

Cyel wrote:
I'd start with the LOTR. The Hobbit lacks so much in comparison. It would be a shame if being disappointed with the Hobbit put you off reading the LOTR.

If you like it so much that after finishing you read various appendices and find them interesting, you may try Silmarillion. Skim the first era part, though.

I was by no means disappointed, it's just that I was a child. Doodling in my school copybooks and annoying my little sister probably took priority and I probably forgot about it. I did see the peter jackson films with my dad later on though (they were masterpieces), and the hobbit films. They were decent.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Lathe Biosas wrote:
The Silmarilion is like reading a RPG Sourcebook. It's interesting if you want a deep dive of everything - but not something I recommend to a casual reader.

That's a very good explanation. Thanks for coming in clutch once again, Lord Biosas.

The Hobbit, followed by The Lord of the Rings.

The Hobbit
LOTR
The Silmarillion*

The Silmarillion is my favorite of his works. I think it plays to Tolkien’s strength, his love of lore. Some of it is quite slow, but most of it is interesting, like reading a really long WHFB codex with more literary depth and fewer bad puns.

*You can also just pickup the complete novellas from it, such as the Sons of Hurin or The Fall of Gondolin.

The Hobbit and Lord of the Rings are very different in tone, but you really do want to read them in order.

The events in The Hobbit establish a lot of elements that then develop into major parts of Lord of the Rings; plus it introduces you to a lot of world concepts along the way.

I wouldn't miss it out.




Everything after that is basically fleshing out the world. You've got The Untold Tales, The Silmarillion and a few books that are basically enlarged stories from Tolkien's notes where one of his children/grandchildren has expanded on them.

Also note that there are a LOT of books that he never wrote that appear when you start searching. Basically if there isn't a Tolkien as the author; then its a summary/review type book written by someone else for hte most part.
They can be a lot of fun; some are very detailed, but they are very much for after reading the big core books of The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings

 bullisariuscowl wrote:

Cyel wrote:
I'd start with the LOTR. The Hobbit lacks so much in comparison. It would be a shame if being disappointed with the Hobbit put you off reading the LOTR.

I was by no means disappointed, it's just that I was a child. Doodling in my school copybooks and annoying my little sister probably took priority and I probably forgot about it.

Yeah, that's the thing with the Hobbit, it's much more of a book for children and it is possible that after or even while reading it an adult reader would give up on the entire Tolkien thing expecting more of the same. I am wary of making recommendations like "you need to trudge through the first two seasons of the series which are boring and infantile but they set up the third season which is awesome" because I know I wouldn't want to waste time trudging through something mediocre for an uncertain reward, I'd give up earlier or just not try at all. My time is precioussss like that.

And you can get what LOTR is about without reading the Hobbit first (I read these books like that). That's why my recommendation is to go straight for the best part - LOTR - and maybe go back to the Hobbit later and treat it as a prequel fleshing out some events that LOTR only mentions in passing.

Given that you can smash through the hobbit in a couple of days, I would recommend reading it first as a gentle entree into the world of middle earth

Like others have said, Hobbit, LOTR and skip the Silmarillion. Honestly I'd also recommended skipping the song bits in LOTR too!

Also if you see some supporting books by a fellow named David Day, the battles of Tolkein etc, then I strongly recommend avoiding!

I would say you should read the Hobbit because I think it is great - a lot of people prefer it to LOTR (I like them both about equally). It's much more of a children's story and much more whimsical, and shows a much less nailed down Middle Earth which I like.

Then obviously LOTR. When reading LOTR if you're finding the songs and so on hard going, you can generally skip them without missing too much. They're not plot essential, more for the feel and immersion into the setting. They often reference things you might find out more about in the Silmarillion.

The Silmarillion is more like a history book than a narrative novel. It hasn't got a plot as such and it doesn't really have much in the way of dialogue or characters. If you loved LOTR I'd say give it a go, but Hobbits are barely mentioned, as it's mostly the history of the Elves. I found it was much more pleasant to listen to because there is a poetic quality to a lot of the prose.

The other books like the Fall of Gondolin or the Children of Hurin are more like examinations of drafts of unfinished or unpublished work. You can get much the same experience by reading the Book of Lost Tales, Unfinished Tales or the History of Middle Earth series. But I'd only really recommend them to a super enthusiast. Fall of Gondolin is an interesting read if you liked the Silmarillion.

I should hasten to point out that The Hobbit is a childrens book in terms of being much more accessible reading, but its not a dumbed-down for kids experience.

It's more apt to describe it as an accessible adventure and quite honestly could easily be classed as "young adult".





Also one way to read the Silmarillion that I found was - read random chapters. Each Chapter is basically a snippet of worldbuilding and it can jump you past some of the early ones where there's a long list of "Glorine son of Dorin son of Boffin etc..." where you really feel that if he'd been given a graphic of a family tree to put in the book it would have been so much simpler.

 Overread wrote:
I should hasten to point out that The Hobbit is a childrens book in terms of being much more accessible reading, but its not a dumbed-down for kids experience.

It's more apt to describe it as an accessible adventure and quite honestly could easily be classed as "young adult".





Also one way to read the Silmarillion that I found was - read random chapters. Each Chapter is basically a snippet of worldbuilding and it can jump you past some of the early ones where there's a long list of "Glorine son of Dorin son of Boffin etc..." where you really feel that if he'd been given a graphic of a family tree to put in the book it would have been so much simpler.

My copy has a whole appendix of family trees at the back. It helps, but you basically have to keep a thumb in them so that you can flick back and forth whilst reading!

Read the Hobbit first, not because it's that essential to understanding the Trilogy, but because if you can't force yourself through the Hobbit, you're going to really struggle with the rest of his works. The Hobbit is also written very episodically, each chapter sort of resolves itself by the end. It was clearly written as a series of betime stories for kids.

Then as soon as possible, read the Trilogy. As others have said, when the songs or poetry get a bit much (and some are in Elvish), you can kind of skip ahead. The first third or so of Fellowship can drag, which is one reason reading the hobbit pays off, you're at least somewhat attached to the idea of hobbits and hobbit life. The movies cut pretty much immediately from the ferry over the Brandybuck to Bree, in the books that's multiple chapters. After that, the only other real slow part is the 50 page lore dump that is the council of Elrond, but it's important to understanding the stakes and motivations.

After you finish Return of the King, take a breath and when ready read the appendices. They provide a lot of great background and context, but in a much more straightforward manner than in the Silmarillion.

so, you've read the four canonical books, and you want more Tolkein. The obvious suggestion is the Silmarillion, but I'm going to zag. After your first read through of the trilogy, I suggest watching the Peter Jackson films, extended edition, and really get a sense of how much he got right, but also what he... interpreted.

After that, I think you're better served reading the trilogy a second time, this time focusing less on the plot and more on the details. Read the poems, read the songs, enjoy the imagery.

Only then should you tackle the Silmarillion. I'm not a big fan of it. It's very dry, and there's a simple reason: it wasn't meant to be published. It was finished and edited after Tolkein's death by his son and another author. It's essentially canonical, and locked in much of the earlier history of middle earth. At it's best, it conveys the sheer scope of the wars against Morgoth and also answers the question of "why are elves like that?"

After that, the books and materials are increasingly deeper excavations of Tolkein's notes and correspondence. YMMV.

The Silmarillion, quite appropriately, reads very much like you are listening to a very long Professor's speech about the history of Middle Earth.

I absolutely love world building, but I have attempted several times to read it without great success. The beginning is especially dry, and feel like it adds a new named character every third sentence that might not ever be mentioned again.

If I recall correctly Tolkien wrote in English and in the Western tradition so I would suggest reading it from top to bottom and left to right.

 Ahtman wrote:
If I recall correctly Tolkien wrote in English and in the Western tradition so I would suggest reading it from top to bottom and left to right.

I swear this joke feels like it would get a laugh from the man himself.

A mistake many make with picking up the Silmarillion is thinking its 1 book. Its actually 5 books and appendices, many of which are written "in-character" by characters in Tolkein's universe.

1) Ainulindale: Music of the Ainur. Written "In-character" as a translation of a historical text by a fictional historian. It details the creation of the world. Mostly to be used as reference for the other books, but it is quite beautiful in its own right.

2) Valaquenta. A description of the Valar and other heavenly beings. It is "in-character" written by unknown authors in the 2nd Age and is a compilation of Elvish texts translated and gathered in a reference book for Numenorean scholars, and eventually written into its current form by Bilbo Baggins.

3) Quenta Silmarillion. The largest book of the whole collection. It details the entire history of the Elves, as relevant to the eventual creation of the Silmarils and ends with their eventual dispersal. It is split into 24 parts. Some of which are in the form of historial accounts, others in a more traditional novel or story form.

4) Akallabeth. The downfall of Numenor. A general historical annal of the events which led to the downfall, though most of the general history of Numenor is lost and thus not recorded here. The Realms in Exile preferred to forget most of these tales, preserving only the records directly associated with the Downfall as a cautionary tale.

5) Of the Rings of Power and the 3rd Age. Historical records of what happened prior to and during the War of the Ring.

I would suggest the main books first. Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings. Watch the movies of course. There are lots of good audio book versions out there too if reading it yourself is a lot. Then pick some aspect of the lore that interests you and find where that is in the Silmarillion.

The Tale of Beren and Luthian might be a good place to start. Its actually in a form more akin to an actual novel than the rest of the book. Its also the part Tolkein considered the most important part of his work. Self-insert characters that they are.

Plenty of good Youtube videos out there that give good synopsis of the Silmarillion too. Men of the West has an excellent series where he goes through the history of middle earth as told in the whole Legendarium. You can start there, listen, then read on your own time or along with it.

 Polonius wrote:

Only then should you tackle the Silmarillion. I'm not a big fan of it. It's very dry, and there's a simple reason: it wasn't meant to be published. It was finished and edited after Tolkein's death by his son and another author. It's essentially canonical, and locked in much of the earlier history of middle earth. At its best, it conveys the sheer scope of the wars against Morgoth and also answers the question of "why are elves like that?"

Yes, people often seem to forget / don’t realise that The Silmarillion was never intended to be a published work (despite the fact that it explicitly says so in the foreword!) It was Tolkien’s reference book for the world, partly for the self-satisfaction of world building and partly so that if he needed to reference a person, place or historical event he had something to draw from and that would keep everything consistent.

I would absolutely recommend reading the Hobbit first. It's a great story, a very quick read, and provides a lot of heart to more or less the entire first book of LotR. When I first read the series, I skipped the Hobbit and consider it a pretty significant mistake in hindsight having reread it since with the Hobbit first.

Fellowship dumps a lot of characters in its opening pages that can be overwhelming because it starts assuming you have some attachment to Bilbo before handing the story off to Frodo. It's a LOT easier to get into that book when you treat Bilbo as the initial POV character.

I began my Tolkien dive with Hobbit and didn't regret one bit. I can see why some people would actually prefer it to LotR itself: while latter is much more grand and epic, and adult in its tone, it can also be somewhat laborious to read.

Also, LotR totally spoils the Hobbit, so it makes sense to read them in correct order.

Silmarillion is kind of book which makes huge impression to some people (I am one of those people) and bores others. Ainulindalë and Valaquenta particularly are something which may not feel very engaging, but Quenta Silmarillion is amazing. However Silmarillion is very serious work, without the light-heartedness of his Third Age books. It's a history book, not so much 'novel'.

Children of Hurin is definitely worth the read if one likes Silmarillion, although the basic story is included in it, just in shortened form. It's a great epic tragedy.

Backfire wrote:


Silmarillion is kind of book which makes huge impression to some people (I am one of those people) and bores others.

Oh it did both for me.
I was greatly impressed by it, but found it completely boring.

I've tried to read it 3 times to date:

●Once while a teenager.
●Once after re-reading Hobbit/Rings back when the 1st of the live action movies was coming out.
●Then again during the pandemic while killing time.
I've never gotten more than about 1/2way through.
I find it so boring I'd rather paint minis....

Maybe I'll try again in another 15-20 years or so.

I found it much easier to handle when I just ignored all the names Working out who is related to who is too hard, and doesn’t actually matter much in each individual story. He usually did a good enough job in setting enough character context when it’s important.

Similar, I bounced off it hard the first time, managed to get through by sheer persistence the second time and then when I tried the third time, many years later, I think there was enough residual memory that I could finally appreciate the stories.

It is a great piece of literature, but not for the faint hearted!

ccs wrote:

Backfire wrote:


Silmarillion is kind of book which makes huge impression to some people (I am one of those people) and bores others.

Oh it did both for me.
I was greatly impressed by it, but found it completely boring.

I've tried to read it 3 times to date:

●Once while a teenager.
●Once after re-reading Hobbit/Rings back when the 1st of the live action movies was coming out.
●Then again during the pandemic while killing time.
I've never gotten more than about 1/2way through.
I find it so boring I'd rather paint minis....

Maybe I'll try again in another 15-20 years or so.

I wasn’t able to get into it until I had a terrible fever one day, and the Silmarillion was the only book I could reach when I wasn’t wracked with fever dreams.

I've been resisting saying this since June 19th, when the question of order was asked... and my willpower can hold off no more!

I recommend starting at the beginning of the books, and use numerical order when reading Tolkien.

Following the page numbers makes the book a lot easier to understand when you're not arbitrarily jumping from page to page like some Choose Your Own Adventure novel.

Whew, got that out of my system...

Also, when you finish reading them, come tell us what you think about them, and give us a detailed explanation of whether the Peter Jackson films would've been better with the inclusion of Tom Bombadil and his wife.

 Lathe Biosas wrote:
I've been resisting saying this since June 19th, when the question of order was asked... and my willpower can hold off no more!

I recommend starting at the beginning of the books, and use numerical order when reading Tolkien.

Following the page numbers makes the book a lot easier to understand when you're not arbitrarily jumping from page to page like some Choose Your Own Adventure novel.

Idk, I think before you start at the beginning, it might be nice to start at the title page, then flip the book over and read the back, then flip it again to read page 1

 The_Pilot wrote:

 Lathe Biosas wrote:
I've been resisting saying this since June 19th, when the question of order was asked... and my willpower can hold off no more!

I recommend starting at the beginning of the books, and use numerical order when reading Tolkien.

Following the page numbers makes the book a lot easier to understand when you're not arbitrarily jumping from page to page like some Choose Your Own Adventure novel.

Idk, I think before you start at the beginning, it might be nice to start at the title page, then flip the book over and read the back, then flip it again to read page 1

I just tested that out and if you don't do it exactly right, you end up trying to read parts of the book upside down, and that's not as enjoyable as I would've thought.

I dunno, I’m sure they would have found suitable eye candy for Goldberry. And Tom bombadil is ignorable enough. Just treat it like a 90s Liz Hurley film and turn the sound off and enjoy the view