The Fellowship of the Ring

Kinda like naruto in the sense that it has really good, exceptional peaks and the rest is bland and repetitive. I hope the next parts fare better.

I decided it's been way too long since I read LotR. I had a lot of stuff to do, so decided to listen to the new audiobook narrated by Andy Serkis. On the whole I felt like he did a great job. His Tom Bombadill was very annoying to me and I decidedly didn't enjoy his performance in many of the songs.

I still love the story, though, and the characters, and the language and...

perfection

One of the greatest literary works of our time....or anytime.

I feel like I need to explain myself with this one. I'd like to emphasize the fact that my review reflects my enjoyment of this book, rather than the quality.

In short:

I love the films, I've seen them hundreds of times, and Tolkein's flowery and elegant prose was more of a detriment to me as a result. This felt like a MUCH slower paced version of the film, which made it really, REALLY tough to get through.

I read them back in High School and decided to try again.

épico simplemente

Did the audiobook with Andy Serkis. Very disappointed with his narration. Did not work for me. But the story itself was great. Loved it

Well, I did it. I finally did it. I finished “Fellowship of the Ring”. I had a few other times in my life and just couldn't do it. But with some Amazon TV-show inspiration, an adult appreciation for slower narratives, and the help of Andy Serkis' incredible narration, I did it!

And I really loved this book, especially once I slowed down and accepted it on its own terms. I still think Tolkien could have tightened this narrative quite a bit (many first-time readers have crashed on the rocks of its long travel sections or Tom Bombadil–still a baffling character to me). But Tolkien makes it all worth it in the end and makes me excited for more..

I came with minimal Tolkien or fantasy experience. I read and enjoyed “The Hobbit” as a middle-schooler, and I watched its creepy 1970s cartoon version a bunch. I've watched the theatrical versions of the movies once or twice, but mostly forgot them. I grew up hearing bad “Lord of the Rings” sermon illustrations. So if you are like me, what should you know about the book?

First, before we really get into it, this truly is a sequel to “The Hobbit”. I had forgotten some of the specifics of that book, but “Fellowship” begins with a prologue that summarizes all of it, spoilers and all; so if you ever plan on reading “The Hobbit”, do that first. This book flows directly from that one.

Second, as you may know from just general cultural osmosis, this is more a travel book than an adventure tale. The characters travel many miles for many days on the journey in these pages, and nearly every day and region is described here. This creates a weird pacing to the book. Lots of slow, meandering days, full of beautiful descriptions of landscapes and geography accompanied by little bits and hints of lore and history. Tolkien really is a beautiful writer–not just a profound thinker.

And then there are the action scenes. Some are striking and suck you in. Others are confusing, leaving with an impression of what happened but not the clearest mental picture (for example, what on earth happens in the barrow-downs?). The action is also spaced out amidst sporadically without much rhyme or reason. At times they make sense; at others they feel a little arbitrary, as if an editor had told Tolkien, “they've been walking and talking too long. Throw in some inconsequential peril to liven things up.”

On one hand, this adds suspense as the stakes rise and you never know what's going to happen and when. On the other, this all deeply challenges us modern readers. We are used to information dumps or action-filled narratives that fit particular rhythms and templates for such things.

But “Fellowship” is different. Even in all its fantasy, it's much closer to real life than modern books. Most of life is boring. It's moving from place to place or having conversations that serve no immediate purpose or “plot”. The most perilous things we encounter are often unpredictable, random, and seemingly disconnected from our “real” life.

For example, if you've seen the movies, you know the whole point of all this travel is to take The Ring to Mount Doom to destroy it. And yet, this entire book goes by without them coming to that conclusion! When they start walking, they just know that some bad people want the ring, so they flee. They are literally aimless. Even by the end, they still have no idea where they should go or what they should do! They get up each morning, ask “okay, what now?”, head in a direction, and respond to things that happen along the way.

It's fascinating to experience a book like this. It forces you to slow down, settle in, and receive the book on its own terms. Even as the mystery deepens and you want answers, you're forced to wait. Apparently, the next two books are much faster-paced, but I wonder if having been made to sit and pace yourself makes those books all the more beautiful and exciting.

But that's all about the plot and pacing. But as someone completely unfamiliar with “high-fantasy”, what did I think about the world-building and lore?

I am in awe of what Tolkien has accomplished here. This is truly a fully-fleshed out alternative world at every level. Its history, cultures, languages, geography, and mythology are completely realized in Tolkien's brain in a way similar to a god creating a world in its totality out of nothing. It's astonishing. This world is not built off of a single clever conceit or proposal or small twist added to our world. It is wholly other and unique.

It does not feel nearly as nerdy or inaccessible as I expected. In the book it all unfolds much like real human conversation. People with their own histories and stories travel together and as different things remind them of songs or tales, they mention it to the rest of the group (and us). Then the narrative moves forward.

There are very few grand speeches or exposition dumps. You can tell there is (literally) a whole world of lore and knowledge behind this story that is only given to us in carefully portioned out doses. It really draws you in and makes you curious for more. “Fellowship” is an excellent fantasy gateway drug.

One key to my reading success was that I listened to the audiobook version narrated by Andy Serkis. And it is amazing. I listened to some of every audio version available–even a well-regarded fan-produced one that incorporates music and sound effects from the movies–and Serkis' was by far the best. It will be the new standard for a very long time.

Serkis, who played Gollum in the movies, provides voices, acting, emotion, and singing (so much singing) that really keeps you enthralled. Save for a few characters, his voices tend follow the movie accents pretty closely. (One funny feature of Fellowship in this regard is that Gollum never has a speaking part, so I haven't yet heard if Serkis does the same voice!)

He is dynamic, and truly performs the book in a way that is moving, but not distracting, and still maintains integrity to the text. He takes you on a ride. His voice can be soft and trembling (like when Frodo realizes he needs to the leave the Shire), and screaming to the point of his voice cracking in others (Gandalf's epic “You shall not pass!” He kills that scene. Dang). I cried multiple times reading the book, was actually scared in others, and deeply shaken elsewhere. It's that good.

This has been a long review. I mean, it's “Lord of the Rings”: there's both so much to say, and also nothing really needs to be said. It saturates our world and culture. But still, reading it for the first time makes you realize just how much you really don't get it if you've only seen the movies.

This is not cheesy, nerdy, socially-awkward (or even escapist) fantasy work. This is truly literature that shows you the best and worst of the world, challenging your intellect and moral reasoning, drawing you into something higher. And it does it all with sophistication, beauty, complexity, and humanity.

As long as you accept the book on its own terms and settle in for a long read, you will get through it. And you will love it. I can't wait to finish the whole series, and then read these books to my kids someday.

As Tolkien's bff once said: “onward and upward!”

در باب تفاوت بین کتاب و فیلم Fellowship of the ring
کتاب ها همواره با فیلم های اقتباسی از اونها تفاوت دارند. در اینجا هم همینطوره با اینحال پیتر جکسون یک تالکین فن خراب بود و تمام تلاشش رو کرده بود که بشدت به داستان اصلی و نحوه داستان سرایی تالکین وابسته بمونه و تنها قسمت هایی همچون tom bombadil رو حذف کرده.
با وجود اینکه تام بامبدل یک فصل کتاب به نامشه و در سه-چهار فصل حضور داره ولی به گفته خود تالکین در اصل داستان تاثیر مستقیم نداره و بگونه ای یک ماهیت فلسفی است (یعنی تالکین میخواد یک پیام ماورای داستان خودش رو بگه) که ذهن خود تالکین رو هم درگیر کرده بود.
همچنین بخش های کوچکی اینطرف و اونطرف و فصل Barrow-downs توی فیلم نیست.

در باب شخصیت ها
داستان تالکین بشدت به اصطلاح “آدم‌ها رو تو سفر میشناسی” پایبنده. داستان روایت منده و سوم شخص. با اینحال افکار شخصیت ها به خصوص فرودو بگینز که شخصیت اصلی است به خوبی تفسیر میشه. با اینحال بر خلاف فضا سازی داستان هایی همچون نغمه آتش یخ (نخوندم) در ژرفای فکر شخصیت ها نمیره. چون این شخصیت ها نیستند که معمای داستانند. بلکه واکنششون به شرایط دژخیمه که مد نظره و هر کدام در ماجراجویی و سفر پیش روی خود (دست کم در Fellowship of the ring) و خطرهای پیش روشون خودشونو نشون میدن. دوستی ها شکل میگیره، پرده ها کنار میره، نیت های شوم دیده میشه و افراد مشکوک بعضا محبوب میشن و وارونه این.

در باب دنیا سازی
“چی بگم که هرچی بگم کم گفتم” زیبایی دنیاسازی تالکین رو کنار بگذاریم از توصیفاتش رهایی نیست، اگر بگم پنجاه درصد کتاب توصیف فضاست بزرگنمایی نکردم. به زیبایی میشه حس کرد که تالکین تک تک لحظاتی که روایت میکنه رو قبلا در ذهن دقیق مجسم کرده و به طرز عجیبی براش مهمه، اینکه راهی که ازش میرن چجوریه، درخت ها، کوه ها، آثار طبیعی و انسانی همه و همه توصیف میشن.

در باب نویسندگی
نخستین چیزی که به نظر میرسه حرکت “Ticking Clook” تالکینه. دنیای کتاب به مراتب از دنیای فیلم کندتر پیش میره. در فیلم ماه ها حرکت رو به ده ساعت کاهش دادند. با اینحال در جای جای کتاب یک حس “بدو دیره” به خواننده داده میشه. هیچ جای داستان این حس دست از سر خواننده بر نمیداره. با اینحال تالکین با مهارت تمام حواسش بوده که میان دویدن ها، فرار ها و نگرانی و دغدغه ها، لحظه های آرامش و رهایی بذاره، بهترین نمونه اش حضور د�� lothlorien ه.

در باب شعر
بنظرم تنها دلیل و کافی ترین دلیل برای اینکه توصیه کنم کتاب رو در صورت امکان به انگلیسی بخونید همینه. تالکین دکترای زبان شناسی داشته، به زبان انگلیسی (جدید و قدیم) تسلط کامل و ادبیاتش در عین راحتی (به مراتب راحت تر از جورج آر مارتین) دقیق و ادبیبانه است.
اگر اشتباه نکنم بجز دو سه فصل از 22 فصل کتاب اول همه فصول دست‌کم، یک شعر در خودشون دارند (گاهی کوتاه، گاهی بلند) گهگاهی بیشتر از یکی.
شعر ها با وجود اینکه اگر نفهمید اصل داستان رو خراب نمیکنه، lore و ژرفای دنیای تالکین رو بشدت روشنتر میکنه. گاهی برای چند صفحه روایت های داستان (از رخدادهای تاریخی middle-earth) بصورت شعر میاد.
شخصیت های دنیای تالکین بدون شوخی و تمسخر و با جدیت به شعر جایگاه ویژه ای میدن در حدی که در rivendell تالاری مربوط به شعر خوانی هست. و شاعران جایگاه ویژه ای دارند (این بخش رو به عنوان یک انسان امروزی برام درکش سخت بود ولی به عنوان یک ایرانی آشنا) کاراکتر ها نه تنها به شعر ارزش میدن بلکه با جان دل گوش میسپارند و تلاش در جهت شاعری میکنند و اوج قدرت تالکین جایی خودش رو نشون میده که میتوانید حس کنید که مثلا فلان شعر ضعیف از بیلبو بگینز نمیتونه باشه.
جالبتر برای من اینکه حس میکنم در دوره ای که این کتاب نوشته شده نه دنیای فانتزی اینقدر پذیرفته بوده و نه این روش خاص از [فانتزی] نوشتن. ولی تالکین نوشت و موفق شد.

در باب توصیه به خواندن
این کتاب رو به دو قشر تنها توصیه میکنم
1) کسانی که یک کتاب رو نیمه راه رها نمیکنند، مهم نیست به دنیای فانتزی علاقه دارید یا نه، اگر از این دست هستید بخونید. چون حتی اگر پسندتون نباشه Book(بخش) دوم که برسید کتاب رو زمین نخواهید گذاشت.
2) به علاقه‌مندان دنیای فانتزی یا هرکس که میخواد لحظه ای از خواندن کافکا و کامو و اورول و آل احمد و... رها بشه شدیدا توصیه میکنم این کتاب رو بخونید. اگر نخستین کتاب فانتزی تون باشه مورد بهتری مد نظر ندارم (مگر اینکه شاهنامه رو فانتزی حساب کنید که البته ایرانیان امروزه نه توانایی کافی و نه رمق برای شاهنامه خوانی ندارند) اگر نخستین کتاب فانتزیتون نیست “نمیدونید چه چیزی رو از دست دادید”!

This book is such a comfort and joy, and I love it more every time I read it. Easily my favorite part of my favorite novel; and the novel that I think is the greatest of any book I've read. The Lord of the Rings is so incredibly special.

Summary of Trilogy: A hobbit named Frodo Baggins must go on a journey with his friend Samwise Gamgee to destroy a ring that, if it were to fall into the wrong hands, could be the end of the happy world they know. They are helped by a crew that includes two more hobbits, a wizard, and elf, a dwarf, and a couple of humans. It is a tale of friendship, self-sacrifice, and bravery.

Well, I finally read Book 1 after much nagging from daughter. I really wanted to love it - I love many people who love it!

About a third of the way through, though, I was tempted to ditch it and say that it just wasn't for me. It took ages to get going, and some of the long passages of description and past deeds (with everyone having at least threes names) seemed to go on forever. And as for the songs...

In the end though, it won me over. The good bits were really good and became more frequent in the last third. The atmosphere and the characters eventually got to me and I became more invested as it went on, pretty much from the mountains onwards.

So I'm going to have a go at Book 2 - there, I said it!

Takeaway: Genre defining book, theologically more revealing than I think Tolkien intended. 

There is nothing that I can really write that hasn't been already written, and written better, about the Lord of the Rings trilogy. I am not a superfan. I have read the Hobbit three times I believe, but I think this is only my second reading of the trilogy and my previous reading was more than 20 years ago.

I decided to start the series because the Andy Serkis narrated audiobook was on sale at Audible. I had previously listened to the Rob Inglis version of The Hobbit, but several friends have raved about Serkis' version. Inglis' version is excellent, but I do think that Serkis' version is probably a little bit better. My only complaint about the Serkis version is that when listening with headphones, which is how I tend to listen, the dynamic range was a bit too broad. I understand why the dynamic range is wide, but I tend to listen when I am walking or doing chores around the house, and changing the volume is annoying.

I alternated between audio and kindle. I listened to good portions of the first and third books while reading the second almost exclusively. Song is so much a part of the writing that I am tempted to say that the books should be listened to primarily, but audiobooks do take longer than reading. I don't know how they prepared for the songs, but the singing portions were very well done with appropriate melodies and emotion. It does communicate a very different culture and I think that is part of why the songs are so important to the books.

I was musing on Twitter that war is my least favorite part of the trilogy. And by the end, there are far fewer battle scenes than I had remembered, probably because the battle scenes are so memorable from the movies. It is the quest and friendships that make the story, not the battles.

As I said I am not a Tolkien scholar. I have never read a biography of Tolkien and I have never read a commentary book on the Lord of the Rings, although I do have Fleming Rutledge's book and plan on reading that one. But I have understood that Tolkien did not think he was writing a “Christian” story and did not like people suggesting that there were Christian allegories in the books. That being said, I think that there is a lot of theology. Christian obligation and calling to do good and work toward justice, even if it is personally difficult is throughout. The concept of the way sin breaks not just personal, but social systems is very well illustrated. And the way that even good people with real virtue can be corrupted by access to power. The right use of power and the corruption that power brings is a very significant theme. I think there is some irony to Tolkien talking so openly about power and systems in the trilogy and the fact that there is so much controversy about the “Marxist” roots of that discussion today. There is also a nearly Christian sense of providence or election throughout the books without any referenced God or prophecy that was directing.

One critique is how much Tolkien uses the colors black and white to mean good and evil, and then references how people look to correspond with their goodness or evilness. The bible also uses black and white colors as a reference to good and evil, but the people of scripture were various shades of brown. There was no one in scripture that we would today call “White”. But the trilogy frequently speaks of the beauty and light skin and hair of virtuous characters and of the dark skin of the evil characters. In the context of our racialized history and racial hierarchy, the uniformity of Tolkein's descriptions suggests that there was an underlying understanding of race that was connected to sin in the books even if it was not explicitly described as racialized.

Early on in the books, the fighting was almost entirely between humans/hobbits/elves on the one side and orcs/trolls/other evil creatures on the other. That led to a more lightness, joking quality to the fighting. As time went on, the horrible reality of war was more clearly described. The way that war can impact people over a lifetime was communicated and as many have suggested, I do think Tolkien's experience with WWI was carried through. The broad anti-industrial language also likely reflects the reality of pollution in the UK during Tolkien's life. But I never really understood what these factories were doing other than creating pollution. They did not seem to be producing good, but only darkness. And maybe that was the point.

I think I probably need to read this trilogy again because it is designed to have layers of meaning. I know many people have read it 10 or more times. I won't ever read it that often. But I do think that I need to read it at least one more time. Maybe with my kids in a few years.

Fully recommend listening to unofficial audiobook production by Phil Dragash. Wonderfully read and has sound design and the movie soundtracks behind him reading.

I can see why this book is such a cultural icon and impacted fantasy forever. Tolkien's world is rich and beautifully described and has an incredible amount of cultural knowledge embedded within. It marks the great battle between good and evil and beautifully, courageously illustrates the battle is both within and without oneself. I am glad I waiting until I was older to read this book as I don't know if I would have appreciated it when I was a child. Onto the next book!

Summary:
Frodo Baggins lives with his uncle, Bilbo Baggins, at Bag End in the Shire. Life is sweet and wonderful, with the occasional touch of magic and wonder as Bilbo shares tales of his old adventures, or when the old wizard, Gandalf, comes to visit. Things change as Bilbo disappears from sight during his 111th birthday. This, he accomplishes through the use of a magic ring he once found. Bilbo leaves the Shire to go on one last journey and leaves his house, treasures, and most importantly, the ring to Frodo. Gandalf reveal that he has been curious about the ring for some time and orders Frodo not to put it on and to keep it secretly hidden until Gandalf returns. After 15 years, Gandalf returns with grave news. Bilbo's old magic ring is the ultimate weapon of the Dark Lord Sauron, and he will do anything to get it back. Frodo must leave the safety of the Shire, travel through Middle Earth, and take the ring to Rivendell. He does this with the help of some old friends, and a few new ones too. Once at Rivendell, Frodo decides he must be the one to take the ring to Mount Doom in Mordor and destroy the ring. Companions are chosen and a fellowship is formed, and together they set out across mountains, through the mines of Moria, down rivers, and beyond to destroy this great evil. Sauron's servants are ever faithful to him and pose a real danger to the fellowship. Gandalf is lost in the mines of Moria to a Balrog, orcs kill Boromir and take Merry and Pippen. The fellowship is broken and Frodo must find his way to Mount Doom with only the help of his faithful gardener, Samwise Gamgee.

(Español

One does not simply review or rate The Lord of the Rings by J.R.R. Tolkien. Yet, it earns its 5 stars without as much as a second thought.Seriously, how does one tackle this monumental tour de force? I could enumerate all the goods things about it, but that would be pointless (because it's all good), so instead, I'm going to focus on the negative things that other reviewers have pointed out and try to convey why, in fact, these elements are necessary.1. The pacing (especially in the first 100 pages)Many reviewers have pointed out the incredibly slow start of the book, up until Frodo actually leaves the Shire and starts on his adventure. The general complaints I've seen are that it is 1)too long, 2)nothing happens, and 3)it's painful to get through. Unlike his uncle Bilbo, who is quick to run out of his front door and start on his adventure in [b:The Hobbit, or There and Back Again 5907 The Hobbit, or There and Back Again J.R.R. Tolkien https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1546071216l/5907.SY75.jpg 1540236], it is true that Frodo is incredibly slow to leave his hobbit hole and has to think about leaving for a very long time before he actually moves (as in, it takes him years to leave). Honestly, who can blame him? If you were given two options, one of which would be to stay in your perfect little idyllic village, away from harm, or to throw yourself into the unknown and towards certain death, which would you pick?Jokes aside, the purpose of this slow intro is to drive home the fact that once Frodo leaves Bag End, he will never be able to return to it in the same capacity. War is very near at hand, and even the peaceful little village will be damaged by it sooner or later. What is more, Frodo himself will come back a changed man (or Hobbit), and his childhood home will no longer have the same significance to him as it does in the beginning of the story. Frodo's journey is so transformative, dangerous, and unpredictable, that the first slow, uneventful 100 pages reinforces the pain of losing one's country to an unstoppable war. For the rest of the novel, across all three parts, Frodo and his Hobbit friends will refer to Hobbiton as a place of return and as an anchor in dark times. Tolkien masterfully makes us as readers yearn for the Shire just as much as Frodo and his friends do because of those first pages. Even though it seems uneventful and boring, the time spent in the Shire is immensely important for the rest of the narrative as it allows for feelings of melancholy and hope to bloom in readers as they follow Frodo on his heart-wrenching journey. 2. FrodoMany have complained about Frodo as a character, calling him boring, flat, unremarkable, etc. For a hero, it is true that Frodo doesn't seem to have the appropriate qualities that would make him the focus of the story. However, it is because of his initial unexceptional character that he becomes an interesting choice for the mission. The choice to have Frodo as the ring-bearer comes in two folds: 1) because he is seemingly ordinary and mundane, the Enemy is less likely to notice him and come after him, and 2) the One Ring chose him as its partner. Everyone knows that the Ring has a will of its own and that, once it has decided to follow (or to abandon) someone, there is nothing that anyone can do about it.To counterbalance Frodo's ordinary quality, the Fellowship is sent to accompany him on his mission. Here, the clever composition of characters who make up Frodo's companions gives all the colour and excitement needed for a high fantasy story: Aragorn, the would-be-king, Boromir, the proud warrior, Legolas, the keen-sighted Elf prince, Gimli, the brave and fiercely loyal Dwarf, Merry and Pippin, the comedic best friends, and Sam, the unsung hero of this whole tale. Of course, one cannot forget Gandalf, the fatherly wizard who has known Frodo all his life and who is loved and respected by all. These friends support Frodo in all that he does and serve to help him grow into his own as the story progresses.Initially, Frodo relies heavily on his companions, especially Gandalf and Aragorn; however, as we near the end of The Fellowship of the Ring, Frodo clearly takes charge of his mission on his own and decides for himself on his next course of action. Even though he is very much attached to Aragorn, and would follow him anywhere, he is able to put aside his (very much justified) fear of the unknown and to depart for Mordor all on his own. If it hadn't been for Sam's insistence, Frodo would have left alone to tackle Mount Doom (whether he would have survived or not is another question, but he would have bravely persevered until the last). To call Frodo useless, boring, or pathetic is an insult to one of the bravest people in Middle-earth. Frodo is the one who takes on the Ring, willingly, he is the one who volunteers to carry it into Mordor, he decides to leave on his own to protect his friends and keep them from certain doom, and he is, ultimately, the one who must carry the burden of the Ring and the weight of the fate of the world on his shoulders. When Frodo returns from his adventure, he is psychologically scarred for life (undoubtedly a reflection of what happened to the WWI soldiers of Tolkien's life) and yes, he is gloomy and melancholic, but his task is immeasurably difficult compared to what the other characters must do. As much as the Elves, Dwarves, and Men are brave and loyal to one another, none are as determined to see the Ring destroyed as Frodo is, and other, lesser determined characters would have sooner fallen to the Ring's influence than to destroy it (not looking at you Boromir (jk)). 3. AragornFor some reason, many reviewers think that Aragorn is arrogant, haughty, and self-centered. Perhaps this idea is because of his (infrequent) mentions of his lineage and his duty as future king, but in reality, Aragorn is anything but kind, supportive, and loyal to his friends, especially Frodo. Aragorn is a hero in every sense of the word: he fights bravely, stands by his friends when in need, and takes on any foe who dares come his way. When Gandalf wishes to lead the Company through Moria, Aragorn opposes it until it is the last option in fear of what it might do to his oldest friend. Right in his premonition, Aragorn suffers the loss of his friend, but has no time to mourn as he becomes the de facto leader of the Company and must lead Frodo and the others across dangerous lands. Whenever they stop to rest, Aragorn is always by Frodo's side, tending to his wounds or keeping an eye on him and protecting him. Aragorn has issues of his own to worry about, such as his kingship, but he selflessly puts the Company above himself and gives his utmost to the protection of the ring-bearer. Aragorn is known and loved by many across Middle-earth. His name hangs on the lips of those in the highest of seats, like Galadriel, Celeborn, and Elrond, and all who know him love and trust him. Aragorn is always true to his word, and once sworn, his oaths are unbreakable.Surely, Aragorn can be forgiven for his small moments of grandeur, such as beneath the Argonath and on the land of his forefathers. The Númenóreans are an almost extinct race, with Aragorn being one of the last few standing. Naturally, his anxiousness to regain his power is understandable, and yet, he devotes himself wholly to Frodo's cause and this, from the very beginning, long before the Fellowship is even formed. Readers will remember that it is Aragorn who saves Frodo and guides the Hobbits very early on, when they first meet at the Prancing Pony in Bree.Apart for Gandalf and Sam, Aragorn is Frodo's closest and most faithful ally in the fight against Sauron. Despite his own destiny, Aragorn willingly chooses to trek halfway across Middle-earth to help Frodo as much as he can. In this respect, Aragorn is far from being selfish or conceited; on the contrary, he is selfless and kingly in everything that he does. It is no wonder that Aragorn will go on to become a beloved, peaceful king who values his friendships above all else.I could ostensibly continue to write about The Fellowship of the Ring, but I believe that it is difficult to convey just how much this story is important both as a masterpiece of literature and as a piece of collective memory and consciousness. This review is to be continued in The Two Towers...

When I first began reading this book, I got told by some friends that you should read Tolkien like poems. They have some truth to that. It's not a book meant to rush through; sit back and enjoy the journey with our favourite Fellowship.
It's obvious by the style of writing it's an older book, so if you're not into that, don't do it.
Nonetheless give it a chance. You will not find a book full of action, but full of a journey through treacherous land where danger now lurks.

The second star is for being an inspiration for the Harry Potter series. The foundation of fantasy, or whatever.
Why didn't enjoy this? Why did this feel like too much of a work to me? Why do I feel sorry for myself for having had to read this thing?
1. If I make this a template. It's a journey from one place to another. Insert many more places, mountains, valleys and rivers in; all with multiple names. And half the book is description for them.
Some faceless dark-lord-assistant-type thing attacks them, every once in a while.
One servant-type friend. Two other friends - whose names if interchanged and read, you wouldnt notice the difference (except that Merry knows to handle a boat). And a few others. They meet a few people on the road, who treat them kindly. Umm well, that's it. Oh yeah, and a few songs too... which I just can't make myself care about.
2. There are no emotions. Something happens, sun westers, river flows, golden larks cry, some guy who is the son of some other guy.. idk, sleeps. I feel so disconnected from the characters. I just can't care about them. The only time I saw emotion, is in the final chapter with Boromir.
3. There are so many places. Why?
4. Apart from very few situations, it's very linear. Maybe when Frodo suspects something, or Sam sees something - we have something to look forward to. Otherwise it's just boring narration, that once becomes past, no longer matters.
5. Not relatable. Obviously
6. Appreciate Lady Galadriel, and the other river-lady( though I didn't get her point). But where are all the other women??
7. Nobody has a personality. Aragorn's sort of nice. Everybody else is borrring..
Okbye.

Way better than the movie.

I'm in love

This book is just so good.
It is full of hope and despair and light and good. It is a read that makes me cheer for the characters and their mission. It drew me in, made me want to search every name and location just to find more about this wonderful world Tolkien made.
And though the peril in the book is great the fellowship is brave and good and gives me hope during a time where I too am in need of hope and help.
I simply loved it.

¡Me encantó!

First time reading. It is simply wonderful.

Fantastic. Review coming soon! (Still updating all my read books from this year. I couldn't access my GR-account).

This book has so much detail that my brain feels like it could explode. It was hard to follow at times and I had to stop and take a break. I wanted a map where I could follow their progress but one more detailed than was provided. I need to take a break for now but I'll read the next part soon.