Writing style, Hobbit vs. LOTR

[Lhunbelethiel]

I have started reading the Hobbit after reading the LOTR trilogy and noticed that Tolkien's writing style is very different in the two stories. The writing in the Hobbit seems more familiar and loose, while the LOTR is often formal and sort of complex. The Hobbit is more light hearted while LOTR is quite serious much of the time. Any idea why this is? Is it due to the characters heis writing about (Bilbo as a befuddled hobbit, whereas Frodo is serious) or the events that are happening (dragon hunting vs. Sauron stalking) or perhaps the time in which JRR Tolkien was writing? Was he more mature, more set in the mythology when he wrote LOTR than in the Hobbit? Was it because of different audiences? Your ideas??

(Hope this makes sense) I love the Hobbit already, so I am not putting it down at all! smilies/smile.gif

[Niere-Teleliniel]

The Hobbit was started all of a sudden while JRRT was grading an exam paper and found a blank page. In a burst of inspiration, he scribbled the opening sentence, "In a hole in the ground, there lived a Hobbit." He then spent time "discovering" Bilbo and Hobbits in general. He finished it as a child's tale and passed out to friends "for fun." It was only because an editor got wind of it and asked for a copy that the book was ever published.

After the book recieved great praise, the publishers asked for another story. Tolkien submitted his latest draft of the Silmarillion, but they rejected it and asked for a sequel to the Hobbit. Tolkien decided to elaborate on the ring angle, and started writing The Lord of the Rings, a different, and much more chilling tale.

The way the writing styles differ is (in my opinion) prolly because Tolkien was much more serious about LOTR. The Hobbit was more of a hobby, if you will. It was just Tolkien having fun imagining and playing around with his silly little hobbit, Bilbo. LOTR however, was a request from the publisher. He thought more deeply about it, and was therefore much more intense in his writing. It was written to be an actual novel, and not a lighthearted children's book.

For more info, check out Myth Maker: J.R.R. Tolkien by Anne E. Neimark

[ May 12, 2002: Message edited by: Niere-Teleliniel ]

[Lhunbelethiel]

That was kind of the way I was thinking. Thanks for clarifying!!

[Child of the 7th Age]

As you've said, the Hobbit and the LOTR are definitely different in tone. However, if you read the beginning chapters of the Rings, especially A Long-Expected Party, you'll see that the change is actually gradual. When Tolkien first began writing the "sequel" requested by his publisher, he really didn't know where the story would lead him. He didn't recognize at first just how high and serious it would become, and how it would tie into many of the important themes of the earlier ages.

So the earliest chapter starts out sounding almost like a continuation of the Hobbit. It's got a lot of humor, for example poking fun at the foibles of some of Bilbo's relatives and neighbors by the particular kind of presents he left for them which highlighted their shortcomings. Also, it has a very colloquial style because that's just the way most Hobbits speak (though the speech of Merry, Pippin Frodo, and even to some degree Sam changes later in the book as they interact with more courtly cultures.)

In the Hobbit, the Shire often sounds more like it belongs in Victorian or Edwardian England rather than the ancient, heroic cultures like the men of Gondor or Rohan. One example of this from the Hobbit would be when Bilbo is all concerned because he lost his handkerchief, an item that figures several times through the story. There is some of this Victorian/Edwardian flavor still left in the first chapter of LOTR. When they describe the dragon fireworks, for example, Tolkien says it "passed like an express train" which is obviously not something you'd find in Middle-earth.

Of course, some of this simply reflected the simplicity and simple joys of Hobbit culture. But, by the time you come back to Hobbiton at the end, with the Scouring of the Shire, there's a much different tone.

So even though there's a sharp contrast between the two books, the actual transition in tone and language comes about more slowly.

[Lhunbelethiel]

Thank you for the interesting and thoughtful replies!!!

[Frodo Baggins]

I noticed the same thing Lhunbelethiel. I heard somewhere that the chapter "The Shadoe of the past" was written before the reast of LOTR.

"confusicate and bebother these dwarves!"

[Luntindomeiel]

I think you can note the difference between The Hobbit and the Lord of the Rings: Tolkien wrote The Hobbit for his kids, and you can see that as its much easier to understand than the Lord of the Rings or the Silmarillion

[Jessica Jade]

"The Hobbit is only tangentially connected to the greater history of Middle Earth; it is in many ways a children's story, especially when compared with the epic mythology of The Silmarillion or the desperate wars of The Lord of the Rings. Tolkien "tested" The Hobbit as he wrote it by reading it to his sons, and the manner of narration is, at times, very much like a children's story; it includes such "asides" to the audience as, "He was only a little hobbit you must remember." In fact, the original manuscript of The Hobbit included much more of this sort of language, but Tolkien later removed most of it."

---from Sparknotes (http://www.sparknotes.com/lit/hobbit/section1.html)

[Beatrice]

Look, the more a person keeps writing, the more their style will change. I know because I write fanfics and that's how it is with me. My earliest fics are different from my latest "works of fiction". Just wanted to add in my own two cents! smilies/biggrin.gif

[Greycloak]

Tolkien wrote The Hobbit for his kids,

Actually, Tolkien wrote LoTR for his kids as well, but they were grown by that time.

[Gimli Son Of Gloin]

In The Hobbit, Tolkien writes as though he was almost in the story. If you had heard only a quater of what I have heard about him, and I have only heard very little of all there is to hear, you would be prepared for any sort of remarkable tale.
The mother of our particular hobbit-what is a hobbit? I suppose hobbits need some description nowadays, since they have become rare and shy of the Big People, as they call us.

See what I mean? He kind of wrote like Walter R. Brooks.(He wrote the Freddy the Pig books)

[ May 23, 2002: Message edited by: Gimli Son Of Gloin ]

[Flute the elf]

smilies/mad.gif unfortunatly, I noticed the difference as well. I read the hobbit 1st & loved ti, so i read LOTR & loved it. I recently re-read the hobbit & hated it...the writing style I found to be almost insultingly simple, unlike LOTR. I believe the sil. is even more serious but I love that...the hobbit is just too simple.. smilies/frown.gif

[Child of the 7th Age]

Flute the Elf -- What a beautiful name! Are you musical by any chance? Welcome to the Downs.

Don't be fooled by the simple language of the Hobbit. Yes, it is a children's book, but some of the best literature in the world falls into that category.

And the Hobbit tells us a whole lot about how Bilbo changed from a very self centered creature, concerned only with himself and his hobbit hole, to someone who meets a whole series of moral and physical challenges and emerges with a much different attitude towards life. There's another thread on the board, Bilbo Baggins Testimonial, that talks about some of this.

You can even read about some of this in Unfinished Tales where one chapter explains how Gandalf came to the Shire and specifically chose Bilbo for this adventure to shake the Hobbits out of their complacency.

The interesting thing is that each of Tolkien's main writings are so very different-LotR, Silm, and Hobbit--but each is good in its own way.

sharon, the 7th age hobbit

[ May 23, 2002: Message edited by: Child of the 7th Age ]

[Naaramare]

I would also have to say that the Hobbit is much better when you listen to a good reader read it aloud, as I did. Its style is much more that of the spoken word, as opposed to the written-word style of LotR and the Silm.

[Araen]

I like to think that The Hobbit is being told by Samwise, Merry or Pippin to their children. In Merry or Pippin's case to educate their children on their families history. Just a random rambaling thought.

[Raefindel]

Welcome to the Downs, Flute the Elf and Naarmare! Live long and Pros... oh I mean Mae Govannen.

[ May 24, 2002: Message edited by: Raefindel ]

[Naaramare]

Why, thank you, Raefindel. I think that finding this place is the best thing that's happened to me for months.

[Birdland]

I just recently re-read The Hobbit after many years, and one of the things I appreciated about it now is the fact that Bilbo has to use his wits throughout the book, not just to save his own life, but to actually avert a war between the Elves and the Dwarves.

Being the smallest of the races, I'm sure Hobbits had to develop the ability to "think their way" out of a number of deadly situations. Bilbo demonstrates this talent admirably throughout the Hobbit.

And he seems to be one of the few characters to see the "big picture." He does his best, not to help Thorin hold his place on the mountain, but to keep the races of Dwarves, Elves, and Men from starting a ill-conceived war over treasure, which would have led to disaster for them all, particularly since the real enemies, (goblins and Dragon) would have annihilated them all while they were bickering over the gold.

This is a very "adult" lesson to learn from a children's book.

[Raefindel]

Yes, Birdland, I love the way Bilbo knew just what to give Thranduil to "even the odds"... The Arkenstone. His wisdom and insight are often overlooked.

[Raefindel]

Hey, Birdland! You're a "ghastly neekbreeker"! Wow! how long have you had a personal title? Good for you!

[*Varda*]

i know exactly what you mean. Personally i think one of the reasons for the change in style is simply because Tolkien spent so much more time on Lord of the Rings. he literally poured his heart and soul into it, and of course the finished result is amazing. Lord of the Rings is meant to appeal to a more adult audience and the Hobbit is more for children (although i still love it!). But also as someone mentioned, people's styles of writing do change, and in Tolkiens case i think it was for the best. Now i just have to try and get through the Silmarillion - i really want to read it all but it gets so confusing!

[Belin]

I think there's more to it than that, and I also think Child was on the right track when she mentioned the gradual change of style in LotR. Tokien's style fits itself to its subject matter in interesting ways. Let's look at the changes in LotR.

Among the Rohirrim:
Right through the press drove Theoden Thengel's son, and his spear was shivered as he threw down their chieftain. Out swept his sword, and he spurred to the standard, hewed staff and bearer; and the black serpent foundered. Then all that was left unslain of their cavalry turned and fled far away.

Notice, particularly, the rhythm and the alliteration. It sounds a little like Anglo-Saxon poetry, not a surprise considering all the connections between them and the Rohirrim. As Child noted, the early parts of LotR, set in the Shire, sound both "Hobbitish" and hobbitish. In Tom Bombadil's house, the narration sounds like this:

Its walls were of clean stone, but they were mostly covered with green hanging mats and yellow crtains. The floor was flagged, and strewn with fresh green rushes. There were four deep mattresses, each piled with white blankets, laid on the floor along one side.

Here, although you don't get the same bouncy rhythm of Tom's songs, you do get a similar sounding attention to a particular kind of detail, especially the mention of colors. Or Fangorn Forest:

The drink was like water, indeed very like the taste of the draughts they had drunk from the Entwash near the borders of the forest, and yet there was some scent or savour in it which they could not describe: it was faint, but it reminded them of the smell of a distant wood borne from afar by a cool breeze at night. The effect of the draught began at the toes, and rose steadily through every limb, bringing refresment and vigour as it coursed upwards, right to the tips of the hair.

The sentences are long and unhasty, dealing slowly with each part of the experience and the memories it brings.

And so forth... LotR is not one style, but many. I also notice a difference between Lothlorien and Gondor and Mordor, but have not yet been able to quantify it. In any case, the effect is almost that of a history assembled from the acconts of several different groups of people, a view the appendices support.

Unfortunately, I am in great need of rereading both the Hobbit and the Sil, but the feeling of vocally-told-to-children the Hobbit has seems to me perfectly suitable, considering the subtitle, "There and Back Again," which envisions us pretty strongly as Shire-Dwellers. I imagine some later relative of Bilbo's telling it to their children. I would also imagine, although I still have to go looking for this, that the style of the Sil is closer to that of the elven-parts of LotR than to the rest, given that it is mostly Elvish history.

--Belin Ibaimendi

[ May 26, 2002: Message edited by: Belin ]

[GreatWarg]

Yup, lots of things affected the way the Hobbit and LOTR was written. first, he didn't write LOTR until AFTER WWI, where he had more experience in battle and conquest, where in areas for the Hobbit was intended as a children's book. LOTR was perhaps aimed to a more mature audience because of such detailed description and intense vocabulary.

[Jessica Jade]

I read some stuff at Sparknotes that I found interesting:

Though Tolkien's world is one of fantasy, he designed it to reflect certain truths about the real world. The Hobbit addresses the problem of determining the "right" way for a hobbit (or any ordinary person) to live. Should he concern himself with great deeds and wars and risk losing the humble perspective afforded by the simple life? Or should the ordinary person never look outside her own quiet existence and risk ignoring the larger perspective that might have allowed her to do great things for the common good? The truth that emerges from The Hobbit is that, if one is called on to play a part in great affairs--as we all are, at least according to Tolkien's Christian perspective--then one should not shirk one's duty. To perform that duty well, however, one must never lose sight of one's own insignificance in the larger scheme of things nor lose respect for the value of the simple life.

That IS a very adult lesson for a children's book!