Tolkien wrote, “the Tooks were not as respectable as the Bagginses, though they were undoubtedly richer.” In the next paragraph, he wrote “Bungo, that was Bilbo’s father, built the most luxurious hobbit-hole for her her [Belladonna] (and partly with her money) that was to be found either under The Hill or over The Hill or across The Water…” Why do you think Tolkien references money twice so close together?

I think he did so to give the readers an idea of the sort of "class" the characters are in.

What do you think about the idea that a person/character can have two sides (Baggins vs. Took)?

I think it's fair to say that most people have about 200 sides. Even when they contradict each other, it isn't too surprising. But it is usually interesting. Inner conflict is a topic that never seems to become cliche, no matter how often it's used in stories. And I quite enjoyed the use of it in this book for Bilbo.

Tolkien seems to make it fairly clear that respectability was not dependent upon wealth, emphasizing Baggins vs. Took as a representation of this concept. What do you think contributed to respectability? How could a hobbit or hobbit family earn (or lose) respect?

It was behavior, rather than money. The Tooks were more adventurous and daring and mischievous; whereas the Baggins were very dull and unchanging and didn't get into any trouble.

What do you think of the characters so far?

Thinking back, I didn't get too attached to the characters very quickly my first read. In fact, I didn't think much of them until I got into the later chapters (and then their endearing qualities hit me like a brick). But looking at it now, after Gandalf and Bilbo have become two of my favorite characters in all of literature, I think this chapter has some of their funniest, sweetest moments.

Spoiler

Such as when Bilbo thinks he's been struck by lightning.

~Riella

My mom read the Hobbit to me and my siblings when we were little. It was, and still is to this day, my favorite book of all time.

Now, one of the more interesting things to me with both The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings, is that Tolkien starts off explaining everything. For me, it takes a little bit for me to get into it. In fact, I often skim through the first chapters of both books just to get into the adventure! So discussing Chapter 1... meh Absolutely no offense to Twigs's questions in the top post, but it highlights as to why I'm not a big fan of Tolkien's openers. A little too much history that I don't care too much about.

But! Having said that there are definitely parts of Chapter 1 that I love. I love the very beginning when Tolkien talks about the Hobbit Hole. I don't know very many people who don't want to live in a Hobbit hole like Bilbo's home. It sounds so cozy and comfy. (And I'm partial to all the gardens but that's more in LotR)

Of course, the exchange between Bilbo and Gandalf when he arrives at the door and Bilbo freaks out when he finds out Gandalf is looking for someone to go on an adventure with.

Then the dwarves show up a few at a time with their long multi-colored hats and offer their services.

And then after poor Bilbo runs around for a while freaking out about his dishes being broken and serving the dwarves all of his food, wine and beer, you finally get down to the plot of the book. An adventure across wild, magical lands, to slay a dragon and get the Dwarves' stolen home and gold back. My kind of story, and as it was one of the first and (imho) one of the best written, I can't get enough of it.

Sorry this post turned out to be more of a collection of mismatched thoughts, but I've been very excited for this reading group for a while and can't wait to read through the rest of it. And of course see the movie in less than three months!!

Far over the misty mountains cold
To dungeons deep and caverns old
We must away, ere break of day.
To find our long-forgotten gold.

When I was little, The Hobbit hadn't been translated into Norwegian yet (not until 1972). I don't know when I first read it, but I know that it was after reading LotR (which I read in the mid-1970s some time), and I'm sure I read it in English before reading the translation. I must have enjoyed it, as I got my own copy and have read it several times later

A couple of years ago there was a new translation of it into Norwegian, a very poetical one, which I enjoyed very much. I think the translation of the Dwarves' songs was clearly better than in the previous translation(s). I have a tendency to skip the poetry, but in that version I didn't. I haven't got that copy here, so I cannot give you a sample - and I don't know how many NarniaWebbers read Scandinavian anyway

Did you say mismatched thoughts? I guess I have to say the same about mine
But I'm looking forward to discussing Tolkien's works as well

If you could post a sample, or link to one, Varna, I'd enjoy it! (Our church hymnals still have the occasional Swedish lyric for certain hymns so I'm at least familiar with certain words and it's always fun to see if you can figure out which words equate to ones you're familiar with. )

I think the opening lines for The Hobbit are some of my favourites... as others here could probably attest.

What do you think about the idea that a person/character can have two sides (Baggins vs. Took)?

Somehow, putting it that way makes it sound much more Jekyll/Hyde than it comes across in the book. I'm inclined to agree with Ithilwen and say that the facets of our personality can't be boiled down quite so neatly.

How could a hobbit or hobbit family earn (or lose) respect?

By doing what is expected of them. (We see this idea again in the opening chapters of Fellowship when the characters are discussing the events in The Hobbit.)

If you could post a sample, or link to one, Varna, I'd enjoy it! (Our church hymnals still have the occasional Swedish lyric for certain hymns so I'm at least familiar with certain words and it's always fun to see if you can figure out which words equate to ones you're familiar with. )

Great!
I'll try to remember to do that. It may be a few weeks before I have access to that copy again, though.
But I found a sample that the publishers made available - the first ten pages!

KAPITTEL 1
Eit uventa gjestebod
I eit hòl i marka budde det ein hobbit. Ikkje eit ufjelgt, skitvore
og vått hòl, fylt med makk og sure eimar, og heller ikkje eit turt,
bert sandhòl utan noko å sitje på eller ete; det var ei hobbithole,
og det tyder trivsel.

Slå glas og tallerkar i stumpar og skår!
Bryt kvar kniv og bøy kvar skei!
Slikt er det Skreppingen kvier seg for –
sleng flasker i knas i kvar ei lei!

That poem is the one about the Dwarves pretending to wreak havoc while doing the washing-up. I'll try to do some of the treasure hunt song later ...

This has nothing at all to do with Twigs' questions , but I reread the first chapter yesterday and today (splitting it seems so silly, but I hadn't the time to read it one sitting), and realised that it reminds me of the beginning of The Wind in the Willows. And it wasn't a sudden association---more like one I'd had for ages but had forgotten, even though I only read TWitW a few years ago. Upon further reflection, I think it's probably because we had a children's anthology with an illustrated first chapter of TWitW, and so they have pictures of the Mole in a waistcoat and jacket in his house in the ground and then out and about, and thus he seems very Hobbity. But I also think that they're actually somewhat similar---they both have somewhat reclusive/domestic 'heroes' who suddenly go out into the world and have all sorts of adventures, though Bilbo's are on a far larger scale than the Mole's. And the value of home is also realised, I'd say.

I'm afraid I'm not articulating this very well, but does anyone understand what I mean? Or am I just crazy?

I don't have much to say about the first chapter.

yeah The Wind in the Willows has a lot of hobbit like stuff in it. fantasia_kitty I also think the first chapter is not a real attention grabber but I still enjoy it. (I love the first scene)

The fact that the Dwarves in twos is great rather then them all coming at once

4. What do you think of the characters so far?

I always liked the first chapter and the introduction of Bilbo, Gandalf, and the dwarves. This time a phrase stuck out describing Bilbo's "wooly toes (neatly brushed)".

You get that the dwarves like to sing, Gandalf has adventures pop up wherever he goes and Bilbo has an adventurous as well as docile side. Also, the story of the dwarves and the Mountain, the treasure, the town of Dale, and Smaug.

So I give chapter 1 big thumbs up.

2. What do you think about the idea that a person/character can have two sides (Baggins vs. Took)?

I'm all for it, if it's referring to the idea that one's personality can have multiple facets. In Bilbo's case I think they're actually kind of complementary: One side values the comfort of hearth and home, while the other wants to get out every now and then for an adventure.

Like others have noted, I like the description of Bilbo's home as a cozy, inviting place, confirming that opening statement: "it was a hobbit-hole, and that means comfort."

I also like the humor in this chapter: the drawn-out arrival of the dwarves, Bilbo's worry about having enough food and drink for the group, his waking up to the pile of dirty dishes - not to mention Gandalf calling him an "excitable little fellow" after his reaction ("struck by lightning!") to the wizard creating a blue light on his staff.

Thanks for linking a bit of the Norwegian translation, Varna. It's fun to try to pick out familiar words.

1. Tolkien wrote, “the Tooks were not as respectable as the Bagginses, though they were undoubtedly richer.” In the next paragraph, he wrote “Bungo, that was Bilbo’s father, built the most luxurious hobbit-hole for her her [Belladonna] (and partly with her money) that was to be found either under The Hill or over The Hill or across The Water…” Why do you think Tolkien references money twice so close together? I think he might have been suggesting that the Tooks were richer because they were more likely to take risks (due to their adventurous nature). I'm not sure how the economy of the Hobbits works, but the Bagginses seem like they would be steady businessmen taking a prosperous but safe routes to wealth. The Tooks would be more likely to speculate and try risky business deals.

2. What do you think about the idea that a person/character can have two sides (Baggins vs. Took)?
I think it is a valid idea. I know I've argued with myself on matters before. I'm not sure if it is as hereditary as is implied in Bilbo's case.

3. Tolkien seems to make it fairly clear that respectability was not dependent upon wealth, emphasizing Baggins vs. Took as a representation of this concept. What do you think contributed to respectability? How could a hobbit or hobbit family earn (or lose) respect? They needed to be the average hobbit and not want to go on any adventures. They would need to want to stick around home. As long as a family (or individual hobbit) acts as Hobbits should they will have respect. Have an adventure, lose respect. Do things unexpected, lose respect.

4. What do you think of the characters so far? Throin seems very proud and quick to anger. Bilbo is very naive but for a hobbit he handles the situation remarkably well. Gandalf is very devious. I really enjoy how he handles Bilbo on the doorstep.

5. Why do you think Bilbo put "on his business manner (usually reserved for people who tried to borrow money off him)" when talking with Thorin about burglary? What did he gain by doing so? It probably seemed to him like a business situation. I'm not sure that he gained much. He did get an explanation though. I think a business manner would be more likely to please Thorin than a scared hobbit one.

6. Tolkien is said to have disapproved of Lewis' practice of incorporating a mix of mythological creatures and concepts into his work, yet Gandalf states that "Let anyone say I chose the wrong man or the wrong house, and you can stop at thirteen and have all the bad luck you like". Why do you think Tolkien chose to incorporate the traditional concept of 13 as an unlucky number? What does this say about both Gandalf and the dwarves?
I wonder if it is something so ingrained in culture that Tolkien didn't even think about it? I did a little internet research on it and it seems that different cultures have decided that 13 is an unlucky number. It is possible that there something in Middle-earth's history that makes 13 an unlucky number. I don't think Gandalf cares too much about 13 being unlucky. The dwarves are obviously superstitious. Maybe Tolkien wants to signify that Bilbo is lucky?

I can no longer recall whether I read Hobbit before LOTR. Looking at the evidence I think it must have been read 2-3 years after LOTR.
So I knew about hobbits by then, but seem to have enjoyed the tale for itself. At the time I was about 20, and beginning to enjoy reading kids' books again.

I like the Baggins/Took sides. I know I am a bit like that, one part happy to sit at home and read, watch TV/DVDs, chat on the phone and surf the internet, and maybe go for gentle walks. But there is another side that enjoys fun, adventure, creativity, performance, and travel.
Respectable Baggins family members would be pillars of society, living quietly and in the same old pattern as their neighbours, helping others, dressing and eating the same way as everyone else.

The characters: Bilbo is just an average middle class single chap of Tolkien's sort, quieter living and not wanting to be bothered, but who knows his manners. In some ways he's a bit old-womanish! (Really needs shaking up I think). Gandalf is an enigma - very story book, not a lot of background to him, but clearly the author is impressed with him so we trust him with our hero. Dwarves: a somewhat hairy, coloured-hooded, hungry flash-mob? They are already a group, already have a common purpose, but we don't quite know whether to like and trust them. We hope so for Bilbo's sake, as we are getting rather protective of this quiet stay-at-home little fellow.

After seeing The Fellowship of the Ring in theaters I made a conscious decision not to read The Lord of the Rings, or at least not all of it, until the movie trilogy was complete. I knew then, as we all know now, that if you read a book before you watch the movie, you are never entirely happy with the movie. Thus, while waiting for Peter Jackson to tell me what happened to Frodo and Sam, I decided to direct my literary interests to The Hobbit in order to learn more about the peoples and places of Middle-earth.

To this day, of all of Tolkien's works, I have only read The Hobbit and The Fellowship of the Ring (a situation I hope to soon remedy), but as I read The Hobbit for a third time, I hope I have some helpful comments to add to the discussion.

2. What do you think about the idea that a person/character can have two sides (Baggins vs. Took)?

I think that in context, one might attribute Bilbo's two sides to his upbringing. I would assume, until any further evidence shows up, that Bilbo had a mother and a father who raised him through his childhood. I think the "Tookish" parts of Bilbo were simply the characteristics of his mother that rubbed off on him and the "Baggins" part of him was the part of his personality that he learned from his father. Children do tend to imitate their parents. Who hasn't had a parent who has accused them of being "just like" the other parent?

4. What do you think of the characters so far?

I don't like Thorin much in this chapter. But he is a king.

5. Why do you think Bilbo put "on his business manner (usually reserved for people who tried to borrow money off him)" when talking with Thorin about burglary? What did he gain by doing so?

I think Bilbo was simply tired of being taken advantage of all evening and finally took a stance against the gale. He is not going to do anything without having things explained to him first.

6. Tolkien is said to have disapproved of Lewis' practice of incorporating a mix of mythological creatures and concepts into his work...

The key word in your statement is "mix". I don't think Tolkien was against including mythological concepts in a story. Tolkien's criticism of Narnia, as I understand it, was that Lewis mixed so many different creatures from different cultures, with no apparent reasoning behind it. But as I see it, Tolkien was writing a myth about pre-Britain culture, and since unlucky number 13 seems to be a publicly known superstition in the English-speaking world, Tolkien seemed it was fair game for inclusion in his story, -pretending that we got our superstition from our supposed Middle-earthian heritage.

...they both have somewhat reclusive/domestic 'heroes' who suddenly go out into the world and have all sorts of adventures, though Bilbo's are on a far larger scale than the Mole's.

Pun intended?

2. What do you think about the idea that a person/character can have two sides (Baggins vs. Took)?

2. One of my favorite things in the Hobbit is Bilbo's constant going back and forth about liking the adventure and then disliking it.
I can relate to Bilbo wanting to be adventurous and Brave (his Tookish side), but the next moment being unsure or cautions (his Baggins side).

3. Tolkien seems to make it fairly clear that respectability was not dependent upon wealth, emphasizing Baggins vs. Took as a representation of this concept. What do you think contributed to respectability? How could a hobbit or hobbit family earn (or lose) respect? In order to be respectable, it seems hobbits should not go on adventures or get in to mischief. Going on adventures is like getting into mischief. Instead, they should keep to themselves and not get into trouble.

5. Why do you think Bilbo put "on his business manner (usually reserved for people who tried to borrow money off him)" when talking with Thorin about burglary? What did he gain by doing so? It was for the purpose acting like he really was a burglar like Gandalf said. This is his serious tone and it shows maybe he believes that Gandalf trusts him so should everyone else.

6. Tolkien is said to have disapproved of Lewis' practice of incorporating a mix of mythological creatures and concepts into his work, yet Gandalf states that "Let anyone say I chose the wrong man or the wrong house, and you can stop at thirteen and have all the bad luck you like". Why do you think Tolkien chose to incorporate the traditional concept of 13 as an unlucky number? What does this say about both Gandalf and the dwarves? This kind of leads to the idea that Gandalf is trying to get across to the dwarves, that Bilbo is their secret weapon. He not only makes them not an unlucky number which they would not want especially because of the adventure they are going on but also he can actually do things they cannot. This may even give some more crediblity to Bilbo.