I'm with Mehinen and Jo - I haven't ever found a single bit of LotR to be boring, not in any of my reads, and the Council of Elrond was one of my very favorite parts. I admit that I read a lot of long books, so I've had practice with other than short, easy to read books, but to my mind, I find it hard to believe that people could find it boring - especially that scene. It's talking, for goodness sake! So many things being explained that you've been wondering about - it's one of the most crucial and beautiful scenes in the book, to me.
I love love love all the description in all of the books - I'm the sort of person who can find it easy to unconsciously skip them, but they're was so beautiful. I guess it shows how talented Tolkien was, bringing things to life.

*decides to join in in all this Hobbit-ish rambling*

The songs were the best part: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YdXQJS3Yv0Y

Never have I seen the animated or even heard there were ones for that matter, but when I clicked on this song I laughed so hard! So hilarious, which I'm sure they were trying to make it that way.

So johobbit and I have been talking about how we really want to see The Hobbit together, so we've already started planning a line party for December of next year, and we would love to see it with as many of you hard-core Middle Earth fans as possible!! .........

Now that would be a true blast! Though I do live a ways away, I am going to try to find a way to make it. Though I very well may not be able to

I've only read FotR and like, the first chapter of TT, but I still do love the simplicity of The Hobbit, like Warrior said. Along with that, there is a less intense air of adventure in it that is more relaxing. Within it's mood, the adventure for conquesting evil that has polluted the land in every race of the land is enthralling and interesting to immerse one's self into, but I've always been rather partial to The Hobbit. Probably because I read it first.

As Jo and Ella have encouraged you so I do now! Best books I have read. And while The Hobbit is amazing, I think I like Lord of the Rings better, because of the story. Yes there are places that can be a bit "boggy" but over all it is well worth the time.

As most of you have said and I agree that The Hobbit is more 'light' than Lord of the Rings. But over all (as I said to Bella) I like Lord of the Rings, so beautifully written and I just like the adventure and story better.

Now in Lord of the Rings the place that I get most "bogged down" at is probably when Frodo and Sam split up with the fellowship because it gets 'dark'. It is definitely the hardest part to get through with the Audio dramas and the movie but the book I seem to remember it being a little easier.
Also in the books it usually takes me a bit to get into the Fellowship of the Ring because it kinda goes slow. But when I'm in there is no coming out
So to those of you who are just starting Lord of the Rings stick through it if it gets a little rough because it will only get better as it goes!

One thing with me and may be with you is that when I listen to the Audio dramas, watch the movies and read the book all the stories get all mixed up so that I have to go back to the book to make sure whats what Like when I'm about to say something that someone said in the story I have to really think or go back to see if it was something the movie or audio drama added or if its part or the true story.

Got one thing to say to any of you who are big fans of The Hobbit and Lord of the Rings books and that is you should read the history of middle earth if you haven't. I have started and I love it.

--Benjamin

Yes, the Council of Elrond provides important information but it could've been written differently. The pacing is terrible, it slows the story to a crawl. I have no problem with people talking but people just talking for 30 or so pages makes for a tiresome read. Don't get me wrong, I enjoy The Lord of the Rings but I believe Tolkien was much more skilled as a linguist and world-builder than as a writer and storyteller.

I think it's funny that everyone in here is talking about how much harder it is to read Lord of the Rings than The Hobbit (Which it certainly is!) when I'm considering trudging through The Silmarillion for a second time.

I find that when it comes to Tolkien, the harder the book is to get through, the deeper and more philosophical they become.
For example, The Hobbit is such fun and it's so whimsical (It is my very favorite!) but there aren't a lot of life lessons that can really be taken from it I don't think.
Then you move onto Lord of the Rings and you have these incredible, applicable quotes like "I wish none of this would have happened." "So do all who live to see such times, but that's not for them to decide. All you have to decide is what to do with the time that's given to you." (Movie quote, I don't have the book on hand, but I know it's close.)
And then you get into the Silmarillion and Tolkien gets into the the ideas of a corrupt creation that still falls into a grand design, and whether or not it is better to live for forever or to die...

At any rate, Sil isn't exactly my type of book. I have to sit there taking notes and continuously refer to the family trees in the back and such. I can't really get immersed in it like the others, but I do want to read it again, so we'll see....

The Hobbit is easier to read, but I prefer more in depth books - TH has never moved me, awakened any emotions in me, and books that don't do that aren't usually my favorite's at all. I think it's a fun, funny book, and I enjoy reading it, and will all my life - but the depth, and the writing, and the emotions are much different (and in my opinion, vastly better) in LotR.

Interesting posts, everyone. When I said "favourite", I don't mean to imply that I don't like LotR: I just find it a little exhaustive and detailed, but I do want to commit time to get it all, because (like Ben, Jo, n_a_h, and Ela have said), it seems like a deep, moving and philosophical book that would be an excellent read to learn more, instead of reading something only for amusement. (which is why when I want amusement, I read The Hobbit. Although, it does move me in some ways, but probably not as deeply as FotR did.) There's a dark, intense, deep atmosphere that LotR offers that is beautiful to experience when one is in the mood.
(And maybe it was just inability to comprehend details of history that I was only just introduced to that made me skip the CoE. After watching the movie, the Council of Elrond will probably make more sense.)

I liked reading the Hobbit a lot better than the Lord of the Rings.

I personally enjoy the films better than the books. I hated how the books only talked about certain events that should have been shown (The Ents attacking Isengard, Gandalf confronting Saruman, etc).

I like good descriptions if it helps immerse me into the world, but I don't need to read 20 pages of Aragorn, Legolas, and Gimli running to find the hobbits, pausing to say something unimportant, and then resume running.

I also think, with the exception of Frodo who comes across as very weak and wimpy in the films, that the movies gave the characters a bit more personality where their book counterparts were too serious and too dull.

I will say though, I hope in the upcoming Hobbit adaptation, that Peter Jackson does try to retain (at least for the first half) the more adventurous tone of the Hobbit rather than trying to make it a LotR prequel.

I hated how the books only talked about certain events that should have been shown (The Ents attacking Isengard, Gandalf confronting Saruman, etc).

Sorry, I don't think I understand what you're saying, You think that the books didn't show those scenes? They did only talk about the former (though it was a very good description, and being from Merry and Pippin gave it a lot of feeling, in my opinion), but they most certainly did have an entire scene concerning Gandalf and Saruman.
I think we just completely disagree about most everything from LotR. I think the running after the Hobbits scene's are very important, tense, and very thrilling. There's so much emotion, packed in the books and characters, and I love that.
I think the Hobbit will probably be quite a bit lighter than LotR was (from what I've heard. , but I hope they don't overdo that lightness and make it just for laughs. But frankly, with those actors, I'm not too worried.
*get's REALLY excited about Richard Armitage as Thorin*

Elanor, I think Josh was thinking of the scene in FotR in which Gandalf and Saruman butt heads. In the book, we are only told this in retrospect at the Council of Elrond. In the film, we are shown the conflict (and it's on my list as one of the top ten wizard duels of film).

Oh, sorry - the word confronting threw me off, since the real confrontation was during the scene I mentioned. Sorry about that!

One thing I liked about the Hobbit that you kind of lose in LoTR is the feeling of mysterious legends behind the whole thing, with casual references to the Hidden City of Gondolin or the Elf/Goblin Wars.

In LoTR everything is spelled out, and even more so in the Silmarillion- a lot of that feeling is dissipated, and turned into plain ol' History.

I believe Tolkien was much more skilled as a linguist and world-builder than as a writer and storyteller.

I believe you're right. As far as you can distinguish between world-builder and storyteller - and I assume that you can, that they are different skills - then his world-building was Tolkien's strength more than his storytelling. (Whereas I'd say that C.S. Lewis was more skilled as a storyteller than as a world-builder.)

I find that when it comes to Tolkien, the harder the book is to get through, the deeper and more philosophical they become.

I guess that the deeper and more philosophical Tolkien writes, the harder his books are to get through.
But also the more rewarding, once you persevere ...

At any rate, Sil isn't exactly my type of book. I have to sit there taking notes and continuously refer to the family trees in the back and such. I can't really get immersed in it like the others, but I do want to read it again, so we'll see....

Family trees are invaluable when reading Sil. If all you rememer of someone's name is "Fin... something", you've got roughly eight to ten characters to choose between Roleplaying them (like we do in Ditto Town) for some months has helped me a lot, though.

One thing I liked about the Hobbit that you kind of lose in LoTR is the feeling of mysterious legends behind the whole thing, with casual references to the Hidden City of Gondolin or the Elf/Goblin Wars.

In LoTR everything is spelled out, and even more so in the Silmarillion- a lot of that feeling is dissipated, and turned into plain ol' History.

Tolkien saw that feeling as very important, and tried to retain some of it even in his tales of early History - the feeling that there is a wider scope behind what you have got in front of you. I guess it's easier to convey this feeling when more of the History is behind you.

The Hobbit is easier to read, but I prefer more in depth books - TH has never moved me, awakened any emotions in me, and books that don't do that aren't usually my favorite's at all. I think it's a fun, funny book, and I enjoy reading it, and will all my life - but the depth, and the writing, and the emotions are much different (and in my opinion, vastly better) in LotR.

Ditto

I think it's funny that everyone in here is talking about how much harder it is to read Lord of the Rings than The Hobbit (Which it certainly is!) when I'm considering trudging through The Silmarillion for a second time.

Some of The Silmarillion I felt as I was trudging through but it was so interesting in a lot of the parts to hear how everything came about, that it was a thrilling read for me. I just love connecting the dots so to say, and Silmarillion does that for me with seeing how Middle-Earth came about and who came from where and who was who. Right now I'm going through Unfinished Tales and that can be very slow at times!

For example, The Hobbit is such fun and it's so whimsical (It is my very favorite!) but there aren't a lot of life lessons that can really be taken from it I don't think.
Then you move onto Lord of the Rings and you have these incredible, applicable quotes like "I wish none of this would have happened." "So do all who live to see such times, but that's not for them to decide. All you have to decide is what to do with the time that's given to you." (Movie quote, I don't have the book on hand, but I know it's close.)

That is one of the best quotes!

--Benjamin

The toughest part of The Silmarillion to slog through is the creation story. It's incredibly similar to a KJV Bible story of creation.

My book club has just finished reading and discussing The Hobbit. Here's a question we all had, hopefully someone can answer it.
Is there any significance to there being 13 dwarves on the quest? Few of them are developed and even doing anything, so why are there so many of them? Just wondering. Cheers!

I think they needed to be 13 (the unlucky number) so that there would be a need for a 14th participant so that there would be a reason for Tolkien to put in Bilbo.
As the writer's reason for choosing that number, I mean.