Is there still a market for comfy adventure stories? Pic related is so good and one of my favorites. I've had an adventure story brewing for a while and I've had good feedback on my stories from beta readers. Any other good examples of books like The Hobbit?
>>24917471i hate how it's impossible to find a good copy of this i don't trust the ones on amazon to not have typeface for ants or some kind of made in india binding that falls apart the first time u open it. like why can't everyman's library drop some tolkeins? isn't it out of copyright by now?
>>24917471>isn't it out of copyright by now?I thought Tolkien's IPs are owned by a company and not public domain. Either way, my gf had a good copy in good condition but it was way back from 2012
Meant >>24917596 for >>24917480
>>24917596>I thought Tolkien's IPs are owned by a companysome guy named saul zaentz bought the rights
>>24917471>Is there still a market for comfy adventure stories?Middlegrade/YA is ripe with this stuff, look to Percy Jackson, clearly not the same level of talent but the interest is there.
>>24917471would I have enjoyed it more if i didn't read the trilogy first? Because it wasn't bad, but I wouldn't recommend it
>>24917613Interesting. Usually a good amount of readers prefer the Hobbit though I dunno which one they read first. That being said, I don't think you would have enjoyed it any better because they really are two different stories. The Hobbit is more akin to a fairy tale whereas LOTR is a straight up epic. What didn't you like about it?
>>24917620It's obviously a precursor to the trilogy and it's clear that Tolkien hadn't fully worked out how to form the lore around elves and dwarves. But it annoyed me to no end how the dwarves were constantly captured or in trouble where Bilbo having to save/free them. After reading the trilogy and watching Gimly in the movies, I'd expected dwarves to be tougher and harder, especially with 12 of them, to not constantly getting bested by trolls and orcs. It's a fun read, but I read the Trilogy every year, but I probably won't read the Hobbit again any time soon. Being a children's book doesn't gets me eager into reading it
>>24917673>trilogy
>>24917679how would you like for me to refer to those books?
>>24917613>would I have enjoyed it more if i didn't read the trilogy first?>I read the Trilogy every yearI always wondered if this kind of person exists. No offense, but I can only imagine you as completely removed from any artistic understanding. Lotr is a faint shadow of the hobbit. One has charm, a voice, wit, and something to say, though innocent and plain as it is. The other is a sprawling, convoluted mess of poor structure, tangents, and underdeveloped characters. The only person I can see preferring lotr to the hobbit is the kind of person that gets obsessed with the economics of fantasy worlds. i.e. those that completely miss the forest for the trees
>>24917480>i hate how it's impossible to find a good copy of>The hobbitYou're a retard.
i can't give you a specific work but i'd look to actual fairytales and myths
>>24917681LOTR is supposed to be read as one long continuous work. If we got pedantic about it, it's "actually" a six book series. But either way LOTR is supposed to be one book.
>>24917698Nta and that's a fair point but I don't think it's fair to call LOTR a convoluted mess. It's actually pretty faithful to the plot at hand and rarely ever diverges from the "point" of the story, which is destroy the ring and Aragorn returning to the throne. To me it's a tough call: the Hobbit is easily one of my top 3 favorite fantasy books but I love LOTR, especially the last trek of the book in Return of the King.
>>24917716>especially the last trek of the book in Return of the KingThis was my favorite part of the story as well, and perhaps tangents was the wrong way to frame it. It seemed that the story was hindered by losing the hobbits' lens. They are a great way to introduce information to the reader, as they learn about the world at the same pace as the reader does, so when I'm the 10th consecutive page of bureaucratic formalities of some city I don't care about, and the Lords are talking to their underlings who eventually get interrupted by Gandalf, I found the story sidetracked by Tolkien's desire to make it grounded. I think he was partially aware of this, as when the hobbits ARE present for this shit, they usually fall asleep. I know I'll get crucified for this, but I think this is something Rowling figured out well. She doesn't care at all about the logistics of her world, and instead uses every opportunity of lore-building to contribute to the tone she's aiming for. For example, people rightfully criticize Quidditch for being a dumb-as-shit game, so what does she do? She writes an entire supplementary book about the history of Quidditch. Only, she doesn't explain it at all. She just dumps heaps more information that's charming. You think it's stupid that the game can only end when the Snitch is caught? Haha, yeah, one time a game went on for 3 months. It's the abandonment of reason that makes her world interesting, and the internal logic within it that makes it charming. Tolkien, to me, always struggled with that balance. He wants a world separate from ours, but wants it firmly rooted in what we would consider reasonable. I know he worshipped Beowulf, which is ironic because of how flippant that story is with its descriptions. Yeah, bro, I don't know I just swam into the sea and killed 8 sea monsters. I'm not going to describe what they were, but there were some fish and whales or something. Anyways, killed em all.
>>24917740>Tolkien, to meYou're a nobody.
>>24917831Aw! Did I levy light criticism against your favorite fantasy writer? I'm sorry, anon!
>>24917740Fair enough. I do agree that the politics in LOTR were the "worst" parts of it (although I still enjoyed them). However, I'd still say they were necessary to show the grander implications of how much the ring was affecting everyone, even if the ring wasn't even present with them. Prime examples being Saruman and Wormtongue. Just to add to your complaints. I do have a glaring one I always call out and it was Tolkien's decision to seperate Aragorn and Frodo's stories into individual books. You have to wait a whole ass book to get some update on Frodo and Sam, which is arguably why THE point of the story. And even though I enjoy Aragorn's story, I found it an odd choice. It does make the build up quite intense, though, so that when you get to the last book you're excited for the endgame.
>>24919380You're right on it. The structure of the story is insane, with gaps about 100 pages too long between character shifts. Overall, I enjoyed it, but I will not read it again and I do not see how people can get obsessed with it
>>24919380It's an unusual structure but I think it works well. Most books these days do very frequent intercutting, and I find it gets in the way of immersion in the story. There was this one fantasy novel (too forgettable to remember the title) that mechanically switched between the hero and the heroine every other chapter, and they weren't especially long chapters. I found I much preferred the hero chapters, so that during the heroine chapters I was waiting for the chapter to end and the hero chapter to begin. But it's not like the heroine chapters were actually bad. The frequent presence of the hero chapters just kept me from getting immersed in the heroine's parallel adventure. The context switches in LotR are always a big jar, but then I get immersed in the story in that location, and I truly think this is the superior way.
>>24917740>of bureaucratic formalities of some cityWhat bureaucratic formalities? There's nothing like that in LOTR. Man if you just want to read slop go and read Sanderson. But don't make up shit just because you have TikTok attention span.
>>24919431Your loss. I plan a reread next year.>>24919587Interesting. I've had this debate with myself on what I prefer, whether constant POV shift (e.g. ASOIAF) or a continuous singular POV until the next one (LOTR). I think a balance is a nice place to land. Maybe like 5 chapters of one POV or location, then 5 of the other, etc. Don't get me wrong, though, it's a minor gripe for me with LOTR. I still love how Tolkien did it and it forces you to pay attention to Aragorn's story and all that.
>>24917471Honestly, I don't know. There are children's book sections with what seems the normal fare of dragons and/or urban stuff. A lot of it is literally gay, though (as in actual rainbow flags on the covers and direct allusions to LGBTQ), so I dunno. In terms of comfy adventure stories for adults alike, the cynical part of me thinks most adults have lost their sovl, especially with all the slop they consume. I'd like to think there's still a human heart among the NPCs and that they'd enjoy some kino adventures.
I understand The Hobbit is actually Book 1 of LotR and you can't separate them but going from a brisk, simple adventure story to dry descriptions of maps interspersed with set pieces, character moments, and in-universe historical exposition is a pace killer while reading them as one continuous story as you should be.The entirety of The Hobbit is wrapped up in the same amount of pages it takes for The Council of Elrond to take place. Reading them back to back really helped me appreciate the simple fairytale-esque storytelling of it. I'd say there absolutely is still a market for that sort of book.
>>24917480Retard, Tolkien books get the best editions because they're the top sellers.
>>24920661>A lot of it is literally gayDid you read Lord of the rings, buddy?
>>24922138Yes I did, pal. Is your gotcha that Sam held Frodo as he was dying?
>>24917471You need more wymyn of color and homosexuals sorry chud but best I can do is this authoress from pakistan writing about sexual genies and a gay prince
>>24917471I tought Smoags death was anti-clamactic but other then that it was great
