Quote:
Originally Posted by vxf
I would beg to differ. LOTR first, The Hobbit second. LOTR creates this vivid world in which the events of The Hobbit take new light. It's the shorter book that benefits from the extensive background work in LOTR.
Said so, they are very different in tone and perfectly self-standing works.
|
I think you're right about LOTR bringing a new light to the Hobbit. So, if the OP likes to re-read books, then they should read the Hobbit first, then LOTR, and then read the Hobbit again.