Excellent research Eldorion . I suspect, based on some of the other sources mentioned, that the Hobbit was written "in transition" as it were. As the letters demonstrate, Tolkien was still clearly fixed in the traditional mode of writing "Fairy Stories" as directed towards children, yet he was already on his way to "rectifying" himself. I think that many elements of The Hobbit, while still maintaining a child-oriented stance, indicate a maturation of his approach to story-telling.

GB

Agreed, GB. I suspect that some of the changes made across different revisions of The Hobbit also reflected that process, though I only have a Third Edition myself so I can't compare to earlier versions.

Going back to the original question though, I think it safe to call The Hobbit a children's book as it is distinctly different than LOTR, though certainly not as puerile as some of his other (non-Middle-earth related) works.

Hello All,

Odo here to purchase a portion of this discussion.

I think TH is a children's book in that it is suitable for children. T seemed to be a bit ambivalent about the book. I think he wrote it as much for himself (the adult him but also the child-in-him) as much as for his children. If we call it a children's book or a fairy story or a tall tale or merely a 'story', I think we still manage to describe TH correctly.

As to LOTR. I see it as Juvenile Fiction (when I'm not seeing it as 'just' a fairy story - which is my usual stance). This is in the historical sense of stories usually being told by adults to kids and young people (ie transitional age groups - half-child-half adults)(with, of course, the oldies sitting around pretending that they don't believe fairy stories!)

I'm fairly sure that folk will take umbrage at LOTR being called 'Juvenile Fiction', but I stand by that. 'Childrens' Fiction' 'Juvenile Fiction' 'Adult Fiction'? Much blurring goes on. But if TH is meant for children, then LOTR is, truth be known, juvenile-ish.

Anyone not interested in the Fantasy Universe, would call all it's many versions 'kids stuff', let's face it. I believe that nearly all fairy-stories (fairy tales) are serious works. Some are written more lightly than others - but dark themes (in the better works) always intrude, in some more subtly than others. Fairy stories amuse (usually) but they tend to be underlined with reality - they 'teach' while allowing us to think for ourselves - and usually without the 'preach' component. Hopefully we all remain 'learners' no matter how old we get (I trust you understand my point?)

(Has anyone read any Roald Dahl? Adult stories disguised as kids stuff - but I digress).

The whole child genre thing seems slightly ridiculous to me. The only books I think of as being 'for' children are those written for tiny tots.

Regards,
Odo

NB This may sound quirky to you guys, but I find things like so-called 'Adult Fiction' more childish than any fairy story could ever be - though 'juvenile-ish' might be a better way to describe it.

I guess it depends what you mean by "adult" fiction ...ahem...*cough*

But seriously, I find "childrens" fiction, or "young adult" fiction much more satisfying than most "grown up" fiction. And Dahl is the perfect example.

GB

GB,

You understand me completely. Yes... 'that' kind of 'Adult Fiction.' But I now include a lot of supposedly mature literature as well. Example: 'The Da Vinci Code'. Full of fantastic silliness - yes indeed (but good fun nonetheless!) Why isn't it in the bookshelves beside TH?

Regards,
Odo

It's funny you should say that . I would put The Da Vinci Code, The Hobbit/LotR, and Narnia all on the same shelf--but not in the children's section, nor the literature/general fiction section--but all in the sci fi/fantasy section.

GB

GB,

With you all the way on that.

Now, what about Wuthering Heights?

Regards,
Odo

Erm...I'll have to ask Mum what she thinks of that .

GB

GB,

I'm shocked!

You haven't read Wuthering Heights?

Though it's nice to hear your Mum is so cool. Wuthering heights is a MASTERPIECE. Weird and wild and dark and wonderful. Don't be fooled by any movie you might have seen or heard of.

Regards,
Odo

NB Are there any lasses on this site? If so, please tell Gandalf's Beard to read Wuthering Heights. Surely a lass somewhere on this site has read it! Come forward PLEASE. Don't let GB go on being developmentally stunted!

About LOTR - I've always been interested by the two main types of criticism of it. On the one hand are people who dismiss it as juvenile (not saying that you're doing that Odo, but some people seem to think juvenile is a dirty word) and on the other are people who think it is too obscure and complex for even some adults to understand. Personally I have a hard time classifying it on an age scale, but the disparity of reviewers is rather puzzling (and amusing).