My first ever graphic novel. 5 stars.

When I picked this up I was not impressed. I took a fleeting look at the pages and saw artwork that was unglamorous; it was basic and unadorned. The story just looked like a simplified version of the original. So, I stuck it back on my shelf and there it remained for many months. I had not time for it. I didn't want time for it.



I looked at it again recently. I then read it through and realised how perfect it is in its simplicity. I was so wrong the first time.



I think the movie had altered my perceptions of what this should be like. The movie sacrificed the story for visual effects and action. This graphic novel, in retrospect, didn’t sacrifice anything. It has the essence of the story and the artwork is as it should be; it’s simple and not entirely serious. It's really quite charming in parts.



The Artwork: The artwork in this is mainly consistent with the book. As much as I appreciate Martin Freeman’s version, he didn’t quite have the exact appearance of Bilbo. This is only a minor thing. But, in this, Bilbo is as fat and ugly as he should be. Hobbits aren’t supposed to be the most attractive of races. In this he is rendered well, as are the dwarves and Gandalf. My only issue on a character level is Smaug. He just seemed really awkward. In other depictions, such as Allan Lee’s, he is quite splendid and swift. In this he looks old, rusty, and to be quite frank, plump. He just didn’t look much like the mighty dragon that he is; yes, he is old; yes, he is has become lazy, but he shouldn’t look like his wings wouldn’t carry him.

The real success here is the scenery. The Shire is luscious and simple; it is homely and basic. I think it’s illustrated perfectly with its wondrous shades of green. This may seem like a simple thing, but it really is a vital thing. It is the crux of the story; it is the anchor that embodies Tolkien’s idea of “a far greener country.” It had to be done right; it had to embody the simple, goodly and unrefined aspect of middle-earth. And it did.



The Story: I’m not going into a great deal of detail here. I’d only be repeating myself. I think I said all I could in my full review of the actual novel. Here's the link in case anyone wants to read me praising the hell out of it: my review

But, what I will say is that this brings the story to life. Well, that’s a bad phrase. Tolkien’s story is already alive when you read it. What I mean is that this presents it in a medium that allows you to physically see it rather than just visualise it. Is that better? No I think not. Let me try again: this provides illustrations to aid with an abridged version of the story; it enhances the experience, somewhat, because the artwork is so appropriate.

The ending was what really mattered. It was Bilbo’s ending; it is not about the tragic death of a dwarf who went slightly mad, and then redeemed himself; it is not about a boatman who slayed a dragon, and became a renowned hero: it is about a Hobbit. This is Bilbo’s story and no others. It is a story about a fearful Hobbit found the courage to trick a dragon and save his friends. And that all that matters. This evoked the story much more than that heap of shit Peter Jackson shitted out last Christmas. This stayed true to its roots. And the game of riddles was even better.



I do seriously recommend this to lovers of Tolkien’s wonderful novel.

I first read The Hobbit in 1967, the 1965 US paperback edition from the 1956 second edition of the novel. Sadly I gave away that edition many years ago. With all the publicity surrounding the new Peter Jackson movie I decided to reread it in the same edition. It turns out that it's a lot more expensive now than the 95 cents I paid then.

Reading it again after all these years I was surprised to feel some of the same delight I felt the first time. The early scene where Bilbo's home is invaded by an ever growing troupe of dwarves works as well now as it did then, as do much of the early parts of the journey. And the frequent refrain of Bilbo wishing only to back in his Hobbit hole, 'and not for the last time', seems as fresh and as telling now as it ever did.

Overall, though, I was struck by the extent to which The Hobbit is juvenile fiction. And I think it seems especially so by comparison with the ring trilogy. It certainly has none of the sense of existential struggle of the latter work, nor the ultimate sorrow and loss that concludes the trilogy. The Hobbit does share some of the Arcadian perspective of the trilogy - indications that the world was a better, grander place in earlier times, and is now a decaying shadow of what once was. But in The Hobbit this is only presented in passing, and serves mostly to explain why it was so hard for 13 dwarves and one Hobbit to get through a forest and up a river.

Parts of the novel now seem truncated. The meeting with Gollum and the riddle contest, for example, seem shorter than I remembered. And the stay at Elrond's house was a revelation to me: the depiction of elves is quite different than in the trilogy. They are portrayed as being almost ridiculously frivolous, and little hint is given of their nature as depicted in the later work.

I'm quite glad to have read this for the second time, and to have it back on my shelf, but I doubt I'll ever read it again. It simply doesn't hold up to the much more serious work that followed.