Intro: How Has Other Media Affected Your Reading?

[MajahTR]

This is the first time I "read" the book since seeing the movie. Because I am listening to the unabridged reading of FotR, I am finding little influence of the movie. Strangely, when I pick up the book to actually read, I am hearing the reader's voice and seeing my own depictions (mostly) rather than seeing and hearing movie scenes.
I have always enjoyed the illustrations of Alan Lee and John Howe (in most cases), above others who have depicted Middle-Earth. Their illustrations helped me through the years picture certain scenes that for whatever reason I was unable to imagine clearly. So, having their visions for the movie was for me a seamless transition between my mind's eye and the movie screen. I noticed little change in the landscapes as I "read" this time. If anything, the movie added richness.
Have you sensed any changes in how you picture things in your mind after viewing or listening to other media and their interpretations of Tolkien?
DA

[MajahTR]

Most Definetly! Media's interpretation of Tolkien's work has constantly added enjoyment to my readings of his works.

I have only most of Tolkien's works twice already(LotR three times) and I have still got problems picturing the places that Tolkien has described. I have been rather interested to see what other people depict Tolkien when they read or draw it. I especially enjoy illustrations since they always seem to add clarity to my image of a location in ME.

From my first reading to my most recent reading, I have had the image of places change numerous times by outside influences in the form of narratives, the movie and illustrations. I am hoping these images continue to change so that my enjoyment of Tolkien will continue.....
Tuor

---

I also find that the movie doesn't seem to have merged with my imagination's version, the one exception being Rivendell, the house itself, for some reason. As for the characters and other places, my version of them hasn't changed. There is Frodo from the movie, and then Frodo in my mind, I like "both" Frodos, but they're not the same.

DA named two of the three artists who's work I also really enjoy (in most cases), The third is Ted Nasmith. Illustrations are cool because they can be awesome, but less threatning to the imagination. They just offer a glimpse into the artist's imagination of the tales. Of course the movie isn't necessarily threatening, but it can be percieved this way.

Oh, I should add that even though my minds version hasn't really changed because of the movie, it changes on its own anyway. I mean, over the years, the characters and the places have changed. Perhaps a better word is emerged. Oh, I always accidently have big spaces after my posts. ? Im really not trying to put these in for empasis or something. lol.
Fallohide

---

As to the root of this thread, I am still influenced by media, as I have been since I branched out from merely READING the trilogy. For this is a story meant not to be merely read, but EXPERIENCED. We have all done that many ways, long before the movie came out. Buying the calendars, enjoying the many illustrators, even laughing over Leonard Nimoy (Mr. Spock) including LotR stuff on his campy music albums.

Some BAD influences have been the Bakshi animation (pure trash), and some odd interpretations, like the BBC production.

Peter Jackson's vision has been a joy, in many regards. He hired Tolkien linguistic scholars, which was a boon to us, and made our Iarwain very happy to hear Namárië pronounced properly. I myself cannot get over the pronunciation of Isildur, in the movie. Ever since I could remember, I pronounced it IS-ILL-DOOR.........but to hear it pronounced IZ-SIL-DOOR, really rocked my boat. It gave such regality to it, and seemed more historic.

And I am sure we all pick and choose. We want to remain true to our own version of Tolkien, but many outside influences either jell, or do not. Some make our visions better, some worse. So now my vision of ME is a conglomeration of thoughts in my head, and the interpretations of thousands. But one thing remains true. Through it all, it is THE Middle-earth to me, the only one that truly exists. I enjoy sharing it with others, but at the close of the day, it comes home with me, ever ready to open again, out from the door where it began.
Glor

---

Glor wrote: Some BAD influences have been the Bakshi animation (pure trash), and some odd interpretations, like the BBC production

I haven't heard the BBC production and the Bakshi didn't bother my "inner Middle-Earth" at all, BUT, I recently read a long quote about Sam's battle with Shelob from a Freudian that...well, lets just say I'm going to have to pass over that section in the book for a few years...until I can shake the image out of my mind...
DA

---

I was able to borrow the Special edition DVD that goes along with the recently released FOTR DVD package from my friend, Krysha Eppona, who I work with. Thank you so much Krysha. I really appreciate that.

It was really great to watch. I am was very pleased to know that the actual scenes, landscapes, homes, sites, etc. were actually designed and not just computerized. I was so glad that Peter Jackson actually obtained the help of the artists Alan Lee and John Howe who actually sat down outside on the farmland and in the woods to sketch the landscapes they were looking at and drew in their layouts of Hobbiton, Rivendell, Lothlorein, etc.

Most of the movie's scenes were very much as I pictured them in my mind. Seeing them on the wide screen was so breathtaking and wonderous to behold. I marvel at how lovingly Peter Jackson and crew labored over getting everthing right, from scenery, props, languages, actors' getting into the feelings of their character, the creatures, the clothing and war gear, tooling of the arms, etc.

The only thing so far in the movie that really messed up my interpretation was the character of Samwise. While Sean Astin got all the feelings, actions, emotions, long term relationship between Frodo and Sam down pat, he just did not look how I pictured Sam. To me, Sam was much more gruff and had black unruly hair. But I can live with that since everything else seemd so "ON" target. I will still picture Sam's appearance my way.....no matter what!

Now that I have been visiting other sites for artwork for our site, I have been looking at all the various artists depictions of characters, scenes, and lands. I have enjoyed these artists interpretations immensely. For some things that were difficult to depict myself, I have seen others views which have greatly increased my enjoyment of the novel because I have these references to go by now.

Now I would like to listen to the novels and hear the poems, stories, and languages spoken by all those knowledgeable people who have recorded them. Since we have begun some language studies here, I am very looking forward to hearing the spoken word!

Therefore, I would have to say that all of the other media has been a good thing and an ehancement for me.
Stormrider

---

DA, you have mentioned the audio version you have (I think you said the reader was Rob Ingals?)--where did you get it? I have been searching everywhere and can find no mention of it. I would like to get it because sometimes right now I have more time to listen (in the car, especially) than to read.

Fallohide, I was intrigued by your remark that the movie's depiction of Rivendell matched your imagination. I found Rivendell jarring because in my imagination it was much more "homey." (i.e. long hall with big fireplace and heavy timbered tables; more "foresty" outside, etc.) I just bought the movie today (finally! I don't get out much) so I will have to look at Rivendell with a more open mind this time. I agree with you that Frodo--and for me, the other hobbits--did not jibe with my imagination. The movie didn't change my perception of Hobbits--at least not yet. But I managed to accustom myself to PJ's vision enough to enjoy the movie.

The one part of the movie that, for me, was unexpected but seemed exactly right were to two huge statues on the River. I managed to relate to Lothlorien and find glimpses of what I had imagined, but when I saw those statues I finally felt I had found Middle Earth.

One problem I have with movies made from books I have loved is that I'm a "visual" reader--I've already had a movie in my head when I read it-- so often I don't like the movie isn't nearly as well as my mental version.
MusicMom

---

well the movie has obviously shown images of all the characters, and now that i'm reading the book i cannot help but picture the images and portrayals of the actors in my head for the characters in the book, and these images are different than the ones i constructed prior to seeing the movie. also, the movie has made the book a little easier to understand, and i now read it better after seeing the movie.

also, i listened to the BBC radio c.d. set thing a couple times, but that is very similar to the story, so it didn't make much of a difference on how i read the books, although it was enjoyable to listen to it instead of see it, activates another sense.

and the pictures i've seen from John Howe, Allan Lee, etc. are beautiful peices of art and they have enhanced my reading of the book to a higher level.
~Shelob

---

Glor,
thanks for the tip on those spaces. Also, you've got me thinking that there really is one middle earth, though there are different interpretations, and not different middle earths. Why else would we be here?

MusicMom,

You are right about those statues in the movie, they were great, and Rivendell is homey in my mind, only the movie version was breathtaking. I'll need to watch it over again as well. I still don't have a copy either. I'm a visual reader as well, I know just what you mean about the movie in your head.
fallohide

---

MusicMom, you can find the CD's (also comes in cassette) on the Tolkien Multimedia link on our new and improved homepage. It is the last pictured item. You can click on it and go look at it on Amazon.com. Rob Inglis is the narrator. Getting all three books in one shot is alot cheaper in the long run than separately.
DA

---

I am a 'visual' reader too; ever since I first read the books, I have had a clear picture in my mind of all the characters and many places - many, but not all. Most difficult for me to imagine were the places that were very high or deep or wide, such as Caradhras and Moria. That is, I guess, where the movie was a true help for me.
Pearlbloom

---

I agree with you Pearl, for I seem to have the same problem interpreting places which were high, deep or wide. I had problems interpreting places like the dell at weathertop, Caradhras, and Moria. I found the movie to be a large help for that as those places were casted well and fitted and corrected my ever-changing images of those places.

Glor, what you say about our own middle-earth we have in our minds is so true. I agree with all those comments, for the fact of the matter is, our own middle-earth we picture in our minds may be far different from someone else we talk to on this site. I must then salute PJ and his staff on such a fine job they did interpreting such a great image of middle-earth that most Tolkien readers can agree on and say positive things about.
Tuor

---

Seeing the movie first, before reading the novel, means that at least for the first two books, I rely largely on the images from the movie. However, sometimes, after reading the book, I did alter the image from the movie. I find that in watching the previews for TTT, I am not quite as accepting of the images from the movie, because I read that section of the book first. I still think PJ did a good job of bringing the story to life on the big screen.
Sparrow

---

Of course the art by Howe and Lee have done nothing but enrich my enjoyment of Tolkien. I have always found truth in their images and I believe they create from the "heart" where LOTR is concerned.

The movie has actually impacted me less than the art. I completely enjoyed it and I love it moreso because I have been able to seperate cinema from literature easily (I do seen Ian McKellen as Gandalf now when I read ... a minor nuisance ).

If I remember correctly, there was an interview with Brian Sibley (author of the Offical Movie Guide for FOTR) where he stated that Tolkien believed his Middle-earth could definitely be enhanced through other media. I tend to agree with this observation.
Algamesh

---

My recent National Geographic had an atrticle about New Zealand in it, one of the photos of a rainforest is titled Tolkien's Middle Earth. It appears the media has been influenced by Jackson's work at the very least.
For me I love movies, and I loved Tolkien before the cartoon, and before the movie. My Tolkien addict friends and I used to sit a muse about whom would play what parts should a movie be made, so already the media was affecting my visions of Middle Earth.
Now with the second film knocking at our door, the buzz is growing, and I am indeed excited to see Jackson's view of Helm's Deep, and Fanghorn, but as I read now, my own visions still remain, their voices, and faces forever etched with in my small childs brain that still rattles this middle age persona. I don't think the movie will ever really change the vision that child started so many years ago!
Namárië,
Iarwain
P.S. same goes for that up start Rowling's charcters too.

Just to amend my previous post, perhaps it has changed my view of somethings, Boromir in particular. I tended to dislike him until seeing him in the film, and now when I read his words, I seem to be seeing a different man. Sorry about the previous post, but really considering all affects and views, it has changed my vision. Anyone else?
Iarwain

---

When I first heard about the movies, I was somewhat worried that they just wouldn't get things "right" - that I wouldn't be able to enjoy it because the images and the characters would be so different from what I had imagined. In many ways it was different from what I had imagined as a visual reader, but I found myself accepting the new images and now they're part of the experience for me.

I have to agree that the most amazingly majestic scene was the two statues by the river - I was talking to a friend who had never read the books, and he said that that particular scene really blew him away.

And Glorfindle, I agree with you on the pronunciations - it was weird to hear things said differently, with mor-DOR with the rolled rrr's and stuff like that. I've pretty much stuck to my old ways in that area, though.

So, although I like the movie images, I still tell people who haven't read the books that they really shouldn't see the movies until they have. It's important to have your own images first, I think.
Eleandune

---

Yuk! I just had an unpleasent experience reading the Ring Goes South. I pictured that it was Gandalf that determined the road to Caradhras... not Aragorn being determined to go that way... This came from watching the movie to many times I think... Sob
Luthien

---