The movies diverged a lot from the books. The Dwarves are such stupid assholes in the book, even worse than they are on the screen. They are comically inept and their relatively large number means you have multiple instances where every single one walks into a trap one after another Zap Brannigan style. Maybe if we each spring the trap they will run out of dwarf sized bags to stuff us in (spoiler: they don’t, and they need to be Deus ex Machina’ed out of their jam).
I still don’t know why there were so many Dwarves in the story, especially with samey sounding names. They get basically no characterization and readers will be hard pressed to remember the name of more than half of them by the end of the story.
As a kid they didn’t come across as assholes to me, as an adult i think it’s just part of the narrative. They’re underestimating the gravity of the overall adventure, and they’re all blinded by the promise of potential riches and fame. Bilbo is there as their gopher and unwitting patsy, he was basically a (un)glorified sherpa but he happened to have more wits about him than the rest of the party which is part of the fun for a kid as they experience the story through his eyes.
Why so many dwarves? I don’t think i have the full story but as i recall i think Tolkien came up with the names randomly when he wrote the first draft, really liked it and just stuck with it. When he realized the names made no sense since they’re Nordic in nature he felt compelled to flesh out his entire universe to justify the names though he did say he regretted the naming. Without all the silly dwarves we would’ve never had Lord of the Rings. I could be wrong but that’s the story i remember 
feel free to correct me if you have insight.
In a related way:
For the study group that I’m in, if whatever book we’re reading comes in both print and e- versions, I’ll get both, and have them both open in front of me when I’m reading.
The bright screen is so compelling, and I can make the text bigger, which makes me more eager to read. But scrolling makes it hard to have a sense of where I am in the book, which makes it harder for me to remember what I’ve read and put it all together. So, as I go along, I stop every few paragraphs and read it over again in the print version and make whatever pencilled notes or underlines I want there.
So it automatically becomes a slower way of reading. And I get to read everything twice, which may seem redundant, but I find that using two versions, combined with the extra time it takes, leads to greater engagement with the material.
And although I’m not reading in a foreign language, if there’s an audio version I’ve sometimes done as you describe, i.e., listened to it while reading the same book. I’ve found that useful.
2 Likes
I’ve listened to books that have been voiced by multiple people, and some that were adapted as audio plays for a large cast. I suppose it’s a matter of who’s doing the adapting and whose permissions need to be granted.
Slow better speed you say?! Well ok then.
Surprised the post doesn’t mention slowread.org – A summerlong simul-read of Willa Cather’s “My Ántonia”, reading exactly 6 pages a day.
1 Like
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
