[devjab]

Everyone in a certain generation did, yes. But it didn’t carry over to their children as such, unless you were a member of fantasy communities I think it’s largely positive that you haven’t heard about them. This is obviously anecdotal, but I grew up in the 80/90ies, played dnd and was a general fantasy nerd and nobody in our community had read them before the movies. Even after the movies a lot of us never made it through all the running around in the second book, which was a staring point for a lot of us after having watched the first movie. Our younger siblings never got into it, they got into Harry Potter instead. For todays youngsters LOTR is basically non-existent.

While anecdotal like I said, none of the “fantasy” stores around my city sell anything LOTR related while some of them have entire floors dedicated to Harry Potter merc.

But you’re absolutely right about what we call the 57’ generation. They all ate it right up. Everyone in my parents generation read it during their early university years, and I do mean everyone.

[indigochill]

I grew up in a family of fantasy nerds and it still took a while for me to get around to LOTR. My main interest was I vaguely remembered a WIRED interview with the creators of Riven (the sequel to Myst) where they said it was an inspiration. I don't remember in what way since the setting is very different, although looking at it now I can see some thematic similarities (a formerly pristine world set on a doomed path by an evil figure with a god complex).

Anyway, I did read the trilogy and the Hobbit and held them in high regard. The movies (mainly the Return of the King) actually did _significantly_ "cheapen" the idea of the LOTR in my eyes at least because the "Return of the King" movie left out plot points that I felt were vital to the message of the books. Primarily that even after the "big bad" was defeated, people were still evil (see the Scouring of the Shire). Much like the real-world war that must have inspired Tolkien given his participation in it, it was a major victory to celebrate but nevertheless not the end of every struggle.

Tangentially I'd also say that even the original Harry Potter brand is cheaper than LOTR because although it's fun and palatable, it doesn't have as much to say about the real world or challenge us in how we live our lives.

A major theme throughout the book trilogy had been that everyone, even Gandalf, has a "shadow" that corrupts their good intentions, except for hobbits which made them ideal ring bearers since the Ring would twist ambition/pride/etc to its own ends. It's basically a morality play for the post-WW2 generation, where the demons are not just external monsters but internal temptations. The movie trilogy's ending was much "neater" and also much less true to life.

But on the other hand, the RPG "The One Ring" does right by the source material by making the shadow a mechanic in the game that mirrors the theme in the books.

So LOTR seems like an excellent example of licensing gone both right (The One Ring) and wrong (admittedly the movies weren't all bad, but most could probably agree the Hobbit movies did cheapen the source material).