> This is similar to the point of why I became
so fed up with fantasy and Science fiction in
general as I headed out of adolescence -
LOTR in particular. Yes, it is very involved and
Tolkien has put a lot of time into developing
this imaginary world, but it kills off any
semblance of pace in the novels, and unless
you are prepared to immerse yourself in the
lore of his world, it's just not that satisfying to
read.

I must disagree. My first experience with
Tolkien was reading The Hobbit as a 10-year
old. And I loved it. I didn't have to study up on
all the background and "historical" stuff that
existed; The Hobbit works as a stand-alone
novel and the rest simply enhances it.

Some would argue that The Hobbit was
written as a children's story; that it is more
lighthearted, and I would have to agree. Yet I
still enjoy reading it as an adult; my
appreciation of it is enhanced, not diminished
by having looked into the intricate background
material.

The same held true for LOTR. My first full
reading of the trilogy was at the age of 14 or
so, and I enjoyed it every bit as much if not
more than The Hobbit, without knowing any of
the background material contained in The
Silmarillion and other works. I will admit that I
skimmed over a lot of the longer Elvish epic
poems and similar material that first time
through, but unlike you, I became more
interested in such passages and their
"origins" as I grew up, not less.

Gri"seems like there was something else I
wanted to say, but I can't remember what"shny