J.R.R. Tolkien Epic Reads discussion

Yay! Finally, we have arrived at The Hobbit. We will read two chapters a month. This thread is for any beginning notes in your edition, plus chapters 1-3. We will read any Notes and Chapter 1 in September, and Chapters 3-4 in October 2017. If you read ahead, please feel free to go ahead and comment.

Yay but I might have got a little impatient and started it last week! 😳

John wrote: "Yay but I might have got a little impatient and started it last week! 😳"

Lol! That is awesome:) I actually had to restrain myself but I DID read the Notes and Chapter 1 yesterday! And thoroughly enjoyed them. I'm going to stick to the reading schedule to give me time to absorb things. OMG! There is so much in that first chapter, yeah?

So ... what are your thoughts? Or would you like me to begin?!?!

If you want a real treat, try reading it aloud and listening to the words. I think one aspect of Tolkien is his unique ability to capture voice in his writing. As famous as the opening paragraph is, it really feels like it is meant to be read aloud. It fits with the idea of him reading it to his children as he wrote.

As he gets into the story, it shifts, but the opening pages definitely are worth reading aloud.

I just found your group and I love the concept. I can't wait to get started!!

James wrote: "If you want a real treat, try reading it aloud and listening to the words. I think one aspect of Tolkien is his unique ability to capture voice in his writing. As famous as the opening paragraph is..."

What a great idea, James!

I haven't started it yet, but I will definitely to read the first chapter aloud. And since I will read it both in my own language and in English, I wonder if there's any different when I read it aloud :)
Thank you for suggesting it.

John wrote: "Yay but I might have got a little impatient and started it last week! 😳"

Yay! How far are you now?

Heidi wrote: "Lol! That is awesome:) I actually had to restrain myself but I DID read the Notes and Chapter 1 yesterday! And..."

I'll try to start the book next week :)

Hey Everyone! My apologies for an unexplained absence. We had a family tragedy:( My husband's 24-year-old grandson died on September 17, a fatal car crash. He was hit head-on by someone who was DUI. When we got the news we left immediately for the funeral, etc and were gone a couple weeks (out-of-state). When he died his wife was pregnant with their first son, who was born the Friday before last. Needless to say, very bittersweet.

ANYWAY.

Back to The Hobbit!

John, James, and Rachmi:) and everyone else, what did you think of the opening?

I've read the Notes and Chapter 1.

My thoughts:

1. The Note is on runes. I really like that because it lends a historical veracity to the fiction:) I'm sure that's exactly what Tolkien meant to do. And I love his explanation of dwarfs vs. dwarves and his decision to use dwarves.

2. He uses the word "adventure" 15 times in the first chapter, drawing a strong and playful contrast to the hobbit culture's disapproval of adventure.

3. Then he references Bilbo's fairy-mother several times, to explain, the state in Bilbo's change of mind from the beginning of the chapter to the end. I'm not certain, I haven't read LotR in so long, but is Bilbo's fairy mother the only fairy in the series?!?!?

4. Gandalf enters right up front as the wise elder and dispenser of history, so that almost all the back story is given in dialogue rather than info-dumping. The reason this works so well, for me, is that Gandalf's voice is authentic and distinct, as James pointed out, and thus makes the dialogue aspect intriguing vs. "eyes-glaze-over" boring!

Looking forward to reading chapters 2 & 3!

I'm so sorry.

Thank you, Mary. It's possible that we're all just still in shock.

Heidi wrote: "Hey Everyone! My apologies for an unexplained absence. We had a family tragedy:( My husband's 24-year-old grandson died on September 17, a fatal car crash. He was hit head-on by someone who was DUI..."

So sorry for your loss, Heidi

Donna, thank you.

Heidi wrote: "Hey Everyone! My apologies for an unexplained absence. We had a family tragedy:( My husband's 24-year-old grandson died on September 17, a fatal car crash. He was hit head-on by someone who was DUI..."

I love "The Hobbit" as well as the other books, so this is a fun read for me. I love the way J.R.R. Tolkien told his stories, putting in enough detail to see, hear, smell, taste; but not so much that his readers lost the story line.
I have always loved the way Bilbo gets "involved" and how he copes with all of the house guests. He is ever the good host, bringing out food and drink from a seemingly endless supply. Then, when he thinks he can avoid a journey, the dwarves begin to sing. He is hooked. Details, always the details!
I enjoyed reading the Notes and learning about the runes. I also agree that Gandalf's voice is authentic and distinct. I love how he pulls people in and gets them to think it is their own idea.
All in all, I had a hard time stopping here and can't wait to pick the book up again. =)

Heidi wrote: "Hey Everyone! My apologies for an unexplained absence. We had a family tragedy:( My husband's 24-year-old grandson died on September 17, a fatal car crash. He was hit head-on by someone who was DUI..."

1. The Note is on runes. I really like that because it lends a historical veracity to the fiction:) I'm sure that's exactly what Tolkien meant to do. And I love his explanation of dwarfs vs. dwarves and his decision to use dwarves.

As I'm reading The Hobbit in Indonesian, I was surprised to find that there's no notes about Tolkien's explanation about dwarfs vs dwarves and why he decided to use dwarves. So when I saw your comment, you made me check it out on my English edition. And I somehow feel ignorant maybe? (am not sure if it's the right word) as I thought dwarves is the correct word, as I only knew dwarve and dwarves though later on, just a week ago, I read in Gaiman book and he used dwarf and dwarfs instead. To be honest, I thought Gaiman used the not-so correct word :D

2. He uses the word "adventure" 15 times in the first chapter, drawing a strong and playful contrast to the hobbit culture's disapproval of adventure.

Did you really count the words? I didn't realize there are that much "adventure". But strangely, I feel more exiting with Bilbo adventure now, than when I first read the book 15 years ago.

3. Then he references Bilbo's fairy-mother several times, to explain, the state in Bilbo's change of mind from the beginning of the chapter to the end. I'm not certain, I haven't read LotR in so long, but is Bilbo's fairy mother the only fairy in the series?!?!?

I think so. I haven't read LoTR in a long time either though.

This is OOT but in Indonesian, the translator translated both fairy and elf with the same word, peri. Before I read any Tolkien books, I don't have problem with it, as I only know peri is for a teeny tiny creature like Tinker Bell. But when LoTR the movies came you can imagine how surprised I was to find that elf isn't a little creature like I used to know. And then I read LoTR and The Hobbit and found out that elf isn't the same thing as fairy.

So now, reading The Hobbit again and still find that peri is for both fairy and elf is a bit confusing, hahaha. My friend told me that it's because my copy is the first edition though. The latest edition of The Hobbit and LoTR and any other Tolkien books now use peri for fairy but decided not to translate elf. So they keep it as elf in Tolkien books Indonesian edition now.

Donna wrote: "Heidi wrote: "Hey Everyone! My apologies for an unexplained absence. We had a family tragedy:( My husband's 24-year-old grandson died on September 17, a fatal car crash. He was hit head-on by someo..."

This is the fun read for me too! I remember that I was amazed with the story when I first read it, but now I feel like it's more fun, I don't know why. Or maybe because now I get to pay more attention with everything while 15 years ago all I wanted to is having an adventure with Bilbo and the dwarves :)

I feel Bilbo is too kind though. I tried imagine myself being in his shoes and think that I won't be able to be that kind and acceptance to my guess like Bilbo did hahaha.

Rachmi wrote: "Donna wrote: "Heidi wrote: "Hey Everyone! My apologies for an unexplained absence. We had a family tragedy:( My husband's 24-year-old grandson died on September 17, a fatal car crash. He was hit he..."

I agree, Bilbo is too kind. I also think he is in shock! LOL

Hi everyone! I've only just turned 13 and I joined the group only yesterday but I've already read 'The Hobbit' around 5 times! A few times in my own language as well (Russian).

Anyway, here are some of my thoughts for the first chapters:

1. In the intro Tolkien uses very simple language to create a calm cosy atmosphere which helped me to understand hobbits.

2. Tolkien is using a human as a narrator so the way in which he describes hobbits is as we would see them and not from their point of view.

3. Bilbo is described as a quiet respectable hobbit but with something queer in him. When Bilbo remembers Gandalf he suddenly starts talking very dramatically which the reader would not expect from a hobbit like Bilbo was described. This makes us guess about Bilbo's future adventure that the adventurous part in him will finally take over which makes the reader want to carry on reading because they know that the adventure is going to change Bilbo and we want to know how he will change.

4. I love how Tolkien shows us the two sides of Bilbo - it's like he's been asleep all these years and the coming of the dwarves woke the strong side in him but Bilbo wasn't ready yet to become a 'hero'. However, as the time went, the strong side took over and even though not fully but enough for Bilbo to surprise himself and the others.

5. Also, if you have the book version there should be a map on the first page of the book. That is the map that Thorin has which also has runes on it. They are not just random runes but some sentences which the dwarves will later discover in the book. Below there is a link which should take you to an image with dwarvish runes and how they should be translated. Personally I learnt them off by heart.
https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=dwa...

Heidi wrote: "Then he references Bilbo's fairy-mother several times, to explain, the state in Bilbo's change of mind from the beginning of the chapter to the end. I'm not certain, I haven't read LotR in so long, but is Bilbo's fairy mother the only fairy in the series?!?!?"

There are no fairies in Middle-earth we know about. 'The Hobbit' was one of Tolkien's first books so he only briefly knew what Middle-earth is like. Only after 'The Hobbit' he wrote LOTR, Silmarillion, The History of Middle-earth, etc. The reference to fairies in the first chapter is probably a tiny detail Tolkien didn't really think about. Also, in some editions goblins are mentioned instead of fairies and in others it skips that part. However, fairies could exist in lands behind Mordor and south of countries like Harad and Khand.

Great points Marji. I love that informal style that Tolkien uses in the early chapters, it really does draw you in.

A few more points for the first 3 chapters:

1. So far Tolkien kind of uses chapters for short stories - the first chapter was the intro and the comic meeting of Bilbo and the dwarves, the second chapter was all about trolls and the third chapter was mostly about Rivendell.

2. The way in which Tolkien describes elves in the third chapter is very different to all other descriptions of elves in other books. Here he describes them as merry people who as it seems know little of great matters, however, in other books, e.g. Silmarillion, Children of Hurin, etc., Tolkien describes them as wise folk which do know joy and laughter but not in this way.

3. In the third chapter Tolkien mentioned Gondolin and the king of Gondolin. If Hobbit was his first book about Middle-earth then he wouldn't have thought of Gondolin beforehand except for maybe as a made up city. However, there is also a theory that Tolkien started writing Silmarillion before any other book but published it later after he wrote LOTR and Hobbit and got the idea of how middle earth should look like by the end of Silmarillion. This will also be proved in LOTR because of Numenor and the ancient line of kings of Numenor but I won't say any more because I don't want to spoil it for people who haven't read LOTR in a long time.

By the way, if you are not bothered to translate the runes from the map at the beginning, everything is written in the third chapter so you won't have to bother translating them.

Hello, everyone! I finished chapters 2 & 3. OMG! Chapter 2 is fun with the trolls. Lots of humor:D "Trolls simply detest the sight of dwarves (uncooked)." heehee.

Let me try to catch up with everyone's comments and throw in a few of my own.

Donna, reading it this time is much more fun. Maybe that is the pleasure in re-reading a beloved book. You know what's going to happen, so your brain isn't driven to figure it out. You can sit back and enjoy the scenery, and the scenery in The Hobbit is great!

Rach, I'll have to slightly disagree that Bilbo is too kind. The way I read it, if he were rude to his guests, he would be breaking some "unspoken Hobbit rule" of hospitality or propriety. What is funny is all his muttering and inner thoughts about how ungrateful his guests are, and how he's quite glad to wake up and find them gone.

And then Tolkien expands on that in so many ways, as Marji, pointed out with all Bilbo's ambivalence about his pending adventure. A great example is the paragraph in chapter 2 that begins, "To the end of his days, Bilbo could never remember how he found himself outside, without a hat, a walking-stick, any money ... leaving his (famous Hobbit) second breakfast half-finished and quite unwashed up..." Tolkien drives this Hobbit fastidiousness home with the pocket handkerchiefs ... of which Gandalf gallantly supplies him with "a lot", later on.

I also love Tolkien's simple way of creating mood, environment, drama, tension with phrases like this: "old castles with an evil look, as if they had been built by wicked people."

Yes, Rachmi, I COUNTED the word adventure, because as I was reading I was like, he keeps using this word!!!! So, yes, I went back and counted. Interestingly, enough I noted in chapter 2, he repeatedly uses terms for conflict between the dwarves, and then between the trolls: quarreling, arguing, began to fight, grumbling and dratting, a gorgeous row, fighting like dogs, calling one another ... names, locked in one another's arms, fought like mad ...

Is this a Tolkien writing technique? Creating a theme per chapter? Not sure, I didn't pick up on anything like that in chapter 3, but I was tired when I read it.

Rachmi, I love that word "peri" for faerie or elf. It's interesting to hear how the translation to other languages progress, as you mention the 1st edition of the Indonesian translation vs. the later ones.

Marji, I really noticed the human narrator in chapter 2, as the narrative "I" is used several times. And great observation on this>>>>"When Bilbo remembers Gandalf he suddenly starts talking very dramatically which the reader would not expect from a hobbit like Bilbo was described. And thank you for the rune translation! Amazing. If you have time, could you add that to the resources?

Marji, I think it's interesting he wrote the essay on "Fairy-Stories" between The Hobbit and LotR. His whole writing and story-telling shifted so dramatically between the two works. It seems highly likely that after he wrote The Hobbit and before he began LotR he began working on The Silmarillion. And that he worked on The Silmarillion the entire time he wrote LotR as he had to fill in the background, history of Middle-earth. As you know, Tolkien never published TS as it was published posthumously, which probably has a lot to do with the uneven quality of the work, i.e. some of it is brilliant, some of it is repetitive, and some of it, well ... It's not fair to judge though since it's not a complete work from the author's perspective.

Okay, all ... onward!!!!!

Oh, a few thoughts on chapter 3:) There are some great segments, although, honestly, sometimes I find Tolkien's long narration of scenery ... well, long. I have to remind myself this was written long ago ...

Anyway, the touch where Bilbo wanted to talk to the elves about their thoughts on "adventure."

I love love love, the scene with Elrond where he identifies Orcrist, the Gobinslayer and Glamdring Foehammer. This is a section where having read The Silmarillion really enriches the reading experience of The Hobbit.

OMG! And the whole concept of moon letters ... just to die for, lol.

November: Chapters 4 & 5. We'll get out an email!

Tolkien started the Silmarillion stories in 1916, and was in the process of revising them in the 30s. The Hobbit was primarily a story told to his children and the Inklings, who encouraged him to publish it. It crept into the world of the Silmarillion. He tried getting his publishers to look at those stories after the Hobbit was published, but they didn’t give them much attention, wanting a sequel to the Hobbit. LOTR is a melding of Hobbits into the wider world he already had made up. The light comedy disappears and the realism and weight of created history take over.

James wrote: "Tolkien started the Silmarillion stories in 1916, and was in the process of revising them in the 30s. The Hobbit was primarily a story told to his children and the Inklings, who encouraged him to p..."

So is it your understanding that he began TS before The Hobbit ( it was published in 1937.) Or did he tell the tale to his children, then start TS, then The Hobbit got published. Fairy-Stories came out in 1939.

James wrote: "The light comedy disappears and the realism and weight of created history take over."

I always found it fascinating how different The Hobbit and LotR are. TS is obviously much more in the vein of LotR. I've found Fairy-Stories to be the best explanation for the difference. Tolkien's belief in the "eucastrophe", etc. But if he began TS in 1916, then The Hobbit really was more of an aside? for his children. Pretty amazing "aside" if that's the case.

Since he first told it to his children, I guess that explains the first-person narration, and colloquial, genial tone of the narrator.

Didn't he work on TS until his death?

Most of The Silmarillion was written by 1930, then endlessly revised until his death. It started as a Book of Lost Tales, and around 1930 he began trying to tie them together more. After the success of LOTR he even started rewriting The Hobbit in more formal style to bring it in line with everything else, but it didn’t work well.

Interestingly, I believe many of the tales in the Silmarillion were intentionally given more or less detail to increase the illusion they were gathered stories rather than one cohesive work. Turin and Beren have fairly complete stories, while others tell only partial tales, or cover specific events, like the breaking of the trees or the fall of Gondolin.

Tolkien was notorious for revising, often writing a quick copy, transcribing a fair manuscript copy, then typing a transcript of the writing... revising each as he went.

Most of his other stories are whimsical in ways, like the Hobbit. Smith of Wooten Major, Farmer Giles of Ham, Roverandom, but The Hobbit crept into his “serious” world, and becomes more serious in tone as each chapter goes by (after ch. 5 or so). It is very episodic into the goblin cave, but starts to shift after Riddles in the Dark. There are almost three different parts to it, the light comedy episodes to start, the more drawn out mini-plots with the goblins, elves, and lakemen with comic elements inset in longer story arcs, and the final chapters which have a high fantasy tone more similar to LOTR with darkness, war, and less comedy.

Bilbo is pretty constant throughout, but the story shifts to include much more than him. He almost disappears at times in the later chapters.

But I’m rambling, and we’re taking our time with the book... I can be a bit of a fan boy at times. It’s wonderful to share ideas with you all. And I love reading everyone else’s comments as well. Thanks for listening!

James wrote: "Most of The Silmarillion was written by 1930, then endlessly revised until his death. It started as a Book of Lost Tales, and around 1930 he began trying to tie them together more. After the succes..."


James, please don't apologize for rambling! The whole point of taking the reading so slow is so we can do a "deep dive" with our thoughts, impressions, and the whole discussion. So, please, your insights and knowledge are valued!

I'm not surprised Tolkien tried to re-write The Hobbit, but I'm honestly glad it didn't work. I like that it's quite distinct and yet still part of the whole. I think it makes his whole catalogue that much more fabulous;)

As far as the varying level of details in the tales in TS , I agree with you, and that didn't doesn't bother me. For me, it was mostly the last few chapters that really felt unfinished, and repetitive. They really read like drafts to me. I haven't read those other tales, but maybe someday ...

I love your insight into The Hobbit and how it changes, i.e. "There are almost three different parts..." It's going to make it more interesting to read and notice that:) But now that you mention it, I did think the end of chapter 3, Elrond's dialogue about the swords and the moon letters veered much more into LotR territory.

I have forgotten Bilbo's "disappearance" toward the end, that will also be interesting to take note of on this read as well.

The other really interesting tidbit in chapter 3, was Bilbo's desire to talk to the elves about "adventure." It isn't fleshed out and doesn't seem to go anywhere, but how intriguing, that he was seeking a different perspective other than Hobbit-perspective, and dwarf-perspective, perhaps elves are more akin to faeries, and his faerie-blood yearned for conversation with a race more similar to his mother's. Okay, now I'm rambling, lol.

Hi! As I mentioned in the other topic, I thought it was interesting the runes in my French edition had been translated if I may say so. Here are pictures:






Our title says 'Le Hobbit ou un aller et retour'. I'd never realized before that the runes in translations were changed so readers could study them and translate them into French by themselves. Now that I think about it it makes sense, and it really pleases me!

I found this link useful to translate them.

Mel ☀︎ wrote: "Hi! As I mentioned in the other topic, I thought it was interesting the runes in my French edition had been translated if I may say so. Here are pictures:




Our title says 'Le Hobbit ou un aller ..."

Thank you for posting this. It's easier for me to distinguish the difference in the subtitle, but even in the smaller images I can discern some difference. I love seeing the French! We went to France several years ago and tried to learn French before we went. We got some basics, enough to help us along. It's a beautiful language. BTW I'm reading a book on Voltaire right now, quite an interesting figure!

You're welcome ! I'm so glad I found this group - pretty sure no one else around me would be interested in such details lol.
Where in France did you go? I honestly have only read 3 or 4 books by Voltaire I think. I've been meaning to read his plays for a while though. Zaïre has been sitting on my shelves unopened for far too long!

There's an interesting discussion about the difference edition of The Hobbit in French, Indonesian and Russian in another thread. If you want to know about it, here its link (it started at message 39):

https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...

Mel ☀︎ wrote: "Hi! As I mentioned in the other topic, I thought it was interesting the runes in my French edition had been translated if I may say so. Here are pictures:




Our title says 'Le Hobbit ou un aller ..."

Mel, I honestly never thought that in other language the publisher (or the translator) will change the rune too! I just checked my edition out of curiosity hahaha. But turns out it's the same with the English one. I never try to translate it though. But now I'm curious and want to learn the rune :D

As I promise, here's one of the songs (from chapter 3) in Indonesian. It doesn't sound similar in rhyme, unlike in English which is so good when I read it, but it has pretty close in meaning with English version.

O! What are you doing,
And where are you going?
Your ponies need shoeing!
The river is flowing!
    O! tra-la-la-lally
here down in the valley!

O! Apa yang kaulakukan,
Dan ke mana kau mau berjalan?
Kudamu perlu ganti sepatu,
Sungai gemercik di batu-batu!
    O! tra-la-la-lali
        di lembah subur ini,

--> sepatu does sound similar with batu-batu. But batu-batu isn't meant to be in this lyric, in my opinion. The translator adds the word (which means rocks) to make it sounds more meaningful or beautiful or I don't know, honestly.

O! What are you seeking,
And where are you making?
The faggots are reeking,
The bannocks are baking!
    O! tril-lil-lil-lolly
        the valley is jolly,
            ha! ha!

O! Apa yang kaucari,
Dan ke mana kau pergi?
Ranting kayu gemeretak,
Roti dipanggang berderak-derak!
    O! tri-lil-lil-lolli
        di lembah yang makmur ini,
            hi! hi!

--> this verse doesn't rhyme but the meaning is pretty close.

O! Where are you going
With beards all a-wagging?
No knowing, no knowing
What brings Mister Baggins
    And Balin and Dwalin
        down into the valley
            in June
                ha! ha!

O! Ke mana kau menuju?
Janggutmu mengangguk sangat lucu?
Tidak tahu, tidak tahu!
Mengapa Mr. Baggins,
    Dengan Balin and Dwalin
        turun ke lembah ini
            di bulan Juni
                hi! hi!

--> similar with second verse, it doesn't rhyme but has similar meaning.

O! Will you be staying,
Or will you be flying?
Your ponies are straying!
The daylight is dying!
To fly would be folly,
To stay would be jolly
    And listen and hark
        Till the end of the dark
            to our tune
                ha! ha!

O! Maukah kau mampir,
Atau terus menyingkir?
Kudamu tersesat!
Siang hari pun sudah lewat!
Kalau terus sunggu sayang,
Kalau mampir sungguh senang
    Dengarkan nyanyian kami yang merdu
        Sampai malam gelap pun berlalu
            Mari kita bergembira
                ha! ha!

--> this verse doesn't rhyme at all and just like first verse, the translator add a few words to make the lyrics sound more understandable in Indonesian.

Despite the rhyme and the additional vocabulary that aren't in English version, I'm pretty impressed with the translator. He/she chose the words that I don't think I will choose if I have to translate these verses, but what he/she chose are still sound beautiful and more make sense in Indonesian.

I don't know if what I write now is understandable to you but I do hope you get what I'm trying to say :)

Mel ☀︎ wrote: "You're welcome ! I'm so glad I found this group - pretty sure no one else around me would be interested in such details lol.
Where in France did you go? I honestly have only read 3 or 4 books by Vo..."


We were in Paris (of course!) and Nice. I think a week in each? My husband paints casually, so we were on an art trip, visiting museums, etc. It was a small group guided by an artist, who went every summer, so she was familiar with the cities. The tour allowed for free time so we could wander and take the metro in Paris. It was harder to get around in Nice, the buses, but we had so much fun!!!

Oh, Voltaire. I read this book: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1...

About Voltaire, who was a fascinating person! I confess, I've tried to read Candide and didn't get very far:( It was just, uhm ... his style is difficult. However, as a fighter for freedom of thought, he was a great champion, and for that I deeply admire him.

Rachmi wrote: "Despite the rhyme and the additional vocabulary that aren't in English version, I'm pretty impressed with the translator. He/she chose the words that I don't think I will choose if I have to translate these verses, but what he/she chose are still sound beautiful and more make sense in Indonesian..."

I don't know Indonesian but you can see, visually, how skillful the translation seems. WOW!

Thank you for sharing the link to the other thread!

Oh I lived in Nice for 6 years! Studied there. I miss it but I still live just 2 hours from there so I can go easily. I haven't been to Paris very often though. Well, I have, but with specific things to do/events to attend so I didn't get many chances to visit.

Mel ☀︎ wrote: "Oh I lived in Nice for 6 years! Studied there. I miss it but I still live just 2 hours from there so I can go easily. I haven't been to Paris very often though. Well, I have, but with specific thin..."


How cool! We drove along to some of the other cities along the coast, it was all (naturally) quite different from Paris, to me, so it was nice to see the contrast.