Article published in the «Book history» — 2005 — Vol. 8 — p. 245-286Allusions in the American press to The Lord of the Rings have frequently embraced an implicit degree of irony. This tendency can be noted over a period of some years; Tolkien might occasionally make news, but perhaps not of any real consequence. More recently, however, this attitude has begun to shift radically once again. The central reason behind this change lies in the massive popularity of Peter Jackson's trilogy of film adaptations. One argument for renewed respectability for the source material will be strictly economic. Along with a few almost obligatory references to the film's "geek-magnet story" and "little-boy allure," the New York Times review of The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers was also compelled to note that "the first film took in enough cash to jump-start thу flagging United States economy single-handedly."A similar note sounded in the Hollywood Reporter's assessment of the February 2003 American Film Market, at which Frodo Baggins was declared "the most important player," сapable of "rescuing] the annual event from the clutches of a global recession." In the new millennium, nothing commands respect as much
as the billion dollar grosses that each film has generated in worldwide box office. But beyond economics, the movies have certainly returned The Lord of the Rings to the mainstream on some level. Whether the book's audience, under the influence of action figures, fast food tie-ins, and video games, will become yet further juvenilized, or whether it will perceptibly broaden, it will be interesting to observe how public perception of the book changes in the wake of the films. Whatever the case, the longevity of The Lord of the Rings—a book that passed its fiftieth anniversary in October 2004 without ever having left print—can no longer reasonably be doubted. Respectability, however, might need to wait for fifty years more.
