Alright, I've been wanting to buy the books for awhile now, but I am absolutely TORN about which versions to get. From the way I see it, there are two main versions I am contemplating on getting. The first being the three volume, hardcover illustrated Lord of The Rings set. This is valued at $80.00 at book stores, but can be bought online for about half of that. I'm not sure what the collectable value of this thing is, but I'd be willing to bet it's quite high.

The second option I've been exploring is the leather-bound single version of the book. It comes in a nice leather slip case and looks absolutely GORGEOUS. I think the leather idea is really cool, and when you figure in that you can buy a leather version of the hobbit, I'd say this is the option to go with. But then again, having all "three" books would be cool as well.

What's the bigger collectable? Do any of you have these versions? Is there another version I should get? Could someone give me some input? Thanks in advance.

Personally, I'd go with the 3-volume hardcover set. I prefer the hardcover edition of any book, yet having it split into threes makes for a more convenient read.

On a budget, I'd go with a trade paperback edition (non-movie cover, of course).

Unfortunately, I'm stuck with a 4-volume mass-market paperback boxed set from the late 80s. No reason to spend money on them again--I'd rather buy books I don't have.

I don't know the collectibility of what you're looking at, but being a book, unless it's a numbered limited edition, I wouldn't expect the collectibility to be a deciding factor, or even a concern. Get what you feel most comfortable with reading and displaying in your library.

Are you planning on reading it?

Because the single-volume, slip-cased set isn't ideally suited to reading.

I've been eyeing the single volume mass market hardback with Gandalf on the cover. It's a nice hefty tome, but not such a pricey, collectible as the leather one, that one may be tempted to just look at rather than read.

The Red leatherette single volume edition is the keeper. I absolutely love it and of all the versions I've seen it is my favorite. It has that classic feel and it looks like a book Samwise or Gandalf would have picked up after their campaign to reminisce. Yes, the book is quite hefty and so its not a convenient book to read. It looks great on the shelf and it is the volume I pick up when I'm at home and I want to read specific passages. It is the volume that will last me a life time. The binding and acid free paper is as good as the day I bought it 14 years ago. I do really like the hard cover edition with the Alan Lee illustrations and recently a 3 volume hard bound edition of the same has just been released. They're both nice but what I didn't like about both Alan Lee versions were the bindings. I still want to pick up an Alan Lee illustrated version but the bindings keep me from buying it. But I will eventually.

I also have the single volume trade paperback edition (it came out right before the movie cover editions) and has the cover of Minas Tirith by Alan Lee. I like having the entire LOTR in one volume and its the one I use when I'm re-reading the entire book or when I'm in the loo. (My 4 volume mass market paperback boxed set my father bought for me back in 1978 that I love dearly is in retirement.) The paper does yellow in about a year and although I take care of all my books the appendix has split from the glue. Its holding on but I don't know for how long. I don't think this will happen to the trade paperback editions split into 3 books. I didn't like the same single volume edition as a hardcover. It costs twice as much and the paper isn't acid free.

Other versions I like are the 3 volume trade paper back boxed set with movie images and the 3 volume hardcover boxed set with movie images. What's wrong with the movie images? Peter Jackson's vision is now just as important as Lee's, Howe's or Hildebrandt.

There's nothing particularly wrong with movie images. I just prefer the original artwork. In the case of LOR, the idea of "original artwork" is pretty much moot. But I won't, for instance, buy the "fight Club" novel unless I can find an edition without Pitt and Norton on the cover.

In DVD talk we argue about OAR vs. cropped films, and complain about DVD covers that differ from the original one-sheet artwork. I do the same with books.

I deeply desire quaility in the books I buy, which is why I prefer harbacks over paperbacks, and trade pbs over mass market pbs. If I'm going to go through the trouble to find a volume with a nice binding and nice paper, why shouldn't I also desire original artwork, instead of an ephemeral reference to the film version?

The LOR movie covers are pretty well-done, though. Movie covers can usually be pretty annoying and cheap. But I'd still rather have a nice painting of a scene than a picture of Elijah Wood.

And if you believe Nicholson Baker ("Double Fold: Libraries and the Assault on Paper"), acidic paper isn't that big a deal.

I'm with TeeSeeJay on the cover art issue.

Having "movie" images or artwork on the cover of a book makes the book feel like a piece of merchandising, rather than a novel.

I don't know about the LOTR hardbacks, but the Illustrated Silmarillion is absolutely gorgeous. Makes me mad with envy that my copy was a new printing of the non-illoed hardcover.

Alan Lee illustrated 1-volume edition.

Hey, I'm with you guys on the cover. I'd certainly like a painted cover instead, but it's the feel of the above pictured volume that I like. I think the size and heft is dead on perfect. I think the Alan Lee one volume is nice, but just a bit too big. When I saw the one above, I thought I'd try to find a copy of that version before they went to the movie cover, and honestly, I like the movie version better, as the previous cover just looks too much like a romance novel...

If the current Houghton HC came with the image they used for the softcover, pictured below, I probably wouldn't hesitate at all. While I like the warm color image of the one with Gandalf, I like the fact that the subject is sihlouetted on the softcover, thus not such a blatant reminder that it's a movie image.

And I think there may actually be a HC of this floating out there, although I'm not 100% sure.

FYI...
Current Houghton Mifflin movie cover HB at Alldirect.com, 22.80
Alan Lee version at Alldirect.com, 42.00

What happened to not judging a book by it's cover?

I suppose not judging a book by its cover applies when you are browsing speculatively and are looking to pick up something otherwise unknown.

With LotR many will already know what they are getting so have the option to pick "pretty" version....

Just my two pennies.

A good book cover sets the tone for the book.

It's not so much judging a book by its cover, but the juding the cover by the book.

There's just something immensely satisfying about a nicely designed cover. Actually, a well-designed book is a real treasure.

I knew there was a hardback of this one! And I just won an auction for it on eBay too.

13 bucks, yo

If you want to look at the Alan Lee images before you buy, they can all be found here:

http://fan.theonering.net/rolozo/col...lename&hide=-3

and on subsequent pages.