Skip to main content

Creating Middle Earth: The Hobbits

J.R.R Tolkien's Middle Earth is a place of magic and wonder, a place of immortal creatures, warlike heroes and fair and virtuous maids. It's a land of legend, locked in an eternal strife between Good and Evil where kings clash with dark and malicious powers. And because of all this is, by nature, so far removed from us, the reader and the audience, it can be easy to look at it with cold detachment and not truly get invested in it. Or it would be if Tolkien hadn't placed a relatable heart at the center of the story.

That beating heart that drives the Trilogy is found in the humble and kind hobbits, whom in their non-magical essence and their gentle hearts and simple minds create a familiar link with the reader that guides him through Tolkien's mystical world.

It's the quiet and tranquil hobbits that lie at the emotional core of the story. But it's that same every-man quality of theirs that lies at the very center of this epic and its theme. Because of these, we decided it was high time we talked about them in this series.


Hobbits, the little people that tend The Shire, were so important to Tolkien that he dedicated an entire 21-pages long prologue to them. In it, Tolkien explained their culture and traditions in extensive detail. So, how do you translate that onto the screen? Doing a documentary/slash 20 minute prologue is completely out of the question, as a movie, you need to jump right into the story. So how do you solve this conundrum?

Well, through every cinematographic tool there is: production design, acting, script... and, of course, costume design.

And make no mistake, there is a lot of information being transmitted solely through their clothes. But before we get to how these are transmitted, we need to briefly look at exactly what needs to be transmitted.

So, what is a Hobbit? Hobbits are, according to Tolkien, small creature between two and four feet tall with big feet covered in curly hair with leathery soles. They tend to be stout with slightly pointed ears. They are a distant branch of the race of men.
I picture a fairly human figure, not a kind of 'fairy' rabbit as some of my British reviewers seem to fancy: fattish in the stomach, shortish in the leg. A round, jovial face; only slightly pointed and 'elvish'; hair short and curling (brown). The feet from the ankles down, covered with brown hairy fur.                      --- J.R.R Tolkien in a letter to his American Publisher--- 
But even more than their looks, it's particularly important to understand what defines Hobbits as a group. Hobbits are fond of an unadventurous, bucolic and simple life of farming, eating and socializing. And although their mildness would seem contrary to it, they will defend fervently and courageous their way of life when threatened. They eat around six meals a day and prefer simple and homemade food. They also love smoking pipe-weed.

With that in mind, we will look at how they managed to translate that into the costume through the quartet of hobbits in the saga.


In order to visually translate the habits and traditions of the Hobbits onto their costumes, Ngila Dickson had three main tools: style, color and fabric. And she makes the most out of it.

The first and most obvious tool she has is style itself. Probably, the most telling aspect of their designs is that they have nothing in common with the elegant and luxurious look of the elves (read more about it here) or the rough yet proud look of the men of Rohan (read more about it here). The style of the hobbits is simple and utilitarian. They are farmers, their costumes are made to work with them.

This means that all their outfits consists of work-pants, shirt and suspenders and a vest or jacket. This is clearly inspired by the traditional work clothes for the field. They are made to be comfortable, not pretty, which helps transmit both the idea that farming is an essential part of their lifestyle and that they are content in it.

This style is found in every single hobbit shown on screen, which helps highlight the idea that they are a tight community. The difference in personalities is mainly highlighted through fabric and color, but never through style.

And so, if the style and layering is the same for all, we'll need to focus more on how the differences are used to highlight not only the different personalities, but also to cover all the aspects and characteristics of their race, thus creating a true cultural spectrum.


If hobbits are simple people, Sam is the simplest of them all. He is kind, shy and dedicated. He cares not for riches but for love and everything green in this world. He might not seem much, but his heart alone would will the ring to destroy itself. And so his clothing reflects all that.

When you look at his clothes, you see wool, cotton and "poor" fabrics. Look at the jacket he is wearing in the frame above; it looks rough and not gentle to the touch. It's a work jacket. He is a hard working hobbit, and so his are the clothes of someone that breaks his back working day in day out.

Another important element is that you can clearly see that he gives no importance to his clothes. Unlike the leather canteen he carries around or the gigantic backpack that includes a set of pans and pots and other such essential tools when you set out to save the world... which he clearly cherishes and never once even separates from them until they are deep into Mordor.

This, if anything, highlights both the hobbits' dislike of adventure (he seems more worried about basic daily routines such as eating than the actual danger, at least when they depart towards Rivendell) and also underlines how essential is food and eating to their culture (beautifully rendered both in the second breakfast scene with Aragon and the "rabbit and potatoes" scene with Gollum).

Another key element of the hobbits that is mainly represented in Sam is their shyness. Sam doesn't enjoy attention, and has a strong aura of shyness about him. Which is marvelously integrated in his costume through color.

He mainly dresses in very muted and unobtrusive colors; brown for the trousers and desaturated beiges and greens and greys for the rest. Which certainly underlines the fact that he doesn't dress to call attention to himself. His palette perfectly blends in with the landscape he loves so much.

Aside from the color, you'll also notice that he is the only of the four main hobbits that actually wears plaid. Plaid shirts are usually worker's clothing. And it's the same for Sam. He is not rich, he is a worker.

Himself and his designs represents hobbits at its most humble and kind. Which is radically opposed in the aforementioned cultural spectrum to someone as, say, Frodo Baggins.


Frodo shares a lot of characteristics with Sam: a deep love for his home, love for his peers and a kind humility. But Frodo is not a worker. For starters, Frodo is quite rich for a hobbit (take into account that Bilbo took back a literal treasure back with him from his adventure with Smaug).

And how is that shown? Well, through fabric. He is usually dressed in much finer clothes than Sam. For instance, in the picture above, he is wearing green velvet trousers and a fine linen shirt, and both are much nicer than any of Sam's wool and cotton outfits. After all, Sam is his gardener and not the other way around.

He also has some richly patterned vests that are meant to visually indicate his higher economic status within the community.

But character wise, Frodo is also radically different than Sam. Frodo is much more insightful and thoughtful. He dedicates his time to reading on the outside world, and has a certain curiosity for knowing that Sam certainly doesn't share.

But he also is much more social than Sam (at least before the quest), and so his costumes are not made to blend in so much as Sam's. He doesn't mind being noticed.

Which brings us to his color palette: most of Frodo's outfits are in a rich and broad palette of browns, which heavily contrast with Sam's more muted and unobtrusive colors. Also, in that brown outfit, Frodo looks like one of his leather books, which beautifully ties into his more bookish personality.

And so, you can see how the designer found a clever way to visually differentiate the both of them whilst still having them wear a very similar style.


Merry and Pippin are a representation of hobbits at their most fun-loving and social. They enjoy life at its fullest and all its simple pleasures: they like eating, pranking, dancing and drinking. They are loud and vociferous. And so is their clothing.

Both Merry and Pippin regularly dress in rather bright and cheerful colors. Merry in rich yellows and ocres, and Pippin in blues, calling attention onto themselves rather gleefully.

Also, notice the difference between their clothing and Sam's. These two do not dress for work, but for the Pub.


And so, the four of them together, manage to represent the whole of Hobbit community both in look and personality. From the hardworking Sam to the funny and noisy Merry and Pippin. Because of this, we think that this was the perfect way to introduce both the hobbits as a race and the four main characters, which is really clever because it saves runtime, but still manages to transmit all the information that Tolkien wrote in that detailed prologue without ever bringing the story to a halt.


We hope you enjoyed this new entry and we'll see you next time. As always, tell you that we don't know what other designs from Lord of the Rings we will be covering yet. This functions more or less the same way that the Padme series works (improvising basically) but if you want to request any specific design from the Trilogy don't hesitate to contact us and tell us!


All the images of the dress used in this article (and many more) 
can be found in the amazing collection of movie costumes 


  1. Thank you this is so interesting to read. I'd love to know more about how the various styles of armour worn matched not only fighting styles but also races and allegiances and any real life inspiration. Please, would you do a blog on that?


Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Burning Question: What's wrong with Belle's gown?

Since the first promotional pictures of Disney's new Live-Action remake of Beauty and the Beast hit the internet, there has been a lot of discussion around Belle's iconic ball gown. And, even months after its release in cinemas, there still continues to be a lot of buzz around it. Why? Mainly, because a lot of people feel that it is just doesn't look that good.
The thing is, Belle's animated yellow ball gown is, at this point, an iconic staple of animated cinema. Everybody knows it and everybody loves it. And, as a result, everybody can see the new one and say "this is not the costume I know". Therefore, everyone can compare it down to the smallest detail and see that it just doesn't quite look right.
Today, our goal will be to try and dissect the design in order to answer the burning question everyone has been asking themselves: what's so wrong with the "new" dress? Or, to put it bluntly, why is it so incredibly underwhelming?

This might n…

Disney's Cinderella(s) and the evolution of the "princess" aesthetics

Every girl, at some point in life, has wanted to be a princess. It has become undeniable that the concept of the "princess" is, for better or worst, inseparable from girlhood. We live in a "princesses" obsessed era, and we have for a long time now. And a lot has been said about it, with loud people yelling over the internet about the positive and negative aspects of it. So it was about time for us to join the yelling contest, I guess.
If we're going to talk about princesses, the logical place to go is to the Global Mogul Conglomerate that has led the trend and, in many ways, defined it: Disney. They have, undeniably, redefined the fairytale and have turned the term "princess" into a best selling Licensed Entertainment Character Merchandise.

The thing is, even though princesses have been part of the fairy tale canon for a very long time, they didn't become the central figure until Walt Disney placed them there.
In the tales that the Grimm Brothers…

Historic Accuracy in Costume Design: The 16th century

I've never been a purist with historical accuracy as long as the changes made have a real reasoning behind (generally a narrative or symbolic one). I will always think that La reine Margot (1994) costume design is one of the most gorgeous and smart designs ever, even if said designs main premise is to purposely bend the period in regards to costume.
But there are certain things that bother me in regards to historical accuracy in costume which I realized when I found myself constantly irritated while watching The other Boleyn Girl (2008). This led me to post a question: when is it right to bend history? why is it interesting sometimes? whilst other times it's simply horrendous?
To me, when these changes are made for the narrative's sake, I'm usually on board (like the 2012's "Anna Karenina" designs, which mixed 1870's fashion with 1950's fashion in order to enhance the sense of theatricality and falsehood in Imperial Russia). But when these change…

Marie Antoinette: Working with an historical basis

A couple of months ago, we talked extensively about the narrative aspect of the designs for the 2006's movie; Marie Antoinette (see here). But that's only one half of the story. This movie is, after all, a period piece, so let's have a look at how they translated that period into the costumes.

MARIE ANTOINETTE: WORKING WITH AN HISTORICAL BASIS Period accurate pieces are actually the hardest to get by; that is because clothing in past centuries was way more complex and expensive that our 21st century standards. Because of this, most costume designers end up being constricted by their allotted budgets and have to make compromises with the accuracy. This was not the case with this movie.
Sofia Coppola's Marie Anotinette had a rather large budget, which allowed renowned designer Milena Canonero the freedom to create period-accurate pieces (the inaccuracies were only added for narrative purposes not budget constrictions). Because of this, Canonero decided to work of actual …

Cleopatra or the Most Undeserved Oscar Win ever

There is a reason why I usually do not review movies from the "golden-age" of Hollywood (which means any movie prior to the 1970's), and that is because back then they cared even less about historical accuracy in costuming than nowadays, which is saying a lot. Because of this, most of the "historical" movies generally ignored the period and just did whatever was fashionable at the time with a spice of the supposed period.
This is something that usually makes me laugh, rather than angry, because it results in very funny outfits (peplums particularly created a lot of funny imaginary). And Cleopatra, 1963's epic about the Egyptian queen, was for most of my childhood one of those movies. I knew the costumes were not accurate, but they fascinated me anyways in their ridiculousness. That is until I heard that the movie had won an Academy Award for Best Achievement in Costume Design, the same year that "Il Gattopardo was nominated for Best Costume Design. An…