Are these the fifty you would have chosen? - The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum

Child of the 7th Age · 08-01-2004, 02:11 PM

TORN recently came up with a list of the "Top Fifty People in Tolkien History" in honor of the fiftieth anniversary of LotR. To see this list, click here.

They do not give us any idea what criteria they used to compile these names, but they are presumably the fifty individuals and/or groups who, in their view, have contributed the most to Tolkien in a personal or literary sense as well as those who have helped to spread knowledge and understandings of his writings. The compiler of the list cautions us in this way:

Quote:

These entries may not be in the exact order you feel they ought to be in, so PLEASE do not email me telling me what a horrid person I am.

The compiler's statement about "exact order" suggests that, although we should not pay attention to the strict order of each item, the most "important" persons and groups will appear closer to the top of the list.

This listing is very eclectic. Some are contemporaries of the author who had a personal or professional influence on him; others are eminent medieval and/or Tolkien scholars, artists, musicians, or various individuals associated with any of the movie adaptations. Esty - If this is not the correct forum for such an eclectic mix, please move to where you think it would fit in better. I suppose that one of the reasons I have placed this in Books is because I feel that any compilation assessing fifty years of "history" should be more concerned with the Books themselves, their sources and influences, rather than any cinematic, artistic, or musical adaptations.

Are there names you would have included that do not appear, or should others have been left out? If so, why? Would you have ranked certain names higher (or lower) than they currently appear? Additionally, do you have a problem with the way any of these particular people are described?

A few personal comments out of the many that came to my mind..... This is a popular list compiled on a popular movie website. A number of the entries make sense, while others definitely do not.

The list of scholars seems "quirky". Why list Wayne Hammond, Douglas Anderson, Michael Drout, Jane Chance and David Salo but leave out Shippey and Flieger and Carl Hostetter? I would argue that the latter three were actually more important in initially bringing academic recognition and respectability to the professor. Actually, I would include Anderson and Hammond on the list based on their definitive descriptive bibliography (done jointly), Anderson's Annotated Hobbit, and, once it comes out in the next few months, Hamond's new guide, which is supposed to be different in scope and nature than anything that has gone before. Drout and Chance just don't belong there, at least yet. Drout is just getting started on editing Tolkien's "lost" Beowulf manuscript and Chance is a good scholar but not in the same category as the others. (She actually lives here in Houston.)

Jackson and Walsh listed as number one? Please, no! I am not a movie basher, and I know that this website is geared to the films, but I would move them down to the middle. And possibly there are others who would place them even lower?

And how about that final listing? Whatever I may personally think about these books, I see no relevance to Tolkien and his writings.

Evisse the Blue · 08-01-2004, 02:44 PM

Quote:

but leave out Shippey and Flieger and Carl Hostetter?

Shippey is there, at #16. And so is Flieger, listed alongside Owen Barfield at # 30.
I'm ashamed to say I don't know some of the people on that list.

I think the anonymous student must be placed at the top though. After all, this is how the hobbit saga started, more or less.

But why not bring in, if it comes to that, the anonymous writer(s) of Christ of Cynewulf, whose line 'Eala Earendel...' inspired Tolkien to create the mythology of Middle Earth?
I realize this list is meant to serve the movie-goers who know the Lord of the Rings mainly as a movie, and while I really like the movies myself, I still don't agree with Peter Jackson and Fran Walsh getting the top spot for 'bringing people to the books'. Those people would have got to the books eventually, sooner or later. And I won't even start on those moviegoers who went to the books, only to be bored by them. For the same reason, I don't see J.K.R as belonging in this top. Sure, I love HP, sure, she made kids read more and kudos to her for that. But her world and Tolkien's world are two different things, and one's idea of 'fantasy' radically different from the others'. I'm sure some people love HP and can't stand LOTR (and vice versa, of course )
As, for how these people are described - I would have liked to see a more detailed account of their contribution to Tolkien's works/life and why they are so important, besides simply stating their brief relationship to him: (ex: school friend).
But, on the whole, and not being a Tolkien expert I find it a satisfactory list.
EDIT: did I say satisfactory? I just spotted Robert Plant in there...

Maybe Nightwish should be listed here too, since they sometimes happen to mention Tolkien related stuff in their songs? And Blind Guardian were simply robbed!

Child of the 7th Age · 08-01-2004, 03:33 PM

Evisse,

Thanks, Evisse, (and Tuor) for pointing out Shippey. That's what I get for viewing a long list online but not printing it out!

However, it's my understanding that #30 lists Barfield alone, with a fleeting reference to the fact that both Flieger and Barfield's biographer had identified Barfield's impact on Tolkien in their own works. But Flieger is not identified as one of the fifty, which does seem patently wrong, especially when someone like Chance has her own listing.

In a sense you are very correct in asking why the anonymous writer of Christ of Cynewulf wasn't included, when the anonymous student with the exam booklet was. As you imply, lists like these are, by their very nature, "impossible". It is hard enough to sit down and debate the influence of a particular person on Tolkien, even when carrying on an extended conversation, and actually reach an agreement. So how much harder (or less worthwhile?) is it to set down a list of the "top" fifty with a one sentence justification for each in some kind of ranked order.

By its very nature any list compiled must be a gross oversimplification. Yet there is something inside people that wants to see things set down clearly on paper --kind of like the hobbits, with no contradictions and such! How else can you explain how people felt when Tolkien made it to the top of several lists as 'book of the century'? And lest one thinks only "fans" are prone to such excesses....if oversimplified lists don't matter, why did many critics blow their lids when they saw Tolkien come out at the top of these lists? Or, for that matter, what about the endless arguments about what work goes where when it comes to establishing what is "canon"? Those dratted lists again....

I do think this compiler would have been better served by limiting the number of people listed, and providing more explanation of why that person actually deserved inclusion in the list. I also see an inherent movie "bias" in some of these names,which reflects the interests of the person who actually made the list. For example, David Salo did a good job in providing Elvish material for the movie, but there have been a number of people involved over many years in editing the materials coming out from the estate: Hostetter, Wynne, Smith, etc.
Because of them, we have access to materials like osanwe-kenta that didn't even exist in the public domain before.

In a list of this type, I honestly think there is no one "expert" who could do it all. It would be hard to find one person who was equally knowledgable in all these different aspects of Tolkien: Elvish language, art, cinema, biography, music, popular culture and, of course, the writings. The only way to come up with a list that truly reflected those interests in some kind of balance would be to have it selected by a group of people, a project far beyond what was done here.

**************************

Encaitare · 08-01-2004, 07:08 PM

Evisse said:

Quote:

EDIT: did I say satisfactory? I just spotted Robert Plant in there... Maybe Nightwish should be listed here too, since they sometimes happen to mention Tolkien related stuff in their songs? And Blind Guardian were simply robbed!

Yeah, and Led Zeppelin too. And possibly Enya. But hooray for locating another Nightwish/Blind guardian fan!

I didn't really have a problem with the list except for its inclusion of JK Rowling. HP and LotR are completely different, and while the creator of the list says she made fantasy "cool" again, Tolkien didn't create Middle-earth so people would think it was "cool."

Ugh.

Child of the 7th Age · 08-01-2004, 08:22 PM

Child takes a closer look at the list and grits her teeth as she spies a familiar name....

Number 15 is Gary Gygax. He is the man who invented the rules for Dungeons and Dragons in the late sixties and early seventies. He's the author of numerous RPG books and games that take a little bit from one fantasy author and a little bit from another to create a world for gaming. Lots of fun and he did borrow generic characters from Tolkien, but to include him in a list like this is definitely not wise.

To put him ahead of Shippey, Tolkien's guardian Father Morgan, the Inklings, Pauline Baynes, and Humphrey Carpenter is downright painful!

Imladris · 08-01-2004, 08:44 PM

Quote:

HP and LotR are completely different, and while the creator of the list says she made fantasy "cool" again, Tolkien didn't create Middle-earth so people would think it was "cool."

Neither did J.K Rowling. Inspiration came to her and struck, just like it did with Tolkien. It is the compiler of the list's opinion that she made fantasy cool again:

Quote:

But I personally feel she is majorly responsible for making fantasy "cool" again

The only reason that J.K Rowling should be on the list is if she made Tolkien's works more popular. In other words, if she did make fantasy popular again, thus making Tolkien popular again, then she should be on it.

Tuor of Gondolin · 08-01-2004, 02:48 PM

I beliebe Shippey's there at # 16. Generally, the list seems adequate. Was Charles Williams on it?
As for # 50, no problem. Gollum will just pop into HP's universe with the precious and wipe the floor with doby, dooby, whatever.

08-01-2004, 08:22 PM	#5
Child of the 7th Age Spirit of the Lonely Star Join Date: Mar 2002 Posts: 5,133	Child takes a closer look at the list and grits her teeth as she spies a familiar name.... Number 15 is Gary Gygax. He is the man who invented the rules for Dungeons and Dragons in the late sixties and early seventies. He's the author of numerous RPG books and games that take a little bit from one fantasy author and a little bit from another to create a world for gaming. Lots of fun and he did borrow generic characters from Tolkien, but to include him in a list like this is definitely not wise. To put him ahead of Shippey, Tolkien's guardian Father Morgan, the Inklings, Pauline Baynes, and Humphrey Carpenter is downright painful! __________________ Multitasking women are never too busy to vote.

08-01-2004, 02:48 PM	#7
Tuor of Gondolin Ghost Prince of Cardolan Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Pennsylvania, WtR, passed Sarn Gebir: Above the rapids (1239 miles) BtR, passed Black Rider Stopping Place (31 miles) Posts: 1,548	I beliebe Shippey's there at # 16. Generally, the list seems adequate. Was Charles Williams on it? As for # 50, no problem. Gollum will just pop into HP's universe with the precious and wipe the floor with doby, dooby, whatever. __________________ Aure Entuluva!

08-01-2004, 03:33 PM	#3
Child of the 7th Age Spirit of the Lonely Star Join Date: Mar 2002 Posts: 5,133	Evisse, Thanks, Evisse, (and Tuor) for pointing out Shippey. That's what I get for viewing a long list online but not printing it out! However, it's my understanding that #30 lists Barfield alone, with a fleeting reference to the fact that both Flieger and Barfield's biographer had identified Barfield's impact on Tolkien in their own works. But Flieger is not identified as one of the fifty, which does seem patently wrong, especially when someone like Chance has her own listing. In a sense you are very correct in asking why the anonymous writer of Christ of Cynewulf wasn't included, when the anonymous student with the exam booklet was. As you imply, lists like these are, by their very nature, "impossible". It is hard enough to sit down and debate the influence of a particular person on Tolkien, even when carrying on an extended conversation, and actually reach an agreement. So how much harder (or less worthwhile?) is it to set down a list of the "top" fifty with a one sentence justification for each in some kind of ranked order. By its very nature any list compiled must be a gross oversimplification. Yet there is something inside people that wants to see things set down clearly on paper --kind of like the hobbits, with no contradictions and such! How else can you explain how people felt when Tolkien made it to the top of several lists as 'book of the century'? And lest one thinks only "fans" are prone to such excesses....if oversimplified lists don't matter, why did many critics blow their lids when they saw Tolkien come out at the top of these lists? Or, for that matter, what about the endless arguments about what work goes where when it comes to establishing what is "canon"? Those dratted lists again.... I do think this compiler would have been better served by limiting the number of people listed, and providing more explanation of why that person actually deserved inclusion in the list. I also see an inherent movie "bias" in some of these names,which reflects the interests of the person who actually made the list. For example, David Salo did a good job in providing Elvish material for the movie, but there have been a number of people involved over many years in editing the materials coming out from the estate: Hostetter, Wynne, Smith, etc. Because of them, we have access to materials like osanwe-kenta that didn't even exist in the public domain before. In a list of this type, I honestly think there is no one "expert" who could do it all. It would be hard to find one person who was equally knowledgable in all these different aspects of Tolkien: Elvish language, art, cinema, biography, music, popular culture and, of course, the writings. The only way to come up with a list that truly reflected those interests in some kind of balance would be to have it selected by a group of people, a project far beyond what was done here. ************************** __________________ Multitasking women are never too busy to vote. Last edited by Child of the 7th Age; 08-01-2004 at 03:59 PM.