Visit The *EVEN NEWER* Barrow-Downs Photo Page |
|
View Poll Results: Canonicity means: | |||
The author's published works, during his lifetime | 3 | 15.00% | |
The author's published works including those edited/published posthumously | 5 | 25.00% | |
ALL of the author's works, notes, letters, and ideas, published or not, conflicting or not | 9 | 45.00% | |
What the reading community says is Canon | 0 | 0% | |
What the BarrowDowns community says is Canon | 1 | 5.00% | |
What the critics say is Canon | 0 | 0% | |
Canon is whatever I, the reader, want it to be | 1 | 5.00% | |
Something completely (or slightly) different [if you choose this last option, please explain yourself in the thread. Thank you] | 1 | 5.00% | |
Voters: 20. You may not vote on this poll |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
08-23-2005, 03:43 AM | #81 | |
Corpus Cacophonous
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: A green and pleasant land
Posts: 8,390
|
To change the subject ( ), I found the following comment by Kuruharan on another thread (Melkor's depiction by artists: Flawed?) interesting in this context:
Quote:
__________________
Do you mind? I'm busy doing the fishstick. It's a very delicate state of mind! |
|
08-23-2005, 05:51 AM | #82 | ||||||
Illustrious Ulair
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: In the home of lost causes, and forsaken beliefs, and unpopular names,and impossible loyalties
Posts: 4,240
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Look, we can both bounce quotes from the letters & writings back & forth & get nowhere because Tolkien contradicted himself (never realising that his comments in his letters would be taken as definitive statements). Letters 19 : Quote:
Quote:
H-I Sorry, but that's just a satyrical dig at lawyers - it doesn't show a complex social structure. |
||||||
08-23-2005, 06:15 AM | #83 | |
A Mere Boggart
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: under the bed
Posts: 4,737
|
I'm going to be hypocritical. Just five minutes ago I told davem I wasn't going to be arguing any more today abut this. But then I looked at Christopher Tolkien's introduction to the Sil:
Quote:
__________________
Gordon's alive!
|
|
08-23-2005, 06:19 AM | #84 |
Deadnight Chanter
|
Good try, SpM, but once saddled, we (he?) can not be unmounted...
Gosh, davem, even as 'satirical dig', the whole paragraph is the on Angband of a textual evidence of 'social complexity' you seem denying the Hobbit whatsoever!
Would there be LoTR's 'heir and eight signatures in red ink' etc if not for messers. Grubb, Grubb and Burrowes? (Funny aside fact: Gondolin is mentioned in LoTR 6 times. Gondolin is mentioned in TH 6 times) But on the whole argument seems to go the way of 'which is more important - the egg or the hen' questions. Yes, without a hen there would be no egg, and hen is much more complex and beautiful and feathery and beady-eyed than egg may ever be, on account of not having eyes and feathers at all, but they are both part of the same circle, and one proceeds from another. Silmarillion was a beautiful hen, and it laid an egg, which is the Hobbit. I saw an egg, and out of it hatched a cockerel the LoTR is, and I was glad to see both, for the egg had a pearly shell, and the cockerel's song brought me joy, and I went and enquired upon egg's origin, and found the hen. Hen was beautiful in her own right, but I would not learn about her if she hasn’t laid an egg. Poultry keeper (that is, Tolkien) was proud of his hen, but when he discovered an egg one morning, he thought it was not his hen's at all, for A) she laid it over the night, B) he was sure his hen will never lay eggs, but after few days, observing peculiar markings on the shell and its hue, he saw it was indeed egg of his hen. Now stop quoting his notes of the first few days when he thought the egg was stealthily laid by some kind of cuckoo, and take a look at a cockerel hatched from it, or dare tell me again that cockerels are born directly from hens and eggs are not involved there somewhere in between
__________________
Egroeg Ihkhsal - Would you believe in the love at first sight? - Yes I'm certain that it happens all the time! Last edited by HerenIstarion; 08-23-2005 at 11:32 PM. Reason: typos |
08-23-2005, 07:12 AM | #85 | ||
Stormdancer of Doom
|
Quote:
Prime example: in the illustration of the front hall of Bag End-- Bilbo quite clearly has normally-proportioned feet. (Hildrebrants, you missed the boat on that one, completely.) I very much appreciate the artists who took Tolkien's basic design or sketch or visual concept, and added detail and polish. For instance, Nasmith's "The Last Sight" of Hobbiton in the dark is a stunning makeover of Tolkien's original "The Hill". Also interesting to note that in "The Last Sight", the hobbits have normally proportioned feet. Well done, Nasmith.
__________________
...down to the water to see the elves dance and sing upon the midsummer's eve. Last edited by mark12_30; 08-24-2005 at 08:18 AM. Reason: never heard of Paunline Baynes |
||
08-23-2005, 07:22 AM | #86 | ||
Cryptic Aura
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 5,997
|
Quote:
And, in fact, good old dictionary.com says Quote:
Perhaps we should jettison this word 'canon' rather than any part of the, ah, oeuvre? Particularly in respect of Tolkien's view of the Machine.
__________________
I’ll sing his roots off. I’ll sing a wind up and blow leaf and branch away. |
||
08-23-2005, 08:10 AM | #87 | |
Illustrious Ulair
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: In the home of lost causes, and forsaken beliefs, and unpopular names,and impossible loyalties
Posts: 4,240
|
Quote:
|
|
08-23-2005, 09:33 AM | #88 | ||
Dread Horseman
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Behind you!
Posts: 2,743
|
Quote:
Quote:
"Peripheral" is a long way from "nothing to do with Middle-earth" -- do you concede at least that TH takes place in Middle-earth? Even if you don't I give up. For if you are bound and determined to exclude The Hobbit from your conception of the Legendarium, it is your Middle-earth that is diminished, not mine -- a fruitless victory indeed, I should think. And little more than an intellectual exercise, I might add, since you in fact cannot conceive of a M-e canon in which TH does not exist. It is Flieger's children that I really feel sorry for. Imagine all the richness that is lost to them. Bilbo's past history and friendship with Gandalf that informs the opening chapters of LotR. The encounter with the stone trolls -- confusing. The moon-letters that prefigure the Gates of Moria -- unknown. The whole history of the Riddle Game, and of Sting, and of Bilbo's mithril shirt -- only guessed at. Frodo's conversation in Rivendell with Glóin about Lonely Mountain and what has become of the members of Bilbo's party -- shorn of color and meaning. Geez, a whole layer of subtext to Gimli and Legolas's relationship -- sacrificed to intellectual pretension. The story of the finding of the Ring, the central element in what you consider to be the culmination of the Sil, available only in bare outline. And on and on. A Middle-earth without The Hobbit is impoverished by its absence. Good thing any future davem progeny will have Lalwendë around to see that they are not so deprived! It's only quite a little book in a wide world after all, but thank goodness for it. |
||
08-23-2005, 09:41 AM | #89 | |
Ghost Prince of Cardolan
|
Quote:
|
|
08-23-2005, 10:25 AM | #90 | |||
Cryptic Aura
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 5,997
|
Quote:
Quote:
Would LotR have come about, Athena like, had Tolkien not first written TH? What odds and what objective facts would prove that possibility? Because I'm both busy this morning and a lazy git, I will copy something from another thread which I think is relevant here. Quote:
Because we can end up in places different from where we started out, does that mean we discount the importance of what set us out in the first place?
__________________
I’ll sing his roots off. I’ll sing a wind up and blow leaf and branch away. Last edited by Bęthberry; 08-23-2005 at 10:38 AM. Reason: fixin' phrasings |
|||
08-23-2005, 11:26 AM | #91 | |||||
Illustrious Ulair
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: In the home of lost causes, and forsaken beliefs, and unpopular names,and impossible loyalties
Posts: 4,240
|
[QUOTE=Mr UI'd say you couldn't be more wrong about this. Bilbo is our mediator in the story, the one who we can identify with, really the most humdrum, human character in the whole fantastic world he inhabits.[/QUOTE]
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
It does mean we will read LotR in a different way. Everything you give from TH as 'necessary' to an understanding of LotR, can be countered by things in it which will cause confusion & perhaps break the spell - the Trolls, the 'Elves of Rivendell', Beorn's animals. The only way you seem to be able to account for them is by some wild theory that Bilbo's account was exagerated to such an extent that in large part what he says is completely wrong & untrustworthy. The general argument seems to be that because LotR began as a sequel to TH, makes use (only in reference though) to the geography of TH & is referred to in it then TH must be included. All I see (& maybe I'm wrong here) is people wanting to defend poor little Bilbo from the nasty man who wants to evict him from his home. It seems like from my first suggestion everyone has reacted by saying 'Whoa! I don't like that idea, so I'm going to attack it'. And to be honest, that was my initial reaction on hearing Flieger's statements. However, being that she is one of the world's greatest Tolkien scholars & gave reasoned arguments, I decided to calmly step back & look at what she was saying about TH not fitting into the Legendarium - for all the reasons I've given, & particularly in the light of The Fairy Stories essay, both what Tolkien says in it & the fact, & significance, of when he wrote it. The conclusion I came to was that inclusion of TH into the Legendarium causes far more problems than it solves. Quote:
|
|||||
08-23-2005, 11:45 AM | #92 | ||
Corpus Cacophonous
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: A green and pleasant land
Posts: 8,390
|
Must resist being drawn back in ... must resist ... mu ...
Quote:
Of course The Hobbit takes place in the same Middle-earth as LotR. The characters and events of LotR tell us so. Quote:
__________________
Do you mind? I'm busy doing the fishstick. It's a very delicate state of mind! |
||
08-23-2005, 12:10 PM | #93 | ||
Illustrious Ulair
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: In the home of lost causes, and forsaken beliefs, and unpopular names,and impossible loyalties
Posts: 4,240
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
08-23-2005, 12:23 PM | #94 | |
Corpus Cacophonous
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: A green and pleasant land
Posts: 8,390
|
Quote:
__________________
Do you mind? I'm busy doing the fishstick. It's a very delicate state of mind! |
|
08-23-2005, 12:42 PM | #95 | |
Dread Horseman
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Behind you!
Posts: 2,743
|
Quote:
Trolls: The translator conceit allows that various names are normalized into English forms in LotR, and that "Some attempt has been made to represent [the varieties of tongues and dialects spoken by various races] by variations in the kind of English used". Dialects and English names are chalked up to translation by Tolkien himself. Does the normalization of "Galpsi" to "Gamgee" really ruin the magic for you? Beorn's animals: Nix on Beorn's animals, but okay on talking eagles, werewolves, Telvido, Shadowfax, Queen Beruthiel's Cats, Huan, Ents, huorns, and for that matter, talking swords in the Sil writings? I don't see the problem. Tra-la-la-lallying Elves: You don't dig the tra-la-lally. Others do, or at least don't have a problem with it. Your opinion is far from conclusive evidence on this matter. Does this summarize the main "problems" you see TH causing? While you're at it, why don't you tell me which of the "Sil writings" make the cut for the Legendarium and which ones do not. EDIT: Cross-posted with SPM, who makes some of the same arguments in fewer words. |
|
08-23-2005, 12:54 PM | #96 | ||||
Illustrious Ulair
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: In the home of lost causes, and forsaken beliefs, and unpopular names,and impossible loyalties
Posts: 4,240
|
Quote:
What interests me in this debate is that when I'm challenged on anything I say & can offer proof & evidence for it that's never acknowledged - like your point on the 'exact' match between the geography of TH & LotR - are you going to acknowledge that what I said about the geography of TH & LotR being only similar was correct? Or when I said that the name 'William' for a Troll was wrong, as was the way they spoke - people argue 'Well, we don't know that Trolls in the rest of the Legendarium didn't speak that way or have names like William.' When I then go on & quote from a letter of Tolkien's in which he states that he regretted using the name William or having them say such things as 'Poor little blighter' all those who argued against me suddenly change the subject & just carry on blithely accusing me of not offering any evidence for what I'm saying. Again, this accusation that I've only cited 'mood & tone' has been repeated ad infinitum, & I've had to respond each time that I've also given examples of the difference between the Elves, Dwarves, Trolls & Hobbits, & the presence of talking purses & animals walking on their hind legs carrying plates, etc. The wrong accusations get repeated, so I'm forced to repeat myself. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
||||
08-23-2005, 01:20 PM | #97 | ||
Cryptic Aura
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 5,997
|
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
I’ll sing his roots off. I’ll sing a wind up and blow leaf and branch away. Last edited by Bęthberry; 08-23-2005 at 01:31 PM. |
||
08-23-2005, 02:16 PM | #98 | ||||
Dread Horseman
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Behind you!
Posts: 2,743
|
Quote:
Quote:
It seems clear to me that Tolkien's many efforts to harmonize the texts shows that he did not regard TH as an unrelated sideshow that "wasn't really" set in M-e. And speaking of sidestepping... Quote:
EDIT: Quote:
|
||||
08-23-2005, 02:47 PM | #99 | ||||
A Mere Boggart
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: under the bed
Posts: 4,737
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
Gordon's alive!
|
||||
08-23-2005, 03:18 PM | #100 | |||||
Illustrious Ulair
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: In the home of lost causes, and forsaken beliefs, and unpopular names,and impossible loyalties
Posts: 4,240
|
Quote:
(The sub-creator) makes a Secondary World which your mind can enter. Inside it what he relates is ''true': it accords with the laws of that world.[/QUOTE] The Elves, Trolls, Dwarves, etc of TH do not accord with the 'laws' of the Legendarium. Therefore they do not belong there. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
|||||
08-23-2005, 03:43 PM | #101 | |
Dread Horseman
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Behind you!
Posts: 2,743
|
Quote:
|
|
08-23-2005, 04:03 PM | #102 | ||
Illustrious Ulair
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: In the home of lost causes, and forsaken beliefs, and unpopular names,and impossible loyalties
Posts: 4,240
|
Quote:
Quote:
Oh, & can I take it that you accept my point about the Dwarves?
__________________
“Everything was an object. If you killed a dwarf you could use it as a weapon – it was no different to other large heavy objects." Last edited by davem; 08-23-2005 at 04:08 PM. |
||
08-23-2005, 04:22 PM | #103 | |
A Mere Boggart
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: under the bed
Posts: 4,737
|
Quote:
I'm going to have to find you more housework to do.
__________________
Gordon's alive!
|
|
08-23-2005, 05:10 PM | #104 | |||
Dread Horseman
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Behind you!
Posts: 2,743
|
Quote:
So would you throw out all post-late-1930's work on the Sil, seeing as how it became "infected" at that point by the influence of TH, and later LotR? You say you acknowledge the evolving nature of the legendarium but for some reason refuse to admit that evolution included TH. Quote:
Anywho, this is getting more than a little repetitive. You are welcome to your Hobbit-free legendarium as far as I'm concerned. Quote:
|
|||
08-23-2005, 06:31 PM | #105 | |||
Corpus Cacophonous
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: A green and pleasant land
Posts: 8,390
|
Quote:
The only major discrepancy involves the distance between the rushing river and the clearing in which Bilbo met the Trolls (which Mister Underhill has addressed). Otherwise, the difference in journey time can be easily accounted for by the fact that Bilbo and the Dwarves were in unfamilar territory, low on rations and not being guided by a Ranger. That hardly seems sufficient grounds on which to base the proposition that the geographies of LotR and TH are merely "similar". They are virtually identical. Tolkien intended that they be identical and I am happy to accept them as such. In any event, would discrepancies between LotR and Tolkien's Silm writings lead you to reject one of them? There are many discrepancies within the Silm writings (Galadriel's history, for example). Yet, it seems that you would warmly welcome all of them into the Legendarium, while leaving TH standing wretchedly at the door. Quote:
Quote:
__________________
Do you mind? I'm busy doing the fishstick. It's a very delicate state of mind! |
|||
08-24-2005, 12:47 AM | #106 | |
Deadnight Chanter
|
shift the perspective
We may cite lot of things at each other, and both sides may have their points, but the gist of the debate seems to come down to the following:
1. TH was not originally conceived by Tolkien as part of Legendarium 2. Later (and as soon as chapter 3, I'd argue, even if it was merely for 'depth'), Tolkien changed his mind and made some effort to incorporate it into Legendarium. Both statements are true, and davem is perfectly right in pointing out clause 1 at us, but than it is a question of 'authorial intent' or 'reader's freedom' we have our noses pressed against. I believe that 2 has supremacy over 1 in this case. davem seems to hold the opposite view, that is, 'Tolkien made a mistake in shifting his positon from 1 to 2'. For additional support to my own view, apart from things already said, it may be stated that many things which form essential part of LoTR were born in The Hobbit: the Ring and Gollum to name the most important. The very geography of LoTR and its much discussed discrepancies with that of the Hobbit is there at all thanks to TH. There would be no Erebor, no Dain Ironfoot and his conversation with Sauron's messanger, no Gimli in the fellowship, no Galmdring of Gondolin in Gandalf's hand on the bridge in Khazad-dűm, no elated legend of Azog and Thrain if some things were not originally parts of the Hobbit. True, it is not essential to have read the Hobbit to understand and enjoy LoTR, but I think LotR would be poorer if there were no TH (leaving aside the obvious fact there would be no LoTR at all if there were no TH) The very choice of names for the dwarves and Gandalf points in opposite direction - TH was less of a fairy tale from it's very beginning, than, say, Roverandom. Fantasia? Let it be termed so, but if fantasia takes part there, it is part of it. Apart from all elaborate explanations we keep coming up with to davem's dissatisfaction , the most perfect one comes out of LoTR itself (I doubt it was conciously put in there, but it is the best): Quote:
Yet, kidding apart, the real question is, did Tolkien make a mistake? However I may respect davem (and Flieger, whose work was introduced to my attention and brought me much enjoyement thanks to aforesaid davem), I believe they are making a mistake, not Tolkien As I never was one for democracy in matters of opinion (that is, majority does not have casting vote here), I'm forced to conclude that this particular debate comes to a draw and both sides stand unconvinced, though.
__________________
Egroeg Ihkhsal - Would you believe in the love at first sight? - Yes I'm certain that it happens all the time! |
|
08-24-2005, 01:57 AM | #107 |
Illustrious Ulair
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: In the home of lost causes, and forsaken beliefs, and unpopular names,and impossible loyalties
Posts: 4,240
|
Ok - I'm happy to leave things here. If nothing else I've exposed the serious 'differences' between TH & LotR/The Sil writings, & shown how much has to be put down to Bilbo's 'excentircity'. H-i's 'Mad Baggins' account simply confirms to me that at best TH can be seen as a Hobbit 'fairy story' (with its basis in actual events long left behind). A fairy story within Middle-earth - yet because of that I cannot see how we can depend on what we find there - however charmed we might be by it.
That's my last word - others can have the last last word if they like. |
08-24-2005, 03:46 AM | #108 | ||
Corpus Cacophonous
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: A green and pleasant land
Posts: 8,390
|
Quote:
Quote:
Now, that may just be me being nostalgic. If that's the case, then so be it. It works for me. I would rather have the magic of enchantment over the realism of cold academic debate any day. And the same goes for Balrog's wings and pointy Elvish ears ...
__________________
Do you mind? I'm busy doing the fishstick. It's a very delicate state of mind! |
||
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|