Christopher Tolkien

[Maverick]

Is Christopher Tolkien still alive, and i so, will there be any more books?

[Lachwen]

I believe he is still alive, yes. As for any more books...well, we'd have to ask him.

By the way, did you know that Tolkien's house at Oxford is for sale?

[Joy]

He is still alive. I do believe that he is working on HoME 13 (though it is just an index of all the other volumes.)

[Estelyn Telcontar]

The HoME index (volume 13 of the series) is already published; I bought my Harper-Collins paperback of it two years ago.

[Joy]

Whoa - I am a bit behind times

[The Squatter of Amon Rûdh]

To the best of my knowledge, Christopher Tolkien has retired from the family business. New material is published occasionally, but in periodicals. Tolkien's translation of Beowulf is being edited by Professor Michael Drout, who has already published the notes for 'Beowulf' - The Monsters and the Critics, and are due out over the next two years.

[Elianna]

How old is Christopher now? Are we in danger of celebrating his passage from the Circles of the World?

[Son of Númenor]

Christopher Tolkien will be 80 years young in November. In response to your second question: I don't know that anyone would be in danger of celebrating such a passing.

[Elianna]

Well, to be able to leave this crummy world deserves celebration, that is if he's going to Heaven. We'd miss him of course.

[Knight of Gondor]

Wasn't there a soldier in Gondor that was played by a Tolkien descendant? I don't think the line is quite died out.

[Gorwingel]

I believe the son that had a small role in the films is Simon Tolkien, who is also a writer. He released a crime-thriller just recently.

Christopher Tolkien has been in the news because he has been completely against the films. He still owns the rights to The Hobbit, and so thus he won't let anyone make a film verson. But this issue can, of course, be discussed in the Movie forum.

[Snowdog]

Is Christopher Tolkien still alive, and i so, will there be any more books?

Yes, he's alive, and hopefully he won't try to edit paper scraps and comment together anymore books. I think Chris's contribution of the Silmarillion, and Unfinished Tales would have been enough, but tried to squeeze every possible buck out of every letter and doodlescrap of his fathers. He could take the time and re- edit the Silmarillion, but that is being done here on the Barrow Downs .

[Son of Númenor]

but tried to squeeze every possible buck out of every letter and doodlescrap of his fathers.

To be fair, he was probably well-off enough financially for his motives in publishing the letters and HoME not to have been entirely monetary; and I for one am glad he has published what he has.

[kboleen]

Actually, Christopher only holds the right to the Silmarillion and beyond. The Saul Zaentz Company holds the right to the Lord of the Rings and the Hobbit. To quote their website:

"The Saul Zaentz Company also owns exclusive rights to certain copyrightable elements of The Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit, including, among other things, film and legitimate stage rights."

http://www.tolkien-ent.com/

[The Squatter of Amon Rûdh]

Diamond is right. This isn't the first time that C.R.T. has been accused of milking his father's notes for every penny he could get, but I don't see it. He didn't sell the film rights to The Silmarillion, which would have been the single easiest way to make a lot of money very quickly out of his father's works, and now that there's even more money involved he's even more reluctant.

How many people really buy the Histories anyway? I can't think that they have the same mass appeal as, say, The Hobbit; and even if they did, there was no need to edit all of the old material together: it could just have been put into folders and sent off to HarperCollins without any commentary or indexing. Also I should like to know why the now very wealthy director of those staggeringly lucrative films is thought obviously to have been in it for love, while the author's son, who has made less money out of more work, is supposed clearly to have been motivated by financial gain. Could it be that Christopher Tolkien's somewhat austere image has something to do with it? Maybe if he wore shorts and described the books as 'cool' more often he wouldn't be a sell-out.

[kboleen]

I disagree with the "shameless cash-in." Tolkien always viewed his stories as "a modern myth" and as with ancient myths, all the cracks must be filled in. And I think that is what Christopher has done: filled in all the gaps that Tolkien would have done had he lived. JRR Tolkien spent his lifetime writing about Middle Earth and filling in all the gaps. He may have done it not expecting it ever to be published, but he did it nonetheless.

[Estelyn Telcontar]

I've often wondered what it is like for Christopher Tolkien, always living in his father's shadow. How much time he devoted to sorting and editing those notes! He was a professor himself and could have worked on something of his own. But he chose to dedicate his life to the completion of what his father's great genius started, working methodically as his father never could. I agree with Squatter that monetary motivation can't have been the primary reason; the family has earned more on royalties of Hobbit and LotR than the HoME can ever earn.

I think it was rather selfless of Christopher Tolkien to devote himself to the work of preparing the great mythology of Middle-earth for publishing! He certainly did us and our discussions a favour.

[Durelin]

I just think we need to thank God for Christopher Tolkien! I think of poor Charles Schultz and how his son wouldn't continue the 'Peanuts' comics, and just think of how fortunate it was that one of Tolkien's children took an interest in his work.

but tried to squeeze every possible buck out of every letter and doodlescrap of his fathers.

Hmmm...and why not, is all I have to ask. Christopher Tolkien has 'filled in the cracks,' as kboleen said, and now he is able to make money off of the 'enterprise' his father created. I do think it has become a true enterprise. And Christopher has been doing great things for it. Why not benefit from it?

I myself am glad that he is benefiting from it, and think that Estelyn wrapped up the 'why' very nicely.

Somehow I can't believe he's so old already - after all, I've always thought of him as "Tolkien's son". And most likely - sigh - he will be gone in just a few years. How healthy is he, anyways?

About Christopher Tolkien being modivated by money - I don't think anybody can really accuse him of that. Think about how much work he devoted to reading every freakin' letter and note his father left behind. He spent years doing that, and, in the end, he earned a couple of bucks and published some books that have the name "J.R.R. Tolkien" written in cover.

[Gorwingel]

I have never ever even had the thought that he was just publishing for the money. In my opinion much of the work that he has edited together and released is stuff that Tolkien would have published anyway, if he just would have lived longer. I know that there are a lot of movie fans that have been angry at him for not allowing the opening of a film museum (for which they need the estate's permission), his opinion of the films, and the disgust that he has shown about the plans for a Hobbit film. He has just been saying what he personally believes, and of course what many other Tolkien fans believe too. But I believe that he has done a very good job taking care of the estate, and if he was really just out for money, I don't think that he would have taken such care.

[Legolas]

Somehow I can't believe he's so old already - after all, I've always thought of him as "Tolkien's son."

JRR was born in 1892. Chris was JRR's second youngest child (born in 1924), but surely we wouldn't expect him to have a son past the age of 40 - still, that's 1932. This was all quite a long time ago, even to the oldest members here Older than my parents' parents.

[Snowdog]

I don't see publishing several different versions of stories in the Silmarillion "fills in the blanks". Now the Unfinished Tales did fill in the blanks, and there are surely tidbits of good stuff sprinkled throughout the 12 volumes of HoME but I am of the opinion that it was overkill.

To be fair, he was probably well-off enough financially for his motives in publishing the letters and HoME not to have been entirely monetary; and I for one am glad he has published what he has.

I never said he wasn't well off, but it does come across as trying to get as much as possible. As for me, it don't matter how Middle Earth is supposed to be like our Earth in some way or the other, so I won't be paying for the HoME.

[The Squatter of Amon Rûdh]

I'm not of that opinion. I am especially not of the opinion that just because someone can't understand the point of something it must be a shameless cash-in. Unfinished Tales fills in blanks, The Silmarillion as a complete published text is a fulfillment of J.R.R. Tolkien's lifelong dream, but The History of Middle-earth is not meant as something to fill in the blanks in a fan's knowledge. It is intended to give the reader an insight into how the legends developed, what inspired them, and the amount of time that J.R.R.T. spent developing and refining his mythology and languages. Some of the writings in the HoME were unknown to C.R.T. when he published the Silmarillion in 1977: this wasn't a small collection of papers that he was editing together, but sixty years of constant invention, revision and composition, which had been kept in an extremely disordered condition. There were bound to be omissions from the final edited work, and the HoME is intended to lay before the reader a lot of excellent writing that couldn't be included in the Silmarillion or was still sitting at the bottom of a box of documents in 1977. If this writing is of no use to someone who wants a definitive final version of the legends of Middle-earth (as possible and likely a thing as there being a definitive version of Hellenic or Norse mythology), it is still of use to someone who is interested in J.R.R. Tolkien's creative process or who doesn't care how many times something was superseded as long as it's an enjoyable read.

I am currently reading The History of Middle-earth, and so far it has been a fascinating journey through the mind of a truly remarkable man. The Silmarillion by its very nature cannot explain how and why it came to be written, or what inspired its author: the creative process is hidden by a complete and finished narrative. However, Christopher Tolkien was unhappy with the editorial work he had done, so he laid as much of the material he had used before interested readers as he could. The Revised Silmarillion project on the Downs is only possible because of this later work of CJRT's.

Even if the publication of HoME was superfluous, why can we not assume that it was a love of his father's writing (of which he was one of the first fans) that kept Christopher Tolkien editing his way through his father's works instead of devoting his time to his own professorial career? I and many others have found that the HoME have enriched our appreciation of the Tolkien corpus and deepened our understanding, not to mention made available some of his best writing, dropped because a newer version came along or because it was lost in his notes. As Terentianus Maurus pointed out in the quotation I gave above, it's all down to the reader. Go looking for something that tells you 'this is what happened at this point in LotR' in HoME and you will be disappointed. Go looking for an idea of just how fecund was Tolkien's mind or how he approached creative writing and you will find a wealth of information; go looking for good writing, previously unpublished because it failed to fit in with some grandiose all-embracing mythological vision and you will find it.

Again I would like to point out that with Christopher Tolkien people always assume that he's on the make, trying to squeeze as much money and mileage out of his father's work as possible. Not only do I not agree (although I can imagine that I might want to get paid for twenty years of work as well), but I am also mystified at why people are always assuming the worst of Christopher Tolkien, but giving the makers of the recent films the benefit of the doubt. It seems to me to be a completely wrong-headed double standard that profits no-one.

[VanimaEdhel]

Again I would like to point out that with Christopher Tolkien people always assume that he's on the make, trying to squeeze as much money and mileage out of his father's work as possible. Not only do I not agree (although I can imagine that I might want to get paid for twenty years of work as well), but I am also mystified at why people are always assuming the worst of Christopher Tolkien, but giving the makers of the recent films the benefit of the doubt. It seems to me to be a completely wrong-headed double standard that profits no-one.

Now you see I never saw HoME as a "cashing in" of any sorts. I saw it as Mr. Christopher Tolkien's way of remembering his father and also giving his father's fans a bit more insight into the development of the genius invention that was Middle Earth. Yes, he does include his own comments as to what he thinks, but, in my opinion, he makes it absolutely apparent that what he writes is his interpretation. The reader, upon discerning Tolkien's own writing, can make their own opinions on the subject.

On the other hand, I also tend to just let the movie-makers be. From what I've seen - which I admit is not a lot - Peter Jackson at least seems to be a genuine fan of Tolkien's works. I'm not sure you can say that it was a completely selfless attempt to carry Tolkien into the next generation, but his heart was somewhere in the general viscinity of the right location. And while it is fun and frequently merited to gripe about the introduction of Elves at Helm's Deep or the lack of Tom Bombadil, ultimately this was still a movie and not a book. If they wanted to even get the money to make the films, they couldn't very well tell New Line, "Well, look, yes, each movie will be about eight hours, but you see how accurate it is?" Firstly, the shorter the cinematic release, the more showings in one day. Also, the simpler the story, the more people will come to see it. Ultimately I think the movies did wonders for Tolkien's popularity. Yes, there are many people who love to think that the movies are the "real" version, and that the books are too "long" and "tedious," but look at how many new members the Barrow-Downs, for example, has obtained. Many of them either picked up the books again after not reading them for a good many years, and others read them for the first time, were fascinated, and determined that they were going to come here to find more about the world they stumbled across. It's easy enough to ignore the more annoying people who claim to be Tolkien fans, and I think that many of the newer members are precious to the board and to the Tolkien "fandom," as some people call it.

This is of course, my personal opinion. Very few people share it, from what I've seen.

[The Saucepan Man]

... but I am also mystified at why people are always assuming the worst of Christopher Tolkien, but giving the makers of the recent films the benefit of the doubt. It seems to me to be a completely wrong-headed double standard that profits no-one.

Squatter, I agree entirely with the points that you make concerning Christopher Tolkien's efforts and the value of what he has done in compiling and presenting his father's works. But it seems to me that there is little basis for comparing him with Peter Jackson (either favourably or unfaviourably) as they were both striving to acheive entirely different things. As far as I am concerned, they both greatly succeeded in what they set out to acheive (and were justly rewarded for doing so).

[The Squatter of Amon Rûdh]

I'm not trying to turn this into a thread of Peter Jackson complaints and rebuttals of them. I only wanted to point out that it's hypocritical to call HoME an unnecessary cash-in when there are three films out that made more money in a couple of years than Christopher Tolkien and his father have made out of their combined work since the 1930s.

I don't want to start throwing mud at Peter Jackson, particularly as I'm fairly sure that his motives were similar to Christopher Tolkien's. All that I wanted to do was to show that he's made a lot more money out of his undoubtedly enthusiastic and genuine tribute to Tolkien than Tolkien's son will ever make out of his work. However, if anyone thinks that everyone involved either in the making of the films or in the publication of Tolkien's works is an altruistic devotee, then they're sadly mistaken. I just think that C.R.T. is motivated by genuine enthusiasm for the subject and not just how much money he can make out of it. I only wish that I could say that about everyone.

[Snowdog]

How in the hell did those movies get into this? Oh well.

...as long as it's an enjoyable read.

Exactly. I'm not one to want to 'get into the mind' of Tolkien, or any author for that matter. I have browsed through Lost Tales 1 while sitting on a bookstore floor, and I've browsed the Lays of Beleriand another time in a store. These are the two that seem to be on every store's shelf around my area, and the content did little to inspire me to buy them, or pursue finding any of the others. I got more from reading Karen Fonstad's Atlas of Middle Earth.

I guess I think of Christopher as an individual, not an extension of his father. Therefore what he writes is his, not his father's, though he uses his father's notes.
I have to hand it to Simon Tolkien, for he writes his own stuff.

[HerenIstarion]

it seems only we down here are altruistic devotees , than

[The Squatter of Amon Rûdh]

it seems only we down here are altruistic devotees

And maybe not even we. I know I expect to be paid for this.

I guess I think of Christopher as an individual, not an extension of his father. Therefore what he writes is his, not his father's, though he uses his father's notes.

I think that's where you're going wrong, Snowdog. The Silmarillion combines J.R.R. Tolkien's writing with C.R.T's so that it's very difficult to tell who wrote which parts without some knowledge of the original text. HoME, on the other hand, is clearly divided into J.R.R.T's unedited writing and C.R.T's academic analysis of each piece, each clearly presented as such.

HoME are not new compositions from J.R.R. Tolkien's notes, but collected writings by him with editorial commentary on the presented work, much like an edition of a medieval document. The irony is that C.R.T. came to regret a lot of his changes to the Silmarillion material, which is why he later published as many of the original texts as he could bring together. I think that his confidence in his ability to compile a truly definitive Silmarillion waned as he read more of his father's notes and drafts, so that in the end he felt that he had to present the incomplete material as he had found it rather than in a complete and finalised form. I value his comments as those of someone who knew the author personally and shared much of his learning and professional experience.

CRT was also involved in the production of his father's two main works of fiction. His earliest involvement with JRRT's writing was proof-reading early editions of The Hobbit, which was a task that his father set him when he was confined to bed with a juvenile heart condition; and JRRT also set him the task of drawing the maps for LotR. You will see the initials C.J.R.T. in the corners of all of these except in some new editions, for which the maps have been redrawn to fit on a smaller page. There are hints in the Letters that father and son had some very in-depth conversations about the Legendarium as a whole after JRRT realised that he would never be able to finish The Silmarillion, so I doubt that anyone living is more qualified to comment on the work than he.

Actually, one small part of The Lays of Beleriand isn't by either of the Tolkiens: C.S. Lewis made some textual comments on the manuscript of the Lay of Leithian when J.R.R.T. asked him to read it, and those are published with the poem itself, also clearly labelled. Lewis' comments are worth reading in themselves, since he presented them as though he were analysing a medieval poem, 'quoting' a number of fictional critics in support of his points.

Personally I enjoyed the Lost Tales and the Lays, particularly the alliterative verse Lay of the Children of Húrin, but that's a matter of personal taste. I even enjoyed reading quotations from one of JRRT's lectures about Beowulf in HoME 5, so mine's probably dryer than most.

[HerenIstarion]

It would be nice to get paid for hanging around this place. Let us form a trade union, sort of, than

[Mithalwen]

Well I have HoME and I am profoundly grateful to Christopher Tolkien for sacrificing so much time which he might have usedfor his own research in to making all the archive available - I very much doubt that the hard-core buyers are numerous enough to generate the cash bonanza Snow dog seems to think.. especially when you think how long it all took.... I mean the publishers clearly took the films as an opportunity to republish and so I have finally been able to complete my "set" and get the "Road" - but I very much doubt that CT had much say in that .... from the articles I have read it would be hard to find someone less commercially minded...

If anyone is cashing in I would say it was Simon - using his name and the films and washing dirty linen in public to publicise his book.... somehow I don't think if you are genuine about a reconciliation with a family member it is most helpful to go about it by bitching about them in the tabloid... he clearly has issues....

As a point of fact it was Royd Tolkien, Michael's grandson who was a Ranger of Ithilien in the films...wearing Viggo's wig!...... From what he said in the interview it is not as dysfunctional as it has been made out.... he got involved in the film but understands why Christiopher was uninterested ... there are about 20 Tolkien descendants and they all work even if they don't absolutely need to .... I am not sure if Priscilla is still alive.... Fr John Tolkien died a couple of years ago. Only Michael and Christopher had children......

[The Squatter of Amon Rûdh]

Priscilla Tolkien is still alive. I hear that she's a regular attendant at annual Tolkien Society gatherings.

I'm not really interested in what Tolkien's family have to say about one another. I think that a family's internal problems are none of my business, no matter what the gutter press has to say about them.

Incidentally, Heren: I did go on strike for a while, but no-one seemed to notice. Perhaps if we did have a union it would be different.

[davem]

Priscilla is alive & well, & turns up at the saturday luncheon at Oxonmoot every year. Shes a really nice friendly person (I've been in her presence, but never spoken to her). She gives a little speech of welcome to attenders. She's the honorary vice president of the society. Tolkien himself is the president in perpetuo . There's a picture of her on the Tolkien Society w/s

http://www.tolkiensociety.org/oxon/about_oxonmoot.html

And a VERY interesting one of Tolkien & Priscilla at:http://puledroimpennato.immaginario....tolefiglia.gif

[Snowdog]

I think that's where you're going wrong, Snowdog.

I'm not "going wrong" with anything I said here. Its my opinion. You have your opinion on it as well, which I take as 'everything written by CT is canon. I also know of some who don't accept anything written by CT as canon. I fall between the two extremes.

[Sharkû]

No, you're actually (and factually) going wrong when you're talking about 'everything written by Christopher' when it is in turn the many writings written by JRRT but only _edited_ by his son which constitue the HoME series.

[The Squatter of Amon Rûdh]

Which is, of course, exactly what I said in my post, only punchier. Obviously the quality of the writing presented in The History of Middle-earth is a matter of opinion, but its authorship is not in any doubt. J.R.R. Tolkien wrote the texts; Christopher Tolkien gathered them together, added an editorial commentary - which he separates clearly from his father's work - and then published it as Unfinished Tales and The History of Middle-earth. The Silmarillion is a much more heavily edited version of the same thing, with the editor making invisible changes to make the book more readable and leaving out his own comments.

For the record, I am not overly concerned with what does or does not constitute the Tolkien 'canon', which is only really useful when debating aspects of JRRT's mythos. I just like to read what he wrote, and I'm prepared to accept that some of his writings differ from others on certain points; just as I'm prepared to accept that Hesiod doesn't agree with Ovid on the details of Greek mythology. In fact, my main reason for responding on this point at all was to point out that J.R.R. Tolkien's writing has a value outside of the details it gives us about his invented universe.

Whatever different permutations of the 'canon' are presented, however, Christopher Tolkien's writing does not belong in it. His opinion deserves respect by virtue of his long association with the stories and their author, but it is not and can never be 'canon' as I understand the word. The question of authorship is, however, completely different from the much vaguer question of canon. Although we'll probably be arguing canon indefinitely, the answer to the question of authorship has been given several times already in this thread.

[Mithalwen]

I am rereading the Silmarillion at the moment and it strilkes me that the role of CT is a little like the Valar entering Ea and finding it all unshaped and trying to make it as it was in the Music...... but maybe I am being flippant.... I agree there is a distinction between the works published in Tolkiens lifetime and those after ... but that said I think I prefer the "openly" edited ones to the seamless Silmarillion. I like CT writing in his "own" voice as editor, the explanations, back history and alternative "histories" and the occasional flashes of rather dry humour..