|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
squire
Half-elven
Feb 1 2013, 3:14am
Views: 2196
Shortcut
|
|
It is certainly a great topic to debate
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Thanks for your compliment about my verse.
I am curious about your assertion that "most do not consider" The Adventures of Tom Bombadil to be "canon". One, who are these people and how do we know they are "most", so to speak? And two, why is a concept like "canon" useful when discussing Tolkien's imaginarium, in comparison to the concept of stating one's sources, acknowledging the publishing history of the works in question, and using sound logic and fair methods of argument? I have always thought the idea is more applicable to publishing ventures with multiple authors than it is to the works of a solitary genius like Tolkien, whose mind was always torn between the constraints of a neat consistency and his driving need to be able to re-imagine his world as he saw fit over many decades of world-creation.
For instance, if the question is "Who is Tom Bombadil?", yet the book of poems named after the character is excluded from "evidence" in seeking an answer (while the Silmarillion is oddly admitted to the party), then surely the question needs to be narrowed to "Who is Tom Bombadil in The Lord of the Rings?". A second discussion would then be called for, entitled "Who is Tom Bombadil in 'Bombadil Goes A-Boating' and 'The Adventures of Tom Bombadil'?" Some corollary discussions that devolve from there could be "Who is Farmer Maggot in 'Bombadil Goes A-Boating'?" and "Who is Old Man Willow in 'The Adventures of Tom Bombadil'?" Obviously I'm not being very serious here, but my point is that using the "canon" idea to delimit discussions of Tolkien seems excessively complicated and unhelpful!
squire online:
RR Discussions: The Valaquenta, A Shortcut to Mushrooms, and Of Herbs and Stewed Rabbit
Lights! Action! Discuss on the Movie board!: 'A Journey in the Dark'. and 'Designing The Two Towers'.
Footeramas: The 3rd (and NOW the 4th too!) TORn Reading Room LotR Discussion; and "Tolkien would have LOVED it!"
squiretalk introduces the J.R.R. Tolkien Encyclopedia: A Reader's Diary
 = Forum has no new posts. Forum needs no new posts.
|
|
|
|
Subject
|
User
|
Time
|
Tom Bombadil As the Spirit of the Music of the Ainur
|
rangerfromthenorth
|
Jan 17 2013, 4:27pm
|
Thanks for this!
|
Radagast-Aiwendil
|
Jan 17 2013, 8:57pm
|
|
Great Theory
|
Lost_istari
|
Jan 18 2013, 7:56pm
|
|
Thank you much
|
rangerfromthenorth
|
Jan 22 2013, 2:07pm
|
|
Agreed
|
CuriousG
|
Jan 23 2013, 5:53pm
|
|
A quick thought on children of Ainur
|
Lost_istari
|
Jan 24 2013, 6:46am
|
|
Excellent theory!
|
FlyingSerkis
|
Jan 23 2013, 9:13pm
|
|
Thank You
|
rangerfromthenorth
|
Jan 23 2013, 9:33pm
|
|
Regarding Bombadil's boundedness
|
Plurmo
|
Jan 28 2013, 5:59am
|
|
I Know
|
Tolkien Forever
|
Jan 30 2013, 8:38pm
|
|
"None has yet defined him, for Tom is an enigma"
|
squire
|
Jan 31 2013, 1:27am
|
|
Great poem/
|
CuriousG
|
Jan 31 2013, 1:34am
|
|
Great Poem Indeed
|
rangerfromthenorth
|
Jan 31 2013, 2:29am
|
|
It is certainly a great topic to debate
|
squire
|
Feb 1 2013, 3:14am
|
|
a "most" dangerous discussion
|
rangerfromthenorth
|
Feb 1 2013, 3:32pm
|
|
ATB was published after LOTR.
|
N.E. Brigand
|
Feb 1 2013, 5:55pm
|
|
yes yes it was
|
rangerfromthenorth
|
Feb 1 2013, 6:14pm
|
|
thats where the confusion came from
|
rangerfromthenorth
|
Feb 1 2013, 6:22pm
|
|
Tolkien did alter the poem for its 1962 re-publication.
|
N.E. Brigand
|
Feb 1 2013, 7:51pm
|
|
Very nicely stated
|
squire
|
Feb 1 2013, 8:38pm
|
|
This may interest you.
|
N.E. Brigand
|
Feb 1 2013, 5:46am
|
|
|
|
