|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Voronwë_the_Faithful
Valinor
Nov 18 2011, 2:35pm
Post #2 of 24
(3604 views)
Shortcut
|
I won't comment on this week's interview (for obvious reasons), except to say that having enjoyed the previous interviews, and now having had the opportunity to be on the other side of one, I am really impressed with Michael's ability to asking really insightful and penetrating questions.
'But very bright were the stars upon the margin of the world, when at times the clouds about the West were drawn aside.'
www.arda-reconstructed.com
|
|
|
SirDennisC
Half-elven
Nov 19 2011, 2:59am
Post #5 of 24
(3586 views)
Shortcut
|
even as the question takes form in my mind...
It is clear that many have already decided that having CT's Silmarillion is better than having no Silmarillion at all. But if the following is true,
Although the vast majority of the published book is based on J.R.R. Tolkien’s writing, barely a sentence is unchanged.
is it fair to consider it a work by JRRT as edited by CT, or could it more closely be described as a collaboration (however posthumously on JRRT's part)? Or should authorship belong solely to CT?
A simpler question: would anyone recommend reading Arda Reconstructed before reading the Silmarilion? (I understand not everyone has had the luxury of making such a decision as this.)
Questions aside, I stand in awe of both the interviewer and the interviewee.
(This post was edited by SirDennisC on Nov 19 2011, 3:00am)
|
|
|
Voronwë_the_Faithful
Valinor
Nov 19 2011, 3:21am
Post #6 of 24
(3589 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I don't think it would make that much sense
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
The book is written so that no particularly knowledge of HoMe is assumed, but it does assume a basic familiarity with The Silmarillion. You may have enough of a familiarity just from reading discussions here and elsewhere, but it might not be enough. It would be an interesting exercise, however, to read AR first and then read The Silmarillion. It would certainly give you a different perspective than anyone else! I would certainly recommend reading The Silmarillion soon after if you were to do that. And then probably either reading the relevant portions of HoMe, or rereading AR.
Regarding your comment about the book being a collaboration, I would say yes and no. Many of the changes that I describe are literally sentences that are combined from two (or more!) different versions of a story written by Tolkien, with minor changes in the phrasing to get them to fit. Or minor changes in a sentence to have it match another sentence taken from another source. So for the most part, it is still Tolkien's words, but with a dizzying amount of cutting and pasting.
And then there is the X-factor of Guy Kay. Kay assisted Christopher in the task, back when he was a graduate student, long before he was a highly successful fantasy writer in his own right. But there is basically no information about how much influence he had. I do know from a talk that Kay gave that it was he who suggested that one continuous text be devised, rather than the more scholarly "mini-HoMe" compendium that was Christopher's original idea. And I know that it was Kay who suggested that a short portion of the Lay of Leithian be added to the text in the chapter on Beren of Luthien, because Christopher notes that. But that is the only specific that he gives about Kay's work in all of HoMe, and neither of them are willing to talk about the subject further. Charles Noad speculated in his review of AR (and perhaps elsewhere) that Kay was more responsible than we realize, since he is much more of a writer than Christopher. But we just don't know.
'But very bright were the stars upon the margin of the world, when at times the clouds about the West were drawn aside.'
www.arda-reconstructed.com
|
|
|
SirDennisC
Half-elven
Nov 19 2011, 3:54am
Post #7 of 24
(3597 views)
Shortcut
|
Not having read the Sil or HoMe, perhaps I should reserve judgement. But the bit about Kay makes the whole enterprise seem a bit dodgy. Playing to the perceived demands of popular culture is hardly ever a good idea -- to wit Bakshi released the year following the Silmarillion. (Said with fingers crossed as The Hobbit is in production.)
It sounds as if "the more scholarly "mini-HoMe" compendium that was Christopher's original idea" might have been a better first step. Economic considerations be darned!
On a personal note, this is a fine experience having you here to answer questions arising from the interview. Thanks V!
|
|
|
Voronwë_the_Faithful
Valinor
Nov 19 2011, 2:25pm
Post #8 of 24
(3554 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I don't think money was the main driving force
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I have never had the impression that money was Christopher Tolkien's main driving force in his work presenting his father's material posthumously. Rather, I think his main driving force has been to preserve and enhance his father's legacy. To quote myself from the Introduction to the book:
As Jason Fisher [better known around here as "visualweasel"] writes in his article in the restrospective The Silmarillion: Thirty Years On, “Christopher would have been faced with the challenge of gaining some measure of literary acceptance for the work his father had failed to complete, and a maximalist approach might have run counter to this goal.” I definitely agree with that. I don't think the original more scholarly approach would have gained much literary acceptance. And as it happens, we have the best of both worlds: a single concrete text to stand as "The Silmarillion" and a much more extensive scholarly record than we would otherwise have had in The History of Middle-earth. Had the original approach been followed, we likely would not have had either.
'But very bright were the stars upon the margin of the world, when at times the clouds about the West were drawn aside.'
www.arda-reconstructed.com
|
|
|
grammaboodawg
Immortal
Nov 19 2011, 2:54pm
Post #9 of 24
(3531 views)
Shortcut
|
this article feels like it unfolds... unfolds again... opens into such a wealth of understanding, love and respect for Tolkien's work (both JRR and Christopher).
This is wonderful! I'm so impressed! Thank you!
I really need these new films to take me back to, and not re-introduce me to, that magical world.
TORn's Observations Lists
Unused Scenes
|
|
|
Magpie
Immortal
Nov 19 2011, 4:57pm
Post #10 of 24
(3532 views)
Shortcut
|
(I waffle between calling it 'entertaining' - which has some connotation of being light weight - and 'interesting' which isn't always a good adjective in Minnesota!. If we don't load the modifiers... it was both.)
I appreciate more than I enjoy the Sil but I do like dabbling in it. As scholarly as Douglas' approach surely is, I found that interview - both Michael's questions and Douglas' answers - very accessible for this casual reader. It digs into topics without being too dense.
Good job for both of you.
LOTR soundtrack website
magpie avatar gallery ~ Torn Image Posting Guide
|
|
|
dormouse
Half-elven
Nov 19 2011, 5:00pm
Post #11 of 24
(3564 views)
Shortcut
|
... and the thought that there might have been a less structured 'Silmarillion' with the glorious Athrabeth as its final appendix a good dream, even if an unlikely one.
That said, I love the published 'Silmarillion' even if it isn't what it might have been. I remember reading interviews towards the end of Tolkien's life in which it was said that he was writing it - and then his death with the book unfinished (somehow I suspect that if he had had another 50 years it would never have been finished, any more than Niggle's tree - he loved the details too much). And then the news that there was to be a book, and the anticipation, and finally, opening it for the first time...
Someday I will read 'Arda Reconstructed' because there isn't anything about the Sil that I don't want to know.
Well done interviewer and interviewee - and I'd also like to put in a little cheer for the design and layout of the site. It made it a real pleasure to read! 
|
|
|
sador
Half-elven
Nov 19 2011, 7:10pm
Post #12 of 24
(3558 views)
Shortcut
|
I thought Voronwë was just another fanboy who got lucky.
I haven't read this interview yet, but I'm looking forward to doing it. Thank you for this series!
"The Appendices (and Prologue) gave Tolkien an outlet for explanations he couldn't fit into the text, and therefore made the text that much simpler and free of burdensome explanations. It's very hard for someone who creates a world from the ground up to refrain from overexplaining what he or she has created; the Appendices, and what is more the promise that someday The Silmarillion might be published, may have helped Tolkien exercise ruthless restraint."
- Curious
The weekly discussion of The Lord of the Rings is back. Join us in the Reading Room for the discussion of the appendices!
|
|
|
Michael Martinez
The Shire
Nov 20 2011, 3:31am
Post #13 of 24
(3544 views)
Shortcut
|
I would take that as a compliment. I'm sure even Christopher considers himself a fan of his father's work, and he is I have no doubt grateful for the appreciation so many people have expressed over his labors.
I have enjoyed doing the interview series, although it has required more effort than I originally imagined. In fact, it is taking more effort than the "Middle-earth Unplugged" articles I put on hiatus so I could do the interviews -- which I thought would be less challenging.
But I don't like to ask the same questions that I can find in other interviews. I find that to be discourteous to both interviewee and the audience.
I'm glad people like the interviews. They have turned out to be the most popular part of the Website, although I certainly hope people hang around and look at the other articles. There is a LOT of new material there.
Author of Visualizing Middle-earth, Parma Endorion, and Understanding Middle-earth.
http://www.michael-martinez.com/
Middle-earth.Xenite.Org
|
|
|
FoundEntwife
Rivendell
Nov 20 2011, 5:21am
Post #14 of 24
(3510 views)
Shortcut
|
Thank you for the link! I had a wonderful time reading this. I only have three scholarly books on Tolkien's work but it has been some time since I delved back into reading such works.
This tale grew in the telling. . .
|
|
|
geordie
Tol Eressea
Nov 20 2011, 10:06am
Post #15 of 24
(3520 views)
Shortcut
|
- on a side note: I find that here, as almost everywhere else on the net, the main focus of attention for many (most?) Tolkien enthusiasts seems to be Middle-earth. But there's more to Tolkien than that; indeed if asked to guess what Tolkien considered to be important about his works, then I should guess that his academic output was at least as important to him as any of his fictional works (which, by the way, extend beyond M-e).
It may come as a surprise to some that the first of JRR's works to be published by Christopher had nothing to do with M-e at all - it's his father's translations into modern English of the Middle English poems 'Sir Gawain and the Green Knight, Pearl, and Sir Orfeo' (1975). Hardly a money-spinner!
And anyway; the vexed question of money hardly comes into an examination of the publication of HoMe - IIRC the individual books did not sell in any great numbers in hardback as they came out
(I bought my copies on the day of publication, or as near as I could get them) - and at one time there was talk of Harper Collins having so many unsold copies that they were being pulped!
(The books, that is; not Harper Collins. Though mind you, that might not be such a bad idea in some individual cases I can think of...)
(This post was edited by geordie on Nov 20 2011, 10:10am)
|
|
|
dormouse
Half-elven
Nov 20 2011, 3:49pm
Post #16 of 24
(3564 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I think a lot of readers are aware....
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
... that Tolkien's writing goes beyond Middle Earth in many directions - some quite unexpected. For example, I liked the Jerusalem Bible best of the modern translations before I knew Tolkien had played a part in it, albeit a minor one. Finding out that he did both confirmed and enhanced my appreciation of it! And Leaf by Niggle and Smith of Wootton Major are both special to me - also the essay on fairy stories and some of the academic stuff - I can't claim to have read it all.
Middle Earth is so much bigger and opens so many avenues for discussion, and familiarity breeds, well, more familiarity, but don't assume that people don't know the others works because they don't talk about them so much - I reckon many do...
|
|
|
geordie
Tol Eressea
Nov 20 2011, 4:50pm
Post #17 of 24
(3523 views)
Shortcut
|
- I know that many readers are aware of Tolkien's other writings. But I'm also aware that many others don't look far beyond M-e; when I said it may come as a surprise to some that Christopher's first foray into publishing his father's posthumous writings had nothing to do with M-e, I wasn't being faceitious. I was merely bringing up this (somewhat surprising) fact to illustrate my point; which is that money alone doesn't seem to play much part in CT's reckoning. It's the integrity of his father's writings that counts.
(This post was edited by geordie on Nov 20 2011, 4:52pm)
|
|
|
SirDennisC
Half-elven
Nov 20 2011, 7:20pm
Post #18 of 24
(3519 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Did not know that... thank you twice today!
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Tolkien's Sir Gawain is a masterpiece, my favourite of the romances save Malory's Tristan and Isolde.
I did not know it was because of CT that it saw the light of day again in the seventies. I have it in two Oxford editions (Tolkien with EV Gordon, and again both as edited by Norman in 1967), and the Del Rey/Random House 1975 (Allen & Unwin) version.
By the way, I was not meaning to suggest that money was the motive behind releasing the version of the Silmarillion that was released... but I do wonder at the decision to make it appealing to Hobbit fans that appears to have been taken. I can understand the motivation -- especially as someone who has struggled to make it even half way through the Sil a couple times now -- it just seems a liberty was taken that JRRT may not have agreed with himself.
|
|
|
geordie
Tol Eressea
Nov 20 2011, 9:44pm
Post #19 of 24
(3531 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I think it might be beneficial
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
- for our readers to point out that the edition produced by Christopher in 1975 differs from Tolkien & Gordon's in 1925 (with a revised 2nd ed, by Norman Davis) in that while the 1925 book and its successor are printed in the original Middle English, Tolkien's 1975 book is, (as I said above) a translation into modern English - a boon for folks like me who wot not the ancient vernacular.
To quote Tolkien: 'That is the sort of sentence I usually write'.
Most of Tolkien's written works are available in the form of audio books; Tolkien's translations of these Middle English works were recorded by Monty Python's own Terry Jones. My set of the tapes is signed by Mr. Jones, himself a scholar of mediaeval literature . He told me that when he recorded the books there was a man sitting opposite him - he joked he thought the man was Tolkien's son, waiting to pounce if and when he made a mistake.
|
|
|
squire
Half-elven
Nov 21 2011, 1:41am
Post #20 of 24
(3515 views)
Shortcut
|
|
It's not the same book in a "different edition"
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Tolkien's and Gordon's Sir Gawain and the Green Knight of 1925 is what's called a "critical edition". It features, as you say, the original text in Middle English, with extensive editorial notes defending the infinite choices made by the editors about what a printed book of an "original text" should contain when there is no authoritative manuscript. Students of the poem depend on such critical editions (yes, there have been many others before and after 1925) to increase their understanding of the work itself, and of the linguistic and cultural world that surrounds and supports the work. Tom Shippey has written somewhere an appreciation for us laymen of the incredible scholarship, intelligence, and (yes) daring on Tolkien's part that such a book entailed.
Now, the Sir Gawain etc. of 1975, released by CT after his father's death, is a book of the same title in Modern English, but with an entirely different approach. It is a "translation" of the poem into modern English. Such a work allows people to read the poem without mastering Middle English - you might say, the 1975 book is for those who cannot or will not make use of the 1925 book!
There is, obviously, a connection between Tolkien editing Sir Gawain for his academic peers and students, and then wishing to attempt a good modern translation of the same work. The first project was Tolkien displaying his erudition as an up-and-coming scholar, and the second was his building on that erudition by adding to it his artistic talents as a poet/translator of Modern English. But the difference between the two is great enough that it is not correct to say that they are simply different "editions" of Tolkien's "book about Sir Gawain."
The 1975 translation was a work in progress that had been piling up in Tolkien's study for a long, long, time - almost as long as The Silmarillion had been similarly moldering. I think you are right to remind us that in 1973 CT's first priority as his father's literary executor was to complete it and send it to the presses, leaving Middle-earth for later. Many of Tolkien's colleagues and students had probably given up on ever seeing the long-awaited modern translation by one of the world's greatest experts on the poem -- and surely they were properly grateful, even if the Rings fans weren't!
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.
|
|
|
Voronwë_the_Faithful
Valinor
Nov 21 2011, 1:56am
Post #21 of 24
(3491 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I doubt it was a question of priority
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I'm quite sure that publishing both the translation of Sir Gawain and The Silmarillion were important to Christopher, but I don't think that one can say that the fact that Gawain was released first is proof that he considered it a higher priority. Rather, I think it is a result of the fact that producing a publishable version of The Silmarillion required far, far more work to complete than Sir Gawain (not that Christopher's work on that was inconsequencial). It simply made more sense to complete the latter before tackling the former.
'But very bright were the stars upon the margin of the world, when at times the clouds about the West were drawn aside.'
www.arda-reconstructed.com
|
|
|
dernwyn
Forum Admin
/ Moderator
Nov 21 2011, 3:24am
Post #23 of 24
(3476 views)
Shortcut
|
A well-done interview indeed (thank you, MM)!
And yes, do get yourself a copy of Arda Reconstructed, the amount of research in it will boggle your mind as much as those books of HoME which deal with LotR, or as The History of The Hobbit does. It is quite well worth it!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"I desired dragons with a profound desire"
"It struck me last night that you might write a fearfully good romantic drama, with as much of the 'supernatural' as you cared to introduce. Have you ever thought of it?"
-Geoffrey B. Smith, letter to JRR Tolkien, 1915
|
|
|
geordie
Tol Eressea
Nov 21 2011, 11:00pm
Post #24 of 24
(3491 views)
Shortcut
|
- but I didn't put it as eloquently as you just have. (that first sentence of mine really got away from me). This is what happens when I try to take on a complicated subject when I'm tired; for which I apologise to the group.
Thanks for explaining it better. (thumbs-up smilie)
|
|
|
|
|
