|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Elthir
Grey Havens
Jul 9 2014, 2:39pm
Post #26 of 52
(3295 views)
Shortcut
|
Hmm, I'm not aware that any such Quenta Silmarillion exists.
As far as I know the only 'complete' [if briefer than later versions] 'Silmarillion' that JRR Tolkien ever wrote was Qenta Noldorinwa, written in 1930.
|
|
|
Elthir
Grey Havens
Jul 9 2014, 3:05pm
Post #27 of 52
(3282 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I meant drafts published by JRRT himself...
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
... although admittedly I didn't phrase it that way. In other words, after, in theory, Tolkien published his legendarium, I very much doubt he would publish, or want published, his draft works.
You make a good case for CJRT doing it, but I think there could be another factor...
... his father perhaps requesting that he not do it 
[his will might differ had JRRT published his own Silmarillion, for example]
I think Tolkien built this appeal into his works from the beginning, with his desire to write legends rather than fiction and his knowledge that legends have many sources, not just one. For many reasons, he ended up writing the many sources himself.
I agree if you mean that Tolkien was mindful of variant sources with respect to his legendarium, and thus wrote, for example: The Drowning of Anadune [Mannish] --versus-- the Akallabeth [mixed, Mannish and Elvish].
But I would not agree [as some seem to mean, although not that you do necessarily] if you mean, for example: Quenta Silmarillion of the mid to later 1930s --versus-- Quenta Silmarillion of the early 1950s. These are not variant internal sources, and are only variant as they are working drafts. In a sense these texts do not contradict each other, except in a Primary World context.
Or for an easy example, I would not agree that the various 'contradicting' texts [generally speaking now] on Galadriel and Celeborn were meant to be seen as internal variations due to various sources [The Elessar being a notable exception of contradiction in general here, containing two internal variations of the history of the stone]... no more so that Trotter the Hobbit was intended as a variant internal idea to Strider the West-man.
And as you note in any case, no one [yet?] raises the draft section of The Lord of the Rings as 'canon' or considers them as holding 'internal' variations to go with the published text, and had Tolkien published his Silmarillion and CJRT still published the drafts, I think we would have a very different scenario and discussion than we have now...
... canon wise, I mean.
(This post was edited by Elthir on Jul 9 2014, 3:18pm)
|
|
|
Otaku-sempai
Immortal
Jul 9 2014, 3:25pm
Post #28 of 52
(3279 views)
Shortcut
|
Hmm, I'm not aware that any such Quenta Silmarillion exists.
As far as I know the only 'complete' [if briefer than later versions] 'Silmarillion' that JRR Tolkien ever wrote was Qenta Noldorinwa, written in 1930.
That might be what I mean. There was some version that Tolkien wanted to have published along with The Lord of the Rings, but his publisher was only interested in the latter. At that time Tolkien considered his First Age account to be in completed form.
'There are older and fouler things than Orcs in the deep places of the world.' - Gandalf the Grey, The Fellowship of the Ring
|
|
|
Elthir
Grey Havens
Jul 9 2014, 4:56pm
Post #29 of 52
(3271 views)
Shortcut
|
JRRT went back to work on QS in the early 1950s, yes, but he never completed it at this time, or ever again. The mid to later 1930s version was 'missing' a section -- in the sense that a section had never been updated in the 1930s even -- or, I'm not sure the respective section in Qenta Noldorinwa would have stood in for the missing part, exactly as it was anyway. Maybe.
But still, in the 1930s Silmarillion, no Galadriel as yet... for instance
Tolkien wanted to complete QS and publish it with The Lord of the Rings, that's correct, but he still had work to do, especially if we consider the long prose versions of the Great Tales [Fall of Gondolin and so on] -- although granted, these are not QS proper.
Very briefly put!
(This post was edited by Elthir on Jul 9 2014, 5:03pm)
|
|
|
Otaku-sempai
Immortal
Jul 9 2014, 4:59pm
Post #30 of 52
(3268 views)
Shortcut
|
Yeah, it sounds like we are talking about the same thing; it just may not have been as commplete as I thought. As you say, it would be heavily revised later in any case.
'There are older and fouler things than Orcs in the deep places of the world.' - Gandalf the Grey, The Fellowship of the Ring
|
|
|
squire
Half-elven
Jul 9 2014, 5:43pm
Post #31 of 52
(3269 views)
Shortcut
|
|
He thought he could finish it quickly enough if a publisher was interested.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
But he found out he was wrong. The manuscript or manuscripts existed, but were not really "completed", as you put it.
Anyway, that's how I've always understood what was going on, when Tolkien abandoned Allen & Unwin and courted Collins as a publisher for The Lord of the Rings in the later 1940s and early 1950s. A & U refused to include the Sil in their estimate of what was worth publishing, while Collins implied to Tolkien that they would at least consider doing a giant double book as Tolkien envisioned.
But according to Christopher Tolkien in his History of Middle-earth, in fact the Quenta Silmarillion was not really textually complete, or rather coherent, at that time. Tolkien hadn't worked on it since the late 30s when the Hobbit took off and launched him on the LotR tale of tales. It is debatable just when Tolkien realized, in the midst of developing the War of the Ring and all the other accessory aspects of his new book, that it was or should become a kind of epic epilogue to his extensive and ambitious Elvish tales of the Elder Days that were already in existence. It was certainly some time in the mid-1940s.
When he had finished the LotR (late 1940s) and roughed in the entire tale of Numenor to boot (originally an independent tale stemming from his "time travel science fiction contest" with C. S. Lewis in the 30s), he felt the new so-called sequel would make little sense to his (aging) Hobbit audience unless the entire backstory was made available simultaneously. He also realized that packing the Sil onto the LotR would enable the Sil to get published, which he had long since been told was virtually impossible as a stand-alone prospect.
What he seriously underestimated, according to CT, was just how much work was actually required to whip the Sil into shape.
Partly this was because it had to be back-written to accommodate new features of Elvish history that he'd invented for LotR (like the Ents, Elrond, Glorfindel, and Galadriel!).
But even more daunting was the question of narrative voice. His writing style had matured thanks to the two hobbit books, and he began to think the 'mannish adventure/quest' tales in the Sil needed rewriting in the livelier, more novelistic mode that we see in LotR. The results, never finished, can be seen in the tales of Tuor and Turin that show up in Unfinished Tales, HoME, and The Children of Hurin; he never even got close to rewriting Beren and Luthien, which remains a mess (try reading the epic if incomplete poem version in HoME III for a kick - I think it's better than the prosy pastiche that ended up in CT's edited Sil).
Worse was the fact that the stories at the end of the First Age cycle -- the fates of Hurin and Thingol, the fall of Gondolin, the quest of Earendil, and the end of the Elvish struggle against Morgoth -- all were much more unfinished than the earlier chapters, with many only existing in the primitive and quaint style of the "Lost Tales" from the late 1910s.
Finally, he also struggled with the 'frame device' of what the Sil "was" in the context of modern-day publication, a problem much accentuated by his concept of the LotR and the Hobbit as stories written by the hobbits. His original idea of having the Sil be translations of Elvish legends made by a wandering English mariner had never been abandoned, but it seemed inconsistent with the immense new timeline, including the creation and destruction of Numenor by the descendants of Earendil. He tinkered with the ideas of the Sil being a Mannish manuscript that survived Numenor to be preserved by Gondor, and the Sil being Bilbo's 'Translations from the Elvish'. The latter idea made it into the finale of LotR by its publication in 1954, but Christopher Tolkien omitted all of his father's incomplete or inconsistent 'frame' ideas when preparing the edited Sil.
Anyway, to make a long story slightly less long, yes, Tolkien did have most of the Silmarillion written out before he started The Lord of the Rings. But it was by no means publishable in any form that would please him without considerable editing, rewriting, and reconceptualizing. Then Collins the publishing company, sensing disaster, lost interest in the massive project, and Tolkien fled in panic back to Allen & Unwin, begging them to forgive him and just publish LotR - something they had always been willing to do for him! Then he spent the rest of his life and waning energy worrying the Silmarillion towards publishable form, with the unfortunate method of changing it even further every time he reapproached it.
I may have some of the details wrong here - corrections welcomed! - but I think I have the big picture roughly correct enough to respond to your question.
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 & 4th TORn Reading Room LotR Discussion and NOW the 1st BotR Discussion too! 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.
|
|
|
Otaku-sempai
Immortal
Jul 9 2014, 6:02pm
Post #32 of 52
(3256 views)
Shortcut
|
That is a much more detailed response than I expected; it is very informative.
'There are older and fouler things than Orcs in the deep places of the world.' - Gandalf the Grey, The Fellowship of the Ring
|
|
|
Voronwë_the_Faithful
Valinor
Jul 9 2014, 6:22pm
Post #33 of 52
(3270 views)
Shortcut
|
|
In the words of the man himself
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Tolkien wrote to Rayner Unwin in June 1952, after his dalliance with Miton Waldman failed to lead anywhere, "As for The Lord of the Rings and The Silmarillion, they are where they were. The one finished (and the end revised), and the other still unfinished (or unrevised), and both gathering dust." He then goes on to say that he had "modified his views" and that the publication of LOTR alone was better than nothing.
'But very bright were the stars upon the margin of the world, when at times the clouds about the West were drawn aside.'
The Hall of Fire
|
|
|
HeWhoArisesinMight
Rivendell
Jul 9 2014, 7:31pm
Post #34 of 52
(3258 views)
Shortcut
|
|
So where does that leave the Silmarilion in terms of canon?
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I read the Silmarillion as a pre-teen, so at that time I thought it was written by JRR Tolkien. It was a bit later (in high school) that I read the first volumes of HOME, but I was still too young to fully comprehend them and read the tales why skipping over all of Christopher Tolkien's commentary. I've read much of the HOME twice again since high school (most recently this past month I read three volumes), this time following the commentary much closer, but it is an arduous task to read all the notes and commentary, and I still skip past some of them. The tales get redundant too..
Anyway, back to my question. For me, reading the Silmarillion when I was young, I always accepted it as "in universe." Yes, we know it was "constructed," but by-in-large it doesn't completely contradict The Hobbit and the LOTR. In fact, it makes the latter two more understandable and fleshes out some of the back story. Yes, there are some contradictions (If I recall correctly, there is a poem in LOTR by Sam or Frodo that refers to Gil-galad as the king of Gondolin), but overall it makes the history of Middle Earth all the richer. I like the context the Sil provides for Tolkien fans and consider it canon, although I know some strict adherents don't agree.
|
|
|
CuriousG
Half-elven
Jul 9 2014, 8:47pm
Post #35 of 52
(3250 views)
Shortcut
|
Even if edited, The Sil is still *largely* the writing of JRR intended to flesh out the story of MEarth. Whether it was published or not is less important than the author's intent of where it fit and how finished it was.
For comparison, let's say Tolkien never published anything, but his grandson found LOTR, posted it online, it went viral because it was so good, and then we later got the Sil because we clamored for more. If you're interested in how Middle-earth works and which tales inform other tales, would we worry about whether anything was officially published or not by a company and put in print, or recognize that it was more writing by the same author meant to fill in the blanks for us? Then the question of "legitimacy" seems moot.
|
|
|
Elthir
Grey Havens
Jul 10 2014, 1:33pm
Post #36 of 52
(3234 views)
Shortcut
|
Even if edited, The Sil is still *largely* the writing of JRR intended to flesh out the story of MEarth. Whether it was published or not is less important than the author's intent of where it fit and how finished it was.
But as we have seen, the Silmarillion wasn't very finished, and I would say the constructed Silmarillion is largely the writing of JRRT in that it is a compilation of unfinished texts, some written as early as 1930. Voronwe's book both generally notes the amazing amount of Tolkien written material that was employed -- but more specifically it also sets out the myriad choices that were sometimes made to weave together a single paragraph.
Add choices like what to include or exclude with respect to the source material, or how consistent does the editor try to make things given the source texts; never mind Tolkien's later texts or notes which arguably speak to the 'intent to revise' something but which were left aside due to the obvious desire for internal consistency [in this sense I mean the attempt to create a one volume 'consistent' version, as much as could be achieved]. Toss in a measure of invention that has no real basis in the source texts [with respect to the Nauglamir and Thingol's death].
There were many subjective editorial decisions that went into making the 1977 Silmarillion, although the source texts were largely written by JRRT -- but again, written at various stages in Tolkien's life, and left in various stages of completion.
To my mind the constructed Silmarillion is very much Tolkien in one sense, but yet probably very different to the version Tolkien himself would have published. And publication 'fixes' the Subcreated World in large measure, which is why Tolkien was still so free to constantly niggle, revise, and update Quenta Silmarillion after its publication was rejected -- or that is, the general fact of it merely remaining a private work
For comparison, let's say Tolkien never published anything, but his grandson found LOTR, posted it online, it went viral because it was so good, and then we later got the Sil because we clamored for more. If you're interested in how Middle-earth works and which tales inform other tales, would we worry about whether anything was officially published or not by a company and put in print, or recognize that it was more writing by the same author meant to fill in the blanks for us? Then the question of "legitimacy" seems moot.
Your scenario seems to accept as a given that both works were finished by the author himself, but just unknown to the public...
... in other words, what Silmarillion did we get 'on line' in your scenario? Who wrote it, assuming we got The Lord of the Rings exactly as we have it in bookstores.
|
|
|
Elthir
Grey Havens
Jul 10 2014, 1:51pm
Post #37 of 52
(3233 views)
Shortcut
|
... the constructed Silmarillion is outside canon. However I think it serves each reader for the important 'internal experience', which I think was a large reason to make this kind of version in the first place.
I'm almost sure that's what Guy Kay was thinking 
But actually I would love to hear Kay's account of his persuasion of Christopher Tolkien, if in fact it is true [as I think it is so far] that Christopher Tolkien -- not being a writer of fiction -- really wanted to produce a 'mini-History of Middle-earth version' originally, until talked out of it. And did Tolkien's publishers have a say in this?
Anyway I think you answered your own question about canon when you wrote [earlier in the thread]...
Tolkien himself would ostensibly be the arbiter on what counted as cannon in Middle Earth, but he is now gone.
Right
Which does not mean you cannot imagine what happened in the Elder Days in any detail however, outside of what Tolkien himself revealed about the Elder Days in The Lord of the Rings, The Hobbit, The Road Goes Ever On, The Adventures of Tom Bombadil, The Pauline Baynes Map.
I do. In a sense I elevate my personal Silmarillion [based on Tolkien's posthumously published writings where they do not conflict with author-published description] to 'canon' status in my own mind, but obviously I do not expect others to take my personal Silmarillion as canon...
... and thus it isn't canon
(This post was edited by Elthir on Jul 10 2014, 1:56pm)
|
|
|
Otaku-sempai
Immortal
Jul 10 2014, 2:23pm
Post #38 of 52
(3229 views)
Shortcut
|
Agreed that The Silmarillion might be outside of the main canon. However, it could be accepted as secondary canon.
'There are older and fouler things than Orcs in the deep places of the world.' - Gandalf the Grey, The Fellowship of the Ring
|
|
|
noWizardme
Half-elven
Jul 11 2014, 3:00pm
Post #39 of 52
(3220 views)
Shortcut
|
Welcome to the Reading Room, Cari!
The issue of canon is very problematic if you try to set up detailed rules (though I solve this problem myself by ignoring it pretty completely). There was a good discussion of the subject here recently, if you're of a mind to read more: http://newboards.theonering.net/...i?post=720576#720576
~~~~~~
"… ever let your aim be to come at truth, not to conquer your opponent. So you never shall be at a loss in losing the argument, and gaining a new discovery.”
Arthur Martine
"nowimë I am in the West, Furincurunir to the Dwarves (or at least, to their best friend) and by other names in other lands. Mostly they just say 'Oh no it's him - look busy!' "
Or "Hold off! unhand me, grey-beard loon!"
|
|
|
Meneldor
Valinor
Jul 11 2014, 6:52pm
Post #40 of 52
(3210 views)
Shortcut
|
|
My personal rules for canonicity are simple.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
If I like it, it's in my canon. If not, I ignore it.
They that go down to the sea in ships, that do business in great waters; These see the works of the Lord, and His wonders in the deep.
|
|
|
Elthir
Grey Havens
Jul 12 2014, 1:25pm
Post #41 of 52
(3200 views)
Shortcut
|
I like plenty of ideas found in The Book of Lost Tales
But no only do I know Tolkien rejected some of them, and thus doesn't consider them to be part of Middle-earth, but I know it was never really intended that I know about them.
(This post was edited by Elthir on Jul 12 2014, 1:26pm)
|
|
|
Voronwë_the_Faithful
Valinor
Jul 12 2014, 1:48pm
Post #42 of 52
(3211 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Do we really know that it was intended that we not know about them?
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I like plenty of ideas found in The Book of Lost Tales But no only do I know Tolkien rejected some of them, and thus doesn't consider them to be part of Middle-earth, but I know it was never really intended that I know about them.
Tolkien meticulously kept the drafts of the Book of Lost Tales, along with all of the other drafts. He clearly thought that his work was important (correctly in my opinion), and he left instructions in his will that made it possible for them to be published. Indeed I think a good argument could be made that he left instructions in his will that ensured that they would be published, knowing Christopher as he did. I'm curious to know how it is that you reached the conclusion that it was never really intended that we know about them (I say 'we' because I am assuming that when you said "I" you weren't really meaning that you weren't intended to know about them, but the rest of us were.
I certainly agree that many of the ideas in them were rejected as Tolkien revised his subcreation of Middle-earth (and points beyond). I would agree that they are not "canon" is the concept of "canon" had any meaning to me, but since it does not, I am free to enjoy the parts that I enjoy without worrying about it one way or the other.
However, I will say that I think that for the most part, Tolkien's later conceptions are superior to his earlier ones. No metal dragons for me!
'But very bright were the stars upon the margin of the world, when at times the clouds about the West were drawn aside.'
The Hall of Fire
|
|
|
squire
Half-elven
Jul 12 2014, 2:47pm
Post #43 of 52
(3211 views)
Shortcut
|
|
When he wrote the Lost Tales he clearly hoped to publish them someday soon.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
It was only later on in his career as a writer of invented myth that he changed his style and abandoned the early stories as they were written in the late 1910s.
So it's arguable whether he "never really intended" you as a reader of the 1970s to read them (Voronwe argues here that JRRT did expect that CT would find a way to publish them willy-nilly), but it seems certain that he intended you as a reader in the 1920s to know about them! See that famous letter about the so-called Mythology For England: 'my crest has long since fallen', etc.
I think Tolkien is the last fantasy writer on earth about whose creations one should debate which he did and didn't consider to be 'part of Middle-earth'. The immediate responses are, 'what point in time are you referring to?' and, 'you mean in his head, or in a recorded piece of writing of his?' Christopher Tolkien generally refuses to assert such things. If anyone should know it would be him, but he repeatedly if cryptically remarks that just because his father had replaced an idea in a later text doesn't mean he had abandoned it!
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 & 4th TORn Reading Room LotR Discussion and NOW the 1st BotR Discussion too! 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.
|
|
|
Elthir
Grey Havens
Jul 13 2014, 3:01am
Post #44 of 52
(3183 views)
Shortcut
|
So it's arguable whether he "never really intended" you as a reader of the 1970s to read them (Voronwe argues here that JRRT did expect that CT would find a way to publish them willy-nilly), but it seems certain that he intended you as a reader in the 1920s to know about them! See that famous letter about the so-called Mythology For England: 'my crest has long since fallen', etc.
Yes that was a mistaken use of 'never'. I would be among the first to argue that Tolkien desired publication of his early material, in the early 'phase' at least.
So never say never, especially on the web and in a forum with only a certain amount of minutes to revise 
I think Tolkien is the last fantasy writer on earth about whose creations one should debate which he did and didn't consider to be 'part of Middle-earth'.
I think he is a prime candidate, since we have plenty of [what are essentially] draft texts now posthumously published. If Tolkien was concerned with the art of subcreation as a difficult but true art, then in my opinion what he [perhaps arguably] considered a rejected idea becomes an important enough part of canon discussion.
The immediate responses are, 'what point in time are you referring to?'...
I think that kind of goes without saying in my opinion. The day Tolkien imagined Trotter the Hobbit he was thinking of this idea being part of Middle-earth, for example. Although no one can read JRRT's mind [the osanwe-centa aside here].
Christopher Tolkien generally refuses to assert such things. If anyone should know it would be him, but he repeatedly if cryptically remarks that just because his father had replaced an idea in a later text doesn't mean he had abandoned it!
Well in my defense I did say I know 'some' things were rejected. What you say here is generally true, but now and again Christopher Tolkien also states things like 'definitively' rejected as well, or similar wording. Also there are certain cases where in my opinion he doesn't have to say anything [like a change in the parentage of a certain character for example].
But that said, one could argue: but how does anyone, even Christopher Tolkien certainly know if A was truly rejected for B, if Tolkien himself hadn't published his own legendarium...
... and if there is some truth in this [sort of] 'ultimate' perspective, in my opinion published-by-author once more comes to the foreground.
|
|
|
Elthir
Grey Havens
Jul 13 2014, 4:37am
Post #45 of 52
(3188 views)
Shortcut
|
About the Lost Tales, Christopher Tolkien noted [Foreword to BOLT I]: 'The Lost Tales never reached or even approached a form in which my father could have considered their publication before he abandoned them; they were experimental and provisional, and the tattered notebooks in which they were written were bundled away and left unlooked at as the years passed.'
I guess I misremembered that a bit, and I guess I was thinking -- noting for clarity that my 'them' were the rejected ideas from BOLT -- if Tolkien truly rejected certain ideas -- why would he ever want his readership to know about them? They weren't 'true' internally anymore, and might only help illustrate that Tolkien is the author, or at least help remind of the author behind the translator, from a man who [I think] loved to indulge in the conceit that he wasn't the author.
So revise to: in my opinion he would not, instead of 'I know' [almost as dangerous as saying 'never' I guess]. And if he did for some reason, I doubt he would want his readership to take them as 'internal', likeable or not. But anyway you raise a fair point or question...
Tolkien meticulously kept the drafts of the Book of Lost Tales, along with all of the other drafts. He clearly thought that his work was important (correctly in my opinion), and he left instructions in his will that made it possible for them to be published. Indeed I think a good argument could be made that he left instructions in his will that ensured that they would be published, knowing Christopher as he did.
Tolkien seems to have kept a lot of his early texts and tales, yes [although we can't know about what is no longer existing], but why?
Not that you said otherwise, but I think there are possible reasons outside of JRRT desiring these materials to be published, one of them being as simple as sentimentality, or beyond that, something about the relationship of artists to even their old art, at least for some.
Or another, to possibly employ some of these materials as very general guides for updating [especially the long prose versions of the Great Tales] -- but, probably not remembering exactly what is in all of it, perhaps one keeps much or all of it for the possible 'some' of it you might need or want later.
By your last sentence, I take it that you mean that by making it possible, Tolkien knew Christopher would publish these things, knowing his son?
If so, why do you think Tolkien himself would want it all published?
(This post was edited by Elthir on Jul 13 2014, 4:41am)
|
|
|
Elthir
Grey Havens
Jul 17 2014, 3:58pm
Post #46 of 52
(3145 views)
Shortcut
|
By the way, here's the wording of at least part of Tolkien's will, as noted by [someone who posts here as far as I know] geordie on line.
'Upon Trust to allow my son Christopher full access to the same in order that he may act as my Literary Executor with full power to publish edit alter rewrite or complete any work of mine which may be unpublished at my death or to destroy the whole or any part or parts of any such unpublished works as he in his absolute discretion may think fit and subject thereto.'
So I think one could say that Tolkien did not desire that all his unpublished work certainly be destroyed or certainly never be published [or it seems to me that he could have made sure this was or would be done], but he left it very much up to Christopher Tolkien.
(This post was edited by Elthir on Jul 17 2014, 4:01pm)
|
|
|
Voronwë_the_Faithful
Valinor
Jul 17 2014, 5:16pm
Post #47 of 52
(3140 views)
Shortcut
|
I think he knew full well that Christopher would never destroy it, and that he would do everything he could to publish as much as possible. As you say, if he wanted it destroyed, he could have said so (although of course that doesn't mean that it would have been destroyed, as we have seen with other authors).
'But very bright were the stars upon the margin of the world, when at times the clouds about the West were drawn aside.'
The Hall of Fire
|
|
|
Elthir
Grey Havens
Jul 17 2014, 5:53pm
Post #48 of 52
(3132 views)
Shortcut
|
I think he probably thought CJRT wouldn't destroy it, I agree with that much. Let's say most likely.
As I say we can glean that JRRT did not certainly want it destroyed, but he likewise left even the possibility of destruction open to Christopher Tolkien as well. One never knows. Tolkien could have also stated 'do not destroy' and taken any measure of doubt away, at least with respect to his instructions, but he did not.
And as far as you thinking JRRT knew full well his son would do everything he could to publish as much as possible, again is this opinion meant to suggest that you think Tolkien himself desired as much as possible published?
And if so, why?
|
|
|
Voronwë_the_Faithful
Valinor
Jul 17 2014, 5:58pm
Post #49 of 52
(3146 views)
Shortcut
|
I think he was probably of two minds. I think he realized that what he created was very big, and very important, but also that it had gone beyond his ability to complete to his own satisfaction. Leaving it to Christopher, with the option to even destroy it if he (Christopher) decided that was best, satisfied both sides. However, I'm not aware of any specific statements Tolkien made on the subject, beyond wanting to publish The Silmarillion.
'But very bright were the stars upon the margin of the world, when at times the clouds about the West were drawn aside.'
The Hall of Fire
|
|
|
Rembrethil
Tol Eressea
Jul 20 2014, 2:16am
Post #50 of 52
(3123 views)
Shortcut
|
It was to give him the broadest and unquestionable control and prevent any misinterpretation. If he has the right to 'destroy' it, then he can pretty much do anything he wants, no loopholes provided. An intention hyperbolic overstatement?
Call me Rem, and remember, not all who ramble are lost...Uh...where was I?
|
|
|
|
|
